Glenn McGrath vs Dale Steyn (Tests)

[Batman_DB]

After 74 Test Matches

Glen McGrath

351 Wickets @ 21.39 SR:51.9

Dale Steyn

373 Wickets @ 22.80 SR:41.9 still to finish 2nd innings of the SRI test

GLEN MCGRATH analysis



Dale Steyn analysis

 

[Batman_DB]

Dale steyn's average in England is 31.65 thats way too high considering the conditions there

 

[Buffet]

Both are the best bowlers of their generation and have similar records but Steyn has a very good strike rate. In McGrath era, probably Ambrose will have some say for the top spot.

I will wait for the day Steyn hangs up his boots before deciding the exact order but he is likely to go down as the top few bowlers in history.

 

[Mamoon]

I prefer Steyn.

 

[tempus123]

Both are the best bowlers of their generation and have similar records but Steyn has a very good strike rate. In McGrath era, probably Ambrose will have some say for the top spot.

I will wait for the day Steyn hangs up his boots before deciding the exact order but he is likely to go down as the top few bowlers in history.

I think Ambrose was more difficult to score against, and kept it tighter.

 

[Buffet]

Dale steyn's average in England is 31.65 thats way too high considering the conditions there

What conditions you are talking about? Don't assume that SA was served green pitches like Lords you saw against India. See tests and their score cards. I will put highest inning in that test on side.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/296909.html [ Eng put 593 runs in their first inning ]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/296910.html [ SA put 522 runs in their first inning ]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/534225.html [ SA put 637 runs in their first inning ]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/534226.html [ Both teams put 400+ in their first inning ]

Teams making 600s/500s/400s in their first inning should indicate something even if you have not seen those matches. Steyn has played only 5 games in Eng and 4 of them are listed above. Point is - Don't assume that conditions were great for pacers when Steyn bowled just because it was Eng.

 

[Batman_DB]

What conditions you are talking about? Don't assume that SA was served green pitches like Lords you saw against India. See tests and their score cards. I will put highest inning in that test on side.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/296909.html [ Eng put 593 runs in their first inning ]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/296910.html [ SA put 522 runs in their first inning ]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/534225.html [ SA put 637 runs in their first inning ]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/534226.html [ Both teams put 400+ in their first inning ]

Teams making 600s/500s/400s in their first inning should indicate something even if you have not seen those matches. Steyn has played only 5 games in Eng and 4 of them are listed above. Point is - Don't assume that conditions were great for pacers when Steyn bowled just because it was Eng.

then his average in india shouldn't be flattering either as he was lucky to played on some seaming tracks
we generalise seeing the country

 

[Hawkeye]

Steyn.

Better record than Glenn in the subcontinent - that's really a benchmark for any fast bowler.

A better overall strike rate as well.

More intimidating.

I'll pick Steyn over McGrath.

 

[saeedhk]

I'd pick Steyn.

 

[Buffet]

then his average vs india shouldn't be flattering either as he was lucky to played on some seaming tracks
we generalise seeing the country

We shouldn't generalize based on country. But it's not wrong to say that over all , Eng has more seamer friendly conditions than India. It may not be true for few selected matches but in longer periods with a larger sample size that generalization has some truth. That's why we often generalize.

 

[Hawkeye]

Will be difficult to pick either Steyn or McGrath on green tracks with cloud cover.

Too tough.

But overall Steyn specially in Asia.

 

[Batman_DB]

We shouldn't generalize based on country. But it's not wrong to say that over all , Eng has more seamer friendly conditions than India. It may not be true for few selected matches but in longer periods with a larger sample size that generalization has some truth. That's why we often generalize.

ye we generalise and we don't know in what conditions glen mcgrath bowled in asia. So i think its fair to categorise by country

 

[Buffet]

ye we generalise and we don't know in what conditions glen mcgrath bowled in asia. So i think its fair to categorise by country

Mostly typical Indian pitches but I recall one test in series when Aus won in India. That test looked like a typical Eng pitch where any seamer would have loved to bowl. See what Wisden says about it,

-------------

"Looks like home, don't it?" said umpire David Shepherd, in his familiar West Country burr, as he surveyed the strip at the Vidarbha Cricket Association ground on the eve of this match. And, indeed, it looked like an old-fashioned English green seamer.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/238049.html

-----------------------

I never understood why Indians gave a green pitch to Aus. Specially considering difference in class of pacers between two teams. That allowed great Aus team to win a test series in India.

