Why is Malcolm Marshall considered a GOAT despite average performance in ODI cricket?

[Ted123]

Something I find hard to accept. Between 1975-2000, of all the best pacemen (Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Lillee, Imran, Ambrose, Wasim, Donald, Roberts, Holding, Garner, Waqar, Pollock) all of them have awesome averages under 24 in tests and averages under 25 in ODIs - except Imran and Marshall. Imran averages 26 in ODIs but obviously not considered as GOAT in bowling and was also batting higher at 5/6 so he has some kind of excuse. Marshall averaged 27 with bowl yet he's usually called the greatest pacemen of them all and widely regarded as GOAT bowler.

Surely, a GOAT fast bowler should be expected to be top level performer in whichever format they play in international cricket. From his era only- Joel Garner, Richards Hadlee, Andy Roberts, Michael Holding and Dennis Lillee averaged higher than him and they were all better ODI bowlers than Marshall and at the same time ATG test bowlers.

A point to note here is that Windies won the World Cups in 1975 and 1979 but missed out in 1983 World Cups and didn’t even qualify to top 4 in 1987 World Cups. Imagine Australia not qualifying to top 4 in a World Cup with Glenn McGrath playing in that team.

Marshall was highly skillful and probably the best in Test from his era but the very fact that he was not even a top 5 in ODI from his era is a strong argument against his GOAT status as a bowler.

Discuss!

 

[RexRex]

That is why Bumrah is the undisputed GOAT - the gangly-armed red and white ball maestro.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

The argument for Marshall is GOAT bowler in Tests, not overall.

However, I agree with the overall gist of your post. These things do matter when you are unequivocally labelling someone as an unqualified GOAT.

Which is why, imo, McGrath is the true GOAT.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Garner was the benchmark from WI. Ambrose was good. Walsh with his well disguised no ball was also good.

 

[pratiktc]

It is a very pertinent point raised and inexplicable on basis of stat only but lets do a deep dive.

When we breakdown Marshall's ODI numbers from 1980-1992 we see that until 1983 he doesn't seem to have been a regular ODI pick...then he has 2 spectacular years in 83 and 84 where he becomes a regular and averages 20 while going at around 3 rpo but signs can be seen that he's becoming a containing bowler as his WpM drops off (perhaps because of teams opting to play him out)

Subsequently he has a poor 1985 where he is average in the World Series and is outbowled that year by an aging Holding and Garner.

He comes back in 86 and 87 with good years but low impact in big games unless the oppsition is England which seems to switch an extra gear within him.

The last 5 years of his career from 88-92 he becomes third wheel behind a surging Walsh and Ambrose and is also outbowled by Bishop when fit. He fades slowly into a holding bowler with decent whacking capability at #8

 

[pratiktc]

Perhaps someone who actually watched Marshall in mid to late 80s can comment better.

The tale of the stats tells us a story but it may be missing several nuances.

 

[Local.Dada]

Unfortunately I saw most of the 80s super heroes on their last legs- Marshall, Botham, Imran, Kapil Dev, Richards. That’s why I try stay away from discussions comparing them with the new gen players. They were not very impressive from my lens. For example Marshall looked like a trundler, IK barely bowled and his batting was a typical Misbah innings at 0.5 speed, his presence as captain was powerful though, Kapil still had some juice as I remember 2-3 stand out spells in Australia in 1991 and 1 100 on a fast SA pitch against world class attack in 1992 but between that there was a lot of mediocrity, Botham I only remember him from 1992 World Cup where he looked like a bits and pieces player.

 

[Kianig89]

Marshall seems to be the early version of Steyn , Goat in Tests and but not so in ODIS.

 

[Buffet]

Marshall is seen as the GOAT in the test format.

For both formats combined it has to be McGrath. Mcgrath was top dog in both formats.

 

[TheSultan]

Something I find hard to accept. Between 1975-2000, of all the best pacemen (Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Lillee, Imran, Ambrose, Wasim, Donald, Roberts, Holding, Garner, Waqar, Pollock) all of them have awesome averages under 24 in tests and averages under 25 in ODIs - except Imran and Marshall. Imran averages 26 in ODIs but obviously not considered as GOAT in bowling and was also batting higher at 5/6 so he has some kind of excuse. Marshall averaged 27 with bowl yet he's usually called the greatest pacemen of them all and widely regarded as GOAT bowler.

