View Full Version : Shane Warne or Stuart MacGill??
ScouseCat
30 Dec 2002, 08:26
This thread is inspired by a good mate of mine...
We've been discussing Shane Warne vs Stuart MacGill and which player you'd prefer in your team and why. He thinks Warne is overrated... I think Warne deserves his high rating through his performances over a long period.
Here are both players test averages...
Shane Warne
107 matches
491 wickets @ 25.71
Best: 8-71
Strike Rate: 60.8
Econ Rate: 2.53
Stuart MacGill
17 matches
82 wickets @ 25.01
Best: 7-50
Strike Rate: 50.4
Econ Rate: 2.97
I would choose Shane Warne every time. Warne is in a class of his own when it comes to leg spin bowling. He is able to consistantly land the ball on a good length and has the ability to tie a batsman down and make it hard for them to score. He has proved himself over a long period against the best batsmen in the world and therefore gets my vote.
And Shane Warne is a Victorian!! :D
Who would you choose and why??
TheMase
30 Dec 2002, 08:32
Originally posted by ScouseCat
This thread is inspired by a good mate of mine...
We've been discussing Shane Warne vs Stuart MacGill and which player you'd prefer in your team and why. He thinks Warne is overrated... I think Warne deserves his high rating through his performances over a long period.
Here are both players test averages...
Shane Warne
107 matches
491 wickets @ 25.71
Best: 8-71
Strike Rate: 60.8
Econ Rate: 2.53
Stuart MacGill
17 matches
82 wickets @ 25.01
Best: 7-50
Strike Rate: 50.4
Econ Rate: 2.97
I would choose Shane Warne every time. Warne is in a class of his own when it comes to leg spin bowling. He is able to consistantly land the ball on a good length and has the ability to tie a batsman down and make it hard for them to score. He has proved himself over a long period against the best batsmen in the world and therefore gets my vote.
And Shane Warne is a Victorian!! :D
Who would you choose and why??
MacGill...
His short time in the Australian side, has seen him bowl statistically better than Warne.
If he was given the chance to actually settle into the team, I have little doubt that he would bowl even better than he has done in his 18 test matches.
Warne is a class bowler, no doubt about that. But he has not been at his best for a long time IMO.
If it was the old Warne (before injuries), I would choose him most times...
kretchy
30 Dec 2002, 08:43
I'd take Warne has a lot better control than MacGill. I also think that Warnie has better variations than MacGill although MacGill's wrongun would be better than Warnie.
Desredandwhite
30 Dec 2002, 09:22
If both were fit and firing, I'd still take Shane Warne. More accurate, IMHO a slightly more intelligent bowler. Better fielder (though only at slip :D) and better bat.
Stuie is not a bad replacement though, and would walk into any other test side, IMO. always good fun to watch - he only knows one way, and that is to attack.
I don't think stats wise that there's very much between them. when Warne recovers from his injury, I would hope that he has to warrant his spot through performances, not "just because he is shane warne". this is something I think he is capable of, but it would be good to see it happen anyway.
TigerCraig
30 Dec 2002, 09:24
Warne mid-late 90's by a street. Now, probably MacGill.
Warne now is not in the same league as he used to be, when basically every ball you were expecting a wicket.
lamby29
30 Dec 2002, 09:27
Warne. He is still at his peak and his slider is better than MacGill's wrong-un.
Unwritten_Law
30 Dec 2002, 10:04
Originally posted by TigerCraig
Warne mid-late 90's by a street. Now, probably MacGill.
Warne now is not in the same league as he used to be, when basically every ball you were expecting a wicket.
Granted Warne is no longer in the same league but before he did his shoulder he had 67 wickets from his last 10 tests, nothing to scoff at there.
grayham
30 Dec 2002, 10:11
Warne by a mile.
McGill's stats are flattered by the fact that when he has been selected alongside Warne, the pitches have been spinners paradices like the SCG. If like Warne, he had to play the WACA every year, his figures wouldnt be so great.
