"No i will not have any trouble facing Marshall."

[slog sweep]

McGrath WAG. McG don't need no excuses.

Unfortunately for you champ, the majority of cricket experts around the world, who know more about this game than you ever will, don't even rate McGrath in the top 3 fast bowlers of all time, because he was completely one dimensional and not particularly skillful. The majority of Australians who have seen both, don't even think he was as good as Dennis Lillee.

But, keep staring at those McGrath posters on your wall, if that helps you sleep better at night.

 

[Bringbackbondy]

For a one dimensional bowler he sure was successful.

 

[Debris]

I would go as far as to say that anyone who called McGrath one-dimensional knows nothing about fast bowling. Two seconds thought would make you realise a one-dimensional bowler could not have the success that McGrath had.

 

[smash84]

For a one dimensional bowler he sure was successful.

True

I would go as far as to say that anyone who called McGrath one-dimensional knows nothing about fast bowling. Two seconds thought would make you realise a one-dimensional bowler could not have the success that McGrath had.

Waqar says hello.........

 

[Debris]

Yeah but he doesnt quite average under 25 against every1, strike at 46 and average 20.9 like Marshall

does. Those r just mind boggling stats if u ask me.

By that logic. Fred Spofforth is a better bowler than Malcolm Marshall. Average under 20 against every1, strike at 44 and average 18.41

 

[centurymaker]

unfortunately for you champ, the majority of cricket experts around the world, who know more about this game than you ever will, don't even rate mcgrath in the top 3 fast bowlers of all time, because he was completely one dimensional and not particularly skillful. The majority of australians who have seen both, don't even think he was as good as dennis lillee.

But, keep staring at those mcgrath posters on your wall, if that helps you sleep better at night.

+1

 

[abmk]

Anyone who calls Mcgrath one-dimensional doesn't know much about cricket.

Could bowl short of length, pitch it up, move it in, move it away, had a highly under-rated bouncer, had a pretty good yorker as well, varied the pace as required. He knew what exactly he should bowl to which batsman.

Can't really think of any bowler who had that much success vs the best batsmen of their era as Mcgrath did

 

[MrIncredible]

By that logic. Fred Spofforth is a better bowler than Malcolm Marshall. Average under 20 against every1, strike at 44 and average 18.41

Dont insult ur own intelligence. Spofforth played vs what 2 teams. Marshall 5 all

established teams. Incl in the Subcon. Really did I need to state the obvious??

 

[centurymaker]

Anyone who calls Mcgrath one-dimensional doesn't know much about cricket.

Could bowl short of length, pitch it up, move it in, move it away, had a highly under-rated bouncer, had a pretty good yorker as well, varied the pace as required. He knew what exactly he should bowl to which batsman.

Can't really think of any bowler who had that much success vs the best batsmen of their era as Mcgrath did

Comparing McGrath with Marshall is akin to comparing Dravid with Lara....

 

[Debris]

Dont insult ur own intelligence. Spofforth played vs what 2 teams. Marshall 5 all

established teams. Incl in the Subcon. Really did I need to state the obvious??

Marshall played against 5 teams, McGrath played against 10 (if you cound World XI). Did you miss the obvious?

The teams were established but were they that strong? I know Australia was at a low point when he played them and the sub-continental sides in the 80s had a weakness against pace.

 

[MrIncredible]

Anyone who calls Mcgrath one-dimensional doesn't know much about cricket.

Could bowl short of length, pitch it up, move it in, move it away, had a highly under-rated bouncer, had a pretty good yorker as well, varied the pace as required. He knew what exactly he should bowl to which batsman.

Can't really think of any bowler who had that much success vs the best batsmen of their era as Mcgrath did

I wouldnt say Mcgrath was one dimensional either.But watchin him and Marshall,

Marshall was surely more skillful. And unlike the likes of maybe Wasim, his stats,

reputation, all round success back that up.

 

[MrIncredible]

Marshall played against 5 teams, McGrath played against 10 (if you cound World XI). Did you miss the obvious?