Surely, a GOAT fast bowler should be expected to be top level performer in whichever format they play in international cricket. From his era only- Joel Garner, Richards Hadlee, Andy Roberts, Michael Holding and Dennis Lillee averaged higher than him and they were all better ODI bowlers than Marshall and at the same time ATG test bowlers.

A point to note here is that Windies won the World Cups in 1975 and 1979 but missed out in 1983 World Cups and didn’t even qualify to top 4 in 1987 World Cups. Imagine Australia not qualifying to top 4 in a World Cup with Glenn McGrath playing in that team.

Marshall was highly skillful and probably the best in Test from his era but the very fact that he was not even a top 5 in ODI from his era is a strong argument against his GOAT status as a bowler.

Discuss!

The reason is simply because no one ever used ODIs as any yardstick to compare players. It was always tests.

ODIs came in to it because of Indian fans. Tendulkar didn’t have the best test record, so they started this narrative about combining ODIs and Tests.

Every cricketer of the 80s-90s never really gave a damn about their ODI record.

And if Marshall was still alive I very much doubt he would lose any sleep over not having the best ODI record.

Marshall is thought of as the GOAT because of his consistency in all countries - pretty much meaning he could perform excellently in all conditions

 

[tiger_khan]

The best fast bowler I have ever seen

Regardless of white or red ball

Better than wasim akram in my opinion


I remember in the 80s... forget about the players who were scared of batting against him; we the TV viewers were jumping up and down on our couches along with the batsmen facing him

May be it was because I was young, but he is the scariest fast bowler I have ever seen, who used to hurt batsmen on a regular basis

Also, had the movement to go along with the pace.

The white-ball record might not be a good as the red ball because of the over limits. Teams just to wait his overs to get finished.

That's why I always say that quantitative analysis (stats) alone, doesn't do justice when it comes to evaluation of a player

Mudassar Nazar was an extremely important player for his country but the stats don't reflect that.

 

[tiger_khan]

Something I find hard to accept. Between 1975-2000, of all the best pacemen (Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Lillee, Imran, Ambrose, Wasim, Donald, Roberts, Holding, Garner, Waqar, Pollock) all of them have awesome averages under 24 in tests and averages under 25 in ODIs - except Imran and Marshall. Imran averages 26 in ODIs but obviously not considered as GOAT in bowling and was also batting higher at 5/6 so he has some kind of excuse. Marshall averaged 27 with bowl yet he's usually called the greatest pacemen of them all and widely regarded as GOAT bowler.

Surely, a GOAT fast bowler should be expected to be top level performer in whichever format they play in international cricket. From his era only- Joel Garner, Richards Hadlee, Andy Roberts, Michael Holding and Dennis Lillee averaged higher than him and they were all better ODI bowlers than Marshall and at the same time ATG test bowlers.

A point to note here is that Windies won the World Cups in 1975 and 1979 but missed out in 1983 World Cups and didn’t even qualify to top 4 in 1987 World Cups. Imagine Australia not qualifying to top 4 in a World Cup with Glenn McGrath playing in that team.

Marshall was highly skillful and probably the best in Test from his era but the very fact that he was not even a top 5 in ODI from his era is a strong argument against his GOAT status as a bowler.

Discuss!

One thing has to be said about Imran Khan which stats don't reflect

Imran khan in his last 3 years or so didn't concentrate on his bowling. He bowled but he used Wasim, Waqar and Aqib as the strike bowlers. That's why his average is higher

Although Wasim Akram might have more skills with the old ball and was a complete bowler in the later part of his career, Imran Khan is probably the best Complete genuine fast bowler Pakistan has ever produced.

Imran used to get top order wickets in his prime with the new ball, including but not limited to Sunil Gavaskar. Same can't be said about Wasim and Waqar.

Sunil Gavaskar is the best test batsman I have ever seen in my cricket watching life. I don't care what the stats say. (I haven't even seen SG in his prime. He must have been a treat to watch).

Wasim and Waqar have been taken to the cleaners by the top order batsmen of their era quite often. They got back to them with an older ball but they were not that lethal with a new one, in their prime.

 

[saimayubera]

Test stats are main stats I'd say.

The likes of Brett Lee, Mohammed Shami, Nathan Bracken have great ODI numbers but test numbers are not in the same range so not regarded as ATGs in general (although they are ODI ATGs).