Also, Warne completely ties up one end. The batsmen are just trying to survive, and hope to score off the other bowler.
With McGill you know there will be a long hop, or full toss every over which you can whack. So he doesnt put pressure on like Warne does, and therefore isnt as helpful to the other bowler.
Warnes a much better bat too.
Simon_Nesbit
30 Dec 2002, 10:58
If anyone is familiar with Ultra Cricket (an awesome pbm e-mail game), the current output includes a rating of each delivery (Bad/Poor/Average/Good/Great)
I feel that the ratio's of bowling would be something like
TYPE........BAD......POOR.....AVERAGE.....GOOD.....GREAT
Average....5%........20%.......40%...........20%.........5%
Warne......2%.........10%.......40%..........40%..........8%
MacGill......10%.......20%.......20%..........30%.........20 %
I always get the feeling that MacGill is the type of 'feast or famine' bowler (he'll either get carted or take heaps of wickets), whilst Warne is the more reliable bowler.
Because MacGill gets so much turn, he often gets wicket off bad balls.
If not for the selectors obsession with Lee, or unwillingness to play Gilchrist at #6, then MacGill could well have played 50+ tests (and taken 200-odd wickets).
I'd still go warne however, as much on his batting, fielding, and consistency as anything else.
catattack
30 Dec 2002, 11:38
Warne for me. He's more reliable and consistant than MacGill. MacGill sure can get wickets, but usually those wickets come at a price. He doesn't have the same control as Warne and under a presure situation, MacGill might struggle to control the ball and keep the runs down.
MacGill is a great leg-spinner and is easilly the 2nd best spinner in the Australian team, but for me you can't go past Warne.
knuckles
30 Dec 2002, 11:58
Warne. Fielding, batting, thinking, mental strength and of course bowling.
MacGill, I just can't stand seeing him. Another unlikeable player.
MightySaint
30 Dec 2002, 13:52
Warne, like McGrath and Waugh is an out and out matchwinner, and that is a priceless quality in a player. He is one of those rare players that produces on the big stage, like Hewitt, McLeod, etc. Warne without the slightest shadow of a doubt for me.
On the cricket show today they showed that Warnie has taken the most test wickets this year, so you'd have to go with him. He was just hitting some great form again before his injury, so it will be interesting to see how he recovers. He has more control than MacGill, has a bigger intimidation factor, plus he is a much better fielder and is vital cog in the slips. He also barracks for the Saints ;), so i'm gonna have to go with Warnie.
Warne by a mile. It's a myth that he's past it.
His last four series read:
v SAf in Aus: 3 tests, 17 wkts @ 27.82
v SAf in SAf: 3 tests, 20 wkts @ 22.10
v Pak in SL/UAE: 3 tests, 27 wkts @ 12.66 !
v Eng in Aus: 3 tests, 14 wkts @ 24.78
Still going strong, no matter what the opposition or the venue. He's had his lean patches but he was well and truly over that.
MacGill isn't as mentally strong as Warne, thus he doesn't have his consistency. As grayham pointed out, he has mostly played on spin-friendly pitches which flatters his figures.
topjars
30 Dec 2002, 15:20
Originally posted by knuckles
MacGill, I just can't stand seeing him. Another unlikeable player.
As above.
Apart from that he bowls too many loose balls and looks like a shortarcsed sloth when he fields.
He wont ever blow the froth off of Warney beer....ever
dogboy23
1 Jan 2003, 20:08
Warne by that far its not even worth discussing.Mcgills far too expensive.
It is quite simple for me. Stuart MacGill is a leg spinner. Shane Warne is a god given, once in a lifetime freak. he is something else.
ScouseCat
7 Jan 2003, 11:57
One question which I keep coming back to with regards to the Warne vs MacGill discussion....
How many times has the opposition scored over 375 in the second innings with Shane Warne in the side?? I can only think of the Calcutta test where India scored over 650 thanks to the unbelievable partnership between Dravid and Laxman but Warne's record in that regard would be really good.
England managed to do it twice in the last 2 tests with MacGill in the side.