Who was the better AUSTRALIAN CRICKETER: Akram or McGrath?

[BlazeDragon]

errr.......dude we are talking about the 90s here. Wasim, Waqar, Saqlain, Mushy, and since you want to bring in Gillespie you can also bring in Akhtar. The Pak bowling attack was of course better for most of the 90s. It is just the batting and fielding were dire so many times.

You bring in Akthar you could bring in Lee too. I am not just talking about the 90's.

 

[BlazeDragon]

if you could be a little less cryptic, i might be able to answer your question.

haha......totally missed the sarcasm

Yes

 

[smash84]

However Mcgrath also has a disadvantage for being in the Australian team. Aussie bowling has also always been significantly better than Pakistan. So if it weren't for Warne, Gillespie, Lee etc taking all those wickets for themselves also then Mcgrath would have more wickets also.

which time period are you talking about? I don't think the Aussie bowling in the 90s was significantly better than Pakistan.

Wasim, Waqar, Mushy, Saqlain (90s) > McGrath, Warne, Fleming (90s)

. I am not just talking about the 90's.

Dude at least know what you are talking about. You said Aussie bowling has always been significantly better .

Now you say that you are not talking about 90s. At least think before you write

 

[Howe_zat]

The Aussie attack only overtook Pakistan's once Waqar's reign of terror ended around 94-95. Remember Mcgrath had only debated the previous year. By the end of the decade the Aussie attack was miles ahead.

 

[vcs]

The Aussie attack only overtook Pakistan's once Waqar's reign of terror ended around 94-95. Remember Mcgrath had only debated the previous year. By the end of the decade the Aussie attack was miles ahead.

Eloquent bloke, that McGrath.

 

[Howe_zat]

****ing phone

 

[hang on]

Remember Mcgrath had only debated the previous year.

so that's what it means to ask questions of the batsman...

miles ahead at the end of the decade? even though waqar was only a shadow of his former fearsome self, akhtar was bowling well, akram was still fine, and saqlain was superb. marginally ahead, i would imagine.

 

[G.I.Joe]

I don't get why the comparative qualities of the Pakistani and Australian attack are even a factor? Good bowlers bowling from the other end can only negatively affect your tally of wickets. They do not negatively affect your strike rate.

 

[BlazeDragon]

Dude at least know what you are talking about. You said Aussie bowling has always been significantly better .

Now you say that you are not talking about 90s. At least think before you write

However Mcgrath also has a disadvantage for being in the Australian team. Aussie bowling has also always been significantly better than Pakistan. So if it weren't for Warne, Gillespie, Lee etc taking all those wickets for themselves also then Mcgrath would have more wickets also.

You bring in Akthar you could bring in Lee too. I am not just talking about the 90's.

At least read before you write bro. I never even brought up the 90's. Your the one only talking JUST the the 90's. I said they were ALWAYS better in the Mcgrath era including the 00's.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Ok, the poll's up. Please vote so we can clear up this tricky little conundrum!

 

[Hurricane]

Not enough irrelevant options.

 

[Top_Cat]

I don't get why the comparative qualities of the Pakistani and Australian attack are even a factor? Good bowlers bowling from the other end can only negatively affect your tally of wickets. They do not negatively affect your strike rate.

It does, though. You bowl differently in a team full of guns vs pea-shooters. Personalities obviously play their part because no-one exists in a vacuum and the technical and mental requirements are different (different jobs at different points of the game, etc.). The very best might adapt eventually but it takes time.

 

[smash84]

At least read before you write bro. I never even brought up the 90's. Your the one only talking JUST the the 90's. I said they were ALWAYS better in the Mcgrath era including the 00's.

Really? Just read the statement of yours that I have quoted. It didn't mention the McGrath era anywhere. Just a blanket statement "always better"

 

[honestbharani]

It does, though. You bowl differently in a team full of guns vs pea-shooters. Personalities obviously play their part because no-one exists in a vacuum and the technical and mental requirements are different (different jobs at different points of the game, etc.). The very best might adapt eventually but it takes time.

yeah sometimes all the statsguru-ing just ends up having us think cricketers are just a bunch of equations whom you can take and imagine playing somewhere else and know exactly what their numbers would then be..

 

[BlazeDragon]

Really? Just read the statement of yours that I have quoted. It didn't mention the McGrath era anywhere. Just a blanket statement "always better"

Well what exactly do you think I am talking about Bradman era? I would think that it would be kind of obvious if I said Mcgrath was "always better" I mean that better in always better in his era. Unless Mcgrath has a secret time machine I don't think he can be in any other era other than his own.

 

[Fusion]

Ok, the poll's up. Please vote so we can clear up this tricky little conundrum!

It would be the awesomest result ever if Wasim wins this poll.