 

[saimayubera]

The reason is simply because no one ever used ODIs as any yardstick to compare players. It was always tests.

ODIs came in to it because of Indian fans. Tendulkar didn’t have the best test record, so they started this narrative about combining ODIs and Tests.

Every cricketer of the 80s-90s never really gave a damn about their ODI record.

And if Marshall was still alive I very much doubt he would lose any sleep over not having the best ODI record.

Marshall is thought of as the GOAT because of his consistency in all countries - pretty much meaning he could perform excellently in all conditions

Lolwut. Most centuries, most runs. Not best test record lol.

Everyone (barring salty Pakistanis) considers Tendulkar to be the best of the modern era and overall behind Bradman. Check out lists from Wisden etc.

And it is Pakistanis who use ODI records to elevate the likes of Wasim and Waqar who while good in tests were hardly in the first tier in tests with the likes of Marshall, Hadlee, McGrath, Ambrose, Steyn and now much to their disagreement/annoyance Bumrah.

It is Pakistanis who use things like ODI records to prove that Wasim is better than Bumrah while it is a no-contest in tests. Bumrah has way higher peak rating, has been no 1, more SENA wickets already, more winning 5fers outside Asia etc.

 

[tiger_khan]

Test stats are main stats I'd say.

The likes of Brett Lee, Mohammed Shami, Nathan Bracken have great ODI numbers but test numbers are not in the same range so not regarded as ATGs in general (although they are ODI ATGs).

Not in my opinion. Even the test stats have shortcomings when comparing players of different eras. No DRS is taken into equation. Many of the modern era bowlers will have far less wickets if there were no DRS. Particularly if their victims got out on referred LBW, controversial catches & faint edges. Even the close stumpings.

It's a futile exercise, comparing players of different era. Their challenges were different.

It's good entertainment to have a discussion but stats alone should not be used to assess and compare the body of work of players from different eras.

 

[mominsaigol]

Something I find hard to accept. Between 1975-2000, of all the best pacemen (Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Lillee, Imran, Ambrose, Wasim, Donald, Roberts, Holding, Garner, Waqar, Pollock) all of them have awesome averages under 24 in tests and averages under 25 in ODIs - except Imran and Marshall. Imran averages 26 in ODIs but obviously not considered as GOAT in bowling and was also batting higher at 5/6 so he has some kind of excuse. Marshall averaged 27 with bowl yet he's usually called the greatest pacemen of them all and widely regarded as GOAT bowler.

Surely, a GOAT fast bowler should be expected to be top level performer in whichever format they play in international cricket. From his era only- Joel Garner, Richards Hadlee, Andy Roberts, Michael Holding and Dennis Lillee averaged higher than him and they were all better ODI bowlers than Marshall and at the same time ATG test bowlers.

A point to note here is that Windies won the World Cups in 1975 and 1979 but missed out in 1983 World Cups and didn’t even qualify to top 4 in 1987 World Cups. Imagine Australia not qualifying to top 4 in a World Cup with Glenn McGrath playing in that team.

Marshall was highly skillful and probably the best in Test from his era but the very fact that he was not even a top 5 in ODI from his era is a strong argument against his GOAT status as a bowler.

Discuss!

Marshall is viewed as no 1 in test. Not in odi.

All format does count but if you are the greatest bowler of all time in a sole format you will be considered a goat.

Had Bradman played t20 and sucked at it, it wouldn't invalidate his test status.

 

[Ted123]

The reason is simply because no one ever used ODIs as any yardstick to compare players. It was always tests.

ODIs came in to it because of Indian fans. Tendulkar didn’t have the best test record, so they started this narrative about combining ODIs and Tests.

Every cricketer of the 80s-90s never really gave a damn about their ODI record.

And if Marshall was still alive I very much doubt he would lose any sleep over not having the best ODI record.

Marshall is thought of as the GOAT because of his consistency in all countries - pretty much meaning he could perform excellently in all conditions

In modern era, everyone uses Tests + ODIs as yardstick for comparing players. Not just Tendulkar fans but also when comparing Wasim.

How does Viv stack with the rest of his contemporaries in 80s-90s if we ignore ODIs?

Of course, no one will lose sleep even if they aren’t considered the best.

 

[Ted123]

Test stats are main stats I'd say.

