Did anyone master Malcolm Marshall during his peak?

Bilbo

Tape Ball Regular
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Runs
507
I don't think any batsman was able to play Marshal comfortably during his peak. He troubled the best batsman from the opposition. Did anyone play Marshal with ease or troubled him or frustrated him during his peak years?
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

Problem is the man who could have mastered him was playing in the same team.
 
I don't think any batsman was able to play Marshal comfortably during his peak. He troubled the best batsman from the opposition. Did anyone play Marshal with ease or troubled him or frustrated him during his peak years?

Yes: Mohinder Amarnath in the West Indies in 82-83.

Marshall was brilliant, he took 21 wickets at 23, bowling at around 160K into the ribs of the batsmen from round the wicket.

But Jimmy scored 598 runs in nine innings, with two hundreds and four fifties.
 
Gavaskar played an absolutely devastating innings againist Marshal in 1983 at Delhi.100 of 90 odd balls.Hooked and Pulled Marshal and Holding to bits.
 
Of course must have been an indian superman who did it..

I am not Indian. It's just that Mohinder Amarnath really did play pace and Marshall in particular better than anyone else.

He was 32.6 years old then. Unfortunately, he scored 1 run in six innings when the Windies next toured India: his technique of pulling, hooking and cutting was fine on lively wickets, but was hopeless on home strips which were cracked, grassless and had inconsistent bounce.
 
I am glad Pakistan are playing two games in 3 days. Whenever there is a break all kind of threads pop up :yk
 
Last edited:
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

Averages over 40 when Marshall played.... (min 300 runs)

In matches where there was a "result" pitch....

S Malik
K Wessels
R Smith
S Waugh
M Taylor

In matches which had a "draw" pitch...

Border
Gavaskar
Vengsarkar
Amarnath
Crowe
D Jones
Gooch
Shastri
 
Here comes the Draw and Result pitch guy:facepalm

Picking and choosing stats is the trend on PP.
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

I'm sure there were some excellent performances in the draw inducing pitches as well.. See Junaids' post for an example.


Someone explain to me why the list is longer in the draw inducing pitches.... Than result inducing pitches?
 
Last edited:
You are mistaking your data.

Border, Amarnath and Crowe didn't play on "draw pitches."

They turned certain defeats into draws by showing incredible technique, concentration, stamina, endurance and courage.
 
Last edited:
I'm sure there were some excellent performances in the draw inducing pitches as well.. See Junaids' post for an example.


Someone explain to me why the list is longer in the draw inducing pitches.... Than result inducing pitches?

If you're going that way about it. Why not discount "result" inducing games where spinners/medium pacers took wickets to effect result? Such might not be the right kind of pitch to judge a batsman's ability to face Marshall.
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

If you're going that way about it. Why not discount "result" inducing games where spinners/medium pacers took wickets to effect result? Such might not be the right kind of pitch to judge a batsman's ability to face Marshall.

If the data could support it then that should be done....

Best way is always to look at individual innings.... Which should be possible.
 
You are mistaking your data.

Border, Amarnath and Crowe didn't play on "draw pitches."

They turned certain defeats into draws by showing incredible technique, concentration, stamina, endurance and courage.

If you're going that way about it. Why not discount "result" inducing games where spinners/medium pacers took wickets to effect result? Such might not be the right kind of pitch to judge a batsman's ability to face Marshall.

Its his way of discounting players like Gavaskar,Amarnath,Border etc since they dont fit his agenda.Take out this pitch take out that pitch this years that opposition to suit your agenda.

Why not discount result pitches while talking about bowlers as result pitches are bowler friendly?
 
Averages over 40 when Marshall played.... (min 300 runs)

In matches where there was a "result" pitch....

S Malik
K Wessels
R Smith
S Waugh
M Taylor

In matches which had a "draw" pitch...

