Is Walsh a better batter than McGrath

[SpecialBruce]

I think Walsh is slightly a better batter than McGrath. But, if McGrath keeps improving then he will be better than Walsh. With bowling, they are about even. Walsh needs now 10 more to make his target of 500.

 

[JUBJUB]

Yeah right,Walsh is better than McGrath.

McGrath's got about 18 wickets in the series and Walsh's got about 5.

Walsh should've retired before this series.He won't reach 500 in this series.

------------------
"Absatively Posilutely"

 

[PieGirl#41]

Well they are both shit batsmen, but I think McGrath has had a better series than Walsh, well it is fact, and Australia have had a better series than the Windies, and so on. And you can't really say that Walsh is a better bowler than McGrath because of the fact that Walsh has been playing alot longer than Oh Ah, so yeah, but I think McGrath will end up more sucessful..



------------------
~*~Go Chippa!!~*~
~*~Go Binger!!~*~

 

[SpecialBruce]

I am not just talking this series. Walsh will make that 500 in Australia's second innings in the 5th test. He will pick up a couple tomorrow morning.

 

[acuguy]

McGrath is a better batsmen and a better bowler even when walsh was at his peak, though walsh has an insatiable work ethic and has shown himself to truly be the quintessential team man, lets not try to compare them, just count ourselves lucky we are able to watch two fantastic cricketers.

 

[NICK THE PIE MAN]

I have nothing but respect for Walsh. Some may say he is past his use by date. But he proved today that he can still bowl very well in a close and tense situation picking up two wickets and bowling a very good line.

 

[SpecialBruce]

Don't be surprised if a fresh Walsh tomorrow grabs 2 wickets in little time.

 

[WA]

I think it'd be great to see Walsh get the 500! I hope he makes it! If Aust. bat twice in the next test, he's got a good chance.

 

[Mags]

Someone needs to throw some balls at McGrath the nets! I dont look forward when he comes out too bat!

When B.Lee was on 61 (Im thinking u bloody ripper his a test century for ya) guess who walks and gets out about 4th ball from Walsh (I think). Gezz i was hoping for a century! Oh well better luck next time Brett

 

[SpecialBruce]

WA - If Lara fires in the next test, there will be a second Australian innings. They have over a week to prepare for the boxing day test and they can't rely on Lara all the time. Someone like Ganga needs to step up and score at least a century with Lara.

 

[walshy1993]

the question should be is mcgrath better than walsh

sure mcgrath is better at the moment, but he is at his peak
there is no way he is better than uncle courtny was at his peak
dont forget walsh is the leading wicket taker in test cricket

mcgrath is great but still has a long way to go

 

[Dipper]

Walsh may be the top wicket taker but this owes more to his longevity than anything else,whilst he is a very good bowler he is not a truly great one(otherwise how come the new ball was given to others before him 4 most of his career,ie Marshall,holding,Ambrose,Patterson,Bishop)I would say that McGrathis better than Walsh now(definitely)& better than him at both their peaks.Personally I prefer fast bowlers who try to bowl the batsmen out(Lee,Donald,Akthar,Thommo) rather than tie them up & wait for the mistake(McGrath,Walsh,Pollock),if all bowlers bowled like these then Test cricket would be bloody boring

 

[Grendel]

Mcgraths easily a better bowler that Walsh ever was. Mcgraths a pain but he is all class. Walsh is the best work horse quick the game has ever produced. But he was always a better first change bowler than a new ball bowler. I really doubt he would have anywhere near 500 wickets if he hadnt had the likes of Ambrose,Marshall,Holding at the other end to support him. Just my view on it.

As to the batting?? Who cares their both ferrets (they go in after the bunnies) two of the most inept holders of a cricket bat that have graced the field (but there both better than Danny Morrison was!)

 

[acuguy]

walshy you really have a narrowminded view of cricket, you cannot possibly say that courteneay at his peak which was believe it or not only four years ago was better then mcgrath, mcgrath will go down as equal to lillee as our greatest fast bowler. Typical aussie tall poppy syndrome, lets embrace our great players.

 

[Bloodstained Angel]

McGrath, as good as he is, has a long way to go before he can even be mentioned in the same breath as Walsh.

