View Full Version : MacGill or Hogg?
TheMase
19 Mar 2003, 09:11
Who would you choose as the number one spinner for the WI tour?
TheMase
19 Mar 2003, 09:13
I would take MacGill.
Superior test record and First Class Record.
Bowling pretty well at the moment aswell.
Hogg has a very poor first class record and is not a front line bowler like MacGill.
St-KriS
19 Mar 2003, 09:19
I suppose you go with the proven test bowler i.e. MacGill...but is there any chance of the both of them playing at the same time? I know Windies pitches traditionally have been a fast bowler's paradise, but I've heard arent as good as they used to be, so is there any chance?
Jars458
19 Mar 2003, 09:25
This poll is an insult
Its like saying beer or water
Hogg is a hack as first class bowler
How Hauritz didn't get the nod is beyond me
TheMase
19 Mar 2003, 09:26
Originally posted by St-KriS
I suppose you go with the proven test bowler i.e. MacGill...but is there any chance of the both of them playing at the same time? I know Windies pitches traditionally have been a fast bowler's paradise, but I've heard arent as good as they used to be, so is there any chance?
I guess with Hogg there is always the chance because he is handy with the bat too.
But as you said, I think you have to go with the proven test bowler.
It will be an interesting series for MacGill, will make or break his international career. He has been told to improve his attitude with the team if he wishes to play International Cricket again.
Lets see how he goes....
Batting - Hogg
Bowling - MacGill
Fielding - Hogg
HOWEVER, if they are picked to be a bowler, then pick the better bowler...Stuart MacGill will play the tests.
ScouseCat
19 Mar 2003, 10:58
Stuart MacGill will be the number one spinner until the World's best ever leg-spinner, Shane Warne makes his comeback next February. :D
Desredandwhite
19 Mar 2003, 11:15
MacGill for mine. IMHO you should always take the better bowler. If their bowling abilites are very close, THEN use fielding/batting expertise as a tie-breaker
Jars458
19 Mar 2003, 11:15
Originally posted by ScouseCat
Stuart MacGill will be the number one spinner until the World's best ever leg-spinner, Shane Warne makes his comeback next February. :D
you should live in the present
Collins Omondi Obuya is the world's best leg spinner:)
manmountain
19 Mar 2003, 11:28
Originally posted by Jars458
Hogg is a hack as first class bowler
How Hauritz didn't get the nod is beyond me
That's a touch ironic.
dogboy23
19 Mar 2003, 15:29
Dont rate Hauritz at all at this stage.Very straight up and down IMO.Hogg has improved to the point where he looks like he would cause damage in the longer version.Mcgill gets the nod I suppose but I shudder at the thought of him and Lee bowling in tandem giving away 6 an over each at both ends.:(
NICK THE PIE MAN
19 Mar 2003, 16:46
I don't mind Hogg actually.
And as Hoggy points out, he is as clean as they come. ;)
If you give the no. 1 spot to MacGill it has to be on the previso that if he steps out of line again by opening that big mouth of his and abusing someone his international career is over as of that point.
I don't care about if he is better than Hogg or not we can't have arseholes like him representing Australia if they want to abuse everyone. This season 4 reports 2 fines 1 suspension and 1 dismissed, not a great record.
raiderman00
19 Mar 2003, 19:20
Yeh McGill as Hogg is S*$^
harry_hawka
19 Mar 2003, 19:25
I chose Hogg because I thought the Poll was choosing who you'd rather have a beer with. Stuart only drinks wine so I counted him out. Sorry, I misunderstood the question.:eek:
lamby29
19 Mar 2003, 19:25
Hogg
bunsen burner
19 Mar 2003, 19:56
MacGill
Destructive
19 Mar 2003, 20:24
Hogg.
Kenny_01
20 Mar 2003, 01:36
Hogg.
I'd choose Hogg because he is a better batsmen. It means we can drop Martyn or Lehmann and play with four pace bowlers and one spinner. Hogg, Bichel and Lee are all reasonable batsmen, and Gillespie is not too bad either.