Border
Gavaskar
Vengsarkar
Amarnath
Crowe
D Jones
Gooch
Shastri

are these those matches when Marshall was at his peak as the thread title suggests? bcoz if not, then these stats are irrelevant. Peak matters, Even pak managed to win a test match against windies in WI in late 80s but that didn;t mean much bcoz the WI team then had no marshall, no holding, no richard and the bowling attack was a rookie one..So u see, pull out the relevant stats..
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

Its his way of discounting players like Gavaskar,Amarnath,Border etc since they dont fit his agenda.Take out this pitch take out that pitch this years that opposition to suit your agenda.

Why not discount result pitches while talking about bowlers as result pitches are bowler friendly?

You should discount (ie give a bit less credit) wrt result pitches when talking about bowlers....

The layman gets very confused...


To give you an example the likes of Dennis Lillee get undue credit for playing on pitches assisting bowlers for 90% of their careers.

Other bowlers have to suffer and toil through flat pitches.

The likes of waqar and Imran and Kapil for example had to toil on tougher wickets most of the time.


You could be really extreme and look at bowler data in drawn games to see who played relatively better....

But most people forget and don't care about most drawn games.
 
Last edited:
Gavaskar played some wonderful innings with Marshall in the West Indian team. He averages close to 52 in matches involving Marshall.
 
Also take this as a scenario

1) WI Vs India, on a turning wicket....

Fast bowlers fail.
Spinners take most of the wickets.

Gavaskar hits a ton.

India wins the match.

2) Fast bouncy WI pitch.

Pacers create havoc.

All batsmen fail except one Salim Malik who hangs onto his crease for an entire day to make a century.

The match ends in a draw on the last day with Pakistan 200 runs behind WI because all except one batsman failed.

According to Mr. Khan ji,

Gavaskar now is hailed as a batsman who tamed Marshall. Salim Malik performed against Marshall only in non result games, so meh.
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

As an extreme sufferer....

Kapil Dev had to play 75 games in drawn games yet still took over 200 wickets....

Impressive.
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

@KP... Those are all possibilties... No one is denying that.

Point is that when the numbers are large enough the anomalies cancel out.

If u look at a players overall career....

Splitting the runs scored in drawn games from others shows how much average inflation there is.


Its better than a plain average... It's better than Sub-Con vs non Sub-Con...
 
@KP... Those are all possibilties... No one is denying that.

Point is that when the numbers are large enough the anomalies cancel out.

If u look at a players overall career....

Splitting the runs scored in drawn games from others shows how much average inflation there is.


Its better than a plain average... It's better than Sub-Con vs non Sub-Con...

There is the Agenda again.Why am i not surprised.
 
@KP... Those are all possibilties... No one is denying that.

Point is that when the numbers are large enough the anomalies cancel out.

If u look at a players overall career....

Splitting the runs scored in drawn games from others shows how much average inflation there is.


Its better than a plain average... It's better than Sub-Con vs non Sub-Con...
No it's not. It's something that you've personally chosen for your own agenda. Not a single member of this forum has ever agreed with you on this matter, not even Pakistani posters (let along non-Pak ones). Try and find me one non-Pak poster who agrees with you.
 
Last edited:
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

My friends there are plenty flat tracks outside sub con....

Antigua for examole.

Plenty non flat tracks in sub con e.g raging turners.

A much better indicator is drawn games....

Youll find that 80% of drawn games were on flat tracks whether Sub con or outside.
 
Wrong! There were plenty of games that have been drawn due to merits and performances of certain players. Those performances can't be ignored.

And most importantly, if there were any merit in your argument, we would have seen at least a few posters agree with you, which no one does.
 
Last edited:
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

Some games drawn due to merits... But generally due to flatness.


4th innings runs in drawn games are valuable as these were saving a defeat into a draw when the pitch might be finally breaking up.
 
Again wrong! There have plenty upon plenty of instances (not 'some' games) where certain players helped their team draw a game. None of them can be ignored.
 
Like I said before, there would have been at least some posters agreeing with you if your argument had any sort of merit. Guess what, nobody does!
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

Simple question....

Why are batting averages higher in drawn games across every decade cricket has been played????
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

It's really not rocket science....
 
An even more simple question, why should a brilliant innings by a player that helped his team draw a match be ignored under the guise of it being a 'drawn match'? That would be injustice to that player which cannot be done.
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

People from sub contintent have a subservient approach generally when it comes to the west....

