Stuart MacGill's 10 wicket haul has propelled him into 7th. place on the Test bowler's ratings list.
Steve Waugh moved up another couple of places to be 12th. in the batting and Darren Lehmann advanced 11 places to 47th. Justin Langer slipped to 13th.
MacGilla rockets into Top 10.
-
geordie_matt
- Posts: 245
- Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 6:43 pm
- Location: melbourne
-
Donny
- Posts: 80336
- Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2002 6:01 pm
- Location: Toonumbar NSW Australia
- Has liked: 65 times
- Been liked: 28 times
I totally agree, Matt. I often wonder just who is 'forcing' MacGill to play cricket.
OK, m8, what about those of us who weren't at the MCG ?
OK, m8, what about those of us who weren't at the MCG ?
Last edited by Donny on Tue Jul 29, 2003 3:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Donny.
It's a game. Enjoy it.
It's a game. Enjoy it.
-
geordie_matt
- Posts: 245
- Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 6:43 pm
- Location: melbourne
the reason i called him warnie is because at the boxing day test i was with the barmy army and we were singing "warnie warnie" every time he came a fielded in front of us and when he was bowling and every time he was hit for 4 and he hated it so much because he knew that when warne was fit he would be back out of the test teamMAGFAN8 wrote: OK, m8, what about those of us who weren't at the MCG ?
just the look on his face said it all
-
I@n S
- Posts: 1649
- Joined: Thu Sep 09, 1999 6:01 pm
- Location: Pakenham
-
Donny
- Posts: 80336
- Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2002 6:01 pm
- Location: Toonumbar NSW Australia
- Has liked: 65 times
- Been liked: 28 times
"MacGill a poor man's Shane Warne" ?
How easily these statments are made. Maybe a look at some figures would be helpful here.
MacGill (5.2) takes more wickets per Test than Warne (4.6).
MacGill's strike rate (balls per wicket) is 52 against Warne's 61.
MacGill is considered much more expensive than Warne. In fact, MacGill's average (26.22) is only half a run worse than Warne's (25.71).
As Richie Benaud says, "Give me a spinner who takes 4/80 from 20 overs, not one who takes 1/50 from 20"
Sure, Warney LOOKS a class above MacGilla but the figures certainly make interesting reading, don't they.
Most cricket followers would consider McGrath to be one of the very best Test bowlers but how many wickets did he take against the Bangers, JLC ?
How easily these statments are made. Maybe a look at some figures would be helpful here.
MacGill (5.2) takes more wickets per Test than Warne (4.6).
MacGill's strike rate (balls per wicket) is 52 against Warne's 61.
MacGill is considered much more expensive than Warne. In fact, MacGill's average (26.22) is only half a run worse than Warne's (25.71).
As Richie Benaud says, "Give me a spinner who takes 4/80 from 20 overs, not one who takes 1/50 from 20"
Sure, Warney LOOKS a class above MacGilla but the figures certainly make interesting reading, don't they.
Most cricket followers would consider McGrath to be one of the very best Test bowlers but how many wickets did he take against the Bangers, JLC ?
Last edited by Donny on Sat Aug 02, 2003 12:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
Donny.
It's a game. Enjoy it.
It's a game. Enjoy it.