Cricket

I don’t think those 4 have ever played together all at once and Scott Boland got smacked out of the team against England in England. Having a hard time imagining that West Indies attack getting bullied by Zak Crawley.

Yeah, that'll be a stain on their careers. I don't think they are good as Garner, Marshall and co. but I can't remember a better attack in the last 20 years or so. Though, I dont want to comment too much on the years before the 2000s. They've won everything as well, Ashes, WCs, BGT etc.

Can only think of Steyn, Philander and Morkel as the closest. Wasim, Waqar and whoever else was in that team, maybe?
 
Cummins, Hazelwood, Starc vs McGrath, Gillespie, Lee vs Steyn, Philander, Morkel. I think those are the 3 modern pace bowler trios worth comparing.
they’re a good bit a head. largely helped by the standard of test cricket being better then.

if you’re talking about an entire bowling attack, you have to start with jack leach and work backwards.
 
Yeah, that'll be a stain on their careers. I don't think they are good as Garner, Marshall and co. but I can't remember a better attack in the last 20 years or so. Though, I dont want to comment too much on the years before the 2000s. They've won everything as well, Ashes, WCs, BGT etc.

Can only think of Steyn, Philander and Morkel as the closest. Wasim, Waqar and whoever else was in that team, maybe?

It’s hard to get a sustained period of 3 top bowlers fit and together for so long. South Africa could field a trio of Rabada, Jansen and Nortje now but you hardly ever see it. Even the Cummins, Hazelwood, Starc trio hasn’t been playing together a lot recently which is where Boland comes in. That WTC final could be very tasty if everyone’s fit and healthy.
 
Good come back from the Aussies, they looked really poor after the first test. No matter the state of their team they are always so difficult to beat at home.
 
I understand Kohli has always been like this but as a 36 year old senior cricketer who is at the end of his career you would expect a little better for him
 
Yeah, that'll be a stain on their careers. I don't think they are good as Garner, Marshall and co. but I can't remember a better attack in the last 20 years or so. Though, I dont want to comment too much on the years before the 2000s. They've won everything as well, Ashes, WCs, BGT etc.

Can only think of Steyn, Philander and Morkel as the closest. Wasim, Waqar and whoever else was in that team, maybe?

They won Britain's Got Talent?
 
Cummins, Hazelwood, Starc vs McGrath, Gillespie, Lee vs Steyn, Philander, Morkel. I think those are the 3 modern pace bowler trios worth comparing.
Did McGrath Lee and Gillespie play a lot of games together?

From just what I’ve seen, Cummins, Hazlewood and Starc seem to have played together more than any other 3. Steyn, Philander and Morkel were great but I don’t remember them having the longevity of these 3. Lyon as welll as a quartet.
 
Did McGrath Lee and Gillespie play a lot of games together?

From just what I’ve seen, Cummins, Hazlewood and Starc seem to have played together more than any other 3. Steyn, Philander and Morkel were great but I don’t remember them having the longevity of these 3. Lyon as welll as a quartet.

Well, I’ve dug out the maths and I’m surprised that it’s not actually very close between the Australian attacks.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=bowling

McGrath, Gillespie and Lee. 22 matches, 243 wickets @ 28.5

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=bowling

Cummins, Hazelwood and Starc. 34 matches, 415 wickets @ 25.5.

Hazelwood = McGrath
Cummins > Gillespie
Starc > Lee

And to complete the argument.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=bowling

Steyn, Philander, Morkel. 31 tests, 368 wickets @ 23.8. I think they just shade it. Fewer wickets per test but no top spinner backing them up and a lower average.

Bonus scorecard - https://www.espncricinfo.com/series...rica-vs-india-1st-test-1122276/full-scorecard - Philander, Morkel, Steyn, Rabada, Bumrah, Shami and Bhuvneshwar on a South African deck, some lineup.
 