We have to believe the fallacy that Sub-Con is flat... And west has tough pitches.

False.... Plenty Sub-Con pitches are tough to bat on.

Just look at Aussies struggling on raging turners.
 
People from sub contintent have a subservient approach generally when it comes to the west....

We have to believe the fallacy that Sub-Con is flat... And west has tough pitches.

False.... Plenty Sub-Con pitches are tough to bat on.

Just look at Aussies struggling on raging turners.


Non SC avgs are used to gauge the success of SC batsman outside their favoured tracks.SC batsman grow up playing on turners.

I understand you dont like this cricteria as it may not suit your agenda.
 
Some games drawn due to merits... But generally due to flatness.


4th innings runs in drawn games are valuable as these were saving a defeat into a draw when the pitch might be finally breaking up.

And we have to believe it because you said so?
 
That's why you cannot filter flat tracks from non-flat ones (unless you have an agenda like somehow trying to make your players look better than others). All you can do is look at a players performance at 'home' and 'away from home'
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

An even more simple question, why should a brilliant innings by a player that helped his team draw a match be ignored under the guise of it being a 'drawn match'? That would be injustice to that player which cannot be done.

Shouldn't be ignored....

Generally speaking this helping a team to a draw on a flat track will happen in 4th innings.... I really value 4th innings batting in draws.

Remember my stats are still a sweeping generalisation..

Just better than normal averages or sub con... Non sub con.
 
Choro, will talk to you when someone finally agrees with your argument.
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

That's why you cannot filter flat tracks from non-flat ones (unless you have an agenda like somehow trying to make your players look better than others). All you can do is look at a players performance at 'home' and 'away from home'

Home and away is good... And one measure better than plain averages...

But some people home has more "draw" flat tracks than other people's homes...

So net net drawn vs result pitches are a better guide.
 
Like it or not, the fact remains that Mohindar Amarnath is the only person who can lay claim to that title. And not just Marshall, Mohindar Amarnath in the India tour of WI in 1982, when literally the trio - Andy Roberts, Michael Holding and Marshall were at their peak, scored 600 runs in 5 matches against that bowling attack at an average of 67. To put things in perspective, the 2nd highest top scorer for India was Vensgarkar with 279 runs.

Now the natural argument would be whether Marshall was at his peak - Well, he did average 23 runs per wicket in that year, and less that in the 2 years around it. Holding averaged 17.5 in the 2 years on both sides of that series. Amarnath in those 5 matches, was the best a batsmen could ever be against the WI bowling attack.
 
Like it or not, the fact remains that Mohindar Amarnath is the only person who can lay claim to that title. And not just Marshall, Mohindar Amarnath in the India tour of WI in 1982, when literally the trio - Andy Roberts, Michael Holding and Marshall were at their peak, scored 600 runs in 5 matches against that bowling attack at an average of 67. To put things in perspective, the 2nd highest top scorer for India was Vensgarkar with 279 runs.

Now the natural argument would be whether Marshall was at his peak - Well, he did average 23 runs per wicket in that year, and less that in the 2 years around it. Holding averaged 17.5 in the 2 years on both sides of that series. Amarnath in those 5 matches, was the best a batsmen could ever be against the WI bowling attack.

and for anyone who has doubts about what Amarnath was in that period of his life, Mohinder Amarnath was called the best batsman in the world by the two most likely incumbents to the title - Sunil Gavaskar and Vivian Richards.

Imran Khan regarded Mohinder so highly that in his book "All Round View" he went on record to say that in the 1982-83 season, Mohinder was quite simply the best batsman in the world.
 
Last edited:
Like it or not, the fact remains that Mohindar Amarnath is the only person who can lay claim to that title.

No, he can't. Amanarth did well in one series against Marshall / Holding / Garner but then got badly busted up in India - he couldn't buy a run.

The only batter to have sustained success in that era of WI dominance was Gooch with six centuries, and Maco cleaned him up a lot of times too.
 
Last edited:
No, he can't. Amanarth did well in one series against Marshall / Holding / Garner but then got badly busted up in India - he couldn't buy a run.

