Who was the better bowler: Glenn Mcgrath or Wasim Akram?

[Slifer]

Walsh played one test in SL. Walsh and Jimmy Adams were the difference between india and the WI in the 1994 series that was drawn.

 

[Burgey]

Walsh played one test in SL

Never let facts etc etc

 

[akilana]

Allow me to make my case.

Steyn was one of my favorites when he was playing, and I would put him in the top 10 ever, and better than Donald also.

But compared with the cream of the crop given here (Hadlee, Marshall, McGrath and Ambrose), Steyn lacked the consistency, even in his prime.

Yes, he had the best strikerate of all of them, but conversely had the highest econ rate. Which means when he wasn't getting wickets, he was getting tonked around.

I saw this happen to Steyn throughout his career. For one test in the series he would be godly, then the rest of the series rather pedestrian. After his fantastic 10-fer in Kanpur, the next test he was taken to the cleaners by Sehwag and Tendulkar. Before his terrific Perth performance in 2012, he was thrashed by Clarke and co prior to the series. There are many other examples. He was rarely consistently great throughout a series.

I think for a best ever ATG bowler, and especially as a lead bowler of the attack, you need to be able to apply pressure and sustain quality even when you are not taking wickets. So I would opt for an ATG bowler who is more miserly since at least he can prevent the opposition from dominating, even if he needs to take slightly longer to take a wicket.

And I dont know what you guys mean about Steyn running through sides, its not like the other four didn't do that as well, including in Asia?

And yes, Steyn was the best non-Asian pacer in Asia ever, but conversely his record in England and Australia is comparatively moderate.

You’re forgetting all of the bowlers you mentioned came pre t20 era. Steyn was taking 5 wickets a match until his last few tests at an average of 22 at 40 SR. If that’s lacking consistency I’m not sure what’s real consistency. Bowling tight lengths and not giving away runs and not getting any wickets and praying that the batsman nick to the slips?

 

[miscer]

I just want to point out that if akram had 10-15 fewer dropped catches his average would be in the low 22 to high 21 and all of a sudden he would be as good as McGrath. There’s a reason all the contemporaries say what they say

 

[Nintendo]

I just want to point out that if akram had 10-15 fewer dropped catches his average would be in the low 22 to high 21 and all of a sudden he would be as good as McGrath. There’s a reason all the contemporaries say what they say

And if McGrath hadnt have stepped on a ball god knows how long Australia's 16 WS would have gone to in 2005. Stuff like this is all conjecture. If Pak had a good slip cordon would Wasim have gone more for edges instead of targetting the stumps?? Would a more competent cordon have effected the other bowlers around him? If there averages drop you would expect the guys around then like Wasim to inversely raise.

 

[subshakerz]

You’re forgetting all of the bowlers you mentioned came pre t20 era. Steyn was taking 5 wickets a match until his last few tests at an average of 22 at 40 SR. If that’s lacking consistency I’m not sure what’s real consistency. Bowling tight lengths and not giving away runs and not getting any wickets and praying that the batsman nick to the slips?

Consistency in terms of actual match by match performance. Again, we are comparing Steyn with the best of the best like Marshall and Hadlee, who were also taking around 5 per match for most of their career and not getting hit regularly.

Yes, keeping it tight is important, because splaying it about will win you one match and may cost you another.

As for T20 era, you still had many contemporaries of Steyn like Anderson, Ryan Harris, etc. who were all more economical than Steyn. So its not a prerequisite that you have to go for runs to still be successful this last decade. That was just Steyn's MO.

 

[subshakerz]

I just want to point out that if akram had 10-15 fewer dropped catches his average would be in the low 22 to high 21 and all of a sudden he would be as good as McGrath. There’s a reason all the contemporaries say what they say

Yeah, I am not tempted to say Kaneria is much better bowler than his figures for having Akmal as a keeper, but ultimately its just speculation as to how good.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I just want to point out that if akram had 10-15 fewer dropped catches his average would be in the low 22 to high 21 and all of a sudden he would be as good as McGrath. There’s a reason all the contemporaries say what they say

Meaningless speculation. Could just as easily say that if Wasim didn't have ball tampering, notorious home umpiring and always brought on to clean up the tail he would have averaged 25+.