Unwritten_Law
20 Mar 2003, 11:20
MacGill.
Goes for plenty but with our attack we can afford to give away a few runs in return for wickets.
Deestroy
20 Mar 2003, 11:26
MacGill, because he is a much better bowler.
Jars458
20 Mar 2003, 11:40
For all those poeple who have voted for Hogg
your brain is in your backside.
FIRST-CLASS
(1993/94 - 2002/03; last updated 19/03/2003)
M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
Batting & Fielding 65 99 21 2416 111* 30.97 2 15 36 0
O M R W Ave BBI 5 10 SR Econ
Bowling 1197.5 273 3831 83 46.15 5-53 3 0 86.5 3.19
83 wickets at 46 in frist class cricket is very orindary bowling
He is not being picked as a batsment but made four and one in his first two test inniings
TheMase
20 Mar 2003, 11:47
Originally posted by Jars458
For all those poeple who have voted for Hogg
your brain is in your backside.
I was thinking along similar lines.
As for "MacGill goes for heaps" have a look at their records.
Hogg has a worse economy rate in the long game than MacGill does.
MacGill was also the leading wicket taker at a reasonable economy rate this season.
Seems like a pretty straight forward decision to me
Kane McGoodwin
20 Mar 2003, 11:55
MacGill for tests, but Hogg for the ODI's.
Unwritten_Law
20 Mar 2003, 13:25
Originally posted by Jars458
For all those poeple who have voted for Hogg
your brain is in your backside.
FIRST-CLASS
(1993/94 - 2002/03; last updated 19/03/2003)
M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
Batting & Fielding 65 99 21 2416 111* 30.97 2 15 36 0
O M R W Ave BBI 5 10 SR Econ
Bowling 1197.5 273 3831 83 46.15 5-53 3 0 86.5 3.19
Stats are misleading. Hogg today is a much more accomplished bowler than the timeframe that is covered by those stats. I would also suggest that MacGill is on the slide. I don't know how his first class stats compare with the season just finished but he seems to have passed his prime.
chimphawk28
20 Mar 2003, 14:32
tough question..two very different bowlers. MacGill has a better past record but in recent times Hogg is having a great run. Hogg is also a better bastman & fielder. I'd choose Hogg..prehaps it would help if MacGill wasn't such a bloody sook too.
Jars458
20 Mar 2003, 16:09
Originally posted by Unwritten_Law
Stats are misleading. Hogg today is a much more accomplished bowler than the timeframe that is covered by those stats. I would also suggest that MacGill is on the slide. I don't know how his first class stats compare with the season just finished but he seems to have passed his prime.
Hogg only has 3 first class wickets this year
MacGill has 30 odd from memory
Stay tuned
I was a fair way out
Macgill 12 556.3 99 1774 60 29.56
Hogg 4 61.5 13 210 6 35.00
Still MacGill easily
Unwritten_Law
20 Mar 2003, 16:21
Originally posted by Jars458
Hogg only has 3 first class wickets this year
MacGill has 30 odd from memory
Stay tuned
I was a fair way out
Macgill 12 556.3 99 1774 60 29.56
Hogg 4 61.5 13 210 6 35.00
Still MacGill easily
I was never doubting that, the original stats were shoddy but you can't argue with those figures. 60 wickets :eek: that must be close to Miller's record for a season.
Fall Out Boy
20 Mar 2003, 17:44
Originally posted by Unwritten_Law
60 wickets :eek: that must be close to Miller's record for a season.
Don't like the average though.
I don't care what bowling style you employ, an average of 30, is relatively ordinary.
I do think MacGill should go, but to be patting him on the back for taking 60 wickets @ 30, is a tad OTT.
What you have to remember is that Hoggy plays for WA and doesn't get a lot of bowling.
His return at international level would probably be much better as is Warnies.
