The balls of the century

[stephen]

Geez can you imagine if McGrath was an Englishman and got to bowl at Lord's twice a year instead of once every 4 years? Bloke would have racked up 1000 wickets.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Geez can you imagine if McGrath was an Englishman and got to bowl at Lord's twice a year instead of once every 4 years? Bloke would have racked up 1000 wickets.

Nah if he was English he'd probably never play cricket instead would have grown up pale, snooty with weird teeth and ended up owning a fish and chips shop with a butler to make the yorkshire pudding and I don't know a lot about England

 

[OverratedSanity]

If Mcgrath was English he'd be content in being a little better than average because that's all it'd take for him to be considered an all conquering legend of the game by his fans.

 

[honestbharani]

Would have been nicknamed McCloud...

 

[stephen]

He'd have averaged 10 at home and 22 away.

 

[Migara]

Asif in Action. Absolute peaches to get rid of Jayasuriya in 1st innings, Tharanga and Sangakkara in the 2nd. One to Sangakkara is special.

 

[Migara]

I really don't like the way Laxman played that ball. He left a huge gap between bat and pad that he then closed after the ball had already bowled him. It was lazy defense. As opposed to the McGrath balls which were played on three back foot because they looked shorter than they were.

I actually think the reason I dislike the Asif ball is that Laxman's shot really annoys me.

I watched that spell, Asif bowled series of leg cutters to Laxman, and that was why he was playing with a big gap. Then brought it in.

 

[stephen]

I watched that spell, Asif bowled series of leg cutters to Laxman, and that was why he was playing with a big gap. Then brought it in.

Yeah fair enough, great setup by the bowler. The difference for me between that shot and the two McGrath deliveries in that 2005 spell were that in the Asif wicket it really did look like all Laxman had to do was be a bit sharper with his front leg, while McGrath's balls had the batsmen entirely wrong footed.

Having watched it a few more times I can say that it's actually the batsman that makes the ball look worse to my eyes than the ball itself, which was an incredible cutter by any standard.

 

[honestbharani]

I saw that Asif ball live and it totally deserves its place in this countdown. The McGrath one to Flintoff at 5:13 on that video looked like it kept low?

 

[OverratedSanity]

Just bolwing with a wobbly seam won't do that anyway. There needs to be a little bit of 'sideways' on the ball so it actually deviates when it digs into the surface.

I think I do remember debating this exact delivery with you. I'm not entirely sure if he's rolled it to one side looking at the video even though its not particularly clear. Seam still looks like its perpendicular-ish from what I can make out

http://imgur.com/Av7y4qE

If its just a cutter its still an absurd degree of movement at 130kph and might actually be more impressive since he wouldve meant it to do pretty much exactly what it did. If its just a freak delivery that seamed back in (which seems hard to believe but then again it was probably the greenest pitch Pakistan has ever produced) its probably the close to the most Ive seen a ball deviate. No way Asif wouldve known it'd jag back in that far in that case though

 

[Bijed]

Geez can you imagine if McGrath was an Englishman and got to bowl at Lord's twice a year instead of once every 4 years? Bloke would have racked up 1000 wickets.

Most notably/worryingly, if he had played for us, he could legitimately have batted at #9 in some of our lineups

 

[Bijed]

It's my favorite McGrath spell to watch, but I just don't see how that ball is better. Vaughan played it horribly. VVS covered himself really well. Asif's also jagged in way more. If anything, the one to Freddie was really really good and probably the pick of this spell.

Yeah this. I've said it before, but how unplayable Michael Vaughan makes a ball look doesn't always correlate with how good it actually was.

Does footage exist of that Asif over/spell leading up to that ball? If I was going to show it to someone, I'd want to show them the set-up, it sounds brilliant

 

[honestbharani]

how unplayable Michael Vaughan makes a ball look doesn't always correlate with how good it actually was.

VVS is not far away from ol' Mick in that respect though. He will look all flabbergasted when missing a dead straight one too and often give the impression it kept lower than it did coz he stands up tall and does not get even the tiniest of front foot movement against seamers often.

That said, still think that Asif in-cutter is an extra-ordinary one.

 

[Line and Length]

That said, still think that Asif in-cutter is an extra-ordinary one.

I have to agree. The 2 McGrath dismissals were very good but he was helped by the fact the deliveries kept low.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Maybe the ground had a decline from left to right?

 

[stephen]

I have to agree. The 2 McGrath dismissals were very good but he was helped by the fact the deliveries kept low.

They kept low but they both cut in dramatically as well. All three are great examples of the bowler using the pitch to the fullest.

 

[stephen]

Maybe the ground had a decline from left to right?

It was at Lords so the decline ran up and down the pitch.

 

[Arachnodouche]

I mean the Asif delivery. The slope at Lord's and how McGrath in particular exploited it is lore of course, but nobody's really explored the topography of Pakistani cricket grounds as far as l know. Asif cutting it across like a rubber ball might have something to do with it.

 

[Blenkinsop]

For me the best McGrath wicket ball in that spell is the first one, to Trescothick. That's an absolute peach.

The Flintoff one was unplayable but mainly because it kept very low.

 

[trundler]

Harris to Cook was #1