The likes of Brett Lee, Mohammed Shami, Nathan Bracken have great ODI numbers but test numbers are not in the same range so not regarded as ATGs in general (although they are ODI ATGs).

I reckon in subcontinent, all formats matter.

The pitches just don’t allow same level of excitement for test matches in Asia as they do in SENA. New ball barely swing much in Asia.

 

[Ted123]

Marshall is viewed as no 1 in test. Not in odi.

All format does count but if you are the greatest bowler of all time in a sole format you will be considered a goat.

Had Bradman played t20 and sucked at it, it wouldn't invalidate his test status.

Nowadays, all formats matter. These MS Dhoni and Rohit Sharma are treated as demi gods by not just Indian fans but cricket experts across the world also.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

The reason is simply because no one ever used ODIs as any yardstick to compare players. It was always tests.

ODIs came in to it because of Indian fans. Tendulkar didn’t have the best test record, so they started this narrative about combining ODIs and Tests.

Every cricketer of the 80s-90s never really gave a damn about their ODI record.

And if Marshall was still alive I very much doubt he would lose any sleep over not having the best ODI record.

Marshall is thought of as the GOAT because of his consistency in all countries - pretty much meaning he could perform excellently in all conditions

That's a fair point.

Whenever we hear the cricketers of old talk about their duals or battled, they never really mention the ODI series, or even the world cups too much.

It was all about the test duels.

ODI series got more prominence in the 90s then faded away again in the T20 era.

Even now and perhaps it is our own bias as fans from an older era, but if you don't produce the goods in test you are not in the ATG category overall amongst most fans.

 

[saimayubera]

I reckon in subcontinent, all formats matter.

The pitches just don’t allow same level of excitement for test matches in Asia as they do in SENA. New ball barely swing much in Asia.

Yeah but other skills come into play, especially old ball skills.

 

[Ab Fan]

It only means that back in 1980s, Test cricket was the pinnacle of the game and not the ODIs or even World Cups.

The ODI game then was slow-scoring and low risk, pitches often used were Test strips and 225 was a winning total. The format hadn’t evolved much and most of cricket fan base were from England, Australia and West Indies. Test cricket was damn entertaining in these countries because the duels of fast bowling vs batting were the ones to remember for. It was all about aggressive style of fast bowling and picking wickets.

With time when ODIs evolved and art of death bowling came into picture, the perception started shifting from Tests to all formats. Asian pitches didn’t offer the same level of quality in Test cricket as the pitches were less beneficial for fast bowlers and people didn’t have time to watch 5 days of boring Test cricket so once the cricket fan base started shifting to more Asian fans, World Cup started becoming pinnacle of the game.

But time and again, true cricket fans ( anywhere in world) will cherish high class entertaining test series and hence its valuation won’t go anywhere. It is just that all formats matter more nowadays.

 

[Ab Fan]

This also proves why a Dennis Lillee is regarded as a top tier ATG test bowler. Back in 70s and 80s, nobody cared about how Lillee would fare in subcontinent. It was all about the duels against top teams like England, West Indies etc. It is only now that people care about his performance in subcontinent to undermine him, it was irrelevant back then.

 

[Ab Fan]

Yeah but other skills come into play, especially old ball skills.

It hardly does in today’s time. It was common back in 80s and 90s when Imran, Wasim and Waqar picked a lot of wickets in Asia using reverse swing. Nowadays, fast bowlers mostly play supporting roles in Test cricket- one spell with the new ball and then maybe one more spell with old ball. Pick a couple of wickets and its done for the day.

Test cricket can simply never be as entertaining in Asia as it is in SENA conditions ( SWENA pre 2000). ODIs and T20Is will be more entertaining and hence World Cups will be pinnacle for Asian fans.

 

[Ab Fan]

Marshall is viewed as no 1 in test. Not in odi.

All format does count but if you are the greatest bowler of all time in a sole format you will be considered a goat.

Had Bradman played t20 and sucked at it, it wouldn't invalidate his test status.

And if someone isn’t the greatest of all time and still great like Steyn, Anderson, Rabada and Cummins, all of them middling in ODIs and from modern era?

 

[kron]

Nowadays, all formats matter. These MS Dhoni and Rohit Sharma are treated as demi gods by not just Indian fans but cricket experts across the world also.

