[VIDEO] Glenn McGrath vs Wasim Akram. Who was better?

[Sakss]

Glenn McGrath vs Wasim Akram. Who was better?

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/F2lkc8t3xM4" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Saurav]

McGrath.Though Wasim was awesome to watch

 

[Pete Rose]

McGrath.Though Wasim was awesome to watch

agree.

 

[Mamoon]

Mcgrath was dead boring while Wasim was magical to watch so I'd say Wasim.

 

[junaid.ahmed]

the quality of slip to point fielders which Mcrath had in his time if Wasim had he clearly would have more wickets than McGrath

 

[junaid.ahmed]

McGrath should be compared with Shaun Pollock while Wasim has the caliber of Denis Lillee or Hadlee

 

[Swanny]

Glenn.

 

[Robert]

McGrath because he excelled against all teams in all conditions.

 

[Noobosauras]

Glenn is much better imo.
But Wasim was very entertaining to watch.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

McGrath because he excelled against all teams in all conditions.

So did Akram. Tough call for me, McGrath probably edged it on bowling intelligence and control, but then Wasim was far more explosive and could be as effective with the old ball as the new one. I'm not sure McGrath would be much use on Asian pitches once the shine had gone.

 

[ethan hunt]

Most Ex batsmen name Wasim akram as the best bowler ever faced , but if you are a stats nerd than Mcgrath in tests and Wasim in Odis.

 

[Robert]

So did Akram. Tough call for me, McGrath probably edged it on bowling intelligence and control, but then Wasim was far more explosive and could be as effective with the old ball as the new one. I'm not sure McGrath would be much use on Asian pitches once the shine had gone.

Have a look at Wasim's stats against England (average 31, s/r 70), and Mcgrath's in Asia (average 25, s/r 60).

I'd put Wasim either at the bottom of the top tier or at the top of the second tier of fast bowlers, alongside Andy Roberts and Courtney Walsh.

 

[Mamoon]

McGrath should be compared with Shaun Pollock while Wasim has the caliber of Denis Lillee or Hadlee

)

McGrath is among the top 3 bowlers of all time question are arguably number 1 when you consider both Tests and ODIs.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Have a look at Wasim's stats against England (average 31, s/r 70), and Mcgrath's in Asia (average 25, s/r 60).

I'd put Wasim either at the bottom of the top tier or at the top of the second tier of fast bowlers, alongside Andy Roberts and Courtney Walsh.

I must admit I'm not really one for stats, they can only tell you so much. Walsh for example always seemed to me a mood bowler. When he was on song he could be unplayable, but if he got disheartened he looked rubbish.

Can't really argue with McGrath's stats in Asia though if they are accurate. How did he get wickets with the old ball out there? Perhaps he was an early adopter of reverse swing but it went under the radar?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Extremely difficult to choose one of them.Its like who was better among Hadlee and Imran.

But if push comes to shove i am inclined towards Wasim Bhai.

 

[JaDed]

McGrath because Wasim had either Waqar or Imran on the other side and Mcgrath had Bret Lee(unpredictable) or Tom Moody(right!) Felming,Gillespie.
But Wasim had a lot of energy and was defn better at batting and amazing on the field.

 

[Sherlock]

Have a look at Wasim's stats against England (average 31, s/r 70), and Mcgrath's in Asia (average 25, s/r 60).

I'd put Wasim either at the bottom of the top tier or at the top of the second tier of fast bowlers, alongside Andy Roberts and Courtney Walsh.

McGrath's career summary over SA was equally similar. Funny that.

 

[junaid.ahmed]

)

McGrath is among the top 3 bowlers of all time question are arguably number 1 when you consider both Tests and ODIs.

I think you are under rating pollock or may be slightly over rating McGrath, Pollock with bat was the complete package.

 

[Thivagar]

I'm gonna say Wasim just because he bowled in tough Subcontinent condition more than McGrath.

 

[Sherlock]

McGrath because Wasim had either Waqar or Imran on the other side and Mcgrath had Bret Lee(unpredictable) or Tom Moody(right!) Felming,Gillespie.
But Wasim had a lot of energy and was defn better at batting and amazing on the field.