 

[soso_killer]

Different type of bowlers, who are both great.
I would categorize Mcgrath with Ambrose, Pollock type players.
Steyn with Donald, Waqar and Marshal etc who kept the ball on the drive.
All different bowlers but great non the less.

Going back to the OP, I'd pick Steyn because of those mythical spells he tends to produce on a regular basis.

 

[Batman_DB]

Mostly typical Indian pitches but I recall one test in series when Aus won India. That test looked like a typical Eng pitch where any seamer would have loved to bowl. See what Wisden says about it,

-------------

"Looks like home, don't it?" said umpire David Shepherd, in his familiar West Country burr, as he surveyed the strip at the Vidarbha Cricket Association ground on the eve of this match. And, indeed, it looked like an old-fashioned English green seamer.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/238049.html

-----------------------

I never understood why Indians gave a green pitch to Aus. Specially considering difference in class of pacers between two teams. That allowed great Aus team to win in India.

and in the 4th test of that series they played on a rank turner and ended the game in 3 days

 

[lilFlip]

McGrath won 3 world cups, humiliated England at will and dominated SC teams

#legend

 

[Batman_DB]

McGrath won 3 world cups, humiliated England at will and dominated SC teams

#legend

we are talking about tests not ODIs in ODIs there is no comparison at all

 

[Buffet]

McGrath ... dominated SC teams

#legend

He dominated pretty much every team. Only against the 2nd best team of his generation he was not that successful.

 

[Khaseer]

He dominated pretty much every team. Only against the 2nd best team of his generation he was not that successful.

Mcgrath

 

[Anfield]

Steyn because of the entertainment factor.

 

[world cup captain]

It's a tough choice. Both are totally different bowlers. I would pick Steyn by a small margin.

 

[Justcrazy]

Styen for me.

He has more variations , and can be good on flat tracks as well.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Boy is this a tough question. I loved watching McGrath mesmerise the batsmen and of course thoroughly enjoy Steyn's hostile spells as well. Too difficult to choose between them.

 

[Bilal7]

Both are/will be, alongside Marshall, Imran and Wasim, the top five bowlers in history, IMO.

I'll pick Steyn in Asia and McGrath outside the subcon.

 

[Convict]

McGrath.
There's just something special about the fact that he has such a good record everywhere whilst looking like he was bowling bog ordinary vanilla stuff.

Steyn, Warne, Wasim etc suceeded by using the brilliance. McGrath was just as succesful doing nothing special at all and that is something special in it's own right

 

[Alchemy]

Steyn above McGrath. Asif was supposed to take McGrath's mantle but alas!

 

[Haz95]

Steyn. I prefer Ambrose to McGrath too

 

[Hasan123]

McGrath

 

[marlonbrowndo]

Mcgrath just edges past in Tests. In ODIs there is no comparison. Mcgrath blows Steyn away

 

[Stallion__]

McG. Just one of his kind. Among top two pacers ever at very least.

 

[Sidilicious]

Mc Grath, but I am a huge Steyn fan. If he has a couple of brilliant away tours, I will be tempted to put Steyn above McGrath.

 

[Zak_Fan]

McGrath is easily the greatest bowler I have seen. Steyn on the other hand is someone I would rank alongside or slightly above Akram. An ATG for sure, but not quite in the same league.

 

[Pollack]

McGrath has been the best bowler ever I have ever seen.Nobody not even Wasim is close to him. Just because he was line and length and trundler many underrate him.Afterall wasim was more entertaining.Steyn is even farther from being close to McGrath level.

 

[SL_Fan]

McGrath no contest really.

 

[street cricketer]

McGrath.

Dominated pretty much every ATG batsman he faced.

 

[TestMatch]

McGrath.
There's just something special about the fact that he has such a good record everywhere whilst looking like he was bowling bog ordinary vanilla stuff.

This is funny but true. Steyn continually looks like he's about to have an aneurysm. McGrath, however, made things look so effortless and innocuous.

 

[Ab Fan]

McGrath..

 

[The_Odd_One]

McGrath is the greatest bowler of all time across all formats.

