James Anderson averages 26.87. Glenn McGrath averaged 21.

[lamellavig]

I can't fathom how a bowler can average only 21. I can't visualize it. 

 

But the average is the least impressive thing about McGrath. It's his economy rates, and that the fact that he did this with a deficiency in pace. The true version of skill over brawns!

[Nikola]

McGrath is like tier one bowler anderson lower tier 2 or upper tier 3 bowler. Anderson has played many more innings than mcgrath did also many more matches in favourable conditions. There is not even comparision between both. It's like Ashwin breaking Warne's and Murali's records.

[Sandeep99]

Wickets of pace bowlers in England have to be taken with a pinch of salt, just watch how Ishant and others turned into monsters this series.

 

McGrath is truly an exceptional bowler. Anderson is good when conditions suit him, that is about it.

[lamellavig]

3 minutes ago, sarchasm said:

Easy to imagine if you saw him bowl. Relentlessly accurate. Add short temper after follow through and a vile mouth.

 

That combination was enough to unnerve the best batsmen. Contributory factors, of course, were there. Mouthy aussie fielders, no weak bowler to release pressure, superb all round fielding and catching, and almost always batting against a large run deficit.

Utter rubbish. McGrath was the iceman, much like his captain Steve Waugh. If you want to see short temper, check Anderson and Broad. Sledging is for mortal bowlers. McGrath is immortal. He is not a bowler. It is an insult to call him a bowler. McGrath was an intellecutal. He was too good, too smart for resorting to sledging. 

[rkt.india]

30 minutes ago, lamellavig said:

I can't fathom how a bowler can average only 21. I can't visualize it. 

 

But the average is the least impressive thing about McGrath. It's his economy rates, and that the fact that he did this with a deficiency in pace. The true version of skill over brawns!

that ER plays a big role in reducing average.

[Sandeep99]

11 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

that ER plays a big role in reducing average.

It's a great thing he took so many wickets without conceding too many runs. Not many bowlers have done that. That is special.

[Shunya]

Mcgrath in these modern times will give away more runs resulting in higher ER and average.

 

Though, nothing to take away from him, he was absolutely an ATG without any doubt. Legend  

[rkt.india]

47 minutes ago, Sandeep99 said:

It's a great thing he took so many wickets without conceding too many runs. Not many bowlers have done that. That is special.

yes.  It takes a great temperament to keep bowling in one area.

[rkt.india]

47 minutes ago, Shunya said:

Mcgrath in these modern times will give away more runs resulting in higher ER and average.

 

Though, nothing to take away from him, he was absolutely an ATG without any doubt. Legend  

yes, possibly. 

[prasen82]

The aussie attack was relentless . Even their backup 4th seamers were fit to be leading pace attacks of other countries. Such was the gulf.

 

If our current batting toured that era of bowlers we would be rolled over in less than 3 days every test. 

 

How spoilt we were when we had the fab 4

[anoop S]

1 hour ago, Shunya said:

Mcgrath in these modern times will give away more runs resulting in higher ER and average.

 

Though, nothing to take away from him, he was absolutely an ATG without any doubt. Legend  

He will also take more wickets per match.

[vivek04]

Given the Cheating history (& present) of Australia, no wonder they could indulged in ball tampering in the past to get reverse swing etc. Also, Anderson is a overcast green track bully.

[Nikola]

3 minutes ago, vivek04 said:

Given the Cheating history (& present) of Australia, no wonder they could indulged in ball tampering in the past to get reverse swing etc. Also, Anderson is a overcast green track bully.

Many teams and bowlers have accepted that they did tamper the ball in 80s and 90s. McGrath didn't really need to tamper the ball as he wasn't reverse swing bowler. He rarely did that. Infact indians have tampered ball too. Wasim, Waqar and Shoaib have accepted that they tampered so that makes them any less than what the achieved?

[vivek04]

4 minutes ago, Nikola said:

Many teams and bowlers have accepted that they did tamper the ball in 80s and 90s. McGrath didn't really need to tamper the ball as he wasn't reverse swing bowler. He rarely did that. Infact indians have tampered ball too. Wasim, Waqar and Shoaib have accepted that they tampered so that makes them any less than what the achieved?

You yourself gave the answer. They are used to be called tainted bowlers along with great bowlers which questions their credibility. 

[Nikola]

2 minutes ago, vivek04 said:

You yourself gave the answer. They are used to be called tainted bowlers along with great bowlers which questions their credibility. 

Nope. You said Australia might have tried to tamper ball on many occasions but their bowlers were not reverse swing bowlers at all. Pitches were bouncy and had bit of help at times and these bowlers used to make most of it.

[Shunya]

2 hours ago, anoop S said:

He will also take more wickets per match.

Yes, possibly. 

[Trichromatic]

4 hours ago, Shunya said:

Mcgrath in these modern times will give away more runs resulting in higher ER and average.

 

Though, nothing to take away from him, he was absolutely an ATG without any doubt. Legend  

Higher average? No. Anderson averages 23-24 in last 8 years. McGrath could easily average 21 in same time.

 

Accuracy was always key in test cricket irrespective of era.

[Shunya]

23 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

Higher average? No. Anderson averages 23-24 in last 8 years. McGrath could easily average 21 in same time.

 

Accuracy was always key in test cricket irrespective of era.

Right, if you say Anderson averages 23-34 in last 8 years than Mcgrath can indeed do 21-22 avg, highly possible. But still will need more deeper analysis that include supporting bowlers, batting strikerates of different decades, Aussies always on top, etc (Almost everything that Sarchasm mentioned above).

 

I feel Anderson is not very far from Mcgrath. Their strike rate is not much different. 52-56 is almost similar.

[Trichromatic]

28 minutes ago, Shunya said:

Right, if you say Anderson averages 23-34 in last 8 years than Mcgrath can indeed do 21-22 avg, highly possible. But still will need more deeper analysis that include supporting bowlers, batting strikerates of different decades, Aussies always on top, etc (Almost everything that Sarchasm mentioned above).

 

I feel Anderson is not very far from Mcgrath. Their strike rate is not much different. 52-56 is almost similar.

Anderson is far from McGrath. 

[lamellavig]

10 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

Anderson is far from McGrath. 

Well said. McGrath was a level above peak Anderson. Peak McGrath was three levels ahead of peak Anderson.