Only tests and t20 matters now

ODI is dead

 

[BouncerGuy]

Many people give Test cricket performance the most weightage so which is why maybe he is considered one. In his era, there was no T20 cricket as well

 

[mominsaigol]

And if someone isn’t the greatest of all time and still great like Steyn, Anderson, Rabada and Cummins, all of them middling in ODIs and from modern era?

I don't really get what this means? Can you explain?

 

[charlie007]

I don't really get what this means? Can you explain?

Then they won’t be GOATs, just great bowlers.

 

[mominsaigol]

Then they won’t be GOATs, just great bowlers.

Steyn, Anderson, Rabada and Cummins are all goats though?

Cummins has led Australia to victories upon victories either directly or indirectly in test and odi despite not even having 1/3rd of the resource that Ponting had?

Anderson has more wickets then any test pace bowler in history and in odi despite being a bit lackluster hes still England's top 5-10 greatest odi bowlers in that format.

Rabada and Steyn are damn good odi bowlers as well? They may not be odi atg's but are test atg's

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Only tests and t20 matters now

ODI is dead

That argument seems to vary on here depending on who you want to prop up or diss.

World Cup performances are endlessly used to put down other players but since Marshall is a PP favourite , they are disregarded.

It's also interesting that the banal argument about peak ICC rating points is also disregarded for Macco.

After all, Ambrose, McGrath and Cummins did peak slightly higher in their careers.

 

[pillionrider]

Which is why, imo, McGrath is the true GOAT.

We hated him so much during his pomp, it was difficult to give him his due even though we feared him. Unlike a Wasim Akram whom we feared but also loved.

But it's really difficult with a calm mind to argue against him being the GOAT across all the formats of his time.

How would he have gone in T20s in his pomp though. Would he have found a way to take out batsmen trying to hit him off his length like Sachin did during the CT (was it? in Kenya, I think).

We won't know - doesn't help that (post-international retirement), Sehwag benched him in the IPL and Ross Taylor beat him to pulp in an RCB game

 

[charlie007]

Steyn, Anderson, Rabada and Cummins are all goats though?

Cummins has led Australia to victories upon victories either directly or indirectly in test and odi despite not even having 1/3rd of the resource that Ponting had?

Anderson has more wickets then any test pace bowler in history and in odi despite being a bit lackluster hes still England's top 5-10 greatest odi bowlers in that format.

Rabada and Steyn are damn good odi bowlers as well? They may not be odi atg's but are test atg's

I was only paraphrasing what he said

 

[Nikhil_cric]

We hated him so much during his pomp, it was difficult to give him his due even though we feared him. Unlike a Wasim Akram whom we feared but also loved.

But it's really difficult with a calm mind to argue against him being the GOAT across all the formats of his time.

How would he have gone in T20s in his pomp though. Would he have found a way to take out batsmen trying to hit him off his length like Sachin did during the CT (was it? in Kenya, I think).

We won't know - doesn't help that (post-international retirement), Sehwag benched him in the IPL and Ross Taylor beat him to pulp in an RCB game

That was the very last professional match of his career when he was just 3-4 months shy of his 40th birthday.

I think he would've been a brilliant PP bowler in T20 cricket had he played at his peak!

 

[charlie007]

Something I find hard to accept. Between 1975-2000, of all the best pacemen (Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Lillee, Imran, Ambrose, Wasim, Donald, Roberts, Holding, Garner, Waqar, Pollock) all of them have awesome averages under 24 in tests and averages under 25 in ODIs - except Imran and Marshall. Imran averages 26 in ODIs but obviously not considered as GOAT in bowling and was also batting higher at 5/6 so he has some kind of excuse. Marshall averaged 27 with bowl yet he's usually called the greatest pacemen of them all and widely regarded as GOAT bowler.

Surely, a GOAT fast bowler should be expected to be top level performer in whichever format they play in international cricket. From his era only- Joel Garner, Richards Hadlee, Andy Roberts, Michael Holding and Dennis Lillee averaged higher than him and they were all better ODI bowlers than Marshall and at the same time ATG test bowlers.

A point to note here is that Windies won the World Cups in 1975 and 1979 but missed out in 1983 World Cups and didn’t even qualify to top 4 in 1987 World Cups. Imagine Australia not qualifying to top 4 in a World Cup with Glenn McGrath playing in that team.

Marshall was highly skillful and probably the best in Test from his era but the very fact that he was not even a top 5 in ODI from his era is a strong argument against his GOAT status as a bowler.

