What's new

'Bumrah has less threatening performances than Shaheen in all formats' : Aaqib Javed

Started as Bumrah vs Shaheen Shah

Now going on as Bumrah vs Wasim Akram

Will probably end with Bumrah vs McGrath!

ps: This thread reminds of that legendary Bumrah vs Hasan Ali thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bumrah has long gone past Akram, only the legendary Mcgrath comes close to Jasprit. Enjoy him while u still can :alien:
 
Bumrah is a three format bowler. Thats exceptional.

His stats are very close to what Waqar was at his peak.

If Bumrah plays the next 8 tests that India is scheduled to play, he will likely go past 200 test wickets @20.xx

But i think he may play only 5 or 6 of them.

200 test wickets@20 will put Bumrah in the grear cricteria. Add to that his 3 format ability and you may be looking at an atg.

There's some discussion going on here about "making the ball".

I have only one thing to say, since the late 90s when ICC cracked down on ball tampering, no pakistani pacer has taken 200 test
 
Shaheen is willing to play through injury, while Bumrah backs off like a sissy to manage his non-existent workload. Different mindset.
 
Shaheen has a clean action.

Does Bumrah have a clean action? We can's say for sure until he gets tested. :inti
 
Bumrah against Shaheen?? No comparison at all. Even 4 years ago, I would pick Bumrah over Shaheen any day. People might talk about Bumrah's action but until he gets called out, we cannot say much because of the BCCiCC factor or whatever but Bumrah is a genuine match winner.
 
This Aaqib clown is the reason for decline in fast bowling, who are our top 3 pacers ? Nobody knows be it Test.odi or t20
 
Bumrah against Shaheen?? No comparison at all. Even 4 years ago, I would pick Bumrah over Shaheen any day. People might talk about Bumrah's action but until he gets called out, we cannot say much because of the BCCiCC factor or whatever but Bumrah is a genuine match winner.
Nobody is talking about bumrah action except some bitter Pak and Bangla fans. Even ex pak players who make 100 conspiracies don't talk about bumrah's actions

So nice try trying to sneak that there, but it's just you LYING again.
 
Nobody is talking about bumrah action except some bitter Pak and Bangla fans. Even ex pak players who make 100 conspiracies don't talk about bumrah's actions

So nice try trying to sneak that there, but it's just you LYING again.
Did you read my post or have you tried to put an axe on your own foot???

Where is the lie in my post???
 
With regards to Bumrah's action, repeating a lie thousand times does not make it the truth. Such a shame Pakistani and Bangladeshi fans don't realise that.​
its pathetic loser BD fans and nostalgic pak fans who bring that up. There is not a single respected player, admin, umpire or a past player who says anything about his action. It is just their way to cope
 
its pathetic loser BD fans and nostalgic pak fans who bring that up. There is not a single respected player, admin, umpire or a past player who says anything about his action. It is just their way to cope
Does no harm to anyone else. All it does is affect their blood pressure level.
 
Does no harm to anyone else. All it does is affect their blood pressure level.
funny thing is, accomplished players from other countries know what it takes to win and react appropriately. Then we have this loser team whose achievements are an absolute nil acting like they are some kind of world beaters. On top of that we have their pathetic fans dancing, crying, holding beheaded heads, and supporting their arrogant players. They have to be cringiest fans in any sporting history.
 
funny thing is, accomplished players from other countries know what it takes to win and react appropriately. Then we have this loser team whose achievements are an absolute nil acting like they are some kind of world beaters. On top of that we have their pathetic fans dancing, crying, holding beheaded heads, and supporting their arrogant players. They have to be cringiest fans in any sporting history.
I wish Jagmohan Dalmia didn't make a certain mistake that he did.
 
I wish Jagmohan Dalmia didn't make a certain mistake that he did.
oh yeah. He was very smart but made this huge mistake. But remember he was also from Kolkata and he had a soft corner for Bangladesh. Moreover pushing BD and supporting them was India's agenda especially since we were trying to get more political skin in the BD. If India had backed other teams like Netherlands, Kenya, Zimbabwe and others as much as we did BD the world would have escaped from this torture.
 
Unfortunately pcb ruined afridis by rushing him back from his injury in 2021. Has been canon fodder since. And was finished by age 22 shockingly. His career is finished before it even started because of his own stupidity and lack of work ethic
 
These two players underline the huge difference between the Indian and Pakistani cricket systems.

The players of the two countries start at arguably the same approximate point in terms of individual talent.

