Crookbond Posted January 22, 2015 Posted January 22, 2015 McGrath is the greatest fast bowler I've seen alongside with Marshall. Steyn is an all time great bowler as well' date=' but McGrath had that ruthless instinct that Steyn doesn't. He would soften up targets as well as attack like Steyn. [b']What I haven't seen Steyn do on a regular basis is set up targets for lesser bowlers if he couldn't get them - McGrath is the Tendulkar of bowling, supported by an accessory named Warne or Dravid. Personally, McGrath for me lacked the X-factor - he was a great fast bowler but I think Steyn and Marshall are a notch ahead of him. Actually, Steyn has done that quite well with Philander and Morkel - one of the reason Philander was so successful with the ball.
Old guy Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 In the first innings of the same Centurion match, Shaun Marsh played a wonderful knock of 148 against Steyn who was bowling very good as well (also Clarke and Warner failed to play, similar to Amla and du Plessis). So you agree with me? sorry that was typo i meant its not * anyway if you relaly saw the game you will know steyn did not bowl well in match at all and there were people here on this site msot fans like you saying johnson is better and in that game he easily was ! infact morkel bowled much better than steyn in this game
HippoSucks Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 sorry that was typo i meant its not * anyway if you relaly saw the game you will know steyn did not bowl well in match at all and there were people here on this site msot fans like you saying johnson is better and in that game he easily was ! infact morkel bowled much better than steyn in this game He picked up 4 wickets, and anyway he didn't bowl as good as Johnson, but a bad Steyn is still better than most other bowlers.
Old guy Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 He picked up 4 wickets' date=' and anyway he didn't bowl as good as Johnson, but a bad Steyn is still better than most other bowlers.[/quote'] ofcourse he is! but on that day no other batsman in world would have scored against johnson and abdv dominated him for most part . thats why i rate him higher than anyone else ..sanga broke his hand vs johnon in australia on much easier track,, i am not saying he cannot bat but the way abdv handles bowling when its tough and makes it easy is just what separates him from others .
MCGGG Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 really ? i do not really see much difference in opinion of cricketing world .. i am not even sure how this inning will effect how people rate him in tests anyway and everyone knew he can hit big even before .. its good record to have but do not think it will make big difference with people who follow cricket closely and to be bigger inning than this was what he did against johnson in form on uneven pitch where amla and faf looked clueless .. So let me get this straight, AB and Amla are the 2 best bats in the world, and Steyn is the best bowler, if that's the case why did Australia beat them on their own turf in both formats of the game? And let's not kid ourselves, that Australian side wasn't considered strong by Australian standards. Those that do, do!
HippoSucks Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 ofcourse he is! but on that day no other batsman in world would have scored against johnson and abdv dominated him for most part . thats why i rate him higher than anyone else ..sanga broke his hand vs johnon in australia on much easier track,, i am not saying he cannot bat but the way abdv handles bowling when its tough and makes it easy is just what separates him from others . But I thought you don't judge batsman based on one innings?
BlueBee Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 So let me get this straight, AB and Amla are the 2 best bats in the world, and Steyn is the best bowler, if that's the case why did Australia beat them on their own turf in both formats of the game? And let's not kid ourselves, that Australian side wasn't considered strong by Australian standards. Those that do, do! Being best bats doesn't mean they will win you matches on their own. It can happen once and atmost twice ... ATM theres only one or two batsmen or bowlers who has match winning skills.
HippoSucks Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 Being best bats doesn't mean they will win you matches on their own. It can happen once and atmost twice ... ATM theres only one or two batsmen or bowlers who has match winning skills. Having supposedly the 2 best batsman and the best bowler should win you a match on your home turf.
MCGGG Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 ofcourse he is! but on that day no other batsman in world would have scored against johnson and abdv dominated him for most part . thats why i rate him higher than anyone else ..sanga broke his hand vs johnon in australia on much easier track,, i am not saying he cannot bat but the way abdv handles bowling when its tough and makes it easy is just what separates him from others . How do you like Steve smith? He's the best bat going arounf at the moment, he's putting up Bradman like numbers. Not sure why people are taken with ABs latest knock, he had nothing to lose and it paid off, anyone one of the current top bats could've done it with a slice of luck.
MCGGG Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 Having supposedly the 2 best batsman and the best bowler should win you a match on your home turf. Exactly, unless the other 8 are complete muppets lol.
BlueBee Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 Having supposedly the 2 best batsman and the best bowler should win you a match on your home turf. Mitch was in sublime form and the pitches were helping him. He was taking wickets for fun then. Moreover those conditions were familiar to Aussies. They had a great series before in the Ashes. And everyone was in good nick. BTW don't forget that Aussies lost the 2nd match.
MCGGG Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 Being best bats doesn't mean they will win you matches on their own. It can happen once and atmost twice ... ATM theres only one or two batsmen or bowlers who has match winning skills. Rubbish, champions win you series, how did SAs champions go against Australia again? overrated bro. Seriously, if that SA side with the 2 best bats and the best bowler couldn't beat Australia in SA how the heck are they gunna do it in Australia? And as I said, it wasn't a strong Aussie team.
HippoSucks Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 Exactly' date=' unless the other 8 are complete muppets lol.[/quote'] Which they aren't. Maybe then we should reconsider if these are the undisputed best batsman and bowler.
BlueBee Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 I've not said they're the best bats. You said that.
HippoSucks Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 Mitch was in sublime form and the pitches were helping him. He was taking wickets for fun then. Moreover those conditions were familiar to Aussies. They had a great series before in the Ashes. And everyone was in good nick. BTW don't forget that Aussies lost the 2nd match. Is it the Australian's fault that Johnson was doing so good? Anyway I'm just saying that de Villiers is an amazing batsman, but not the best. By the way if the South African conditions were familiar to the Australians, then they were more familiar for the South Africans.
BlueBee Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 Is it the Australian's fault that Johnson was doing so good? Anyway I'm just saying that de Villiers is an amazing batsman, but not the best. By the way if the South African conditions were familiar to the Australians, then they were more familiar for the South Africans. Indeed. But that helps.
HippoSucks Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 I've not said they're the best bats. You said that. Well the original poster and 10 others in this thread think so.
BlueBee Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 But our topic was match winners. :P Which none of the SA player is.
Lord Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 Rubbish, champions win you series, how did SAs champions go against Australia again? overrated bro. Seriously, if that SA side with the 2 best bats and the best bowler couldn't beat Australia in SA how the heck are they gunna do it in Australia? And as I said, it wasn't a strong Aussie team. But they did beat Aus in Aus in 2012
MCGGG Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 But they did beat Aus in Aus in 2012 Australia in transition, damn, even England beat us, happens to even the best every now and then, but it doesn't happen to strong Australian teams, as you know Australia in high gear will push anyone-anywhere, and they won't lose at home.
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