Firstly, Smith has an amazing average because he's an amazing player. I'm not knocking that. He's also played significantly less and has less runs compared to Root because he was banned for a significant time for cheating at the game which he's supposed to love and present globally. Whatever conversation you have about Smith, this will always and rightfully be brought up.

On averages - Root should and would have a much higher average had he played in the types of sides Smith has played in over the course of their test careers, but that's a purely hypothetical point.
There is no doubt the Australians cheated in 2018, but the whole thing was blown massively out of proportion by Cricket Australia with their "holier than thou" attitude, imposing their bans (12 months for Smith and Warner, 9 months for Bancroft). The ICC actually banned Smith for 1 test.

Ball tampering goes on all the time. Faf de Plessis was found guilty of tampering in the 2016 series between the same 2 teams. The SA cricket board did nothing. No one remembers.

Nicholas Pooran was banned for 4 matches in 2020 by the ICC after admitted tampering. The West Indies cricket board did nothing. No one remembers.

In 2010 James Anderson and Stuart Broad were accused of ball tampering. To quote captain Nassar Hussein "Stuart Broad and James Anderson were wrong to behave in the manner they did and I've no doubt that if a player from another country did the same, we'd have said they were cheating." The England cricket board did nothing. No one remembers.

In Marcus Trescothick's autobiography he admits England cheated in the 2005 Ashes which they won 2-1. To quote Trescothick "It was my job to keep the shine on the new ball for as long as possible with a bit of spit and a lot of polish. And through trial and error I finally settled on the spit for the task at hand. It had been common knowledge in county cricket for some time that certain sweets produced saliva which, when applied to the ball for cleaning purposes, enabled it to keep it's shine for longer and therefore it's swing." He found Murray mints worked the best. The England cricket board did nothing. No one remembers.

Other players who have been accused of ball tampering/cheating include Michael Atherton, Waqer Younis, Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, Inzamam-ul-Haq. In each case the respective cricket boards did nothing. No one remembers.

I'm not saying Smith did not deserve to be punished, but the 12 month ban was a massive overreaction. Maybe if all the others had been treated similarly such treatment would be justified, but they weren't and it wasn't.
 
what is the charge for trescothick? eating a mint? a succulent murray mint?
 
what is the charge for trescothick? eating a mint? a succulent murray mint?
It's called ball tampering. Admitted ball tampering I suppose. Faf's was similar in 2016. He used sweets to tamper with the ball. He was caught though.

The incident with Smith, Warner, and Bancroft has a history. Warner accused AB de Villiers of cheating back in 2014, but with no real proof ended up being fined for his comments. Then in 2016 du Plessis was found guilty. I think the Aussies just got tired of one team skirting the rules and stupidly did what they did. It was a really dumb move, but they definitely paid for it in spades.
 
Well, I’ve dug out the maths and I’m surprised that it’s not actually very close between the Australian attacks.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=bowling

McGrath, Gillespie and Lee. 22 matches, 243 wickets @ 28.5

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=bowling

Cummins, Hazelwood and Starc. 34 matches, 415 wickets @ 25.5.

Hazelwood = McGrath
Cummins > Gillespie
Starc > Lee

And to complete the argument.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=bowling

Steyn, Philander, Morkel. 31 tests, 368 wickets @ 23.8. I think they just shade it. Fewer wickets per test but no top spinner backing them up and a lower average.

Bonus scorecard - https://www.espncricinfo.com/series...rica-vs-india-1st-test-1122276/full-scorecard - Philander, Morkel, Steyn, Rabada, Bumrah, Shami and Bhuvneshwar on a South African deck, some lineup.
This is great!

I think Steyn, Philander, Morkel also play 50% of their games on SA, which is the most bowler friendly conditions in test cricket for 20+ years now. So their average being lower is not surprising. Philander almost never played in Asia, whereas the Aussie trio nearly always play barring the last tour to India.

All great attacks though. I did watch Steyn, Philander and Morkel thinking this is the best pace trio of all time. And then they added Rabada to the mix. The scorecard you linked to was Bumrah's debut.
 