Err, Warne?

 

[Barragan]

Wasim Akram easily!

McGrath bowled immaculate line and lengths with a hint of movement, which even the likes of Asif, Pollock and Philander are able to reproduce.

Only Malcolm Marshall can compare with Wasim, imo.

 

[JaDed]

Err, Warne?

True Warne but Warne wasn't great in ODI plus Warne was smacked around by Indians whereas we always had trouble facing Glen in SC itself.

 

[junaid.ahmed]

McGrath because Wasim had either Waqar or Imran on the other side and Mcgrath had Bret Lee(unpredictable) or Tom Moody(right!) Felming,Gillespie.
But Wasim had a lot of energy and was defn better at batting and amazing on the field.

wasnt that above case unfavorable for the bowler, I mean striking bowler from both side always minimize the share of wickets. Anyway McGrath have warne on large part of his career & Jason & Lee was also there for the handful size.

 

[Sherlock]

We're talking about Tests.

 

[JaDed]

wasnt that above case unfavorable for the bowler, I mean striking bowler from both side always minimize the share of wickets. Anyway McGrath have warne on large part of his career & Jason & Lee was also there for the handful size.

The thing is Mcgrath performing in SC is like any SC spinner performing amazingly in Aus or NZ.I didn't see that happening and defn Waqar is wayy above the bowlers u mentioned.As for unfavorable imagine who is hard to face W-W or G-Lee.

 

[junaid.ahmed]

I'm gonna say Wasim just because he bowled in tough Subcontinent condition more than McGrath.

yes this, another thing which I wanna remention that the supports of fielding which glenn had was the best of world which turn many unbelievable stunners into wickets while wasim had support of 10 ordinary rather poor fielders who could have missed even dollies.

 

[Robert]

McGrath's career summary over SA was equally similar. Funny that.

Interesting point. I thought Hawaii averaged 21 against all-comers.

 

[Fahdi]

I have seen many ex-cricketers say that Wasim is the best bowler they ever faced. Probably because in terms of sheer ability he was ahead of many. In-swing, out-swing, pace, seam the man had everything. I remember Ponting said that surviving an over from Wasim felt like an achievement.

But despite that McGrath has better stats.

 

[Big Boss]

McGrath was better but Wasim is my personal favorite. Mcgrath got more top order batsman out compared to Akram though.

 

[Fahdi]

yes this, another thing which I wanna remention that the supports of fielding which glenn had was the best of world which turn many unbelievable stunners into wickets while wasim had support of 10 ordinary rather poor fielders who could have missed even dollies.

This is an interesting point. Wasim must have missed out on a hell of a lot of wickets due to the fielding. And Pakistan also has a knack of missing crucial catches in big games. Wasim and Waqar's stats must have taken a hit due some ordinary fielding especially in games against Australia,England and SA.

 

[junaid.ahmed]

The thing is Mcgrath performing in SC is like any SC spinner performing amazingly in Aus or NZ.I didn't see that happening and defn Waqar is wayy above the bowlers u mentioned.As for unfavorable imagine who is hard to face W-W or G-Lee.

You aren't getting my point, I meant there if you have a striking bowler on both end probably the number of wickets will divide in two bags & if you have one striking bowler with 2 ordinary/less skills bowlers the big share of wickets will easily go into the bag of that only one striking bowler. e.g Sir Richard Hadlee who was the one and only of that time for N.Z enjoyed the loneliness bcz there was no one enough talented to share (no doubt in his skills & supremacy).

 

[samplepiece]

McGrath - perhaps the most reliable bowler of all time.

 

[Hitman]

McGrath, the man was a machine. No one apart from Ambrose from the modern era can go head to head with him.

 

[Big Boss]

McGrath, the man was a machine. No one apart from Ambrose from the modern era can go head to head with him.

Dale Steyn

 

[Machar]

McGrath because Wasim had either Waqar or Imran on the other side and Mcgrath had Bret Lee(unpredictable) or Tom Moody(right!) Felming,Gillespie.
But Wasim had a lot of energy and was defn better at batting and amazing on the field.

