wasim akram vs glenn mcgrath

marc71178 said:

I'll take McGrath from one end and Wasim from the other please.

Click to expand...

I didn't even know you were out of the closet, Marc.

Voltman said:

I didn't even know you were out of the closet, Marc.

Click to expand...

See, that's the kind of humour I can get on board with

Sanz said:

The problem with that is you switch gear to suit your argument. When stats favor your argument, you keep harping on that, when they dont, you say you dont care about what the stats say.

Click to expand...

have a read of what I said two years ago and what I am saying now...

the stats say McGrath is/was a who was/is more efficient at taking wickets and keeping down runs, he takes more wickets per match, he has a lower average and a better strike rate and a better economy rate.

But I am not using the stats, they tell me he was/is the more efficient bowler...that doesnt mean I think he is the BETTER bowler, or the bowler I woild prefer to have on my team, the stats arent the sole thing or even a fraction of the thing that I am basing my opinion on, I just happen to think McGrath is the bowler I want on my team, irrespective of what the stats tell me. I dont actually need to justify my opinion.

However, my main gripe was how you said (read it again) that Akram was the greatest bowler of the modern era, and that MCgrath was good but couldnt compare to Akram.
How can you say McG cant compare to Akram? Thats what I was getting at....you can have your opinion on who was the best, but to say McG cant compare to Akram i.e. doesnt deserve to even be mentioned up there with Akram, can be shot down with a quick look at the stats...the stats suggest McG is a match for Akram if not, more of a match statistically.

I dont have a problem with anyone having an opinion, but to say what you said is just foolish, because McG has done what any bowler is expected to do, more successfully and so can be spoken about with the likes of Akram

Anyway, I still cant see how me saying Akram was great at knocking over the tail and was a great bowler, but I would rather have McG playing for me to get the top order out is anymore of an insult than you saying McG is merely a good bowler and cant compare to Akram.

Is it ok to insult McG but not Akram????

Sanz said:

My statement may have been ridiculous, but it still was an opinion without insulting Mcgrath or anyother bowler as compared to you.And yes I think he was better than most modern era bowlers because while being the great bowler he was a great entertainer as well, he had a great variety. He was an artist or simply the greatest artist of the ball I have seen and a very successful one @ that.

Click to expand...

you actually said Akram was the greatest modern era bowler...which is your opinion. The fact that it may not be shared by even 10% of cricket follwers doesnt matter, its your opinion and thats fine.

He was an artist with the ball, true, but it still doesnt get away from the FACT that McGrath has taken more wickets per game, more economically and at a faster strike rate, and so deserves to be classed as a bowler up there with Akram, something you made out he didnt deserve

Swervy said:

you actually said Akram was the greatest modern era bowler...which is your opinion. The fact that it may not be shared by even 10% of cricket follwers doesnt matter, its your opinion and thats fine.

He was an artist with the ball, true, but it still doesnt get away from the FACT that McGrath has taken more wickets per game, more economically and at a faster strike rate, and so deserves to be classed as a bowler up there with Akram, something you made out he didnt deserve

Click to expand...

You must feel very strongly about this point, it got posted 4 times! (just a joke, I realize that's probably a server issue).

Swervy said:

have a read of what I said two years ago and what I am saying now...

the stats say McGrath is/was a who was/is more efficient at taking wickets and keeping down runs, he takes more wickets per match, he has a lower average and a better strike rate and a better economy rate.

But I am not using the stats, they tell me he was/is the more efficient bowler...that doesnt mean I think he is the BETTER bowler, or the bowler I woild prefer to have on my team, the stats arent the sole thing or even a fraction of the thing that I am basing my opinion on, I just happen to think McGrath is the bowler I want on my team, irrespective of what the stats tell me. I dont actually need to justify my opinion.

However, my main gripe was how you said (read it again) that Akram was the greatest bowler of the modern era, and that MCgrath was good but couldnt compare to Akram.
How can you say McG cant compare to Akram? Thats what I was getting at....you can have your opinion on who was the best, but to say McG cant compare to Akram i.e. doesnt deserve to even be mentioned up there with Akram, can be shot down with a quick look at the stats...the stats suggest McG is a match for Akram if not, more of a match statistically.

I dont have a problem with anyone having an opinion, but to say what you said is just foolish, because McG has done what any bowler is expected to do, more successfully and so can be spoken about with the likes of Akram

Anyway, I still cant see how me saying Akram was great at knocking over the tail and was a great bowler, but I would rather have McG playing for me to get the top order out is anymore of an insult than you saying McG is merely a good bowler and cant compare to Akram.

Is it ok to insult McG but not Akram????

Click to expand...

Trust you to play with words and put those into my mouth, But no matter how much and how well you try to claim that I was being insulting to Mcgrath, it simply isn't true. Neither does it justify your attack on Akram ( remember your ball tampering post was made before I even posted on that thread). Even if you found my post silly, you could have said whatever you wanted to about Mcgrath without really insulting comments.