Bombers14
20 Mar 2003, 20:21
I think that the aussies only need 1 spinner in the team and I think that Hogg should be in the ODI team and the test Team. I think he is better than MacGill is far to expensive.
OldLion
20 Mar 2003, 21:40
MacGill - the bowler's job is to take wickets and he has some form in this regard.
TheMase
21 Mar 2003, 09:47
Originally posted by OldLion
MacGill - the bowler's job is to take wickets and he has some form in this regard.
Hit the nail on the head
Thank god some people can see the light.
Jars458
21 Mar 2003, 10:43
Originally posted by phatandphreaky
Don't like the average though.
I don't care what bowling style you employ, an average of 30, is relatively ordinary.
I do think MacGill should go, but to be patting him on the back for taking 60 wickets @ 30, is a tad OTT.
So we should pat Hogg on the back for 6 wickets at 35!!!!!
nurries
21 Mar 2003, 11:28
FIRST-CLASS
(1993/94 - 2002/03; last updated 19/03/2003)
M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
Batting & Fielding 65 99 21 2416 111* 30.97 2 15 36 0
O M R W Ave BBI 5 10 SR Econ
Bowling 1197.5 273 3831 83 46.15 5-53 3 0 86.5 3.19
===================================
Lets put something into perspective for aboves averages:
Hogg plays half of his games at the WACA....hardly any spin. I am sure if you look at Warnies or Magills records at the WACA as opposed to their home states you will see a pattern emerge.
Hogg has improved his bowling and still is probaly not as good a bowler as Magill but it is closer than it used to be.
Hogg is an infinitely better batsmen and fielder.
I would give Hogg the nod JUST ahead of Magill
Originally posted by nurries
Hogg plays half of his games at the WACA....hardly any spin. I am sure if you look at Warnies or Magills records at the WACA as opposed to their home states you will see a pattern emerge.
Here's some investigating....
Also they made their debut in the first match both for Western Australia in 93/94.
Stuart MacGill at the WACA
Sheffield Shield/Pura Cup Matches
97/98: 1 mt, 2/100
99/00: 1 mt, 5/107
02/03: 1 mt, 2/120
Test Matches
00/01 (v WI): 1 mt, 4/84
Brad Hogg at the WACA
Sheffield Shield/Pura Cup Matches/Tour Matches
93/94: 2 mts, 0/1
94/95: 3 mts, 0/6
95/96: 6 mts, 12/519
96/97: 5 mts, 7/398
97/98: 2 mts, 1/40
98/99: -
99/00: 3 mts, 1/164
00/01: 1 mts, 0/28
01/02: 4 mts, 9/347
02/03: 2 mts, 3/116
Stuart MacGill FC @ WACA: 4 mts, 13 wkts @ 31.62, BB 4/42
Brad Hogg FC @ WACA: 28 mts, 33 wkts @ 49.06, BB: 5/136
goaldrush
21 Mar 2003, 12:40
Brad Hogg
My choice would be MacGill, but if Hogg was chosen I am sure he would do very well, especially against the West Indians who don't play spin very well.
Perhaps if we batted Gilchrist at 6 and Hogg at 7, we could play both.
Kenny_01
21 Mar 2003, 15:48
Interesting to see that Hoggy has more votes.
Originally posted by Kenny_01
Interesting to see that Hoggy has more votes.
And I haven't voted!
TheMase
21 Mar 2003, 20:48
Originally posted by Hoggy
Stuart MacGill FC @ WACA: 4 mts, 13 wkts @ 31.62, BB 4/42
Brad Hogg FC @ WACA: 28 mts, 33 wkts @ 49.06, BB: 5/136
"Hoggy" are you trying to prove that MacGill is a better bowler :confused:
Originally posted by TheMase
"Hoggy" are you trying to prove that MacGill is a better bowler :confused:
Not trying to prove that at all...
nurries made the comment that Hogg's FC record would be better if he didn't play so much at the WACA. The fact is his record at the WACA makes his career record go up over 5 runs per wicket he has taken.
I was just doing some mindless investigating...that is all.