Jason Gillespie played for kenya? shane warne played for scotland.

 

[Robert]

This is an interesting point. Wasim must have missed out on a hell of a lot of wickets due to the fielding. And Pakistan also has a knack of missing crucial catches in big games. Wasim and Waqar's stats must have taken a hit due some ordinary fielding especially in games against Australia,England and SA.

IIRC, Waqar did not need fielders as he got so many cleaned bowled and LBW!

I remember watching numerous nick off Gillespie not carry to the slip cordon. He averaged about 25 in tests but it probably should have been better than that because of the number of nicks that went unrewarded. The slips should have been a yard further up to him.

 

[waleed88]

McGrath was the model of Australian dominance over World Cricket.

Australia had the best in all fields of cricket at that time, it was a collective team effort, which made them bigger than the sum of their parts.

Teams like Pakistan relied more on individual brilliance, rarely ever won a game on collective team work.

The sum of the total Pakistan team victories didnot live upto the potential that they should've achieved.

On terms of sheer skill, Wasim was better than Mcgrath.

Mcgrath was more consistent. But Akram had more ability.

 

[Hitman]

Dale Steyn

Speaking of the retired ones.

 

[Fahdi]

IIRC, Waqar did not need fielders as he got so many cleaned bowled and LBW!

I remember watching numerous nick off Gillespie not carry to the slip cordon. He averaged about 25 in tests but it probably should have been better than that because of the number of nicks that went unrewarded. The slips should have been a yard further up to him.

Well yeah Waqar was that sort of a bowler but no doubt he would have missed out on some wickets due to fielders letting him down. This is something stats don't reflect. One wicket can make a hell of a difference in stats. A bowler takes 2 wickets for 80 runs but had a catch dropped had it been taken he would have had 80 for 3 suddenly averaging 26.66 instead of 40! Take the example of Kaneria. Danish Kaneria would have averaged under 30 had Kamran Akmal held onto the catches.

 

[Big Boss]

Speaking of the retired ones.

Ok then I agree with you

 

[Machar]

some stats lovers forgetting the basic here .. wasim played cricket for 19 years. mcgrath for 14 years .. wasim did not play many test matches at his peak .. while mcgrath always played so many matches at his peak.... and many vs average english team .. which always helps. this thread is only about test cricket.

 

[junaid.ahmed]

some stats lovers forgetting the basic here .. wasim played cricket for 19 years. mcgrath for 14 years .. wasim did not play many test matches at his peak .. while mcgrath always played so many matches at his peak.... and many vs average english team .. which always helps. this thread is only about test cricket.

This seems to be an interesting point. Glenn played most of his career ag england bcz of Ashes & Ashes always played on either England or Australia, on both countries conditions+wickets used to be favorable for the bowlers while wasim had most of his career in Pakistan where nothing favored him except crowd.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

No need to cry like a 10 year old girl . Just post the name of the bowler you think was better.

On topic - McGrath for me.

Ironically you are the one coming across as crying like a little girl. This has been a perfectly decent discussion other than your tantrum thrown for no apparent reason.

 

[Enforcer]

For me its Akram. Never seen a bowler like him. Talk about pace, swing, reverse swing, seam, bounce, yorkers, slower ones. He had everything in his armoury. He could bowl every possible delivery and even some impossible ones! The most COMPLETE bowler since malcom marshal.

 

[Buffet]

McGrath was a better bowler.
Wasim was better to watch.

 

[menace2society]

Wasim. To achieve that many wickets with terrible fielders is a monstrous effort. He would have easily got 700 wickets had he had the support of OZ fielders.

 

[liaqat]

Please remember Wasim played a lot of flat decks and Pak fielding must have put don 20-30 catches of his bowling also,And not taking in to consideration that Wasim and pcb Politic's played a part in his career.

