Bublu Bhuyan
School Cricketer
If you ask any Australian player who saw Dennis Lillee bowl, and ask him to pick one between him and McGrath, I'm pretty damn sure they'll pick Lillee in a heartbeat. Lillee is often described as 'the outstanding bowler of his generation'. I'll even go a step further and say that most players from that era will consider Lille as the finest pacemen they have ever seen. I've seen lots and lots of former player drool over Lillee's mercurial abilities. Just to give you an example, have a look at what Lillee's bowling partner Jeff Thomson have to say about Lillee and his comparison with McGrath. This was way back in 2005.
Lillee is still the greatest, say Thommo and Dougie - Cricket - Sport
P.S. Please read the entire article properly. It contains lots of direct quotes from Jeff Thomson. You'll understand what I've said after you read it.
Thomson brings in a lot of important points like the over all quality and number of batsman from Lillee's era being better than the ones in McGrath's era, and McGrath having the luxury to bowl against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, etc. While Mcgrath having a much superior bowling average, considering the points that Thomson makes, it can be assumed for a moment that Lillee was the better bowler.
However, there were quite a few bowlers from the era of Lillee himself who boasted of much superior bowling averages -
1. Malcolm Marshall
2. Joel Garner
3. Michael Holding
4. Richard Hadlee
5. Imran Khan
All the above 5 players from his era averaged better than him with the ball, some by a good margin while some by a whisker. I'll admit out of those 5 players, 2 of them took less wickets than him (Holding, Garner). The more you play, the more it's difficult to maintain batting/bowling averages. Keeping that in mind let's take those 2 names out of the equation. The players we are left with are -
1. Malcolm Marshall
2. Richard Hadlee
3. Imran Khan
These 3 players played more Test matches than Lillee, took more wickets than him and averaged better with the ball than him. Let's compare -
Marshall - 81 Tests, 376 wickets, 20.94 (ave), SR - 46.7
Hadlee - 86 Tests, 431 wickets, 22.29 (ave), SR - 50.8
Imran - 88 Tests, 362 wickets, 22.81 (ave), SR - 53.7
vs
Lillee - 70 Tests, 355 wickets, 23.92 (ave), SR - 52
It's true that stats don't tell us the exact true story. But isn't it obvious looking at the above comparison that those 3 bowlers outperformed Lillee in every department (barring Imran Khan in SR)? I didn't watch Lillee bowl, but looking at the above comparison, I really do believe that Lillee is over rated.
Lillee is still the greatest, say Thommo and Dougie - Cricket - Sport
P.S. Please read the entire article properly. It contains lots of direct quotes from Jeff Thomson. You'll understand what I've said after you read it.
Thomson brings in a lot of important points like the over all quality and number of batsman from Lillee's era being better than the ones in McGrath's era, and McGrath having the luxury to bowl against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, etc. While Mcgrath having a much superior bowling average, considering the points that Thomson makes, it can be assumed for a moment that Lillee was the better bowler.
However, there were quite a few bowlers from the era of Lillee himself who boasted of much superior bowling averages -
1. Malcolm Marshall
2. Joel Garner
3. Michael Holding
4. Richard Hadlee
5. Imran Khan
All the above 5 players from his era averaged better than him with the ball, some by a good margin while some by a whisker. I'll admit out of those 5 players, 2 of them took less wickets than him (Holding, Garner). The more you play, the more it's difficult to maintain batting/bowling averages. Keeping that in mind let's take those 2 names out of the equation. The players we are left with are -
1. Malcolm Marshall
2. Richard Hadlee
3. Imran Khan
These 3 players played more Test matches than Lillee, took more wickets than him and averaged better with the ball than him. Let's compare -
Marshall - 81 Tests, 376 wickets, 20.94 (ave), SR - 46.7
Hadlee - 86 Tests, 431 wickets, 22.29 (ave), SR - 50.8
Imran - 88 Tests, 362 wickets, 22.81 (ave), SR - 53.7
vs
Lillee - 70 Tests, 355 wickets, 23.92 (ave), SR - 52
It's true that stats don't tell us the exact true story. But isn't it obvious looking at the above comparison that those 3 bowlers outperformed Lillee in every department (barring Imran Khan in SR)? I didn't watch Lillee bowl, but looking at the above comparison, I really do believe that Lillee is over rated.
Last edited: