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

[vvvslaxman]

6 hours ago, MechEng said:

 

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.

 

Today Punter was insisting all morning to bowl 5th stump line which is his weakness. But Australia was bowling filth by bowling straight. After lunch they straight away adopted 5th stump line and got him out. I don't think Mcgrath would have missed an obvious trick like this. 

[vvvslaxman]

Mcgrath's great strength how to utilize a given surface as best as possible. Sure there were occasions he couldn't do. But more often than not he did very well. He averaged very well everywhere. If only there were neutral umpires he would have had great numbers. Look at the reverse he gets

 

 

[MechEng]

5 hours ago, Nikhil_cric said:

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. 

 

 

 

Did your long stint at Pakpassion delude you into glorifying mediocre knocks or what?

 

Check the scorecard and explain in what context it was great.

 

[MechEng]

19 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

Today Punter was insisting all morning to bowl 5th stump line which is his weakness. But Australia was bowling filth by bowling straight. After lunch they straight away adopted 5th stump line and got him out. I don't think Mcgrath would have missed an obvious trick like this. 

 

That's correct, this aussie side is tactically very off.  

[Nikhil_cric]

34 minutes ago, putrevus said:

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.

He was , by far, India's best batsman against Mcgrath. Nobody else came close.

[putrevus]

3 minutes ago, Nikhil_cric said:

He was , by far, India's best batsman against Mcgrath. Nobody else came close.

On what basis he was best batsman?? 

[Nikhil_cric]

6 minutes ago, MechEng said:

 

Did your long stint at Pakpassion delude you into glorifying mediocre knocks or what?

 

Check the scorecard and explain in what context it was great.

 

Playing for a weak side, he scored a terrific knock against the best bowling at their peak in their own backyard at the WACA. Keep your condescending tone to yourself, please and go and watch that knock instead of going by scorecards.

[Nikhil_cric]

Just now, putrevus said:

On what basis he was best batsman?? 

Specifically against McGrath, he was the best. Not best overall

[putrevus]

1 minute ago, Nikhil_cric said:

Specifically against McGrath, he was the best. Not best overall

One fluky 167 innings does not make him best.

 

His knocks in 2001 was more about him able to dominate Warne and being in India.He did very little in 2004 .

[Nikhil_cric]

1 minute ago, putrevus said:

One fluky 167 innings does not make him best.

 

His knocks in 2001 was more about him able to dominate Warne and being in India.He did very little in 2004 .

Who is the best Indian batter against Mcgrath then?

[Nikhil_cric]

1 minute ago, putrevus said:

One fluky 167 innings does not make him best.

 

His knocks in 2001 was more about him able to dominate Warne and being in India.He did very little in 2004 .

I'm not even including that btw. McGrath played India twice after that - 2001 and 2004. Laxman was the best batsman followed by Dravid. 

[Lord]

McGrath made them look average.

 

If you think current guys would have dominated McGrath, you smoking some good stuff

[Lord]

8 hours ago, MechEng said:

 

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.

Moeen Ali

[Lord]

7 hours ago, Norman said:

 

 

You've got to kidding here lmao

got me at Moeen Ali

[Lord]

1 hour ago, Tillu said:

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.

 

they still don't

[Lord]

7 hours ago, MechEng said:

 

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.

 

how does pace matter?You think McGrath wouldn't have adjusted?

[Nikola]

Yes, cause that's what you want to hear and you won't stop replying anyone who disagrees to your point.

[putrevus]

41 minutes ago, Nikhil_cric said:

Who is the best Indian batter against Mcgrath then?

He was sure better than Dravid, Dravid had no ability to dominate bowling on his own other than his purple patch 2001-2003.

 

Mcgrath like Ambrose for most part of their careers had upper hand on all batsmen.

 

If Laxman had knock in Sydney then Tendulkar was lone ranger in Melbourne in that 1999 series.

 

These two bowlers had ability to land ball where they wanted and due to their height always could extract bounce for most part on any wicket.

 

Mcgrath had better team around him so he ended up on winner for most part.

 

 

Edited July 29, 2023 by putrevus

[MechEng]

1 hour ago, Lord said:

 

how does pace matter?You think McGrath wouldn't have adjusted?

 

If Tendulkar never faced Anderson and I had told here that he could have been Anderson's bunny due to inswing susceptibility, most of you would have been hysterical.

 

I know it's impossible to imagine McGrath getting carted around, but just look at that reverse scoop from Root, not sure what McGrath would have bowled to that style of batting.

[Nikhil_cric]

47 minutes ago, putrevus said:

He was sure better than Dravid, Dravid had no ability to dominate bowling on his own other than his purple patch 2001-2003.

 

Mcgrath like Ambrose for most part of their careers had upper hand on all batsmen.

 

If Laxman had knock in Sydney then Tendulkar was lone ranger in Melbourne in that 1999 series.

 

These two bowlers had ability to land ball where they wanted and due to their height always could extract bounce for most part on any wicket.

 

Mcgrath had better team around him so he ended up on winner for most part.

 

 

There is no comparison between SRT and VVS on playing McGrath in Test cricket imo. SRT only scored like 88 runs against McGrath and got dismissed 6 times in his career. VVS got wrecked in his first 3 innings and got dismissed twice for nothing by McGrath. But starting with the 167 knock, he went on to score 135 runs and got dismissed only thrice by McGrath.

 

SRT was terrible against McGrath throughout his career.