Simple way to decide , If you had a chance to come back in life and become Glen or Wasim,, who would u choose,

For me its simple Wasim cuz he made the game sexy and had the x factor,

 

[Electron]

This seems to be an interesting point. Glenn played most of his career ag england bcz of Ashes & Ashes always played on either England or Australia, on both countries conditions+wickets used to be favorable for the bowlers while wasim had most of his career in Pakistan where nothing favored him except crowd.

McGrath averaged 23 in Asia. Was easily a far superior bowler abroad. So when it came to effectiveness, McGrath was quite easily a better bowler anywhere.

But when it comes to excitement and the variety in skills, Wasim is a clear winner.

 

[mithun_minhas]

I will take Wasim anyday.

McGrath is boring and can be hit for runs. Wasim is always entertaining and can get wickets both with the old ball as well as new. He can swing it anytime, anyday at will.

 

[FreakCricket]

Lets say this, Wasim was naturally gifted whereas McGrath was a hardworker.

 

[Electron]

Lets say this, Wasim was naturally gifted whereas McGrath was a hardworker.

Both of them were naturally gifted, and rose to the top with all their hard work. McGrath's style may look like hard work, but it wasn't. He was a master of his art and did it with ease.

Hard-workers are bowlers like Vaas and Kumble who had to bowl 50 deliveries in order to earn a wicket. Wasim and McGrath had a natural gift.

 

[Glen77]

McGrath was the better one and better to watch if you could appreciate what's beyond the surface. McGrath's intelligence in setting up batsmen and getting them out watch a sight. Akram was a fine bowler but he was not as effective as McGrath.

 

[Buffet]

McGrath is boring and can be hit for runs. Wasim is always entertaining and can get wickets both with the old ball as well as new. He can swing it anytime, anyday at will.

What? He along with Ambrose were most difficult to hit. I rarely saw any batsman dominating McGrath.

 

[FreakCricket]

What? He along with Ambrose were most difficult to hit. I rarely saw any batsman dominating McGrath.

4 * 4 razzaq

 

[menace2society]

What? He along with Ambrose were most difficult to hit. I rarely saw any batsman dominating McGrath.

 

[Buffet]

4 * 4 razzaq

Dominating means you take on McGrath in multiple matches and come on top. One over in ODI is not really a good example of one specific batsman dominating McGrath.

 

[mithun_minhas]

What? He along with Ambrose were most difficult to hit. I rarely saw any batsman dominating McGrath.

I remember a few occasions when McGrath looked clueless when batsmen were on rampage.

Never saw anyone bully Wasim. The best the batsman could do was hit Wasim for a FOUR and then take a single to get to the other end.

 

[Fastandfurious]

Give Wasim that Australian team, he would've averaged 20 or lower. Mcgrath enjoyed scoreboard pressure, great fielding, and bowling friendly pitches(for most of his career). While Wasim had to constantly deal with dropped catches, batting collapses and dead pitches.

Mcgrath played more tests than Wasim in his prime.

Wasim for me.

 

[Buffet]

I remember a few occasions when McGrath looked clueless when batsmen were on rampage.

Never saw anyone bully Wasim. The best the batsman could do was hit Wasim for a FOUR and then take a single to get to the other end.

I remember Mark Taylor & Jayasuriya smashing Wasim multiple times. Early in his career, Crowe played a great knock where he hit Wasim all over. I also recall Gilly taking him to cleaners many times in shorter formats.

Anyway, based on what I remember. Wasim and Waqar used to attack wickets a lot more than some one like McGrath and Ambrose. That used to make it bit easier for batsmen to score as well.

 

[Bewal Express]

I am not sure why Akram gets mentioned as he was from my experience nowhere good as his contemporaries. At no point in his entire career was he the best in the world and only on a few occasions was he even close to being the best. I watched him throughout his career and he was always good, sometimes very good and few times brilliant but against the better batsman he looked lost. Just one example, he played against Tendulkar in 7 tests but I don't remember him ever getting him out. He was a great bowler to the tail but that's about it when you compare him to the other greats.

