Stuart MacGill Vs. Monty Panesar

[Dare]

this topic is sort of like the Saqlain vs Kumbe, where we were predicting what one could havee and one did achive. there is no doubt in my mind that MacGill could have had 350+ wickets at this point if it wasnt for Warne but he did great in the time that he was given and his record shows it. so i go with MacGill

 

[BigCrickNan]

MacGill by miles for me no matter how much I like Monty. In a couple of years i'd probably take Monty over MacGill in his prime.

 

[offdriven4]

Currently Macgill wins this argument hands down

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Macgill. He is quite a skilled spinner.

 

[sd92]

i agree macgill at the minute but soon monty will takeover wen macgill aint at his best anymore, but Murali is the best in the world now warne has gone

 

[Cricketman]

i agree macgill at the minute but soon monty will takeover wen macgill aint at his best anymore, but Murali is the best in the world now warne has gone

Peh, Jumbo still pwns tests
But yes, Mulari is the ODI spin king.

Right now i think its hard to compare as they are two different spinners altogether. Two different mindsets, attitudes, and approaches.
But, still McGill for me, but im sure Monty will overtake him soon enough.

 

[sd92]

yer thats true..england havent had a good spinner in ages and suddenly monty comes along....GILES, did spin the ball at all..the only way he got ppl out was by ppl gettin pissed off at his slow bowling,tryin to hit him and getting caught at short leg or silly point...lmao

 

[hollandcricket]

For me Stuart MacGill is the better bowler, but he always has been in the shadows of Warne, imo caused by his personality. Warne is more of a trouble maker, talking at batsmen, his addictions etc. I think Monty is a great bowler and will be improving, and like Warne, he's got the crowd behind him. If Monty keeps going, he is certainly going to be a greater bowler!

 

[sd92]

the crowd reli get behind him cos of his fielding mistakes...they egg him on i spose...

 

[Indyan]

I am a McGill fan. I have been one ever since I first saw him.
He could have been a much better bowler, if he had slightly better controll. He bowls too many fulltosses and longhops - thus releasing the pressure.
But, he can turn the ball a mile. I still remember in one ashes match, the ball pitched near Hussains legs and spun viciously and went to the first slip.

Too bad he never got too many oppertunities. I dont know how has been performing off late - but based on whatever I have seen of him he seemed to be a better bowler than Hogg. He is expensive, but would take wickets.

 

[manee]

Me and Chimp132 were having a debate on who is the better spinner...May you decide!

I beleive Stuey is with 198 wickets in only 40 Tests...but he thinks otherwise!


Stuart MacGill
Monty Panesar

:boxing​

Well, 198 wickets in 40 tests is amazing but what the stats do not pick up is his ability to release pressure at key moments and bowl shocking deliveries once an over. He is one of the biggest spinners of the ball in international cricket history, but his poor ability to contain batsman is why Warne is superior to him and got a place in the team over him every day of the week.

However the argument is against one Monty Singh Panesar. In terms of spinning the ball, MacGill is far better. However, spin bowling is about more than spinning the ball and Monty seems to pick up wickets in Test cricket with nothing more than 20cm of spin and a perfect probing line and length.

Both are seen as wicket taking bowlers and from this angle, MacGill is the far better bowler. but harnessing of flight and variety of pace can have Monty spinning away teams in five years. It is a matter of progression for Monty as he can easily be the next Ian Salisbury just as easily as the next Daniel Vettori who I think we can all agree is much better than MacGill

 

[offdriven4]

imho i feel monty is/will be better than vettori

 

[manee]

Definately not yet, but also definately not a discussion for this thread.

 

[irottev]

Can't really compare. But if you compare just the records, well, I think that is pretty comprehensive. Monty has some catching up to do

 

[aussie1st]

There is no way you can say Monty is better than MacGill right now, in a few years time maybe but definitely not now.