The only batter to have sustained success in that era of WI dominance was Gooch with six centuries, and Maco cleaned him up a lot of times too.

i get your point, but my understanding and based upon the discussions, the thread is not abt who was the most consistent but who decisively mastered these bowlers for a period. For eg: If someone asks who mastered Murali at his peak, the fact that TKar scored tons of runs against murali over say a period of 10 years won't be the answer people would want to hear. Most people would say Lara, who amassed some 600 runs in a single series against Murali and co.
 
i get your point, but my understanding and based upon the discussions, the thread is not abt who was the most consistent but who decisively mastered these bowlers for a period.

Well, IMO Mohinder was an admirable, brave guy with a good technique who had a very fine series in WI. That Indian batting line was very strong (Sunny, Vengsarkar, Shastri, Azhar just starting, Kapil at #7).

As for Sir Viv being the only batter who could master Maco, I'm not convinced. Viv had some trouble against Lillee who was stylistically similar to Maco (fast, acurate, orthodox swing both ways, nasty leg-cutter). It would have been cool to see the two Caribbean champions going at each other. Viv would have hit hundreds but Maco would have cleaned him up a few times too.
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

Simple question....

Why are batting averages higher in drawn games across every decade cricket has been played????

I struggle to see why people don't understand this simple point. It really isn't something too difficult to comprehend.

Draws are more often than not a result of an un sporting pitch. Every now and then it is due to a batsman special innings. But more often than not it is a flat pitch that causes draws to happen.
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

Back to the question at hand - how did Chappell fare against MM?
 
Border was the best Australian against the Windies. Drew many a lost cause.

Did Marshall play when Hughes scored that brilliant boxing day century?

On song Hughes was a masterful player of fast bowlers. Probably helped by Lillee trying to kill him every day in the nets
 
Gavaskar-West Indies myth busted....
http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showpost.php?p=512209&postcount=148

Here are the WI BOWLERS Gavaskar scored his 13 100s against;

1) 1971 (his 100# 1, 2 ,3, and 4)
Boyce, Shillingford, Sobers (end of his career), Gibbs.
Only Gibbs (offie) was any decent bowler. Boyce and Shiingford were no faster than Balaji! WI were not THE BEST in 1971.

2) 1975-76 (100# 5 and 6).
Yes....Robert and Holding were there but Holding's was very early in his career and not very accuarte that time. WI were just trashed by Aus 5-1 in test series. They were not the BEST!

3) 1978-79 (100# 7, 8, 9 and 10)
Against a very DEPLETED WI side whose main players were gone to Kerry Packer. Holder, Clark and Marshall (in his first series) on DEAD/SPINNING wickets....hencse 3 100s. Holder was slower than Balaji!
All their players were gone to Karry packer!

4) 1982-83 (100# 11).
Yes, this was the true/fast WI bowling attack (Robert, Holding, marshal and garner) but he scored on dead batting wicket after WI had scored 470 runs in the first innings.

5) 1983-84 (100# 12 and 13).
Against Holding Marshal, Daniel and Davis....on a batting wicket oif Dehli and the match was drawn. Davis and Daniel were not very good fast bowlers!
13th 100 came against Holding, Marshall, Davis and aging Robets. Again a dead pitch match drawn after no first day's play.


season 1982/83 5 9 1 240 147* 32 20 30.00 1 0 1
season 1983/84 6 11 1 505 236* 121 90 50.50 2 1 2

In last two series when WI were good and had good attack,
see his average in 82-83 series. In 83-84 in India the wickets were spinning or batting wickets.

So......as in reality Gavaskar MOSTLY scored his runs/100s against CRAPY WI attacks....not when they were the best!
 
Was drawing against Windies in the 80s easy?
HOW MANY DRAWS DID ENGLAND ACHIEVE IN THAT PERIOD?

Did England play on the Indian roads?

Did England play WI when 10 of their top fast bowlers were playing for Packer?
 
Did England play on the Indian roads?

Did England play WI when 10 of their top fast bowlers were playing for Packer?