But one system rewards personal discipline, underlines the need for constant growth, is mostly ruthlessly meritorious, endlessly competitive, provides constant support and above all believes in processes.

The other, well….

And that’s why Bumrah versus Shaheen isn’t even a thing any more.
 
Bumrah has declined. His purple patch seems to be over.

Check his performance over the last 2-3 years. :inti

Remember that SA and NZ whitewashed India in India and Bumrah played both series.
 
Bumrah against Shaheen?? No comparison at all. Even 4 years ago, I would pick Bumrah over Shaheen any day. People might talk about Bumrah's action but until he gets called out, we cannot say much because of the BCCiCC factor or whatever but Bumrah is a genuine match winner.
Last 18 months or so , Arshdeep seems a more skilled white ball bowler than Shaheen .
Bumrah , obviously , no comparison .
 
Let me use the logic which some of my fellow indians use for their favorite players like Pant, Pandya and Rahul.

1.) Shaheen is a 22 year old baby in International cricket.

2.) Shaheen is soon going to take 100 wickets in tests so you can imagine by the time he turns 34 he will have around 500-600 test wickets. Next Wasim Akram 2.0. :91:

3.) Shaheen is yet to reach his peak whereas Bumrah has already maximized his peak. :91:

For more info, read KL vs Babar, Pant threads or Haris vs Umran threads.

:inti
Has Shaheen reached his peak yet? While you are it, has Babar reached his peak yet? Hope they baoth play for anther 10 years for Pak to make sure they find their peak.
If you were a betting man - who would you think will last the longest amongst the 2?

I feel Shaheen will have a longer career than Bumrah due to the fact Bumrah has already obtained a pretty serious injury which has affected his bowling. Shaheen's action is just less injury prone than Bumrah's.

If I had to bet I would bet on Shaheen lasting longer than Bumrah.
Hextro bro, you still around?
 
These two players underline the huge difference between the Indian and Pakistani cricket systems.

The players of the two countries start at arguably the same approximate point in terms of individual talent.

But one system rewards personal discipline, underlines the need for constant growth, is mostly ruthlessly meritorious, endlessly competitive, provides constant support and above all believes in processes.

The other, well….

And that’s why Bumrah versus Shaheen isn’t even a thing any more.
Than system, it is to do with the culture and mindset..every system expects their players to be well behaved and focus on their growth..However how their players are brought up decides the growth of the players..India, in its advantage is place of enormous cultural diversity supported with huge population..The only thing Indian cricket system has to do is to identify the right player who follows the rules and strict regime..whereas Pakistanis overall culture and the religious beliefs makes them more vulnerable to the pressure situations and tactical decisions..even in their prime, the great cricketers of Pakistan has achieved far less than India in terms of ICC tournaments..Also they fade so fastly due to lack of personal discipline..all the initial success easily reach to their heads compared to Indians and other teams that leads to their downfall..Many ex cricketers are more happy to criticize the young ones than to help them..one win against India can satisfy a Pakistani player for rest of his life.. so, unless the culture and mindset change, system won't be able to do anything..
 
true.... Arshdeep is a very intelligent bowler
He is hard working . Like most young players enjoying the riches from IPL , he too has not let '' good life '' come in way of sound work ethics .
Personally , am disappointed with lack of interest shown by both Shaheen & Naseem when it comes to the best format which is Test cricket .
 
Shaheen is only 26 yrs old.

If he can take a proper break, get his knee issues fixed and look to remodel his action, he could well return within 1-1.5 yr similiar to how Zaheer came back to intl cricket in mid 2007 a far far more refined bowler than the spraygun he was in 2005 and 2006
 
I honestly don't think Bumrah is even close to Shaheen in white ball. Wickets upfront is what decide games and Shaheen is vastly superior to Bumrah in that aspect.

I've never been impressed by Bumrah in white ball. He doesn't even have a single spell of note at the big stage. On the other hand, he has plenty where he flattered to deceive on the big stage ( 2016 wt20 vs WI, CT17 vs pak, 2021 wt20 vs Pak)

There are easily half a dozen bowlers if not more who I'd rather have than Bumrah in white ball.
Shaheen on the other hand would be my 1st choice fast bowler in white ball. I mean if I'm a batsman there's no one else I'd rather avoid facing.

Bumrah lacks the x factor in white ball, he's much better in tests. High accuracy at good speeds.

Shaheen is only learning his craft in tests though and is far from the finished product.

There's a good 6 years between them and Shaheen should be disappointed if he doesn't end up with a better career than Bumrah.