There is no doubt the Australians cheated in 2018, but the whole thing was blown massively out of proportion by Cricket Australia with their "holier than thou" attitude, imposing their bans (12 months for Smith and Warner, 9 months for Bancroft). The ICC actually banned Smith for 1 test.

Ball tampering goes on all the time. Faf de Plessis was found guilty of tampering in the 2016 series between the same 2 teams. The SA cricket board did nothing. No one remembers.

Nicholas Pooran was banned for 4 matches in 2020 by the ICC after admitted tampering. The West Indies cricket board did nothing. No one remembers.

In 2010 James Anderson and Stuart Broad were accused of ball tampering. To quote captain Nassar Hussein "Stuart Broad and James Anderson were wrong to behave in the manner they did and I've no doubt that if a player from another country did the same, we'd have said they were cheating." The England cricket board did nothing. No one remembers.

In Marcus Trescothick's autobiography he admits England cheated in the 2005 Ashes which they won 2-1. To quote Trescothick "It was my job to keep the shine on the new ball for as long as possible with a bit of spit and a lot of polish. And through trial and error I finally settled on the spit for the task at hand. It had been common knowledge in county cricket for some time that certain sweets produced saliva which, when applied to the ball for cleaning purposes, enabled it to keep it's shine for longer and therefore it's swing." He found Murray mints worked the best. The England cricket board did nothing. No one remembers.

Other players who have been accused of ball tampering/cheating include Michael Atherton, Waqer Younis, Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, Inzamam-ul-Haq. In each case the respective cricket boards did nothing. No one remembers.

I'm not saying Smith did not deserve to be punished, but the 12 month ban was a massive overreaction. Maybe if all the others had been treated similarly such treatment would be justified, but they weren't and it wasn't.

This is a good post. I'm not sure to what extent Smith actually was involved in the tampering. I don't recall if that was ever reported. If the argument is that "The captain must have known", then the same charge could just as easily be leveled at the bowling trio - all of whom got away with it.

The witch hunt against Smith was disproportionate at that time, because of CA's stance. Warner too, but at least he was literally the guy responsible for it.
 
This is great!

I think Steyn, Philander, Morkel also play 50% of their games on SA, which is the most bowler friendly conditions in test cricket for 20+ years now. So their average being lower is not surprising. Philander almost never played in Asia, whereas the Aussie trio nearly always play barring the last tour to India.

All great attacks though. I did watch Steyn, Philander and Morkel thinking this is the best pace trio of all time. And then they added Rabada to the mix. The scorecard you linked to was Bumrah's debut.

They’ve only played 1 sub continent test as a trio, which isn’t surprising as you normally go 2 spinners:

https://www.espncricinfo.com/series...-vs-australia-1st-test-1288310/full-scorecard
 
Because I’m bored.

Here’s Garner, Holding, Marshall:

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=bowling

26 matches, 331 wickets @ 22.5 :eek:

And for my own interest, Harmison, Hoggard and Flintoff:

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=bowling

33 matches, 383 wickets @ 29.4

If I add Simon Jones and make it a quartet it’s 16 matches, 254 wickets @ 26.

I modified your very helpful query to check for the famous duos: McGrath and Warne, Broad and Anderson, Jadeja and Ashwin

McGrath and Warne 1001 @ 22
Broad and Anderson 1039 @ 26
Jadeja and Ashwin 587 @ 21

(I didn't calculate the averages properly, just did it unweighted but it should be fine)

McGrath and Warne just tower over everyone else.
 
Sunil Gavaskar has been giving angry interviews - asking the right questions. The man trots out banalities as a commentator, but I like his passion for Indian cricket. He's an all timer, so he doesn't get controlled by the BCCI, and speaks his mind.
 