Sorry to go off topic, have asked you this before, how is it that the same "Indian roads" become "Spitting cobras" turning square from day one when the discussion is about Indian spinners?
 
Sorry to go off topic, have asked you this before, how is it that the same "Indian roads" become "Spitting cobras" turning square from day one when the discussion is about Indian spinners?

Simple. To discredit Kumble. Kumble took his wickets on "splitting cobras" whereas Indian batsmen accumulated on "Indian roads". Easy peasy to kill two birds with one stone.
 
Did England play on the Indian roads?

Did England play WI when 10 of their top fast bowlers were playing for Packer?

I knew you would ask that.
Your assumptions that Windies bowlers were neutralised in India are ridiculous.
India actually did better in the Windies and way better than England. in the 80s.

and I specifically said 80s. You make it look like Gavaskar played a lot of tests where Windies great pacers were missing when it was just one series.
 
I ask this again
Why is it assumed that WINDIES GREATEST ATTACK was neutralised in India when they were ACTUALLY BETTER than at home?
 

hahaha, cmng from someone who keeps reminding that Pak drew a series against Wi in WI in late 80s and that it was a mammoth achievement. That the one match they won against WI was against a bunch of rookies and not the great WI team of 70s and 80s , he conveniently forgot to mention. But then for someone, whose day job is to build up some colorful (blue, pink, red fonts to draw attention since the content can't) stats, which would lack any analysis, to show something like Umar Gul is a better bat than Gavaskar or SRT, what better we could expect.
 
I knew you would ask that.
Your assumptions that Windies bowlers were neutralised in India are ridiculous.
India actually did better in the Windies and way better than England. in the 80s.
If I asked you who Lillee was... you'll tell me it is a stupid question.
If I asked you who Taslim Arif was..... you may now know him. Just look how he neutralized Lillee in pakistan.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63264.html
The guy was good enough for only three tests afterwards.

Point is ... if no name wicket keeper can beat the crap out of Lillee... Gavaskar can certainly do it too.... on deader than dead wickets.


and I specifically said 80s. You make it look like Gavaskar played a lot of tests where Windies great pacers were missing when it was just one series.

Looks like I need to give you history lesson .... about YOUR OWN TEAM? :facepalm:


I have already talked about home tests at Indian roads.


Gavaskar playedfollowing three series in West Indies:

1971:

Runs:774 Ave: 154.80 Hundreds: 4
Which "class", "fast" and "furious" bowlers did he face?
See in you (or anybody) recognize any names???

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...tting_bowling_by_team.html?id=175;type=series

Noreiga (who?? :)) ) was the highest wicket taker in the series. He career total of tests: a whopping FOUR!.

Sobers was the 2nd highest wicket taker.... at a end of his career..... which started in mid 50s.

1976:

Runs: 390 Ave: 55.71 Hundreds: 2

Both 100s were scored on the spinning wickets of Port-of-Spain....where India played THREE spinners in both test and even West Indies play 2 spinners in first test and THREE spinners in the 2nd test! :)
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63161.html
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63160.html
Yet.... chasing 406 in last innings was no mean feat. I'll give him that! :14:


Bowlers faced in that series.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...tting_bowling_by_team.html?id=175;type=series

Holding: Highest wicket taker.... playing in his 2nd series.... very erratic (no line and length) and was hit all over the park by Aussies in his debut series.

Julian: 4 tests: Slower than Razzaq. Check him out on youtube.

Holder 2 tests: Who?

Roberts: Played with injury and played in only two test....

Daniel: Played in only 1 test.



1983:

Runs: 240 Ave: 30.00 Hundreds: 1

THis is the only time he faced a full fledged WI attack. One big innings of 147* .... brings his average up to 30 in the series. No fifty! :)
 
Last edited:
hahaha, cmng from someone who keeps reminding that Pak drew a series against Wi in WI in late 80s and that it was a mammoth achievement. That the one match they won against WI was against a bunch of rookies and not the great WI team of 70s and 80s , he conveniently forgot to mention. But then for someone, whose day job is to build up some colorful (blue, pink, red fonts to draw attention since the content can't) stats, which would lack any analysis, to show something like Umar Gul is a better bat than Gavaskar or SRT, what better we could expect.

