McGrath - Best form of his career?

[Maranello]

LOL, Beny your obduracy and disregard of all facts and evidence when worshipping your "heroes" is somewhat mystifying, since in all other instances you are thoroughly rational, reasonable and sensible! My only take on this is that many of your more stubborn remarks are tongue-in-cheek asides, and not part of a serious debate! In that vein, I wouldn't bring in all the stats to augment Milo's analysis above. Suffice to say that you will not be able to find any meaningful evidence to back up this bizarre assertion:

McGrath['s] [...] stats now are as good as at any time in his carrer...

Some of your arguments in your debate with your compatriot Leafy Seadragon in another thread were similarly strange... I know there is no live cricket these days, so as a mod you are trying to liven up the threads with some controversial and cheeky banter .... but really, isn't this getting too much for us simpler folk?

[Beny]

obduracy

Save me the effort of looking up a dictionary.

somewhat mystifying, since in all other instances you are thoroughly rational, reasonable and sensible!

Ohhh gee thanks...

I stand by everything I have said... If you want then post the stats to prove me worng.. I've already done the stats thing recently and I wont go over it again...

[Maranello]

Originally Posted by Beny

Save me the effort of looking up a dictionary.

do I have to do everything around here!

Just for you Beny, I have thought about a definition for obduracy, and in the context of this thread, have arrived at the following: "resistance to persuasion or softening influences"

On the McGrath point, let's agree to disagree... I am too lazy to look all this up with numbers.

[Milo]

The blind stats are very simple Beny. In 1999, McGrath took 30 wickets in the caribbean at 16 (in 4 tests) and he also took India apart at home in 2000 (18 wicket at 13). When they toured India in 2001 he took 17wickets @ 15, on the back of 21 wickets @ 17 at home to the Windies (including his top order hatrick). The Ashes in 2001 saw 30 wickets taken at 16. He has done nothing like this since his return that ranks up with this 'peak' form.

[Seamer]

Originally Posted by Milo

The blind stats are very simple Beny. In 1999, McGrath took 30 wickets in the caribbean at 16 (in 4 tests) and he also took India apart at home in 2000 (18 wicket at 13). When they toured India in 2001 he took 17wickets @ 15, on the back of 21 wickets @ 17 at home to the Windies (including his top order hatrick). The Ashes in 2001 saw 30 wickets taken at 16. He has done nothing like this since his return that ranks up with this 'peak' form.

Milo, the point i think Beny it trying to make is : Since those above series you have quoted, McGrath is bowling just as accurately, at the same speed, has the same fitness levels, but is now doing more with the ball. That can only mean he is bowling better now than at any time in his career. I have watched him closely since his comeback last year, and in my opinion, this is the best i have seen him.
Stats from the recent series vs Pakistan
Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct St
3 18 9 9.00 0 0 18 8/24 14.44 1 2 0
18 wickets at 14.44. You should add this statistic to the above ones. If you did, it would only undermine your point

[Milo]

Yep, that would appear to undermine my post, but I think Maranello made a fair point by saying that one innings did influence the figures of the entire series. And for that reason I did (unfairly maybe) leave it out.

Let's wait to the Ashes, five tests should be enough for us to measure whether he is consistently as good as the last time he toured England. I'd be surprised if he can be any better.

[Seamer]

.

Originally Posted by Maranello

However his exceptional figures this season are somewhat misleading, as they are augmented by one 'freak-ish' bowling performance at Perth against the headless chickens that passed for Pakistani batsmen that day. Take out that one spell against some very poor batting where batsmen were intent on gifting their wickets, and you do are left with a very good season but not the best ever. .

You could do the same with every great cricketer. Take away Bradmans scores over 200, take away Ambrose's 10 wicket hauls, take away Brian Lara's world records ect ect. The fact is he DID take apart the Pakistanis, and in the same fashion that he has done in the past. His other successful series were achieved with the same freak-ish performances that he put in against Pakistan. Surely a series should be judged as a whole, not a part?

[Milo]

That's just the point Seamer. It is all about consistency. This is the true measure of a bowler's worth and in this case on whether McGrath's continued excellent form is as good as his peak (a period I suggested was 1999-2001). You should take away Lara's world record (and his worst score) from that series and see how he performed. The median average is always a better indication of a player's performance. If you had watched the series in the caribbean you will have seen that Lara was in dreadful form and no 400not out leaving him with a mean average of over 70 should confuse anyone that he was batting anywhere near as good as when he batted in many other series (v Aus 1999, SL 2000 for example).

[Seamer]

In the Lara instance, you do make a good point. I am a bit too busy at the moment to sift through McGraths 1999/2000 figures but when i get a chance, i will have a look. Would be interesting to check his median figures. But stats aside, In my opinion, he is bowling as well as he ever has, if not better, at the moment. Time will tell i suppose

[Paoli]

4/16 vs NZ off 10 justifies that he is bowling brilliantly. Impossible to get away (16 runs from 10 overs) and almost unplayable (4 wickets). If he can do that once every 4-5 matches it ll keep me happy...