The bowler of the 90s and 00s

[Ikki]

Actually, can see McGrath doing it

My point remains; in basically any reputable panel or discussion on that Australian team, Warne is almost invariably the #1 pick (at least as a bowler if not overall). I love McGrath but people tend to overrate his 'always performing' aspect. He was no more polished all-round than Ambrose and Donald and despite all his injuries and playing more, Warne only had 3 more 30+ average series than McGrath.

There are plenty of points for McGrath, but on replaceability he was closer to Ponting than he was Warne. You can disagree whether that should give him more points if you don't think it should factor in for more value for a side - I guess it is the ATG spinner v ATG pacer debate - but that's just how special and rare Warne was.

 

[fredfertang]

This is one of the most interesting polls I've seen on here in a long time - I'm really, really surprised that only two of us have nominated Waqar - I can only assume that longevity is valued much more than a transient destructive genius

 

[watson]

Not really. MacGill was closer to Kumble than he was to Warne's/Murali's ilk. The closest spinners to Warne and Murali appeared about 50 years prior in Grimmett and O'Reilly. Not likely to see spinners as good as them for a while.

A McGrath-like bowler occurs basically every generation for Australia. Even McGrath (as well as most people during their careers considered Warne the better bowler.

Barnes(?) - Mailey - Grimmett - O'Reilly - Gupte - Benaud - Qadir were every bit as good as Warne in the art of leg-spin, if not better. Obviously they cannot compete when it comes to the quantity of Test matches played, but in their own way each of those leggies was truly great. Chandra and Kumble are not as far behind as we think.

The same applies to off-spin. Laker - Tayfield - Prasanna - Gibbs were every bit as good as Murali in the art of off-spin, but pale because they weren't able to play the same amount of Test matches. But again, each of those offies was truly great.

In short, I think that the skill and greatness of Warne and Murali have been exaggerated in recent times at the expense of other comparable bowlers.

(And we haven't mentioned any of the left- armers)

 

[viriya]

I don't think any of those leg-spinners had the control Warne had. And none of those off-spinners spun it as much as Murali and bowled a doosra. There is no way those bowlers were "every bit as good".

 

[fredfertang]

In short, I think that the skill and greatness of Warne and Murali have been exaggerated in recent times at the expense of other comparable bowlers.

An excellent point - one reason being the fact that before them there hadn't been a really high class spinner for 20 years

 

[fredfertang]

And none of those off-spinners spun it as much as Murali and bowled a doosra. There is no way those bowlers were "every bit as good".

So with a doosra Jim Laker would have taken all 20 at Old Trafford in '56?

 

[smash84]

This is one of the most interesting polls I've seen on here in a long time - I'm really, really surprised that only two of us have nominated Waqar - I can only assume that longevity is valued much more than a transient destructive genius

yep, longevity has more value here for sure (as in life I suppose)

 

[viriya]

So with a doosra Jim Laker would have taken all 20 at Old Trafford in '56?

Not sure what point you're trying to make. That's just one match.

 

[harsh.ag]

This is one of the most interesting polls I've seen on here in a long time - I'm really, really surprised that only two of us have nominated Waqar - I can only assume that longevity is valued much more than a transient destructive genius

I think it's more about representing the time period in question. Waqar's transient genius came and went by the middle of the 90s. So, I couldn't really consider him for the question at hand.

I voted Warne and Murali because I think these two bowlers will come to define this time period's greatness in the future. McGrath and Ambrose (whom I consider better bowlers than the two spinners), will always stay a touch behind them, IMO.

 

[Ikki]

Barnes(?) - Mailey - Grimmett - O'Reilly - Gupte - Benaud - Qadir were every bit as good as Warne in the art in leg-spin, if not better. Obviously they cannot compete when it comes to the quantity of Test matches played, but in their own way each of those leggies was truly great. Chandra and Kumble are not as far behind as we think.

The same applies to off-spin. Laker - Tayfield - Prasanna - Gibbs were every bit as good as Murali in the art of off-spin, but pale because they weren't able to play the same amount of Test matches. But again, each of those offies was truly great.

In short, I think that the skill and greatness of Warne and Murali have been exaggerated in recent times at the expense of other comparable bowlers.

(And we haven't mentioned any of the left- armers)

Apart from the two I named (not sure Barnes was really a spinner), none of them are in the same zipcode as Warne - and they also played on uncovered pitches to boot. The same for the bowlers you've mentioned for Murali.