I didn't want to mention this. But it is true.
If they Gavaskar's runs are a myth , then so is this 'achievement'.
 

That is your biased view not the view of experts.So means ZILCH out side this forum.

Next time look into the HYPED UP drawn series of IK led Pakistan in WI.

As i said Agendas are Agendas.Doesnt matter in the views of experts.Gavaskar remains one of the top 3 openers of all time.When ever Gavaskar scored runs it was a flat wicket or a spinning track.Talking about Agendas here.


Btw if socring runs in WI was so easy why didnt the great Pakistani batting did so and won tests in WI?What stopped them?
 
Last edited:
Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

are these those matches when Marshall was at his peak as the thread title suggests? bcoz if not, then these stats are irrelevant. Peak matters, Even pak managed to win a test match against windies in WI in late 80s but that didn;t mean much bcoz the WI team then had no marshall, no holding, no richard and the bowling attack was a rookie one..So u see, pull out the relevant stats..

Well there can be another thread on this. Richards was the captain then, Windies had no rookies but next monster bowling line-up like Ambrose, Walsh and yes they had Marshall. It was a full side unlike the ones Gavaskar faced back in 70s with no main seamers.
I am not putting Miandad as the master of marshal, although he did score two hundreds in that 88 tour, because Marshal was on downhill slope
 
Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

Sorry to go off topic, have asked you this before, how is it that the same "Indian roads" become "Spitting cobras" turning square from day one when the discussion is about Indian spinners?

I will tell you why, take for instance 87 tour of Pak to India. First four matches were on dead pitches and both team's batsmen scored a plenty, a few hundreds in every inns. The last match in Bengalore was a spitting cobra and with the leader that Imran was, he read the situation cleverly and included two spinners, he knew what the opposition was upto. We won by 16 runs
 
and how actually is that even remotely related to the cricketindiafan question?
 
I will tell you why, take for instance 87 tour of Pak to India. First four matches were on dead pitches and both team's batsmen scored a plenty, a few hundreds in every inns. The last match in Bengalore was a spitting cobra and with the leader that Imran was, he read the situation cleverly and included two spinners, he knew what the opposition was upto. We won by 16 runs

Two out of Qadir, Tauseef and Iqbal Qasim played each of those 5 tests. In fact for the final test, Qadir was dropped for Saleem Jaffer, India played an extra seamer in Binny as the pitch was widely expected to be seamer friendly.
 
Well there can be another thread on this. Richards was the captain then, Windies had no rookies but next monster bowling line-up like Ambrose, Walsh and yes they had Marshall. It was a full side unlike the ones Gavaskar faced back in 70s with no main seamers.
I am not putting Miandad as the master of marshal, although he did score two hundreds in that 88 tour, because Marshal was on downhill slope


the match pak won in georgetown - the only match they won in 80s in wi - didn;t have Richard. Go check. It was Ambrose debut match, Walsh - 8th, and 2 other pace bowlers who collectively played some 6-7 matches till then. There was no Marshal in that game, no holding and Clive Lloyd had retired a couple of months before the game. If that wasn't a rookie attack, then the definition of rookie should be looked into.
 
Last edited:
1983:

Runs: 240 Ave: 30.00 Hundreds: 1

THis is the only time he faced a full fledged WI attack. One big innings of 147* .... brings his average up to 30 in the series. No fifty! :)

As I recall, Sunny dropped down the order to #4 because Marshall and Holding kept getting him with the new ball.

However, he did then get 236*.
 
I didn't want to mention this. But it is true.
If they Gavaskar's runs are a myth , then so is this 'achievement'.

dude, about gavaskar -

Imran Khan describes Sunil as “The most compact batsman to whom I have ever bowled.”

Graham Gooch called him a genius placing him in his all time eleven as an opener with Barry Richards.

Mike Proctor even though a South African stated “Barry Richards was technically better but overall Gavaskar was a better batsman .If I had to bet on a batsman to make a hundred the first man would be Sunil.”

