Was McGrath lucky to bowl to an average English batting lineup?

[MechEng]

Looking at the ways Aussies have always struggled to make the best use of the Duke ball since Ashes 2005, it seems that McGrath bowled to a very defensive English batting line up who most of the time played the waiting game and got out to a peach of a delivery that nipped back in sharply or held it's line.

 

If English batsmen were more positive , he would have never had so much success there. Soft pitches are a no no for metronomic line and length hit the deck bowlers.

 

Ashes 2019 is an exception, Cummins got 29 wickets but again England played the same waiting game and got out to jaffas.

Edited July 29, 2023 by MechEng

[vvvslaxman]

He met his match in Kevin pietersen albeit towards the end of his career. Mcgrath was too canny to be bullied. 

[MechEng]

2 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

He met his match in Kevin pietersen albeit towards the end of his career. Mcgrath was too canny to be bullied. 

 

KP and Freddie Flintoff aside, all of them were classic tuk tuk batsmen.

[vvvslaxman]

2 minutes ago, MechEng said:

 

KP and Freddie Flintoff aside, all of them were classic tuk tuk batsmen.

 

It is not easy to go after Mcgrath without significant risks. Viru is one of the most aggressive batsman in history. He averages 22 against Mcgath getting dismissed 4 times. 

Even hist strike rate was only 67. By his standard that is less given that Sehwag's strike rate against steyn is 81.

[jf1gp_1]

12 minutes ago, MechEng said:

Looking at the ways Aussies have always struggled to make the best use of the Duke ball since Ashes 2005, it seems that McGrath bowled to a very defensive English batting line up who most of the time played the waiting game and got out to a peach of a delivery that nipped back in sharply or held it's line.

 

If English batsmen were more positive , he would have never had so much success there. Soft pitches are a no no for metronomic line and length hit the deck bowlers.

 

Ashes 2019 is an exception, Cummins got 29 wickets but again England played the same waiting game and got out to jaffas.

 

IMO Mcgraths biggest strength wasn't his line length, it was his patience. In an era where batsmen are willing to play a reverse sweep in the first hour of a test match, mcgrath would have 5 wickets every inning. 

[MechEng]

11 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

He met his match in Kevin pietersen albeit towards the end of his career. Mcgrath was too canny to be bullied. 

 

Funny coincidence here is that McGrath switched to the same short ball tactic like Cummins when batsmen hit his length deliveries for runs. Laxman' 167 and 281, Lara in that 1999 series come to mind.

[vvvslaxman]

4 minutes ago, MechEng said:

 

Funny coincidence here is that McGrath switched to the same short ball tactic like Cummins when batsmen hit his length deliveries for runs. Laxman' 167 and 281, Lara in that 1999 series come to mind.

 

Laxman was owner of all the bowlers from Australia back then. ONly bastman to score 2000 runs against the ATG Australian side. During Laxman 167 He butchered Brett Lee for 52 runs in 5 overs. Otherwise he played on merit being a touch player. Lara  was a beastly player against spin. But he didn't quiet thrash Mcgrath. Yes he can be negotiated with sound technique and judgement. But guys like Kohli would be his bunny.

[MechEng]

7 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

It is not easy to go after Mcgrath without significant risks. Viru is one of the most aggressive batsman in history. He averages 22 against Mcgath getting dismissed 4 times. 

Even hist strike rate was only 67. By his standard that is less given that Sehwag's strike rate against steyn is 81.

 

It could be that McGrath was an extreme case of a metronome. Cummins lies somewhere between McGrath and Brett Lee, accurate but not a metronome like McGrath, swift but not rapid like Lee.

 

I still believe McGrath would have had headaches bowling to Crawley, Brook and a fit Moeen Ali.

[Nikhil_cric]

12 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

He met his match in Kevin pietersen albeit towards the end of his career. Mcgrath was too canny to be bullied. 

I think this is a bit of a myth. According to Askcricinfo, KP scored 135 runs at a Strike rate of 50 and was dismissed 5 times by McGrath. 

 

And this was a McGrath who was in decline after stepping on the ball. 

 

For Tests that there is ball-by-ball-data( became ubiquitous only from around 2001), the 3 batsmen who really dominated McGrath were

 

1. Nathan Astle - 237 runs. Strike Rate = 66,  3 dismissals. Average = 79

2. Herschelle Gibbs - 191 runs, Strike rate = 38,  3 dismissals, Average = 63.66

3. Andrew Strauss - 171 runs, Strike rate = 50, 3 dismissals , Average = 57

 

Honourable mention to Kallis

 

133 runs, 3 dismissals, strike rate 35, average = 44.33

 

 

[MechEng]

9 minutes ago, Nikhil_cric said:

I think this is a bit of a myth. According to Askcricinfo, KP scored 135 runs at a Strike rate of 50 and was dismissed 5 times by McGrath. 

 

And this was a McGrath who was in decline after stepping on the ball. 

 

For Tests that there is ball-by-ball-data( became ubiquitous only from around 2001), the 3 batsmen who really dominated McGrath were

 

1. Nathan Astle - 237 runs. Strike Rate = 66,  3 dismissals. Average = 79

2. Herschelle Gibbs - 191 runs, Strike rate = 38,  3 dismissals, Average = 63.66

3. Andrew Strauss - 171 runs, Strike rate = 50, 3 dismissals , Average = 57

 

Honourable mention to Kallis

 

133 runs, 3 dismissals, strike rate 35, average = 44.33

 

 

 

Domination here is in a different context, as in upsetting a bowlers natural game and being in command of your batting. Statistically Gavaskar 'dominated' Imran Khan compared to West Indian greats, but the real picture shows otherwise.