You can't just pick one "what if" that benefits your agenda and ignore everything that works the other way

 

[Ymaxxx]

no ones watching mcgrath wicket compilations on youtube of nicking it to the keeper/slip ? ?

 

[harsh.ag]

And if McGrath hadnt have stepped on a ball god knows how long Australia's 16 WS would have gone to in 2005. Stuff like this is all conjecture. If Pak had a good slip cordon would Wasim have gone more for edges instead of targetting the stumps?? Would a more competent cordon have effected the other bowlers around him? If there averages drop you would expect the guys around then like Wasim to inversely raise.

There are weird things written in this thread like having a great slip cordon wouldn't benefit a pacer's record (okay cool whatever dumb but fair maybe if you are into that sort of upyourbuttism), and then there is this. Would be news to Bumrah, Ishant, Shami.

 

[_00_deathscar]

Yes, he had the best strikerate of all of them, but conversely had the highest econ rate. Which means when he wasn't getting wickets, he was getting tonked around.

I'm not saying he wasn't expensive (he was) or that he couldn't be hit (he could), but has this been adjusted for eras?

Everyone seems to have suddenly gone back to scoring at (and struggling at too at times!) 2 runs an over.

It felt like every other test team was hitting 400+ in every other innings back then, often at 3-4 runs an over (or higher at times!).

How does his economy rate compare with is era?

 

[h_hurricane]

no ones watching mcgrath wicket compilations on youtube of nicking it to the keeper/slip ? ?

I am watching it right now.

 

[Arachnodouche]

no ones watching mcgrath wicket compilations on youtube of nicking it to the keeper/slip ? ?

I do. There's one with Another One Bites The Dust in the background. Works every time.

 

[Daemon]

And if McGrath hadnt have stepped on a ball god knows how long Australia's 16 WS would have gone to in 2005. Stuff like this is all conjecture. If Pak had a good slip cordon would Wasim have gone more for edges instead of targetting the stumps?? Would a more competent cordon have effected the other bowlers around him? If there averages drop you would expect the guys around then like Wasim to inversely raise.

I agree its all conjecture and therefore just a fun thing to think about as opposed to being seriously used to rate a player.

But implying having a better slip cordon could've somehow negatively affected a bowler, then in the same breath saying the bowlers around him would have lower averages (thus causing his to mysteriously go up) is one of the more wtf things I've read on here.

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah, need to be consistent. If slip catching is important, then Wasim suffered due to an incompetent cordon and McGrath benefitted by having an above average one most of his career.

I still think McGrath > Wasim as far as their career goes, but that argument being used both ways to always disadvantage Wasim is a bit silly.

 

[Calm_profit]

It's never ending loop where you know who is better but you wouldn't discredit other.

 

[Ymaxxx]

the reason 95% ppl will end up taking wasim in their teams(even if you consider both are equal bowlers) is because of his left arm variation + 23 batting average which Mcgrath does not have

 

[kyear2]

Yeah, need to be consistent. If slip catching is important, then Wasim suffered due to an incompetent cordon and McGrath benefitted by having an above average one most of his career.

I still think McGrath > Wasim as far as their career goes, but that argument being used both ways to always disadvantage Wasim is a bit silly.

I agree, it's impossible to deny that having a good to great cordon is key to a team's and fast bowlers success. My issue is, whose fault was it that Pakistan didn't have one?

As I said earlier, some teams emphasized their cordons and even made slight sacrifices to maintain strength there. Pakistan didn't see it fit to do so.

 

[Gob]

I just want to point out that if akram had 10-15 fewer dropped catches his average would be in the low 22 to high 21 and all of a sudden he would be as good as McGrath. There’s a reason all the contemporaries say what they say

So McGrath never had a catch dropped of him then. Ludicrous post

 

[Gob]

And if McGrath hadnt have stepped on a ball god knows how long Australia's 16 WS would have gone to in 2005. Stuff like this is all conjecture. If Pak had a good slip cordon would Wasim have gone more for edges instead of targetting the stumps?? Would a more competent cordon have effected the other bowlers around him? If there averages drop you would expect the guys around then like Wasim to inversely raise.

This event set the course of that series and without that Australia could have won or at worse retained the Ashes which would have resulted in Shane Warne's retirement at the end of that series. Would Aust have gone on to win 16 in a row without him? We'd never know. Space, time, reality. It's more than a linear path. It's a prism of endless possibility