Secondly, that matter was done with 3 years ago and I had moved on, but you bring up this everytime claiming that you were bashed for saying Mcgrath was better, as if you are so innocently debating Mcgrath was better and then the big bad subcontinentians came and bashed you for merely saying so. That is simply NOT TRUE.


Lastly I did not insult Mcgrath, Yes I said Mcgrath doesn't compare to Akram which may sound silly considering their stats but my reasons are different because I find Akram much more entertaining than any other bowler in the post packer era, he probably had more variety than anyone and on those grounds I dont find Mcgrath anyhwere close to Akram. If you add Akram's Odi records, batting (and fielding) then there really isn't any comparison, Akram just blows Mcgrath away as a cricketer, (IMO ofcourse).

Voltman said:

I didn't even know you were out of the closet, Marc.

Click to expand...

Sanz said:

Obviously if Bowler B is so good, why cant he knock off Batsmen from 7-11 as well as others ? May be that is a weakness in Bowler B ?

Click to expand...

THAT IS THE WORSE ARGUMENT I'VE HEARD IN A LONG TIME......

Are you insinuating its harder to get 7-11 batters out over 1-6 ?

Sanz said:

Trust you to play with words and put those into my mouth, But no matter how much and how well you try to claim that I was being insulting to Mcgrath, it simply isn't true. Neither does it justify your attack on Akram ( remember your ball tampering post was made before I even posted on that thread). Even if you found my post silly, you could have said whatever you wanted to about Mcgrath without really insulting comments.

Click to expand...

what do you mean putting words into your mouth??? You wrote it in that thread.
What I said was barely an attack...I never accused Akram of ball tampering, I just said I struggled to get the idea of him ball tampering out of my head,accustaions made by others..and it still niggles with me...I niggles with me about Imran admitting he tampered with the ball, still doesnt make me think he wasnt one of the best fast bowlers of all time

Sanz said:

Secondly, that matter was done with 3 years ago and I had moved on, but you bring up this everytime claiming that you were bashed for saying Mcgrath was better, as if you are so innocently debating Mcgrath was better and then the big bad subcontinentians came and bashed you for merely saying so. That is simply NOT TRUE. .

Click to expand...

Everytime????? what are you talking about....first off I never said McGrath was better, I said he has been more effective as a pace bowler.
I havent looked back at when I said that about being bashed..but I am sure I said it tongue in cheek (did I put any s or in there, i will look in a sec)
And anyway, i am a big boy now, I can handle myself on this forum...at no point do I legitimately feel I have been 'bashed'..looking back at that old thread i still feel I held my own on that, despite the fact you completely seem to have missed the point of what I was discussing on that thread and indeed on this one.

Sanz said:

Lastly I did not insult Mcgrath, Yes I said Mcgrath doesn't compare to Akram which may sound silly considering their stats but my reasons are different because I find Akram much more entertaining than any other bowler in the post packer era, he probably had more variety than anyone and on those grounds I dont find Mcgrath anyhwere close to Akram. If you add Akram's Odi records, batting (and fielding) then there really isn't any comparison, Akram just blows Mcgrath away as a cricketer, (IMO ofcourse).

Click to expand...

well I dont seem to remember you stating back then the reasons why you think Akram was way beyond comparison to McGrath..you said MCGrath was 'good'..I actually stated Akram was a great bowler....who is it that appears to be downgrading one of those bowlers, you or me?.

As I have already agreed with you , yes Akram was a treat to watch, was a master at all types of things...I guess you differ from me in that I will judge a bowler on the results he gets as opposed to how it looks..which isnt to knock Akram in the slightest, its just I would pick McGrath to bowl for me life over Akram...and in fact as I said back then, I would choose him any day of the week, because I place high value on nagging consistancy...but yes, Akram was at time just mesmerising to watch.

Re: Akram over McGrath as a cricketer..well yeah, fair do's, but I think the discussion was actually about as bowlers. Everyone knows Akram was miles better as a batsman.

And on to ODI records..well in fact McGrath has the better record as a bowler as well, more wickets per match, better average, more economical (despite Akram playing a huge chunk of his career in an era of lower scoring)...so although I am not actually saying McGrath is the better ODI bowler, he is in fact statistically superior....he has done what a bowler is meant to do in ODI better than Akram has over a long period of time, and thats stop the opponents scoring and take wickets

So again, yeah as cricketers you cant compare the two, because McGrath cant bat, but I think most people who would back McG over Akram (and before you jump in, read what I say, I havent said most people would back McG over Akram) as a bowler in both forms of the game would have one hell of a strong argument

I really am quite surprised by this to be honest Sanz, I have you down as one of the more clear thinking people on here, but I am just finding it bizarre how you are arguing this one out.

Sanz said:

Lastly I did not insult Mcgrath, Yes I said Mcgrath doesn't compare to Akram which may sound silly considering their stats but my reasons are different because I find Akram much more entertaining than any other bowler in the post packer era, he probably had more variety than anyone and on those grounds I dont find Mcgrath anyhwere close to Akram. If you add Akram's Odi records, batting (and fielding) then there really isn't any comparison, Akram just blows Mcgrath away as a cricketer, (IMO ofcourse).

Click to expand...

