Glenn McGrath Vs Wasim Akram?

[sifter132]

hard to argue with mcgrath's record, he got wickets everywhere at a great average, it's basically the most statistically solid bowling record in cricket. ever.

but I would akram in an all time XI because he was just unique in his ability.

notice how I haven't really answered the question.

A lot of people aren't answering the question. So I'm avoiding the fence completely...

I like McGrath better - you'll think I'm biased, but I have my reasons McGrath produced far more consistently and didn't pad his wickets tally with tail enders like Wasim did (35% of Wasim's wickets were #8-11, McGrath 25%. 40% of McGrath's wickets were the top 3, Wasim was 31%)

Wasim of course was more talented and could produce stunning delieveries and bowled some unplayable spells. But he just as often produced lacklustre spells where he'd bowl half a dozen no-balls, sprinkled with plenty of loose balls. He had very little patience and seemed to be wanting a wicket with every ball. Wasim's frustration seemed to come very quickly if he wasn't quite getting it right, and I remember often seeing him gesturing at his fielders about how they should be doing this and that, standing a bit finer/squarer after the balls already been bowled and I personally hate bowlers that do that (Stuart Broad...) And of course there are questions that were raised during his career over ball tampering and match fixing - Wasim may not be guilty, but the fact that questions were asked is never a good sign. For Wasim to play all those years with guys who admit to tampering (Imran, Shoaib and Waqar) and he'd never done it himself? I'd be stunned. In contrast, McGrath never had those questions asked at all.

So basically while everyone acknowledges Wasim was a difficult opponent because you never knew when that unplayable ball or that awesome reverse swing spell was coming, that's a lot different than picking someone for your team that you want to play alongside and I think I'd prefer McGrath on my team every day of the week.

 

[Hybrid]

I don't know. If I had to play in Sub Continent and English Conditions, I would go with Waseem with his ability to swing the ball both conventional and reverse. On Bouncier tracks I would go with Mcgrath.

----------

PS Is it the relaunch of the VS era we had an year back here at PC.

He didn't do so well there. McGrath's record in Asia is also better overall.

Agree that it's an impossible debate really on who is better, it's just good that we have had so many all time greats playing in the last 20 years or so.

It's one of those things where it's impossible to get a definitive answer.

Its even tough a question than a Murali vs Warne one, man. Just can't point one man as better than the other.

If you are statistics its not. There are holes in Murali's record but that's not the case for McGrath.

 

[puddleduck]

Six of one or half of a dozen of another?

 

[Hybrid]

I am guessing vs threads are something that's not regularly done in here. That would explain why a lot of people aren't using statistics. It was almost always pretty good in Cricket Web, always had plenty of interesting debates and got things excited.

 

[puddleduck]

Personally I think Vs threads are one of the most pointless threads in existence. I consider them the brainchild of adolescents. Hence I keep asking equally pointless questions that really have no right answer. My bad.

I think it's disrepectful to both players to try and say one was better than the other, as essentially both were awesome in their own ways, but also completely different bowlers, they would, in my opinion compliment each other very well. It always just comes down to personal preference in those issues, there is no right or wrong answer. Why must the world be black and white when there is so much variation in colour and tone?

Obviously, don't let me stop you all I seem to remember when I last used this forum a few years ago Versus threads constantly cropped up in some form or another, and essentially just degenerate into people insulting very talented cricketers. A glorified "my Dad is stronger than your Dad!" "Yeah, well my favourite cricketer is better than your favourite cricketer!"

Now, if you maybe asked what new ball pairing through time (whether a double act or sticking two different players together) would make you race to the first morning of a Test Match in the hope of not missing a single ball if they bowl. That might have been more interesting? In fact, to expand on that, what ground, in what conditions and against which batsmen? What would make your ideal first test match morning?

After all, you yourself said, ignoring various things like inspirationability (what? It can be a word haha).

Well, the right answer is McGrath, but that's not the point

 

[shravi]

Meh, who cares? At the end of the day cricket's a team game and so by that yardstick, McGrath had a more successful career. Who's a better bowler? Toss a coin.

 

[puddleduck]

Shravi wins

 

[Hybrid]

Well I don't personally use Vs threads as way to show off some sort of personal sense of pride, I just think its a lot of fun to compare and debate.

