PDA

View Full Version : Steve Waugh second to the Don.


jozeph
1 Aug 2003, 19:21
Steve Waugh second to The Don - Marsh


Steve Waugh is the second best cricketer Australia has ever produced, says former teammate Geoff Marsh.

Waugh's former coach and vice captain said only the peerless Sir Donald Bradman outranked the uncompromising Test skipper's feats in Australian cricket history.

The New South Welshman has resurrected his career in 2003, scoring four centuries in his last eight Test innings, following deafening calls for his retirement just eight months ago.

"I think he has to be rated as one of the best, if not the (best)... obviously Bradman stands alone, but I reckon his record speaks for itself," Marsh said of Waugh, who both made their national debut in the summer of 1985/86.

"His captaincy record is outstanding and his performance with the bat speaks for itself.




"All Stephen's hundreds in Test cricket, they are all under pressure."

Waugh is only 653 runs behind the highest run-scorer in Test history, Allan Border, and should overhaul his old skipper's mark in the next 12 months with home series against Zimbabwe (two Tests), India (four Tests) and Sri Lanka (two Tests).

The Zimbabwe coach said Waugh had scored the best two hundreds he had seen, including his unforgettable final ball of the day century against England at the SCG last summer.

"That hundred he got in Sydney last year was just magnificent," Marsh said.

"It was the second best innings I have ever seen in world cricket.

"The other one was his hundred in the World Cup in 1999 in Headingley, when we had to beat South Africa to get into the semi-finals.

"Great knocks, inspirational, great for the game."

That is high praise considering Marsh watched from the dressing rooms as Dean Jones overcame nausea and delirium to score his famous 210 against India in Chennai in 1986.

The West Australian said he wasn't surprised Waugh was still leaving his mark on the game some 18 years after entering the international arena.

"Stephen's such a competitor, he loves the game of cricket and he's so determined to keep going," Marsh said of Waugh, who has managed to creep his Test batting average back above 50 this year.

"He enjoys the captaincy, he enjoys winning and he enjoys the team.

"It is like a cancer, it just keeps growing on him and he just wants to keep doing it as long as he possibly can."

Marsh, who this week signed on for another 12 months with the African nation, said Zimbabwe would try to blunt Waugh's influence in the upcoming two-Test series in Australia in October by boring the Bankstown batsman.

"You have got to bore him out (with good line and length)," Marsh said.

"A lot of teams come in and attack him but you can't do that, if you get him up under the ribs, it spurs him on.

"You have to bore him out and that's what we used to do when we played against him for WA."

Marsh said, whatever the outcome, there would be no better education in the world cricket for his players than competing against the dogged Waugh.

"Our guys are so keen to get over here and to play against Steve, because he wasn't at the World Cup," he said.

"They want to play a Test match against him, bowl to him, bat while he's out on the field and after the game, have a chat to him.

"No-one knows the game better than Steve does."



İAAP 2003


Interesting article, quotes etc, what it doesn't say very clearly though is that G Marsh coaches Zim. Sounds like Marsh is doing a little bit of stirring to me. Reverse psychology?

DaveW
1 Aug 2003, 20:03
Originally posted by jozeph
Steve Waugh is the second best cricketer Australia has ever produced, says former teammate Geoff Marsh.
What an insult to Keith Miller.

crudbucket
1 Aug 2003, 21:06
Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border Border

dr nick
2 Aug 2003, 10:46
Originally posted by jozeph
"I think he has to be rated as one of the best, if not the (best)...

Boom!! there goes all his credibility in one foul swoop.

TheBloods
2 Aug 2003, 11:32
"He enjoys the captaincy, he enjoys winning and he enjoys the team.

"It is like a cancer, it just keeps growing on him and he just wants to keep doing it as long as he possibly can."


What an atrocious analogy!

Wicked Lester
2 Aug 2003, 17:24
Second best ever?

He makes it into my second best ever Australian eleven at number 5 or 6. As an Australian middle order batsman I rate him behind Bradman, Greg Chappell, Harvey, Trumper and Border - and on par with McCabe and Walters. In another 5 years I've got a feeling Ponting will be in there as well.

That's not to say he's not one of the great players, but IMHO not as great as some others. Let's face it - with the amount of cricket played today if you play long enough you are going to break a lot of records.

I actually think Tugga's played better innings than either of those two mentioned.

The 120 against SAF was a great knock, though remember it nearly wasn't.

The century against England in Sydney earlier this year against a bunch of pie chuckers in the fifth test of a series we'd already comfortably won is IMO one of the most overrated innings of all time.