South Africa, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe. Im trying to figure out which team u think

Marshall would have trouble terrorising had he played them in his time??

 

[abmk]

Comparing McGrath with Marshall is akin to comparing Dravid with Lara....

no, lara had more success vs the best bowlers/teams of his era than dravid did. Dravid wasn't/isn't such a dominant player as lara was.

Both Marshall and Mcgrath had similar level of success vs the best batsmen/teams . Both ripped apart the top and middle orders frequently

While Macko was the better strike bowler, Mcgrath's strike rate wasn't half-bad either for someone who supposedly "only" bored batsmen into giving away their wickets

I'd take macko over mcgrath in tests as a bowler, but the margin is small IMO

 

[abmk]

I wouldnt say Mcgrath was one dimensional either.But watchin him and Marshall,

Marshall was surely more skillful. And unlike the likes of maybe Wasim, his stats,

reputation, all round success back that up.

agree ...macko was the more skillful bowler, but McGrath's skills as a bowler are highly under-rated IMO

 

[MrIncredible]

no, lara had more success vs the best bowlers/teams of his era than dravid did. Dravid wasn't/isn't such a dominant player as lara was.

Both Marshall and Mcgrath had similar level of success vs the best batsmen/teams . Both ripped apart the top and middle orders frequently

While Macko was the better strike bowler, Mcgrath's strike rate wasn't half-bad either for someone who supposedly "only" bored batsmen into giving away their wickets

I'd take macko over mcgrath in tests as a bowler, but the margin is small IMO

I agree Marshall and Mcgrath are close indeed. Infact, IMO they and about a few dozen

fast bowlers are more or less on the same level. Ex: Trueman, Hadlee, Imran, Ambrose,

Lillee and more. Sometimes it all boils down to personal preference and maybe some

stats nitpicking. I dont see how one can nitpick Marshalls stats. Excellent overall SR,

average, WPM, Econ. Average under 25 everywhere (disregarding 3 measely tests in NZ).

Average under 23 vs everyone (no minnows or ne dire teams during his time). These are

just a few of the reasons y I favor Marshall overall. On another day, could very well be

Lillee or a Mcgrath or a Donald (criminally underated imo)

 

[Debris]

South Africa, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe. Im trying to figure out which team u think

Marshall would have trouble terrorising had he played them in his time??

What I am say is exactly the opposite. Teams like India and Pakistan were easier to bowl against in Marshall's era than in McGrath's. India and South Africa had very strong batting sides when McGrath was around. There was no really strong batting line-up around when Marshall played so he was not really put to the ultimate test. Not his fault but I get a bit annoyed when people automatically equate better stats with better bowler.

I don't even necessarily consider McGrath the better bowler but stats are not everything. My opinion is that there is 5 to 10 fast bowlers that you really cannot split and it depends on the situation which one you want really.

 

[MrIncredible]

Well Ive seen both live and trust me its not just about the stats. I remember a match against a world XI

where Marshall took like 5 wickets and Gavaskar scored a big hundred in the first innings. Dont

remember where the match was played but some of the greatest 80s players were on show that day,

on a wicket tailor made to dent fast bowling. Marshall was the only bowler on either team to get the

better of the batting. And even though he only took 5 or so wickets he still got MOM.

PS To say that Marshall never came up against a strong lineup in any of his 81 tests, is doing a

serious disservice to the cricketers of his time.

 

[robelinda]

That was at Lords, great display, great match. Gooch got a ton too? Greendige?

 

[robelinda]

Marylebone Cricket Club v Rest of the World XI at Lord's, Aug 20-25, 1987 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[ankitj]

@ McGrath is uni-dimensional:

YouTube - Glenn Mcgrath reverse swinging yorker

Come on guys. He was subtle but he had the whole range of deliveries. He didn't bowl yorkers all the time, but when he did, you could be sure it will not end up as a half volley or a full toss. FTR, I rate Marshal slightly higher than McGrath, but latter is being criticized so unfairly.