I can understand where you are coming from some people do use Vs threads very immaturely. But my idea of a Vs thread not how it turns out on your youtube or cricinfo comments section. I have that hope that mature users can debate with a level head while staying respectful to the other player. It was done that way in cricket web at least. Great and very good players were often compared to another and mostly everybody was respectful to both players.

This place moves pretty slowly compared to cricket web. IMO, some Vs threads are just what it needs to keep it going fast and have some good debates. Of course the result they come up with also matters. Obviously if Wasim wins a who is better poll over McGrath or Dravid wins over Kallis the forum itself ends up looking pretty biased.

So that's pretty much my take on Vs thread. I think if you do it right you can have a lot of fun. Also, I think most people at least have the decency to admit that both are all time greats at the end.

 

[puddleduck]

Also, I think most people at least have the decency to admit that both are all time greats at the end.

You must be new here haha

Nationalistic posturing seems to have been the order of the forum ever since England beat India. For shame. For shame.

Anyway, any thoughts on my counter question? What would be your ideal first morning of a test match. Who would be at the crease, who would be opening the bowling? Would it be a flat sunny day with Sehwag about to smash 100 in a session? Or would it be something fantastical like an old WACA ripe with bounce and pace, Thompson and Akhtar storming in at 95mph+ flinging them at a resolute Boycott, unflinching, unmoved whilst Haynes tries to take them on?

----------

Or would you just like to see Boycott's Gran with a stick of rhubard get hit in the head by a 70mph bouncer?

 

[Papa_Smurf]

Pointless debate. It just comes down to your personal preference. It's like comparing having sex with the Mrs or an exotic stranger. One's safe and predictable, but atleast you know what you're getting, and she gets the job done. The other is unpredictable and exciting, but you don't know how the night is going to end - you'll either be on cloud 9 or trying to figure out what STD you're trying to itch off.

 

[Hybrid]

You must be new here haha

Nationalistic posturing seems to have been the order of the forum ever since England beat India. For shame. For shame.

Ha ha well I think that kind of things wouldn't happen if the forum gained more mature users. Indians have more cricket fans than any other and yes I will admit they do have a pretty big group of fans that like to do that. But I would hope that this place has its mature share of Indian and other users that stays away from that kind of stuff.

who would be opening the bowling? Would it be a flat sunny day with Sehwag about to smash 100 in a session? Or would it be something fantastical like an old WACA ripe with bounce and pace

If we are still talking about the debate at hand, my choice as bowler would be McGrath of both situations

 

[Dipak]

Sausages or Bacon? Pasta or Rice? Audi or BMW?

Sausages, Pasta and Audi.

Anyways, both are very great legends of the game, but yeah feel that Akram might get the nod due to his batting ability, but if it's purely on bowling then I'd say McGrath.

 

[mrtwisties]

If I were picking an XI and had to choose one or the other of these players as my first pick, I'd probably take McGrath. The objective of building a bowling attack is to give yourself quality overs in all conditions. McGrath was fairly dangerous almost all of the time, whereas Akram lost a lot of venom when the ball wasn't swinging. McGrath gives me better odds of assembling an attack for all conditions, because his incredible consistency is a rare attribute - whereas bowlers who are unplayable given the right conditions are far more common.

On the other hand, if I already had an all-conditions attack (say Ambrose, Marshall and Warne), I'd consider picking Akram just for the chance to play him at his murderous best. If my frontliners could dismiss a team for 200 in swinging conditions, the addition of Akram would see them out for 150. Provided I had enough quality overs to cover for Akram when it's not swinging, his addition in place of McGrath would be all upside.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

Pointless debate. It just comes down to your personal preference. It's like comparing having sex with the Mrs or an exotic stranger. One's safe and predictable, but atleast you know what you're getting, and she gets the job done. The other is unpredictable and exciting, but you don't know how the night is going to end - you'll either be on cloud 9 or trying to figure out what STD you're trying to itch off.

no papa smurf, the question is mcrgath or akram. not mcgrath or shoaib akhtar.

 

[Papa_Smurf]

Haha. In that case, you'd definitely know what you're trying to itch off.