Player of the Decade - Ponting

[andyc]

Quit the trolling sasnoz, you're not fooling anyone.

 

[stephen]

And if I accused you of being an upright citizen who was well informed about cricket it does not make it true.

All we're talking about is cricketing ability, there doesn't need to be character attacks in here.

The fact is that your comments are incorrect. McGrath averaged better overseas than in Australia, therefore the "home umpire" point is demonstrably incorrect. Secondly, just because an in form batsman got the better of him in a couple of tests does not detract from his greatness. Thirdly, you don't pick up Lara as your 300th wicket and the second ball of a hat trick without being an extremely awesome bowler. Finally, there's a reason why he's not only the fast bowler with the most wickets but also the bowler with the lowest average in the 00s, despite the feathertops and bat cannons that exist these days.

If you don't believe me watch this:

YouTube - Glenn McGrath

 

[stephen]

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

Interesting to see who the best touring bowlers to Australia were.

Note, they were not quick bowlers.

By average for bowlers who have taken 5 wickets or more in the last decade, 8 of the top 20 touring bowlers were spinners. Only 19 of them have averaged under 40:

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine...7;team=8;team=9;template=results;type=bowling

When Aussies are included, 6 of the top 20 have been spinners (by average), though that is counting Symonds:

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine...7;team=8;team=9;template=results;type=bowling

 

[Burgey]

And if I accused you of being an upright citizen who was well informed about cricket it does not make it true.

All we're talking about is cricketing ability, there doesn't need to be character attacks in here.

The fact is that your comments are incorrect. McGrath averaged better overseas than in Australia, therefore the "home umpire" point is demonstrably incorrect. Secondly, just because an in form batsman got the better of him in a couple of tests does not detract from his greatness. Thirdly, you don't pick up Lara as your 300th wicket and the second ball of a hat trick without being an extremely awesome bowler. Finally, there's a reason why he's not only the fast bowler with the most wickets but also the bowler with the lowest average in the 00s, despite the feathertops and bat cannons that exist these days.

If you don't believe me watch this:

YouTube - Glenn McGrath

I remember during that spell Courtney Walsh was in the back of the commentary box, and someone talking about most wickets by a quick. Walsh had just retired with 519, and McGrath had 499 at the start of the series. They turned around to Courtney and said "How long will it be before McGrath passes you Courtney?" to which Walsh could be heard "Looks like it will be this match!"

Edit: here's his hattrick:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEZOhMNGLj0&feature=related

 

[sasnoz]

Quit the trolling sasnoz, you're not fooling anyone.

wasnt trolling, i just think mcgrath is a wanker

 

[Ikki]

I remember during that spell Courtney Walsh was in the back of the commentary box, and someone talking about most wickets by a quick. Walsh had just retired with 519, and McGrath had 499 at the start of the series. They turned around to Courtney and said "How long will it be before McGrath passes you Courtney?" to which Walsh could be heard "Looks like it will be this match!"

Edit: here's his hattrick:

YouTube - Glen Mcgrath Hatrick

McGrath hadn't taken 499 wickets till 4 years after Walsh retired. You sure Walsh had just retired?

 

[marc71178]

wasnt trolling, i just think mcgrath is a wanker

Have to give him credit for humour to be fair - one of the better trolls...

 

[Burgey]

McGrath hadn't taken 499 wickets till 4 years after Walsh retired. You sure Walsh had just retired?

Yeah, I'm sure. I picked out the relevant numbers, manipulated them to suit my argument and hey presto, they clearly showed Walsh had only just retired.

Can't believe you wasted a post on that tbh.

 

[Ikki]

Yeah, I'm sure. I picked out the relevant numbers, manipulated them to suit my argument and hey presto, they clearly showed Walsh had only just retired.

Can't believe you wasted a post on that tbh.

I thought it weird because I know McGrath hadn't taken 499 wickets in early 00s (when Walsh retired) to then only take about 60 wickets for the rest of the decade.

 

[R_D]

Yeah, I'm sure. I picked out the relevant numbers, manipulated them to suit my argument and hey presto, they clearly showed Walsh had only just retired.

Can't believe you wasted a post on that tbh.

 

[Debris]

That's partly due to the fact that teams all over the world have had better pacers, hence the pitches were prepared to suit them more. This happened everywhere bar India and Sri Lanka where they had better spinners. No surprise that the spinners do better than pacers there.

So pacemen are more useful except where pitches really favour spinners. All other things being even, pick pace bowlers

 

[Ikki]

So pacemen are more useful except where pitches really favour spinners. All other things being even, pick pace bowlers

Yes, I would say so. But if you have a spinner like Hauritz, even, let alone Warne, you should take them for variation's sake. Spinners are also helpful during the later innings.

As for the discussion, my point was that despite the fact that several factors have gone against Warne, he has been striking wickets faster than the best pacer of the era and one of all-time. That's just insane. Imagine if they were as good for him.

 

[Burgey]

So pacemen are more useful except where pitches really favour spinners. All other things being even, pick pace bowlers

...and do your best to consistently bowl 90 overs per day...