The only significance of it was that it may well have saved his scalp.

dr nick
2 Aug 2003, 20:33
Originally posted by Wicked Lester
The century against England in Sydney earlier this year against a bunch of pie chuckers in the fifth test of a series we'd already comfortably won is IMO one of the most overrated innings of all time. i disagree. it was far from a pie chucking attack that day. Caddick and Harmison were bowling with venom, and you could not have even scripted a more pressure situation. It was a flawless innings. That along with a few of his centuries against England in 1989, and that 200, were flawless. (the 200 was also a big pressure situation, with the Australians seeking to win the FW trophy, and Ambrose was bowling the best i'd ever seen him bowl. That is the innings where he first claimed the ranking of #1 batsman in the world, a title which he held for no less than 2 years)

And as for that 120, we were falling badly behind the run rate, and looked to be well out of the match. Again, after that dropped catch from Gibbs, one of the most thrilling innings ever under pressure, as he singlehandedly won us that game, and consequently, kept us alive to claim our 2nd World Cup.

dr nick
2 Aug 2003, 20:40
Originally posted by Wicked Lester

He makes it into my second best ever Australian eleven at number 5 or 6. As an Australian middle order batsman I rate him behind Bradman, Greg Chappell, Harvey, Trumper and Border - and on par with McCabe and Walters. If you are making an all time squad, you must select players based on their best years. Waugh would be classed as an all-rounder in an all time side, not a specialist batsman.

Wicked Lester
2 Aug 2003, 21:48
Originally posted by nicko18
If you are making an all time squad, you must select players based on their best years. Waugh would be classed as an all-rounder in an all time side, not a specialist batsman.

Fine - if he is to be judged on the basis of his best days 'as an allrounder' then he is still in my second eleven behind Keith Miller, who would be my first eleven allrounder. (averaged 37 with the bat, 22 with the ball). Waugh's days as an allrounder (he was always a batting allrounder) were effectively over from about his 60th test match. The last time he had as many wickets as tests played (test number 67) he averaged 44 with the bat and 38 with the ball. On that basis I would clearly go with Miller as the first choice all rounder. Also in contention for an allrounders role - Alan Davidson, Benaud, Warwick Armstrong, George Giffen, Monty Noble - all would give Waugh a run for his money in a true 'all round' category.

Nicko - I don't contest what you say say about Waugh's 120 in the world Cup - great innings. And I agree his innings during the 89 tour of England and the 200 v the Windies are great innings also.

I disagree on Waugh's sydney innings. Caddick and harmison were bowling with some venom and got initial breakthroughs. They were tired and out of the attack not long after Waugh came in. Harmison's control had gone and the bulk of Waugh's early runs came against the great Hoggard.

You suggest you "could not have scripted a more pressure situation" - you're right to the extent it was a pressure situation - but it was pressure in an individual sense. He really needed the runs to ensure he retained his position in the test side. It was not 'one of the great pressure situations' in a team sense (his 200 in Jamaica was). Australia already had this series comfortably won.

Flawless it was (but there have been plenty of Ponting, Hayden and Gilchrist centuries in recent times that have been flawless also AND made at the front end of series) The Sydney knock was not made against an attack of repute, it was not an innings that shaped a series, it was not, as it turned out, an innings that even shaped a test match (we lost) and for those reasons I don't even rate it as one of Waugh's best innings let alone one of the best ever.

Perhaps the emotion and publicity surrounding it was based partly on the idea that we were witnessing the last innings played by a great on Australian soil. Unlikely now - Brad Hogg has him playing til he's 43 and Steve himself recently declared he feels like he's 21 again.

IMHO a little context is needed. It was an important innings in a personal sense for Steve Waugh given his desire to play on - but not one of the great innings by a long way.

dr nick
2 Aug 2003, 22:45
good post Lester, and some great points made.

It may not be one of the greatest innings of all time from a pure class POV (the 102 v england), but in terms of the lead up, and the moment/scenario that was painted, and the final buildup and climax with the last ball, i cant say i'd be able to pick another day in the history of test cricket with which i could say "i would have rathered seen that knock". Fairytale stuff. now i will admit i am biased because Waugh has been my favourite player ever since he made his debut, but i'd be interested to hear from those who do not really like the man which other days cricket they'd rate as "the day i would have most liked to have seen live"

Generalissimo
3 Aug 2003, 09:13
It's funny, isn't it? Waugh would be one of the first names mentioned when you think of great Australian cricketers, but it's so hard to fit him into an all-time best eleven.

That the guy is an absolute champion cannot be disputed. He's played more tests than any other player, made more runs than anyone but Allan Border and captained the greatest side in the history of the game to 16 consecutive test wins. Not to mention his freakish ability to conjure a century when the pressure's on.

P76
4 Aug 2003, 16:48
Originally posted by nicko18
good post Lester, and some great points made.

It may not be one of the greatest innings of all time from a pure class POV (the 102 v england), but in terms of the lead up, and the moment/scenario that was painted, and the final buildup and climax with the last ball, i cant say i'd be able to pick another day in the history of test cricket with which i could say "i would have rathered seen that knock". Fairytale stuff. now i will admit i am biased because Waugh has been my favourite player ever since he made his debut, but i'd be interested to hear from those who do not really like the man which other days cricket they'd rate as "the day i would have most liked to have seen live"

I generally agree with Les on this topic (I seem to agree a fair bit with him, must be a good bloke....), but there are heaps of other innings I would have liked to have seen live, starting with Steve's 200 in the Windies, Dean Jones 200 in India, Doug Walters "century in a session", G. Chappell's maiden test ton, just to name a few. Kim Hughes' ton v. the West Indies at Melbourne in 1981 is the best I've seen, and that was also the best day's cricket I have ever seen.