[Norman]

1 hour ago, MechEng said:

I still believe McGrath would have had headaches bowling to Crawley, Brook and a fit Moeen Ali.

 

 

You've got to kidding here lmao

[Nikhil_cric]

15 minutes ago, MechEng said:

 

Domination here is in a different context, as in upsetting a bowlers natural game and being in command of your batting. Statistically Gavaskar 'dominated' Imran Khan compared to West Indian greats, but the real picture shows otherwise.

Actually, there is no evidence as to whether Gavaskar dominated Imran or not. He could very well have played Imran out and attacked the lesser bowlers. 

 

H2H stats should show if a batsman has consistently upset a bowler's rhythm or not. 

 

Your first post talks about batsmen not being positive against McGrath leading to their doom. I actually agree with that, but only partly. 

 

The point of my post was that only Nathan Astle has shown success against McGrath by being aggressive. If anything the other guys had success with a more restrained approach.

 

So no, I don't batsmen of that era would have been successful against McGrath with a more aggressive approach.

 

However, it is true that in recent years the skill levels of batsmen in executing aggressive strokes have improved drastically. I do think a Bazball lineup would definitely be a challenge even for someone of McGrath's skills but that is purely speculation on my part. 

[MechEng]

27 minutes ago, Nikhil_cric said:

Actually, there is no evidence as to whether Gavaskar dominated Imran or not. He could very well have played Imran out and attacked the lesser bowlers. 

 

H2H stats should show if a batsman has consistently upset a bowler's rhythm or not. 

 

Your first post talks about batsmen not being positive against McGrath leading to their doom. I actually agree with that, but only partly. 

 

The point of my post was that only Nathan Astle has shown success against McGrath by being aggressive. If anything the other guys had success with a more restrained approach.

 

So no, I don't batsmen of that era would have been successful against McGrath with a more aggressive approach.

 

However, it is true that in recent years the skill levels of batsmen in executing aggressive strokes have improved drastically. I do think a Bazball lineup would definitely be a challenge even for someone of McGrath's skills but that is purely speculation on my part. 

 

Strauss dominated McGrath? By that logic, Viv was average against great bowlers if you ignore the wearing of cap and fan-girling over hook shots.

 

I cannot think of a great innings by any NZ/SA/Eng batsmen in that era against McGrath at his prime. 

[MechEng]

40 minutes ago, Norman said:

 

 

You've got to kidding here lmao

 

Have you seen the sort of confidence these guys have? They are ok with reverse-scooping or playing ramp shots against 88-89 mph deliveries.

 

I know McGrath is a celebrated great, but you cannot ignore the novelty of the brand of cricket played by England now.

[Nikhil_cric]

2 minutes ago, MechEng said:

 

Strauss dominated McGrath? By that logic, Viv was average against great bowlers if you ignore the wearing of cap and fan-girling over hook shots.

 

I cannot think of a great innings by any NZ/SA/Eng batsmen in that era against McGrath at his prime. 

If Strauss has not dominated McGrath then neither has KP. Both played majority of their Tests when McGrath was in decline and KP neither made big runs Pidge nor did he score them particularly quick. Strauss made big runs but sure he wasn't the fastest scorer.

 

The only batsman who attacked McGrath successfully and consistently at his peak and scored runs against him is Nathan Astle. His 156* at Perth is a big knock. Even when he has scored 70's, 60's and 50's against Australia, he has disproportionately hit McGrath out of the attack with a flurry of boundaries. 

 

It usually required Warne or Kasprowicz to take out Astle. Astle has clearly dominated McGrath. But yeah he's an outlier. 

 

 

[DeepSpace]

McGrath was the greatest trundler of all time, of all time!  - Kanye.

 

P.S. It is meant with all respect. Never has Yee seen a bowler bowl in high 120s-low 130s and create such bounce and havoc!

[putrevus]

A guy likes VVS with all his technical weaknesses had some success against Mcgrath.

 

So this English team would have had some success but Mcgrath's great strength was his mental ability to find weakness in batsman's technique.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 29, 2023 by putrevus

[Tillu]

More than McGrath it was Shane Warne who was lucky to bowl to that English line up. They don't know how to play spin.

[Vijy]

15 minutes ago, putrevus said:

A guy likes VVS with all his technical weaknesses had some success against Mcgrath.

 

So this English team would have had some success but Mcgrath's great strength was his mental ability to find weakness in batsman's technique.

 

 

 

 

VVS' technical weakness was vs swing, and that's why he didn't do great in Eng. if he played McG in Eng (he played him in Aus and Ind, with little lateral movement), former would do far better

[putrevus]

7 minutes ago, Vijy said:

VVS' technical weakness was vs swing, and that's why he didn't do great in Eng. if he played McG in Eng (he played him in Aus and Ind, with little lateral movement), former would do far better

VVS could not play seam bowling also.He had some success against Mcgrath on flat grounds where there was no seam movement also.

 

VVS could play bounce with ease that is why he did well in Australia.

 

Mcgrath would still come up on top of VVS most of the time.

Edited July 29, 2023 by putrevus