 

[Fastandfurious]

I am not sure why Akram gets mentioned as he was from my experience nowhere good as his contemporaries. At no point in his entire career was he the best in the world and only on a few occasions was he even close to being the best. I watched him throughout his career and he was always good, sometimes very good and few times brilliant but against the better batsman he looked lost. Just one example, he played against Tendulkar in 7 tests but I don't remember him ever getting him out. He was a great bowler to the tail but that's about it when you compare him to the other greats.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMpy00CV810
Silence child.

 

[Machar]

mcgrath was steve waugh of bowling .. like a machine...... while wasim was brian lara of bowling .. genius genius genius

 

[Machar]

Dominating means you take on McGrath in multiple matches and come on top. One over in ODI is not really a good example of one specific batsman dominating McGrath.

McGrath's Last 3 overs went for 40 runs.

 

[yasir]

I remember Mark Taylor & Jayasuriya smashing Wasim multiple times. Early in his career, Crowe played a great knock where he hit Wasim all over. I also recall Gilly taking him to cleaners many times in shorter formats.

Anyway, based on what I remember. Wasim and Waqar used to attack wickets a lot more than some one like McGrath and Ambrose. That used to make it bit easier for batsmen to score as well.

To mean comparison between Wasim and Mcgrath is not a valid one. One was all-round fast bowler other was probably the best Medium pace bowler test cricket has ever seen. They are different category of bowlers.

Mcgrath can be compared with Polluck, Ambrose but not with Marshall,Wasim or Styen.

Marshall, Wasim and Styen for instance were complete fast bowlers. They had pace, swing, bouncers, yorkers anything you look for in complete fast bowler. They are lot more fun to watch

Mcgrath was all about bowling at one length (good) and one line(off), he perfected that probably better than anybody else. But that's a different category of bowling...

On Stats obviously Mcgrath wins!!

 

[Bewal Express]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMpy00CV810
Silence child.

Firstly, i may actually be older than your dad and Maybe you need to be given lesson in history. Even during that period when Akram was at his peak there was a bowler who was 10 times the bowler that Akram will ever be and he also was also playing. But from your post you probably have no idea who he is.

 

[Fastandfurious]

Firstly, i may actually be older than your dad and Maybe you need to be given lesson in history. Even during that period when Akram was at his peak there was a bowler who was 10 times the bowler that Akram will ever be and he also was also playing. But from your post you probably have no idea who he is.

Marshall and lol at 10 times better. Learn some cricket, I could care less about your age.

 

[from_da_lost_dim3nsion]

Keep in mind that MC Grath had an awesome fielding side backing up his bowling . Wasim didn't have that luxury

 

[Fastandfurious]

Lol at nitpicking videos against Mcgrath. Some stupid people here.

 

[zabalestmsm]

My all time top 2 bowlers! Tough one for me! Skills wise Akram was better! So i wud choose Akram! Otherwise both were exciting to watch!

 

[Bewal Express]

@ fast and furios
At least your not as ignorant as you sound. Marshall was genius for all ages, Akram got wickets and was a good bowler but lots of his wickets were tailenders , who couldn't cope with the tampered ball. Instead of talking crap on the forum do some analysis and check for yourself how many wickets he captured were of top order batsman. I would be surprised that he is even in the top 25 in all time list. Getting Tufnell and Malcolm is not the same as getting Richards and Tendulkar.

Ps
I await your analysis.

 

[trogger]

I would take pidge but either would do next time we tour asia maybe we take both just to be sure.

 

[Cricfan4eva]

Mcgrath was better defn, but I'd still pick Wasim because he was exciting to watch..

 

[yasir]

Firstly, i may actually be older than your dad and Maybe you need to be given lesson in history. Even during that period when Akram was at his peak there was a bowler who was 10 times the bowler that Akram will ever be and he also was also playing. But from your post you probably have no idea who he is.

Com'on how can some body be 10 times better than Akram?? - Marshall was probably better bowler than Akram, even he did not have that much tricks as Akram had, plus Akram was far better bowler than even Marshall in ODIs. But 10 times, no way...