When McGrath is 38yo and still playing test cricket and has 490 test wickets - then you can ask this question.

cheers

 

[TigerTank]

It's hard to define better when comparing Walsh to McGrath. Looking at their respective records you would have to say they are almost the same.

McGrath is probably more talented than Walsh, and can do more with the ball but surely that is no more important than Walsh's durability and discipline.

The reality is that Waqar Younis is more talented than either Walsh or McGrath (reverse swing, movement both ways, pace, etc.) but he has lacked the discipline to match either Walsh or McGrath over the long haul. Their respective records prove that Walsh and McGrath are better bowlers overall than Waqar, even if they are less talented.

I hope Walsh gets the 500 wickets because he absolutely deserves it. He is a deadset champion.

------------------
TT - Obligatory bad-tempered Richmond supporter



[This message has been edited by TigerTank (edited 19 December 2000).]

 

[GoEagles]

Yep well said TigerTank! I hope Walsh makes 500 wickets since this will be his last tour. I just hope for his sake he wont be left on 499 wickets!

 

[acuguy]

mcgrath might not make 500 wickets but if he does he wont have to be playing till the age of 38 to do that. It is amazing we cannot possibly say walsh is the greatest bowler of all time just because he has the most wickets, if that was a justifiable way of determing greatness then border would be greater batsmen then tendulkar or sobers, which no offence to border he is not as good as those two.

 

[TigerTank]

The other thing about Walsh that can't be measured by mere numbers is character.

To be the number one workhorse of the Windies pace attack at the age of 38 is amazing.

To forsake a well-earned retirement because your team needs you, even more impressive.

Walsh isn't one of the best fast bowlers ever - Holding, Marshall and even Ambrose were technically better - but Walsh is certainly one of the greatest ever, because of his character.

------------------
TT - Obligatory bad-tempered Richmond supporter

 

[TigerTank]

Back to the original topic for a moment though - McGrath is definitely the better batsman, especially after Steve Waugh's "coaching".

Walsh is a useless batsman.

 

[dees01]

No, I would much rather McGrath in comparison to Walsh.

 

[Grendel]

BSA, im with acuguy, if Mcgraths body lasts until 38,by then he will easily have 600 plus wickets.
Btw i hope that Walsh does get the 500 though, it is very well deserved for all the work hes done.

ps, whoever poster the comment about Waqar was spot on! So much talent, so little work ethic, what a waste that blokes been.

 

[GoEagles]

Bad news for Walsh fans, I just read that he will be returning home straight after the 5th test and wont be staying on to play the one day series

If your living in Melbourne or Sydney make sure you get down and see the great man play his final tests.

 

[TigerTank]

Originally posted by Grendel:


PS, Whoever posted the comment about Waqar was spot on! So much talent, so little work ethic, what a waste that blokes been.

WAQAR YOUNIS

Bowling

Overs - 2203
Maidens - 427
Wickets - 313 (for 7045 runs)
Average - 22.50
Best - 7-76
5 wickets in innings - 21
10 wickets in match - 5
Strike rate - 42.2
Economy - 3.19

Still, not a bad record for a "waste", is it?

Waqar's strike rate (a wicket every 42 balls) is better than McGrath's a wicket every 51 balls) or Walsh's (a wicket ever 57 balls).

Waqar's average is better than Walsh's (24.43) and almost as good as McGrath's (21.86).

Waqar's economy rate is pretty awful, and unlike Walsh in particular, he is only good in spurts.

That's why Walsh is so good. Not only does he take wickets (490 so far) at a respectable average, he also keeps the run-rate down thereby causing wickets for other bowlers.

And he often bowls twice as many overs in a day as anyone else, which means he is really worth two bowlers.


------------------
TT - Obligatory bad-tempered Richmond supporter

[This message has been edited by TigerTank (edited 20 December 2000).]

 

[Grendel]

TT,he still hasnt done anywhere near what he was capable of doing. He should have 400 wickets by now (Akram left that figure behind some time ago) if he had the application and desire. Nope, i look at him and see a perfect action and delivery with more variety than just about anyone (Hadlee and Lillee where the masters) else ive seen play, and i still think hes wasted his talents. Maybe the personality clashes between he and Akram havent helped, but thats just another poor reflection on his attitude to deal with adversity.