Shaheen with a better test career than bumrah, bumrah avgs 20 in tests with a sr of 43 and that’s bowling stats , good luck bettering that
 
Shaheen is only 26 yrs old.

If he can take a proper break, get his knee issues fixed and look to remodel his action, he could well return within 1-1.5 yr similiar to how Zaheer came back to intl cricket in mid 2007 a far far more refined bowler than the spraygun he was in 2005 and 2006
Guessing you don't know much about knee issues. Its the planting knee, there is no fixing it. period. end of of story. thats all she wrote.
 
Does no harm to anyone else. All it does is affect their blood pressure level.
It does harm to themselves.

If you utter a nonsense enough times, even ironically or with purpose of being provocative, you actually start to believe it. These people slowly enter a delusion. And it primes their mind to enter other similarly outrageous delusions. A smart enough person can exploit such people quite easily.
:trump2

And now they can't judge any bowler or any action. They can't tell difference between wishful thinking and reality.
 
Shaheen is only 26 yrs old.

If he can take a proper break, get his knee issues fixed and look to remodel his action, he could well return within 1-1.5 yr similiar to how Zaheer came back to intl cricket in mid 2007 a far far more refined bowler than the spraygun he was in 2005 and 2006
He is probably 30+ in real age...
 
Started as Bumrah vs Shaheen Shah

Now going on as Bumrah vs Wasim Akram

Will probably end with Bumrah vs McGrath!

ps: This thread reminds of that legendary Bumrah vs Hasan Ali thread.
Bumrah is a better limited over bowler than McGrath. In Test format, McGrath still ahead. I did not see Garner so can't comment, but from all accounts he was hard to hit as well. But limited overs were very new those days.

I am counting T20+ODI as limited overs. As a batsman if I have to score 10 runs an over, I will prefer to face McGrath compared to Bumrah and it's not just runs, Bumrah takes wickets as well. I think late release with all skills and accuracy makes it very hard for batsmen despite knowing what's coming. 3 slow yorkers in finals were prime examples today.
 
Bumrah is a better limited over bowler than McGrath. In Test format, McGrath still ahead. I did not see Garner so can't comment, but from all accounts he was hard to hit as well. But limited overs were very new those days.

I am counting T20+ODI as limited overs. As a batsman if I have to score 10 runs an over, I will prefer to face McGrath compared to Bumrah and it's not just runs, Bumrah takes wickets as well. I think late release with all skills and accuracy makes it very hard for batsmen despite knowing what's coming. 3 slow yorkers in finals were prime examples today.
mcgrath won three odi wc back to back which bumrah can only dream of....... where is bumrah during WTC 2021, WTC 2023 where ashwin taking more wickets than him in overcast conditions...... where he was when head was bashing in 2023 final? performed in some mickey mouse t20s and suddenly become better than GOATS
 
This comparison would now be unfair to Shaheen as he was betrayed by the very friends he trusted the most. You can clearly see the hurt in his eyes whenever he walks onto the field.

@hoshiarpurexpress
LOL its not an Indian drama serial. SSA has been pathetic for too long now. And he is still good friends with the people you think betrayed him. Cause they are all the same.

2026 SSA is not even 10% the bowler Bumrah is.
 
mcgrath won three odi wc back to back which bumrah can only dream of....... where is bumrah during WTC 2021, WTC 2023 where ashwin taking more wickets than him in overcast conditions...... where he was when head was bashing in 2023 final? performed in some mickey mouse t20s and suddenly become better than GOATS
Neither Mcgrath won it nor Bumrah won it, it's their teams won it. Both contributed. When comparing players you see what they did and not what teams did.

You should see what they did in limited overs taken together and judge it based on that. For example in WC against non-minnows Bumrah has gone for 4.23 runs per overs and McGrath went for 4.31 runs per overs despite McGrath playing in 225-250 kind of total and Bumrah playing in era with 300-350 runs total.

Then in T20, whcih is premium format in limited overs now, Bumrah is light years ahed of any other bowler in entire history. That's why I will take BYmrah over Mcgrath limited overs cricket. He is siply harder to score and tke wickets at same rate. What else can you ask.

In test, I will take McGrath.


WC ODI games against non-minnows: going for 4.2 runs per over is just ridiculous in 300-350 era.
1773010749477.png
1773010726288.png
1773010694010.png
 
mcgrath won three odi wc back to back which bumrah can only dream of....... where is bumrah during WTC 2021, WTC 2023 where ashwin taking more wickets than him in overcast conditions...... where he was when head was bashing in 2023 final? performed in some mickey mouse t20s and suddenly become better than GOATS

@Buffet is an Indian bootlicker like many South Africans are.