 

[soso_killer]

We comparing different type of bowlers IMO.
I categorise bowlers (fast or medium) as either a strike bowler, line and length type (who can play a containing role), and a workhorse (a LA Ntini, Siddle)

Of course a workhorse could be a strike bowler depending on the strength of the bowling attack. Lillee being a good example.
In return a line and length bowler can be used by the captain, provided he's the best bowler in the team as a strike bowler.

So what's a strike bowler?
For me a strike bowler is an individual capable of winning matches or changing the complexion of the game on his own irrespective of the strength of his team (be it the batting unit or the bowling pack).

I will always rate strike bowlers ahead of any form of fast bowling. The likes of Steyn, Marshall, Donald, Waqar are what I'd define as strike bowlers. In weaker teams they'd win more matches than McGrath. SA exploited McGrath pretty well by surviving him and leaving everything outside the off stump, strike rate in the 70's suggests that.

Of course it could be argued the likes of Steyn don't have McGrath's consistency. But the thing is even against teams he's performed below par he has bowled some match changing and winning spell. The match against England at the Oval 2012, is a clear example of the benefits of having a strike bowler. On a flat pitch with the opposition set at 260/3, Steyn changed that game completely. That's the beauty of strike bowlers.

McGrath is a sort of a player dependent on an attack and scoreboard pressure. I could never have an attack of McGrath, Pollock and Ambrose ahead of Steyn, Marshall and Donald/Waqar.
A more balanced attack would include McGrath/Ambrose though.

Different bowlers but Steyn for me any day, he gives me the best option of taking twenty wickets on any surfaces. McGrath's lack of 5-fors in Asia suggests that he was doing the containing while Gillespie and co where taking wickets.

 

[barnold]

spot on analysis, especially in tests where you have to try to take 20 wickets. maybe an old post....but a good one

 

[Haz95]

We comparing different type of bowlers IMO.
I categorise bowlers (fast or medium) as either a strike bowler, line and length type (who can play a containing role), and a workhorse (a LA Ntini, Siddle)

Of course a workhorse could be a strike bowler depending on the strength of the bowling attack. Lillee being a good example.
In return a line and length bowler can be used by the captain, provided he's the best bowler in the team as a strike bowler.

So what's a strike bowler?
For me a strike bowler is an individual capable of winning matches or changing the complexion of the game on his own irrespective of the strength of his team (be it the batting unit or the bowling pack).

I will always rate strike bowlers ahead of any form of fast bowling. The likes of Steyn, Marshall, Donald, Waqar are what I'd define as strike bowlers. In weaker teams they'd win more matches than McGrath. SA exploited McGrath pretty well by surviving him and leaving everything outside the off stump, strike rate in the 70's suggests that.

Of course it could be argued the likes of Steyn don't have McGrath's consistency. But the thing is even against teams he's performed below par he has bowled some match changing and winning spell. The match against England at the Oval 2012, is a clear example of the benefits of having a strike bowler. On a flat pitch with the opposition set at 260/3, Steyn changed that game completely. That's the beauty of strike bowlers.

McGrath is a sort of a player dependent on an attack and scoreboard pressure. I could never have an attack of McGrath, Pollock and Ambrose ahead of Steyn, Marshall and Donald/Waqar.
A more balanced attack would include McGrath/Ambrose though.

Different bowlers but Steyn for me any day, he gives me the best option of taking twenty wickets on any surfaces. McGrath's lack of 5-fors in Asia suggests that he was doing the containing while Gillespie and co where taking wickets.

Good analysis but it reeks of bias and hypocrisy if anything. You rate Kallis ahead of Lara because he was more consistent as he plodded his way to scores as opposed to Laras more brutal and dominant nature (due to his far superior innovation and dynamism), right? If such is the case, then shouldn't you also rate the more consistent Mcgrath since Steyn, while a more brutal game changer, not as consistent?

 

[Gilly]

Different bowlers but Steyn for me any day, he gives me the best option of taking twenty wickets on any surfaces. McGrath's lack of 5-fors in Asia suggests that he was doing the containing while Gillespie and co where taking wickets.

But in England or Australia and NZ McGrath is the strike bowler and Steyn is a containment bowler, according to how you have established how the stats work.

 

[Bonafide Hustler]

I don't know if someone could pull this out, but I would bet that McGrath had a better record against the best batsmen than Steyn. Still Steyn is mighty impressive and definitely more fun to watch.