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

[G.I.Joe]

But then some people start playing international cricket at a earlier age.

20 vs 23.

One of the reasons why Marshall > Mcgrath.

Should have dismissed more top tier batsmen for that to carry weight, tbh.

 

[vcs]

Apparently Marshall was past his prime at the ripe old age of 34. McGrath carried on for longer as a better bowler. So yeah, the qualification needs to be made.

He also started out earlier, as Cevno has pointed out...

Another interesting thing to note is that Marshall played only 31 Tests at home and 50 away, so it's hardly as if he was getting the benefit of home curators preparing tailor-made greentops for him to exploit..

 

[Teja.]

Apparently Marshall was past his prime at the ripe old age of 34. McGrath carried on for longer as a better bowler. So yeah, the qualification needs to be made.

I'm not on either side of this debate but Marshall debuted earlier and both had similarly long careers so whether McG played one year more on this side doesn't matter when Marshall played the same year more on another side.

Just FTR, Marshall averaged 21 at 4 wpm in his last year of test cricket. When people say he declined, They mean decline from the freakish bowler he was in the mid-80s. He still had as good a last 3-4 years as McG did.

 

[Teja.]

Should have dismissed more top tier batsmen for that to carry weight, tbh.

There was a thread re this IIRC. Both Marshall and McG, along with Ambrose and some other dude are about even in the picking up top-teir batsman thing. League ahead of everyone else too.

 

[G.I.Joe]

He also started out earlier, as Cevno has pointed out...

Another interesting thing to note is that Marshall played only 31 Tests at home and 50 away, so it's hardly as if he was getting the benefit of home curators preparing tailor-made greentops for him to exploit..

McGrath couldn't get greentops anywhere he played.

 

[Spark]

Just to add, he was brilliant at the WC07 but that was not least because it was a pre-planned swansong. He was showing signs of looking really creaky in the 06/7 Ashes. Definitely retired at the right time.

 

[vcs]

Will be fun to see how Murali's test stats look like when only his best 10-11 year period(About as big a career as McG or Marshall) is considered, in the very same 'batting paradise' period tbh.

By a decent margin the best bowler of the post-Bradman era, IMO.

But McGrath and Marshall have more "well-rounded" records (w.r.t oppositions and venues) than Murali..

Anyway, I feel it's best not to compare ATG pacers and spinners.. atleast not by nitpicking over their statistics. I would prefer to stick to comparing pacers to pacers and spinners to spinners.

 

[G.I.Joe]

I'm not on either side of this debate but Marshall debuted earlier and both had similarly long careers so whether McG played one year more on this side doesn't matter when Marshall played the same year more on another side.

Just FTR, Marshall averaged 21 at 4 wpm in his last year of test cricket. When people say he declined, They mean decline from the freakish bowler he was in the mid-80s. He still ahd as good a last 3-4 years as McG did.

I thought Martin Crowe was MOS in the 92 WC, tbh. My bad.

 

[centurymaker]

I reckon Marshall's bowling would be more delightful to watch so
Marshall slightly > Mcgrath

 

[Cevno]

I'm not on either side of this debate but Marshall debuted earlier and both had similarly long careers so whether McG played one year more on this side doesn't matter when Marshall played the same year more on another side.

Just FTR, Marshall averaged 21 at 4 wpm in his last year of test cricket. When people say he declined, They mean decline from the freakish bowler he was in the mid-80s. He still had as good a last 3-4 years as McG did.

True.

People on this thread made it sound as if he was Geoff Boycott's mum bowling in the last few years.

But that was done because they wanted to use the argument against Tendulkar.

And now Joe has turned it around against Marshall.

And now it is one big confusing ****.

 

[smash84]

BTW......why is Hadlee not ranked alongside McGrath???? Seem similar type of bowlers

 

[G.I.Joe]

True.

People on this thread made it sound as if he was Geoff Boycott's mum bowling in the last few years.

But that was done because they wanted to use the argument against Tendulkar.

And now Joe has turned it around against Marshall.

And now it is one big confusing ****.

The Marshall fanboys shot themselves in the foot with their argument against Tendulkar.

 

[Teja.]

I thought Martin Crowe was MOS in the 92 WC, tbh. My bad.

Everything I said is about test cricket tbh. I'm not a particularly great fan of mixing performances of two different games to arrive at an understanding of who the better bowler is.

Can't pick between Marshall and McG for tests.

McG is definitely the better OD bowler, for mine.

This however does not mean I arrive at the conclusion that McG is the overall better 'cricketer' across all forms of the game. There's no such thing for me.

 

[smash84]

Is McGrath a better bowler than Hadlee???

 

[Blaze 18]

absolutely awesome innings from Sachin against such top quality bowling.....does somebody have the full inning??

Bet Robelinda has it, but I think he isn't uploading a lot of videos these days because of some users who rile him on youtube.

Match Scorecard

 

[Teja.]

But McGrath and Marshall have more "well-rounded" records (w.r.t oppositions and venues) than Murali..

Anyway, I feel it's best not to compare ATG pacers and spinners.. atleast not by nitpicking over their statistics. I would prefer to stick to comparing pacers to pacers and spinners to spinners.

The difference of 2.5-3 wickets extra a game when compared for the same time period as an ATG pacer along with taking wickets at around the same SR as the Ambroses and McGs is the deal-maker for me.

 

[Prince EWS]

The Marshall fanboys shot themselves in the foot with their argument against Tendulkar.

I loved what you did tbh. People missing the point amused me the most though.

 

[ankitj]

Bet Robelinda has it, but I think he isn't uploading a lot of videos these days because of some users who rile him on youtube.

Match Scorecard

I can remember vaguely having watched this match live. Tendulkar in 98 was absolutely unstoppable. This was a great knock against McGrath and Donald combined!

 

[vcs]

The difference of 2.5-3 wickets extra a game when compared for the same time period as an ATG pacer along with taking wickets at around the same SR as the Ambroses and McGs is the deal-maker for me.

Again, I would prefer not to compare the two types directly.

FWIW, I think the fact that there is one team (India) that plays spin incredibly well at home (even though the conditions are relatively spin-friendly) and another which is a well-established graveyard for visiting spinners (Australia) muddies the waters too much in these comparisons. While comparing the ATG pacers and spinners over the last 30 years or so, they'll both win out in different areas. If you were looking to construct an all-time XI, you would need to include both types of bowlers as one cannot compensate for the other.

 

[smash84]

I can remember vaguely having watched this match live. Tendulkar in 98 was absolutely unstoppable. This was a great knock against McGrath and Donald combined!

From some of the shots in that video the knock looks absolutely incredible