You have to realize the impact of Wasim, he spawn new category of bowling in world cricket. Before Akram you will hardly see left arm fast bowlers from street to test level. After him almost every team (even every Mohala) has atleast one... His legacy created so much interest in left arm bowling!!!

 

[Buffet]

I am not sure why Akram gets mentioned as he was from my experience nowhere good as his contemporaries. At no point in his entire career was he the best in the world and only on a few occasions was he even close to being the best. I watched him throughout his career and he was always good, sometimes very good and few times brilliant but against the better batsman he looked lost. Just one example, he played against Tendulkar in 7 tests but I don't remember him ever getting him out. He was a great bowler to the tail but that's about it when you compare him to the other greats.

He wasn't that far behind when compared to McGrath and Ambrose. I will put Donald and Wasim just below other two. I also don't think that Wasim was clueless against better batsmen. I have seen him troubling pretty much all batsmen. I think most folks rate him high due to his variety. No one else had that kind of variety. I could watch Wasim all the time. Now, despite all this, he used to some time not get wickets and that was due to swinging it too much. Only great batsmen will get anywhere close to the ball when you are swinging it big.

To mean comparison between Wasim and Mcgrath is not a valid one. One was all-round fast bowler other was probably the best Medium pace bowler test cricket has ever seen. They are different category of bowlers.

Mcgrath can be compared with Polluck, Ambrose but not with Marshall,Wasim or Styen.

Marshall, Wasim and Styen for instance were complete fast bowlers. They had pace, swing, bouncers, yorkers anything you look for in complete fast bowler. They are lot more fun to watch

Mcgrath was all about bowling at one length (good) and one line(off), he perfected that probably better than anybody else. But that's a different category of bowling...

On Stats obviously Mcgrath wins!!

McGrath could do many things with the ball. He used to do just enough to get wickets and I think slight deviations going both ways are going to get you more wickets than huge swing even though huge swing may look better. Sure, Wasim was more fun to watch but if I have to pick a bowler then I will pick McGrath. McGrath wasn't only about putting ball on the same spot but that was a huge factor. Now why should having a great control be counted against a bowler? Bowlers job is to pick wickets cheaply in all conditions and McGrath did it better than pretty much everyone.

Now we can surely put him in different category but I think thread is comparing these two, we got to pick one.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

McGrath is the greatest bowler of all time IMO. And contrary to what a lot of PPers think he was quite exciting to watch too. Wasim is my personal favourite though. Swing, cut, reverse, Yorkers, bouncers and then some deliveries that were simply "unreal".

 

[Fastandfurious]

@ fast and furios
At least your not as ignorant as you sound. Marshall was genius for all ages, Akram got wickets and was a good bowler but lots of his wickets were tailenders , who couldn't cope with the tampered ball. Instead of talking crap on the forum do some analysis and check for yourself how many wickets he captured were of top order batsman. I would be surprised that he is even in the top 25 in all time list. Getting Tufnell and Malcolm is not the same as getting Richards and Tendulkar.

Ps
I await your analysis.

By top order, can you specify? Top 4, 5, 6 or 7?

 

[Bewal Express]

Maybe I exaggerated because of some little boy getting me annoyed. Akram was an excellent bowler and he had periods where he was brilliant and I agree with your analysis about comparisons to his contemporaries. I always thought as a test bowler he was just behind Donald and Ambrose, who were not as good as Marshall, IK and McGrath. In ODI Akram was the daddy and he is the ATG and they are just behind.

 

[Bewal Express]

Normally it starts at 1 and ends at 6. Since when has 7 been considered as the top order.

 

[Zaz]

You got to take into account wasim played with diabetes in his last few years in intl cricket

 

[Buffet]

Maybe I exaggerated because of some little boy getting me annoyed. Akram was an excellent bowler and he had periods where he was brilliant and I agree with your analysis about comparisons to his contemporaries. I always thought as a test bowler he was just behind Donald and Ambrose, who were not as good as Marshall, IK and McGrath. In ODI Akram was the daddy and he is the ATG and they are just behind.

It's a Pakistani forum so you got to cut some slack when it comes to comments regarding Pakistani players.