Anyone who thinks Bumrah is better than McGrath and Wasim is clearly new to cricket or is a paid shill. :inti

Forget about Wasim and McGrath. Bumrah is not even among top 10 greatest bowlers. I can name at least 10 bowlers in cricket's history who were better than Bumrah. :inti
 
@Buffet is an Indian bootlicker like many South Africans are.

Anyone who thinks Bumrah is better than McGrath and Wasim is clearly new to cricket or is a paid shill. :inti

Forget about Wasim and McGrath. Bumrah is not even among top 10 greatest bowlers. I can name at least 10 bowlers in cricket's history who were better than Bumrah. :inti
Now he is saying World cup is not win by mcgrath but whole team 😂
 
@Buffet is an Indian bootlicker like many South Africans are.

Anyone who thinks Bumrah is better than McGrath and Wasim is clearly new to cricket or is a paid shill. :inti

Forget about Wasim and McGrath. Bumrah is not even among top 10 greatest bowlers. I can name at least 10 bowlers in cricket's history who were better than Bumrah. :inti
Even bumrah himself say mcgrath is miles better than him..
 
Neither Mcgrath won it nor Bumrah won it, it's their teams won it. Both contributed. When comparing players you see what they did and not what teams did.

You should see what they did in limited overs taken together and judge it based on that. For example in WC against non-minnows Bumrah has gone for 4.23 runs per overs and McGrath went for 4.31 runs per overs despite McGrath playing in 225-250 kind of total and Bumrah playing in era with 300-350 runs total.

Then in T20, whcih is premium format in limited overs now, Bumrah is light years ahed of any other bowler in entire history. That's why I will take BYmrah over Mcgrath limited overs cricket. He is siply harder to score and tke wickets at same rate. What else can you ask.

In test, I will take McGrath.


WC ODI games against non-minnows: going for 4.2 runs per over is just ridiculous in 300-350 era.
View attachment 162613
View attachment 162612
View attachment 162611
Even shaheen and shami were beast in odi wcs..... stats don't matter.......
 
Even shaheen and shami were beast in odi wcs..... stats don't matter.......

Stats are not generated in vaccum. They are output of actual perormance. Shami is actually rated high for his WC exploits because he went for 5 runs per over but took heaps of wickets and avearges 9 per wicket. His stats did not appear magically, it was his actual bowling.

Afridi?? he averages 27 per wicket with 6+ runs per over, that's very ordinary stats. You probably have to look at stats closely, with a big sample size, they paint mostly accurate picture of ability of players. Just make sure to see main 8 nations and not simply boosted by minnow bashing.
 
Bumrah is a better limited over bowler than McGrath. In Test format, McGrath still ahead. I did not see Garner so can't comment, but from all accounts he was hard to hit as well. But limited overs were very new those days.

I am counting T20+ODI as limited overs. As a batsman if I have to score 10 runs an over, I will prefer to face McGrath compared to Bumrah and it's not just runs, Bumrah takes wickets as well. I think late release with all skills and accuracy makes it very hard for batsmen despite knowing what's coming. 3 slow yorkers in finals were prime examples today.

That is a flawed argument to make when one player never played T20Is. We can never truly know what he might have achieved in that format; any such claim would simply be speculation based on his record in other limited-overs formats.

One could just as easily make the opposite assumption. Since T20 batting requires players to attack more deliveries and attempt more boundaries, a bowler like McGrath—renowned for his exceptional consistency in line and length—might actually have taken even more wickets. However, that too would remain an assumption and may or may not have happened.

Therefore, the only fair way to compare Bumrah and McGrath is through the formats both of them actually played.

In Tests, McGrath is ahead.

In ODIs, McGrath is slightly ahead.

In T20Is, Bumrah is clearly ahead—there is no real comparison there.

By the time Bumrah finishes his career, he may or may not surpass McGrath in one or both of the formats where he currently trails. Only time will tell.
 
That is a flawed argument to make when one player never played T20Is. We can never truly know what he might have achieved in that format; any such claim would simply be speculation based on his record in other limited-overs formats.

One could just as easily make the opposite assumption. Since T20 batting requires players to attack more deliveries and attempt more boundaries, a bowler like McGrath—renowned for his exceptional consistency in line and length—might actually have taken even more wickets. However, that too would remain an assumption and may or may not have happened.