I modified your very helpful query to check for the famous duos: McGrath and Warne, Broad and Anderson, Jadeja and Ashwin

McGrath and Warne 1001 @ 22
Broad and Anderson 1039 @ 26
Jadeja and Ashwin 587 @ 21

(I didn't calculate the averages properly, just did it unweighted but it should be fine)

McGrath and Warne just tower over everyone else.

Statsguru is an amazing resource once you can figure how to filter it right.

One thing we forget with bowlers pre 2008 is no DRS. I reckon McGrath and Warne would have taken a fair few more if it was around in their day.

A few other combinations of interest:

Ambrose, Bishop and Walsh: 37 tests, 412 wickets @ 23.9.
Ambrose and Walsh: 95 tests, 762 wickets @ 22.7
Wasim and Waqar: 61 tests, 559 wickets @ 22.1
 
This is a good post. I'm not sure to what extent Smith actually was involved in the tampering. I don't recall if that was ever reported. If the argument is that "The captain must have known", then the same charge could just as easily be leveled at the bowling trio - all of whom got away with it.

The witch hunt against Smith was disproportionate at that time, because of CA's stance. Warner too, but at least he was literally the guy responsible for it.
Bancroft was the guy who really suffered. It was only his 2nd test series and Warner who came up with plan got Bancroft to do it instead of doing it himself. After his ban, Bancroft never really recovered going through all sorts of mental issues. Smith being the captain took responsibility since he was the leader of the team although it was primarily Warner who was at fault.
 
Hang on a minute we've got paragraphs on why a pre meditated team plan to apply sandpaper to a ball is actually not that bad!?

Punishments looked about right to me. If some previous misdemeanours should have been dealt with more harshly (up for debate to be honest, Id put this in a different category) then that doesn't mean Warner and co got a bad hand!

It was serious breach, they got serious punishments - then continued there careers.
 
On the pace attacks debate - I actually think the SA one is remembered better in hindsight than It was at the time. Excellent bowlers but I'd have the two Aussie line ups clear, and then the original WI quartet in a different stratosphere.
 
Hang on a minute we've got paragraphs on why a pre meditated team plan to apply sandpaper to a ball is actually not that bad!?

Punishments looked about right to me. If some previous misdemeanours should have been dealt with more harshly (up for debate to be honest, Id put this in a different category) then that doesn't mean Warner and co got a bad hand!

It was serious breach, they got serious punishments - then continued there careers.
No, it's bad. There's no two ways about it. The point i was making was that other incidents were not treated similarly. Smith, especially was treated harshly since it was never really proven how much he was directly involved. Where Smith went wrong was trying to protect his teammates and by lying at the press conference afterwards. He should have thrown Warner under the bus straight away like he deserved. All in all, for the most part he just ended up falling on his sword because he was captain.

IMLTHO, the Trescothick behaviour was far more egregious. It was a concerted effort to tamper with the ball using "tricks" that had been discovered on the county cricket circuit. It was premeditated and it appears the whole team knew about it. It just goes to show that this sort of behaviour is not isolated but happens across the board. Du Plessis was still using the same "trick" when he got caught in 2016.
 
Last edited:
On the pace attacks debate - I actually think the SA one is remembered better in hindsight than It was at the time. Excellent bowlers but I'd have the two Aussie line ups clear, and then the original WI quartet in a different stratosphere.

The numbers are all the way through this thread, I was a bit surprised by the McGrath, Lee and Gillespie numbers, only a shade better than Hoggard, Harmison and Flintoff basically. I suppose winning a lot can trick the brain a little. If you throw Warne/McGill into the 22 tests they played together and assess the attack as a whole then the reality meets the perception a whole lot better.

Also that original WI quartet I assume to be Garner, Holding, Roberts and Marshall, well they only played 6 tests together (90 wickets @ 26.3) . Really amazing what you find when digging into the numbers with cricket.
 