Discuss!

This GOAT obsession is a relatively recent phenomenon. Before the dawn of the new millennium nobody thought of GOATs, just greats. Marshall was one such great and universally acknowledged as one. He was fast and furious- the quickest among the famed pace quartet then. But he was also supremely skillful with deadly swing and seam control. His stats truly represent the quality of bowler he was. Nobody really separated Test and ODI cricket too much - if you were acknowledged as a great in one, you were a great. Period. No Test great, ODI great etc.

 

[kron]

That argument seems to vary on here depending on who you want to prop up or diss.

World Cup performances are endlessly used to put down other players but since Marshall is a PP favourite , they are disregarded.

It's also interesting that the banal argument about peak ICC rating points is also disregarded for Macco.

After all, Ambrose, McGrath and Cummins did peak slightly higher in their careers.

Test is given the highest weightage

Then odi World Cup and t20 wc

 

[kron]

We hated him so much during his pomp, it was difficult to give him his due even though we feared him. Unlike a Wasim Akram whom we feared but also loved.

But it's really difficult with a calm mind to argue against him being the GOAT across all the formats of his time.

How would he have gone in T20s in his pomp though. Would he have found a way to take out batsmen trying to hit him off his length like Sachin did during the CT (was it? in Kenya, I think).

We won't know - doesn't help that (post-international retirement), Sehwag benched him in the IPL and Ross Taylor beat him to pulp in an RCB game

We loved Wasim akram? Since when. Not me.

Definitely not Waqar.

I liked shoaib as a bowler. Not as a person. Immy khan was Pakistans greatest fast bowler anyway

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Test is given the highest weightage

Then odi World Cup and t20 wc

Even if you give Tests the highest weightage, there's literally nothing that puts Marshall clearly above McGrath.

In fact, I'd argue the opposite. McGrath was just as good but for much longer.

 

[rpant_gabba]

Becos ODI was considered more a distraction during time?

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Nowadays, all formats matter. These MS Dhoni and Rohit Sharma are treated as demi gods by not just Indian fans but cricket experts across the world also.

Yeah it's shifted a bit for sure

It only means that back in 1980s, Test cricket was the pinnacle of the game and not the ODIs or even World Cups.

The ODI game then was slow-scoring and low risk, pitches often used were Test strips and 225 was a winning total. The format hadn’t evolved much and most of cricket fan base were from England, Australia and West Indies. Test cricket was damn entertaining in these countries because the duels of fast bowling vs batting were the ones to remember for. It was all about aggressive style of fast bowling and picking wickets.

With time when ODIs evolved and art of death bowling came into picture, the perception started shifting from Tests to all formats. Asian pitches didn’t offer the same level of quality in Test cricket as the pitches were less beneficial for fast bowlers and people didn’t have time to watch 5 days of boring Test cricket so once the cricket fan base started shifting to more Asian fans, World Cup started becoming pinnacle of the game.

But time and again, true cricket fans ( anywhere in world) will cherish high class entertaining test series and hence its valuation won’t go anywhere. It is just that all formats matter more nowadays.

Good summation

 

[pillionrider]

We loved Wasim akram? Since when. Not me.

Ok. But I haven't met an Indian cricket fan ever who wasn't also a Wasim fan. You can draw Venn diagrams of Imran, Shoaib, Afridi Indian fans. And in my world, they all intersect with the Wasim venn.

 

[kron]

Even if you give Tests the highest weightage, there's literally nothing that puts Marshall clearly above McGrath.

In fact, I'd argue the opposite. McGrath was just as good but for much longer.

Overall? Yea probably mcgrath

All formats

For tests? Nha I will stick with Marshall thanks. A run through sides better than McGrath.

 

[kron]

Ok. But I haven't met an Indian cricket fan ever who wasn't also a Wasim fan. You can draw Venn diagrams of Imran, Shoaib, Afridi Indian fans. And in my world, they all intersect with the Wasim venn.

I would say immy was the best ever test bowler from pakistan

Then Wasim followed by shoaib and Waqar

All below bumrah anyway

 

[TheSultan]

In the 80s, the only thing memorable about ODIs were some key World Cup games, major tournaments (85 World championship of cricket, Australasia Cup, Nehru Cup etc) or the odd monumental performance, like Viv’s 189*. Not very often you get a batsman outscoring the entire opposition team by a comfortable distance and that too after a very poor effort by the rest of their batsmen.