So because he isn't as entertaining that diminishes his achievement and standing in the game ? Please champ. You have been clutching at straws for the last 5 or so pages. You argued about batters who come in at #7 and I added those to the statistics and now you are adding the one-day records in (including batting and fielding) when it was never about ODI ? Those are the attempts of a deseperate man trying to save face....and it aint working champ.

Hodgo7 said:

THAT IS THE WORSE ARGUMENT I'VE HEARD IN A LONG TIME.....

Click to expand...

Exactly and that is why the argument that Akram was less succesfull in taking order wickets is another worst argument.

Are you insinuating its harder to get 7-11 batters out over 1-6 ?

Click to expand...

No, I am insinuating that it's not the position but the batsman that is harder to get out regardless of the position he bats. During Australia's last tour of India, Indian bowlers had more difficulty in getting Gillespie out than most aussie top order batsmen and it doesn't matter what position a batsman batted.

Hodgo7 said:

So because he isn't as entertaining that diminishes his achievement and standing in the game ? Please champ. You have been clutching at straws for the last 5 or so pages. You argued about batters who come in at #7 and I added those to the statistics and now you are adding the one-day records in (including batting and fielding) when it was never about ODI ? Those are the attempts of a deseperate man trying to save face....and it aint working champ.

Click to expand...

What's with all the "champs" and "desparate man" insults? Agree with him or disagree, but don't patronize him. I have yet to see Sanz initiate the same tone as you in this debate. Swervy is debating him too, but without the use of an insulting tone.

Swervy said:

I havent looked back at when I said that about being bashed..but I am sure I said it tongue in cheek (did I put any s or in there, i will look in a sec)
And anyway, i am a big boy now, I can handle myself on this forum...at no point do I legitimately feel I have been 'bashed'..looking back at that old thread i still feel I held my own on that, despite the fact you completely seem to have missed the point of what I was discussing on that thread and indeed on this one.

Click to expand...

alas I never did put any or in there...but my point still stays the same..I am not after sympathy Sanz

This thread isn't even about McGrath or Wasim anymore ... it's become a mockery of accusations and accusations of accusations and so on.

Swervy said:

what do you mean putting words into your mouth??? You wrote it in that thread.
What I said was barely an attack...I never accused Akram of ball tampering, I just said I struggled to get the idea of him ball tampering out of my head,accustaions made by others..and it still niggles with me...I niggles with me about Imran admitting he tampered with the ball, still doesnt make me think he wasnt one of the best fast bowlers of all time

Click to expand...

What did you mean when you said "Is it ok to insult McG but not Akram????" How and when I insulted Pigeon ? Did I bring up him using filthy language or mental disintegration to upset batsmen's concentration ?

If you are comparing two people purely on their cricketing ability why bring up an accusation that was never proved ? If that is not your way of diminishing Akram's career then what is ?

Swervy said:

And on to ODI records..well in fact McGrath has the better record as a bowler as well, more wickets per match, better average, more economical (despite Akram playing a huge chunk of his career in an era of lower scoring)...so although I am not actually saying McGrath is the better ODI bowler, he is in fact statistically superior....he has done what a bowler is meant to do in ODI better than Akram has over a long period of time, and thats stop the opponents scoring and take wickets

So again, yeah as cricketers you cant compare the two, because McGrath cant bat, but I think most people who would back McG over Akram (and before you jump in, read what I say, I havent said most people would back McG over Akram) as a bowler in both forms of the game would have one hell of a strong argument

Click to expand...

How exactly does Pigeon have better ODI record than Wasim ? Oh wait a minute, you must be talking about the overall average. Does it include the fact that Mcgrath averages 19.8 @ home and 26.6 away whereas Wasim averages 23.89 away and 31 @ home. In neutral venue Wasim has slight edge in avg., strike rate and economy as well despite playing majority of matches in lifeless tracks in Sharjah etc.

In ODIs Except England, Zimbabwe & Namibia, Akram has better avg against pretty much every other country.

Sanz said:

Obviously if Bowler B is so good, why cant he knock off Batsmen from 7-11 as well as others ? May be that is a weakness in Bowler B ?

Click to expand...

Maybe he doesn't get the chance to bowl to them because he knocks over the top order in his first spell and Bowler SKW rips out the tail before he gets another bowl?

marc71178 said:

Maybe he doesn't get the chance to bowl to them because he knocks over the top order in his first spell and Bowler SKW rips out the tail before he gets another bowl?

Click to expand...

Aww Where have you been Marc. Thank You for the excellent research, time and again you have proved that we bunch are so useless without you.

Now can you please explain this same stuff to the folks who are arguing that Wasim also had to share some bowler like Imran Khan, Waqar Younis, Shoaib Akhtar, Saqlain Mushtaq, Mushtaq Ahmad and Abdul Qadir and it is possible that those guys might have shared the top wicket among themselves.

Swervy said:

Everytime????? what are you talking about....first off I never said McGrath was better, I said he has been more effective as a pace bowler.

Click to expand...

http://forum.cricketweb.net/showpost.php?p=148392&postcount=52

Thanks Very much.