Brian Crowley of South Africa “Bradman did not have to contrend with the seemingly inevitable battery of fast bowlers in every international team, something Gavaskar handled with great courage.”

Ian Botham stated, “He is the best opening batsman I have seen.He can defend like Boycott at the same time keep the scoreboard ticking like Gordon Greenidge.”

Mike Brearley said “He has perfect technique, good balance and is almost never rattled or made to look ungainly He never allows the half-volley to go unpunished and for is height is a remarkable player of short pitched bowling.”.

Alan Davidson rates "Gavaskar technically the best batsman he has ever seen"

Forget everyone, Sir Viv Richards rated Gavaskar as the best batsman of his era,while Gary Sobers rated "Sunil as the best opening batsman he ever played with or against, who scored runs against the best attacks all over the world."

Is there anything left to be said? PPers can criticize him as much as they want, but unfortunately for them, facts can't be changed.
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

Fact remains that Gavaskar relied on flat tracks for his runs...

All draws

Doesnt mean it wasnt hard.... Its always hard facing Marshall.,
 
As I recall, Sunny dropped down the order to #4 because Marshall and Holding kept getting him with the new ball.

However, he did then get 236*.

Think that stat is for the series in WI before the 83 WC.

236* was in the return series in India after the 83 WC. Also scored a 121* and a 90 in that series before moving down.
 
As I recall, Sunny dropped down the order to #4 because Marshall and Holding kept getting him with the new ball.

However, he did then get 236*.

Sir Leonard Hutton said of Gavaskar "I have a feeling that if he had been born English or Australian, many of the better judges would have been tempted to bracket him with Bradman. Gavaskar is not as good as Bradman, but very close, which puts him in the very highest class of batsmen of all time. "

Mike Brearley said "Sunil Gavaskar is the best opening batsman I have seen in Test matches. He was better than Gordon Greenidge and Geoff Boycott. "
 
Fact remains that Gavaskar relied on flat tracks for his runs...

All draws

Doesnt mean it wasnt hard.... Its always hard facing Marshall.,

Fact remains that Pakistan could never produce a batsman who would be fit to ??? yea u guessed it rite - tie the shoelaces of Sunil :)
 
Well there can be another thread on this. Richards was the captain then, Windies had no rookies but next monster bowling line-up like Ambrose, Walsh and yes they had Marshall.

How horribly wrong you can be on one single post?

1 - "Windies had no rookies"

  • Ambrose before that match had 0 international wicket.
  • Benjamin who was playing his 2nd game and had 2 wickets before this match
  • Walsh had 71and Patterson had 31 test wickets.

Clearly it was a rookies bowling attack. 4 bowlers taken together had around 100 wickets.

2 - "they had Marshall"

He was not playing that game.

3 - "Richards was the captain"

Richards didn't play that game.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63481.html

It's one thing to be fan of IK but let's not start creating myth out of thin air. Game won by IK's team was against a rookie bowling attack. Marshall and Richards were not playing that game. It was fantastic effort to win the game outside home due to biased umpiring days and WI was still a good team. But, let's keep things in perspective when we talk about Pakistan winning against great WI team to draw a series.


On topic: I saw mainly later part of Marshall's career but he was formidable even on not so helpful wickets. I think he is the best fast bowler I have seen so far.
 
Last edited:
Averages over 40 when Marshall played.... (min 300 runs)

In matches where there was a "result" pitch....

S Malik
K Wessels
R Smith
S Waugh
M Taylor

In matches which had a "draw" pitch...

Border
Gavaskar
Vengsarkar
Amarnath
Crowe
D Jones
Gooch
Shastri

One of the most underrated Pakistani batsmen. His ..err.. extracurricular activities killed his legacy but he was a sight for sore eyes when batting. Right up there with Saeed Anwar as one of the most elegant Pakistani batsmen ever and it wasn't all style no substance either. Played some amazing innings in some pretty hopeless situations.
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

One of the most underrated Pakistani batsmen. His ..err.. extracurricular activities killed his legacy but he was a sight for sore eyes when batting. Right up there with Saeed Anwar as one of the most elegant Pakistani batsmen ever and it wasn't all style no substance either. Played some amazing innings in some pretty hopeless situations.