People remembered performances, not stats.

Nobody was like “hey that vas a great innings, but his aberage is blah blah avay phrom home is blah blah…”

Yes, recently there’s been more weighting given to white ball performances, but even then, tests still have a much higher weighting.

Back in the day if someone performed in ODIs, the confirmation of their cricketing prowess was if they could apply it to tests. If you couldn’t, you were a limited player with poor fundamentals to survive at the top level. That should still apply.

Even in the 90s - nobody thought of Bevan as a great batsmen even though he had great ODI stats for that time.

To try and put Marshall down using ODI stats is the biggest reach I’ve ever seen in cricketing analysis

 

[jeetu]

Marshall remains the best test bowler of all time.
I saw Marshall wreck havoc on the flat of Indian wickets during 1983/84 tour. Only Gavaskar and Vengsarkar could tackle him during that tour. Indian wicket looked like Green mamba when he was bowling. Marshall had rare combination with mastery in Pace , Swing and Seam. Not many bowler had the ability to knock bat out of prime Gavaskar hand. Whats more remarkable was his height being less than 6 feet.

 

[zahid01]

Marshall was a absolute great player in test average of 20 and strike rate 46 per wicket his one day record is not bad economy 3.5 average 26 mind you one day was not a big thing in his days test match was more important

 

[pillionrider]

but since Marshall is a PP favourite....

What's the reason for Marshall being a PP favourite? Did he destroy India somewhere? Was he good friends with some Pakistani. Did he praise Pakistan over India. Did he mock an Indian cricketer like Kapil or someone. Was he at some later point in life.


Or is there actually a cricketing reason for the love

 

[Nikhil_cric]

What's the reason for Marshall being a PP favourite? Did he destroy India somewhere? Was he good friends with some Pakistani. Did he praise Pakistan over India. Did he mock an Indian cricketer like Kapil or someone. Was he at some later point in life.


Or is there actually a cricketing reason for the love

Nah it's just boomer logic about 80's cricket being of a higher standard, bowlers who could bowl 150 + day in and day out etc.

 

[Ab Fan]

Nah it's just boomer logic about 80's cricket being of a higher standard, bowlers who could bowl 150 + day in and day out etc.

In terms of output, McGrath is arguably better than Marshall all formats combined and at same level in Tests.

But McGrath was one trick pony while Marshall was a complete paceman the game ever saw. That’s a belief not what I am saying though.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

In terms of output, McGrath is arguably better than Marshall all formats combined and at same level in Tests.

But McGrath was one trick pony while Marshall was a complete paceman the game ever saw. That’s a belief not what I am saying though.

McGrath was a lot more skilled than what many believe.

You can't deliver in all conditions the way he did if you are a one trick pony.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Garner was the benchmark from WI. Ambrose was good. Walsh with his well disguised no ball was also good.

I wouldn't compare Walsh to those other fast-bowlers. Walsh had longevity and durability and that's good, but he didn't make you excited about fast-bowling like Garner, Marshall, Ambrose...and before them, Holding, Croft, Roberts.

Ian Bishop was the last from that generation of proper fast-bowlers. And even his career was largely derailed due to injuries.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

In terms of output, McGrath is arguably better than Marshall all formats combined and at same level in Tests.

But McGrath was one trick pony while Marshall was a complete paceman the game ever saw. That’s a belief not what I am saying though.

Nah, McGrath is the GOAT

 

[Ab Fan]

McGrath was a lot more skilled than what many believe.

You can't deliver in all conditions the way he did if you are a one trick pony.

Nah, McGrath is the GOAT

More than skills, the game is always about how you mentally challenge your opponent. McGrath was master of mental battle. He would predict the weakness of batsman and get him out. Did to Atherton, predicted the wickets of West Indies batters including Lara. He left phenomenal impact psychologically.

 

[NishanKonar]

ODI cricket became big in the 90s - especially after 1996 WC bcoz of its huge commercial success. After that ODI cricket really took off. Lots of bilateral series , tri series & JAMODIS at random places like Sharjah , Toronto , Singapore , Nairobi started happening. ODI overtook test cricket as the cash cow & bciz of that ODI performances started getting more impetus

Thats why from 90s onwards ODI became important benchmark for evaluating players