Muloghonto Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 u seen him bowl? Yes. Better than Steyn by a fair bit, if you believe that to be possible. For one, he was consistently quicker i believe ( this maybe an illusion but then again,maybe not. Most batsmen are of the mind that Marshall in the mid 80s was the fastest bowler they'd faced and that includes Imran at his peak). marshall in the middle overs was the deadliest fast bowler i've ever seen, because he was one genuinely express bowler who'd mastered the leg cutter ( typically a hard delivery to bowl well consistently and typically bowled by someone who averages 135 kph-ish, like Walsh in his later years). So while most pacers are less potent with the ball at 30-40 overs-ish, (this includes the Pakis, as the ball doesnt start to reverse much, atleast overseas, before the 50-60th overs) Marshall was byfar the deadliest. Oh and another thing- Marshall was, by quite some distance, the best bowler comming around the wicket. When marshall bowled around the wicket, due to his wicked leg-cutters, outswingers and a fabulous fast inswinger, he was practically unplayable. I am yet to see a fast bowler who was as good and as complete a package as Wasim Akram but i am yet to see a bowler who was as dominating as Marshall. He didn't reverse the ball but then again, he did everything else cumulatively much better than the rest.
Old guy Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 Yes. Better than Steyn by a fair bit, if you believe that to be possible. For one, he was consistently quicker i believe ( this maybe an illusion but then again,maybe not. Most batsmen are of the mind that Marshall in the mid 80s was the fastest bowler they'd faced and that includes Imran at his peak). marshall in the middle overs was the deadliest fast bowler i've ever seen, because he was one genuinely express bowler who'd mastered the leg cutter ( typically a hard delivery to bowl well consistently and typically bowled by someone who averages 135 kph-ish, like Walsh in his later years). So while most pacers are less potent with the ball at 30-40 overs-ish, (this includes the Pakis, as the ball doesnt start to reverse much, atleast overseas, before the 50-60th overs) Marshall was byfar the deadliest. Oh and another thing- Marshall was, by quite some distance, the best bowler comming around the wicket. When marshall bowled around the wicket, due to his wicked leg-cutters, outswingers and a fabulous fast inswinger, he was practically unplayable. I am yet to see a fast bowler who was as good and as complete a package as Wasim Akram but i am yet to see a bowler who was as dominating as Marshall. He didn't reverse the ball but then again, he did everything else cumulatively much better than the rest. damn would have loved to see him bowl live..:(( from all the bowlers i have seen bowl steyn has been the best highlights.. i honestly dont judge bowler or batsman from that...
Crookbond Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 The best thing I liked about Marshall was his success on pitches where the conditions do not necessarily suit the fast bowlers. I find that pretty amazing.
Old guy Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 The best thing I liked about Marshall was his success on pitches where the conditions do not necessarily suit the fast bowlers. I find that pretty amazing. how was he compared to modern great bowlers? modern in sense of 90's and 2000's
Crookbond Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 how was he compared to modern great bowlers? modern in sense of 90's and 2000's Lets say I would rather have him in the team than Glenn "Wait for Batsman to Make a Mistake" McGrath.
Old guy Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 Lets say I would rather have him in the team than Glenn "Wait for Batsman to Make a Mistake" McGrath. i can tell that ..well when u have time try to compare them..that will give me better idea how he was i mean with whom was he similar to.. bowling style etc etc:--D
Muloghonto Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 how was he compared to modern great bowlers? modern in sense of 90's and 2000's Marshall swung the ball less than Steyn but at a faster pace, had better cutters, McGrath-ish with his line and length control & Warne-esque with his 'brain and a nose for weakness'. As far as set-ups go, Marshall was the cleverest of them all. Had a devilishly good bouncer, was very hard to read ( his action was a bit open) and one of the rare few (Curtley also qualifies into this) who bowled better when pissed off or injured. he was a faster version of Steyn with a more complete toolkit, fair bit nastier to face and the most intelligent bowler i'd ever seen. Very very quick to feel out who was 'feelign in form today' and who wasn't and who 'preffered the offside' this session and who didn't. Never seen him have a day where he was 'ineffective' except early career Marshall. Either he was devastatign or batsmen barely kept him quiet in the wickets department.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now