His record suggests he was one of the few that succeeded when the going got tough.
 
One of the most underrated Pakistani batsmen. His ..err.. extracurricular activities killed his legacy but he was a sight for sore eyes when batting. Right up there with Saeed Anwar as one of the most elegant Pakistani batsmen ever and it wasn't all style no substance either. Played some amazing innings in some pretty hopeless situations.

agree with all of that..

on the lighter said, when malik was playing, a result was confirmed :)
 
His record suggests he was one of the few that succeeded when the going got tough.

Some amazing double standards there.

Salim Malik on 'result' pitches - 53 matches, 2727 runs@38 with 5 100s
On 'flat' pitches with draw- 50 matches, 3041 runs@51 with 10 100s
 
Re: Did anyone master Marshall during his peak?

Some amazing double standards there.

Salim Malik on 'result' pitches - 53 matches, 2727 runs@38 with 5 100s
On 'flat' pitches with draw- 50 matches, 3041 runs@51 with 10 100s

What double standards?

A straw is a straw.

That's his record and it's inflated by scores in draws....

He has done well. He was inconsistent.

If you look within his record some excellent performances.
 
Malcolm Marshall. I have just been reading about him. He sounds amazing, and it's very sad that he died so young.

No bowler who over their career averages 20 (??!!!) was ever mastered by anybody, but I heard that the now-underrated Graeme Gooch and particularly the great Sunil Gavaskar played him well at times.
 
Malcolm Marshall. I have just been reading about him. He sounds amazing, and it's very sad that he died so young.

I saw a lot of him.

In 1984 he bowled with a broken left wrist and took 7-27 to start the First Blackwash. He was extremely fast and hostile thoughout the series, pushing the boundaries of the intimidation law.

In 1987, in the MCC Bicentenary exhibition match at Lord's he opened the bowling with Hadlee and made him look like a country trundler.

In 1988 he was down on pace but still took 35 wickets in the five-test series, averaging 12 and striking every 35 balls.

By 1991 he was operating as first-change behind Ambrose and Patterson but still took 20 wickets, average 22. Gooch played the best innings I ever saw, carrying his bat for 151 on a Headingley greentop under heavy cloud, as Marshall beat him again, and again, and again but couldn't get a nick.

Stylistically Steyn is similar, but Maco at his peak was quicker. Best fast bowler I ever saw.
 
Last edited:
dude, about gavaskar -

Imran Khan describes Sunil as “The most compact batsman to whom I have ever bowled.”

Graham Gooch called him a genius placing him in his all time eleven as an opener with Barry Richards.

Mike Proctor even though a South African stated “Barry Richards was technically better but overall Gavaskar was a better batsman .If I had to bet on a batsman to make a hundred the first man would be Sunil.”

Brian Crowley of South Africa “Bradman did not have to contrend with the seemingly inevitable battery of fast bowlers in every international team, something Gavaskar handled with great courage.”

Ian Botham stated, “He is the best opening batsman I have seen.He can defend like Boycott at the same time keep the scoreboard ticking like Gordon Greenidge.”

Mike Brearley said “He has perfect technique, good balance and is almost never rattled or made to look ungainly He never allows the half-volley to go unpunished and for is height is a remarkable player of short pitched bowling.”.

Alan Davidson rates "Gavaskar technically the best batsman he has ever seen"

Forget everyone, Sir Viv Richards rated Gavaskar as the best batsman of his era,while Gary Sobers rated "Sunil as the best opening batsman he ever played with or against, who scored runs against the best attacks all over the world."

Is there anything left to be said? PPers can criticize him as much as they want, but unfortunately for them, facts can't be changed.

Gavaskar is an FTB because arm chair stats men on PP said so.I wonder why doesnt anyone hire such great statsmen.
 
Fact remains that Gavaskar relied on flat tracks for his runs...

All draws

Doesnt mean it wasnt hard.... Its always hard facing Marshall.,

Fact remains that ATGs like Sobers and Richards rate Gavaskar as the best opener of their times.And thats their word againist No bodies on a anonymous forum.
 
Back
Top