The numbers are all the way through this thread, I was a bit surprised by the McGrath, Lee and Gillespie numbers, only a shade better than Hoggard, Harmison and Flintoff basically. I suppose winning a lot can trick the brain a little. If you throw Warne/McGill into the 22 tests they played together and assess the attack as a whole then the reality meets the perception a whole lot better.

Also that original WI quartet I assume to be Garner, Holding, Roberts and Marshall, well they only played 6 tests together (90 wickets @ 26.3) . Really amazing what you find when digging into the numbers with cricket.
What number of tests did any 3 of them play together? I know it’s a tedious question to answer. Expecting all 4 to play together regularly is a high bar.. and perhaps why it’s just 6 tests.
 
The numbers are all the way through this thread, I was a bit surprised by the McGrath, Lee and Gillespie numbers, only a shade better than Hoggard, Harmison and Flintoff basically. I suppose winning a lot can trick the brain a little. If you throw Warne/McGill into the 22 tests they played together and assess the attack as a whole then the reality meets the perception a whole lot better.

Also that original WI quartet I assume to be Garner, Holding, Roberts and Marshall, well they only played 6 tests together (90 wickets @ 26.3) . Really amazing what you find when digging into the numbers with cricket.

Lee was a good test bowler, and a great ODI bowler. Gillespie was under-rated. I think when you match them up:

Cummins = McGrath (maybe Glenn is slightly better)
Starc > Lee
Hazelwood > Gillespie
Warne >>>> Lyon
 
Also that original WI quartet I assume to be Garner, Holding, Roberts and Marshall, well they only played 6 tests together (90 wickets @ 26.3) . Really amazing what you find when digging into the numbers with cricket.
Those four were such a joy to watch though. As a bowler Roberts was such a nasty bastard and I say that as a compliment, not as a criticism. He would bowl a bouncer that would follow you when you tried to get out of the way. Michael Holding was just so smooth. He just had the perfect action. Malcolm Marshall (God rest his soul) was just out and out quick. He had this ball that would just skid through and had the batsman hopping all over the place. Last, but definitely not least "the big Bird" Joel Garner. Probably my favorite bowler of all time. Could tie a batsman up in knots with the ball coming down from a massive height. I first saw him playing for Littleborough in the Central Lancs League in 1976. I actually remember the first time I saw him i didn't remember him for his bowling but his batting. It was the Wood Cup final played at Middleton's ground and Joel was facing a spinner. He played the same shot three or four times in a row (a slog sweep) and missed every one. Finally, on the 4th or 5th ball, he connected (same shot). My God that ball went a long way and ended up in the parking lot.

Memories. You just got to love cricket.
 
Those four were such a joy to watch though. As a bowler Roberts was such a nasty bastard and I say that as a compliment, not as a criticism. He would bowl a bouncer that would follow you when you tried to get out of the way. Michael Holding was just so smooth. He just had the perfect action. Malcolm Marshall (God rest his soul) was just out and out quick. He had this ball that would just skid through and had the batsman hopping all over the place. Last, but definitely not least "the big Bird" Joel Garner. Probably my favorite bowler of all time. Could tie a batsman up in knots with the ball coming down from a massive height. I first saw him playing for Littleborough in the Central Lancs League in 1976. I actually remember the first time I saw him i didn't remember him for his bowling but his batting. It was the Wood Cup final played at Middleton's ground and Joel was facing a spinner. He played the same shot three or four times in a row (a slog sweep) and missed every one. Finally, on the 4th or 5th ball, he connected (same shot). My God that ball went a long way and ended up in the parking lot.

Memories. You just got to love cricket.

How do you rank the modern day bowlers against them? Picking 4 names I think are some of the greatest: Akram, Steyn, McGrath, Bumrah..
 
What number of tests did any 3 of them play together? I know it’s a tedious question to answer. Expecting all 4 to play together regularly is a high bar.. and perhaps why it’s just 6 tests.
Garner, Holding, Marshall are the main trio, 26 tests together. Roberts retired in 1983, Garner and Holding in 1987 and Marshall in 1991.