When it comes to spin bowlers being comparable to ATG pacers, the list is very, very short. The amount of tests would really only matter if I was talking about the aggregate amount of wickets. Their averages/SRs are so superior the debate is a non-starter. It'd be like comparing a pacer of the quality of Kallis to Donald.

 

[cnerd123]

Warne may not be far and away the most skilful legspinner of all time (if at all), but it isn't really just about skills is it? Warne was a master tactician, Warne was great at reading a batsman and setting him up, Warne raised his game for the big moments, Warne had a knack for taking the big wickets. Warne didn't beat them just in the air and off the pitch, he beat them in the mind before he even bowled the ball.

Surely that all counts for something?

Personally I would put Warne's name down first over McGrath or any other bowler if I was to pick an ATG Australia XI, but that's because I am biased and looking at the allround package (Slip fielding, batting, and potential captain/vice captain). Purely as bowlers...well comparing apples and oranges would be easier tbh.

 

[harsh.ag]

Apart from the two I named (not sure Barnes was really a spinner), none of them are in the same zipcode as Warne - and they also played on uncovered pitches to boot. The same for the bowlers you've mentioned for Murali

When it comes to spin bowlers being comparable to ATG pacers, the list is very, very short.

Could it have something to do with the fact that the two you mentioned were Aussies?

 

[Ikki]

You don't say.

Could it have something to do with the fact that the two you mentioned were Aussies?

Do I have to put you on ignore?

 

[watson]

I don't think any of those leg-spinners had the control Warne had. And none of those off-spinners spun it as much as Murali and bowled a doosra. There is no way those bowlers were "every bit as good".

You can check the descriptions of how each of those leggies bowled and you will find that their line and length were excellent - with the exception of Mailey of course. However, Mailey used his googly as a major weapon and by most accounts it was far better than Warne's. From memory, the googly had pretty much disappeared from Warne's arsenal by the late-90s.

 

[viriya]

You can check the descriptions of how each of those leggies bowled and you will find that their line and length was excellent - with the exception of Mailey of course. However, Mailey used his googly as a major weapon and by most accounts was far better than Warne's. From memory, the googly had pretty much disappeared from Warne's arsenal by the late-90s.

I can agree with that point, and admittedly I was going by what I've heard of how a bowler like Qadir used to bowl a bad ball an over which Warne was much less likely to. I have to say though that you don't end up with a record like Warne's just because you play a lot of matches.. His average and wkts/match is up there even with 150+ tests played - has to account for something.

 

[fredfertang]

Not sure what point you're trying to make. That's just one match.

Apologies - the sarcasm was unnecessary - the point I was trying so clumsily to make was just that I think Jim Laker was the greatest off spinner the game has seen.

I'm a great admirer of Murali too, but I can't help but disapprove wholeheartedly of the doosra which in most cases is a chuck, and in his a chuck that comes within a law that was right in what it set out to achieve but has proved wrong in what it has led to

That said I'll concede that Laker had the benefit of being able to play on sticky wickets and with a proper leg trap - if Murali had had those advantages he would never have needed a doosra anyway

 

[harsh.ag]

Do I have to put you on ignore?

No, Ikki, please don't do that. How will I live? How will I live without ever getting to tease you again?

Apologies if you took offense dude, but seriously, you've got a fetish going on if you think leggies as good as Grimmett have not been around.

Chandra, Mailey, Gupte, Benaud, Kumble, Qadir, MacGill and Mushtaq Ahmed all as good as Grimmett.

Will give you O'Reilly, of course.

 

[viriya]

I find it hard to believe you can pick any off-spinner over Murali, but if you have a problem with the doosra I guess I can see why you would. If you don't, it just seems silly.

 

[Ikki]

No, Ikki, please don't do that. How will I live? How will I live without ever getting to tease you again?

Apologies if you took offense dude, but seriously, you've got a fetish going on if you think leggies as good as Grimmett have not been around.

Chandra, Mailey, Gupte, Benaud, Kumble, Qadir, MacGill and Mushtaq Ahmed all as good as Grimmett.

Will give you O'Reilly, of course.

If you're going to tease, at least be funny. You're just annoying atm and I cbf.

Personally, I think O'Reilly was better but they're usually mentioned as a pair since many thought Grimmett was better. Grimmett was still better than the above bowlers though.

In any case, my point was that these kind of bowlers are rare. Removing Grimmett from that list only enhances my point.

 

[viriya]

Chandra, Mailey, Gupte, Benaud, Kumble, Qadir, MacGill and Mushtaq Ahmed all as good as Grimmett.

Admittedly I've only seen Kumble and MacGill from this list, but I find this statement hard to believe.