Therefore, the only fair way to compare Bumrah and McGrath is through the formats both of them actually played.

In Tests, McGrath is ahead.

In ODIs, McGrath is slightly ahead.

In T20Is, Bumrah is clearly ahead—there is no real comparison there.

By the time Bumrah finishes his career, he may or may not surpass McGrath in one or both of the formats where he currently trails. Only time will tell.
Shami > Mcgrath/Starc. HE just didn't have the support from batsmen.
 
That is a flawed argument to make when one player never played T20Is. We can never truly know what he might have achieved in that format; any such claim would simply be speculation based on his record in other limited-overs formats.

One could just as easily make the opposite assumption. Since T20 batting requires players to attack more deliveries and attempt more boundaries, a bowler like McGrath—renowned for his exceptional consistency in line and length—might actually have taken even more wickets. However, that too would remain an assumption and may or may not have happened.

Wickets assumtions can be made for sure, I agree. Both have averaged 21-22 per wiclets in ODI WC.

I think it's fair to make assumption that McGrath will be whole lot more expensive than Bumrah in T20. I agree about taking data from where both have played the format. Both played ODI. Since ODI WC games are taken seriously, we can see that McGrath went for 4.3 runs per overs against non-minnows in 90s-2000s period when ODI scores were 225-250 and Bumrah went for 4.2 runs per over per overs when ODI scores are 275-300. If batsmen were actually going after bowlers like they do in T20, it's not unfair to assume that McGrath will be whole lot more expensive than Bumrah. Agree, it's specualtion on my part.
 
Wickets assumtions can be made for sure, I agree. Both have averaged 21-22 per wiclets in ODI WC.

I think it's fair to make assumption that McGrath will be whole lot more expensive than Bumrah in T20. I agree about taking data from where both have played the format. Both played ODI. Since ODI WC games are taken seriously, we can see that McGrath went for 4.3 runs per overs against non-minnows in 90s-2000s period when ODI scores were 225-250 and Bumrah went for 4.2 runs per over per overs when ODI scores are 275-300. If batsmen were actually going after bowlers like they do in T20, it's not unfair to assume that McGrath will be whole lot more expensive than Bumrah. Agree, it's specualtion on my part.
Two new ball era vs one new ball era, T20 era vs before T20 era, Field restriction era vs pre field restriction era. BOwlers way too restricted than ever.
 
Shami > Mcgrath/Starc. HE just didn't have the support from batsmen.

I assume you are referring to ODIs, because in Test cricket there is really no contest.

McGrath is arguably the greatest fast bowler to have played the game. He is also one of the most underrated bowlers on many forums, largely because his greatest strength was something people often find “boring”: relentless consistency.

Many people tend to choose Wasim Akram over him because Wasim was more flamboyant and possessed a wider range of skills. However, he did not maintain the same level of consistency that McGrath displayed throughout his career, which ultimately places him a tier below McGrath.

Even in terms of longevity, McGrath is clearly ahead of Shami and has the stronger overall record. In that regard, there is really no comparison between the two.

The comparison between Mitchell Starc and Mohammed Shami in ODIs, however, is far closer, and a reasonable case can be made for either of them.
 
In Tests, McGrath is ahead.

In ODIs, McGrath is slightly ahead.

In T20Is, Bumrah is clearly ahead—there is no real comparison there.
Bumrah has some way to go in test and not there yet to challenge McGrath. Being better is further away.

Since T20 is premium format in limited overs and ODI has lost its shine, I am just clubbing two limited overs format here. My comment is only about limited overs. I agree Bumrah is slightly behind in ODI but he is so far ahead in T20 that as limited overs bowler I will take him over McGrath. Anyway, there are only 3-4 bowlers in history who have bossed in all formats they played. McGrath was one in his era and Bumrah is another. Glad to see both bowl live.
 
I assume you are referring to ODIs, because in Test cricket there is really no contest.

McGrath is arguably the greatest fast bowler to have played the game. He is also one of the most underrated bowlers on many forums, largely because his greatest strength was something people often find “boring”: relentless consistency.

Many people tend to choose Wasim Akram over him because Wasim was more flamboyant and possessed a wider range of skills. However, he did not maintain the same level of consistency that McGrath displayed throughout his career, which ultimately places him a tier below McGrath.

Even in terms of longevity, McGrath is clearly ahead of Shami and has the stronger overall record. In that regard, there is really no comparison between the two.