The career timeline goes:

Roberts - 1974 - 1983
Holding - 1975 - 1987
Colin Croft - 1977 - 1982
Garner - 1977 - 1987
Marshall - 1978 - 1991
Walsh - 1984 - 2001
Ambrose - 1988 - 2000
Ian Bishop - 1989 - 1998

Roberts, Holding, Croft and Garner. 11 tests together. 172 wickets @ 24.1.
Garner, Holding, Roberts. 17 tests, 193 wickets @ 24.4.
The Marshall, Walsh, Ambrose timeline matches up nicely. 28 tests, 338 wickets @ 23.1.
 
Lee was a good test bowler, and a great ODI bowler. Gillespie was under-rated. I think when you match them up:

Cummins = McGrath (maybe Glenn is slightly better)
Starc > Lee
Hazelwood > Gillespie
Warne >>>> Lyon

I was going to object to your Starc and Lee comparison. I recall Brett Lee being a good test bowler in the back half of his career, but I just checked the stats and it's not supported at all. Starc is indeed better.
 
Those four were such a joy to watch though. As a bowler Roberts was such a nasty bastard and I say that as a compliment, not as a criticism. He would bowl a bouncer that would follow you when you tried to get out of the way. Michael Holding was just so smooth. He just had the perfect action. Malcolm Marshall (God rest his soul) was just out and out quick. He had this ball that would just skid through and had the batsman hopping all over the place. Last, but definitely not least "the big Bird" Joel Garner. Probably my favorite bowler of all time. Could tie a batsman up in knots with the ball coming down from a massive height. I first saw him playing for Littleborough in the Central Lancs League in 1976. I actually remember the first time I saw him i didn't remember him for his bowling but his batting. It was the Wood Cup final played at Middleton's ground and Joel was facing a spinner. He played the same shot three or four times in a row (a slog sweep) and missed every one. Finally, on the 4th or 5th ball, he connected (same shot). My God that ball went a long way and ended up in the parking lot.

Memories. You just got to love cricket.

Remember catching the tram back from an India/England ODI at Old Trafford once and this old guy came up to me and my mate and started talking to us about Farokh Engineer, amazing how the game cuts across generations like that.
 
Remember catching the tram back from an India/England ODI at Old Trafford once and this old guy came up to me and my mate and started talking to us about Farokh Engineer, amazing how the game cuts across generations like that.
I remember watching Farokh. I suppose I'm an old guy now. Ha ha.
 
How do you rank the modern day bowlers against them? Picking 4 names I think are some of the greatest: Akram, Steyn, McGrath, Bumrah..
It's so hard to compare bowlers from different eras. I will say I enjoyed watching cricket more back then although that's partly because white ball cricket seems to be the future of the sport and since I'm a traditionalist, I'm not overly happy about that.
 
People here are severely underrating Glen McGrath.

The man could bowl anywhere, in any conditions, and even on a flat deck with no seam, no swing, no bounce, he would get 2/60 with an economy of 2.5.

He's the best "Fast" bowler I've ever seen.

You have lots of Patrick Cummins types - express fast bowlers who look incredible on their day and can make any batsman look terrible.

From the late 90's when I started watching cricket there's only been one McGrath.

You have your Steyns, Bumrah's, Shane Bonds, Cummins, etc who can all run through a side, but there's nobody else quite like McGrath who can just keep holding up pressure on one end AND take a bucketload of wickets.

Also, the standard of international batting has declined significantly since the 00's.

How many of England's current lineup would get into the lineup of Trescothik, Strauss, Vaughan, KP, Collingwood, Bell?

How many of India's lineup currently would get into Sehwag Gambhir dravid Sachin VVS Ganguly?

How many of Sri lanka's would get into Dilshan, Jayasuira, Sangakarra, Jayawardene etc?

How many of the saffers would get into Smith, Duminy, Amla, ABDV, etc?