The comparison between Mitchell Starc and Mohammed Shami in ODIs, however, is far closer, and a reasonable case can be made for either of them.
yup strictly ODI world cups. SHami did in this era.
 
In Tests, McGrath is ahead.

In ODIs, McGrath is slightly ahead.

In T20Is, Bumrah is clearly ahead—there is no real comparison there.

Who cares about T20? It is a casual format.

A player's greatness is judged by his Test and ODI performances. Not T20.

Let's just say Bumrah is not anywhere close to McGrath. Only delusional Indians compare him to McGrath. :inti
 
Wickets assumtions can be made for sure, I agree. Both have averaged 21-22 per wiclets in ODI WC.

I think it's fair to make assumption that McGrath will be whole lot more expensive than Bumrah in T20. I agree about taking data from where both have played the format. Both played ODI. Since ODI WC games are taken seriously, we can see that McGrath went for 4.3 runs per overs against non-minnows in 90s-2000s period when ODI scores were 225-250 and Bumrah went for 4.2 runs per over per overs when ODI scores are 275-300. If batsmen were actually going after bowlers like they do in T20, it's not unfair to assume that McGrath will be whole lot more expensive than Bumrah. Agree, it's specualtion on my part.


You are missing the context here. When McGrath played in the 1990s and early 2000s, bilateral tournaments, tri-series, and quad-series carried almost the same importance as World Cups. Every series mattered, and teams typically fielded their strongest possible line-ups. Australia, in particular, approached bilateral series with the same level of intensity and competitiveness.

It was only after T20 cricket became dominant—and as several teams declined in strength (such as the West Indies, Zimbabwe, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka)—that ODI bilateral series gradually became more of a testing ground for newer players rather than marquee contests.

Because of this, the performances of players from the 1990s in bilateral competitions against the top teams of that era should be taken just as seriously as their World Cup records.

For example, people often dismiss Wasim Akram’s performances in Sharjah, but at the time those matches were immensely significant. In many cases, they carried more intensity and competitiveness than today’s often one-sided India–Pakistan World Cup encounters, because the skill gap between teams was far smaller and the stakes felt higher.

Every era exists within its own context, which people frequently fail to consider. That is precisely why comparisons across different eras should be made with great caution.
 
Who cares about T20? It is a casual format.

A player's greatness is judged by his Test and ODI performances. Not T20.

Let's just say Bumrah is not anywhere close to McGrath. Only delusional Indians compare him to McGrath. :inti
Now say that without crying.
 
You are missing the context here. When McGrath played in the 1990s and early 2000s, bilateral tournaments, tri-series, and quad-series carried almost the same importance as World Cups. Every series mattered, and teams typically fielded their strongest possible line-ups. Australia, in particular, approached bilateral series with the same level of intensity and competitiveness.

It was only after T20 cricket became dominant—and as several teams declined in strength (such as the West Indies, Zimbabwe, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka)—that ODI bilateral series gradually became more of a testing ground for newer players rather than marquee contests.

Because of this, the performances of players from the 1990s in bilateral competitions against the top teams of that era should be taken just as seriously as their World Cup records.

You missed the point. We can't compare bilaterals records directly across era due to reasons you sighted. No team plays ODI bilaterals seriiusly now. But everyone played WC seriously back then and same is true even now. That's direct comaprison where teams were playing with full inetnsity in all eras and to elminate noise, we can get rid of minnows.

Mcgrath is ahead in ODI for me. My point was about Mcgrath likely to getting hit by more runs in T20 based on ODI WC record for McGrath and Bumrah.
 
Bumrah has some way to go in test and not there yet to challenge McGrath. Being better is further away.

Since T20 is premium format in limited overs and ODI has lost its shine, I am just clubbing two limited overs format here. My comment is only about limited overs. I agree Bumrah is slightly behind in ODI but he is so far ahead in T20 that as limited overs bowler I will take him over McGrath. Anyway, there are only 3-4 bowlers in history who have bossed in all formats they played. McGrath was one in his era and Bumrah is another. Glad to see both bowl live.
Bumrah’s versatility and intelligence make him a more multi‑dimensional LOI bowler than McGrath. He can bowl slow ball like Bravo at the death, hit Malinga‑style yorkers, swing it like Steyn when needed, or settle into a Test‑match length with relentless accuracy. He has out‑thought and out‑foxed many top batsmen, and he executes each skill at a high level. The only phase where McGrath may hold a slight edge is with the brand‑new ball. If you rate both bowlers on a 1–10 scale across all phases, Bumrah would narrowly edge him overall.
 
Back
Top