Here are some irrefutable facts:
Since the retirement of the champion leg-spinner at the end of the 2006/07 Ashes series, his successors - Stuart MacGill and the now-retired Brad Hogg - have taken just 17 wickets in six Tests, at the princely sum of nearly 56 runs each.
8 comments:
You would think 200+ wickets in Test cricket would see you regarded as a solid and respected performer but, from where I sit, MacGill just hasn't established himself as an international cricketer .... and now it's too late.
If the requirement for Warne's replacement was to bowl one or two half-trackers per over and get smashed to and over the boundary, then both MacGill - and I :-)) - fit the bill!
Alan,
Firstly a warm welcome.
Is it right to compare MacGill with Warne?
I ask this question because Warne is a genius, a phenomenon and a freak.
MacGill exploits are human in comparison.
The right way to measure MacGill would be compare him say with a Kumble.
What is your take?
Mcguill will never like to be compared with Kumble who is not a spinner by any stretch of imagination. His success has always been a mystery to me.
You're right, Ottayan, Warne is incomparable, not just for his bowling but also for his tactical approach to the game (and Rajasthan has seen the benefit of this). MacGill falls a long way short of Warne.
While Macgill is a bigger turner of the ball, Kumble's value to his team is much greater in my opinion. Much greater control (in part because he doesn't try to rip the ball), a real workhorse and a much better batting average combine to put Kumble well above MacGill .... Macgill has never been able to adapt his bowling to suit the needs of the game or captain's instructions, which is something that Warne and Kumble are able to do.
I can't understand why Australia doesn't take a longer term view and invest in a younger spinner - there's little point taking Casson to the West Indies if he never plays and you have to expect new spinners to get belted for a while ... Warne took a real belting from Ravi Shastri and others in his debut (with figures of 1/150) and look what he became!
R,
Kumble's success is due to his longevity.
Alan,
MacGill needs a much more understanding Captain to flourish.
Is Casson good enough to replace MacGill?
Now, that's the big question and you get different answers depending on how you choose to answer it ..... right now, perhaps not, because Macgill has the runs on the board - often because he'll go for 10 or 12 an over :-)). Can Casson ( or somebody else) be better than MacGill? I'd prefer to find out starting now (when I have some flexibility in how and when he's used) than be forced to use him because MacGill has retired.
It's an interesting question - how much, if any, immediate success are you willing to risk for the sake of investing for future gain?
Australian spinners... the current and the ones in line are complete crap! It might be better if they play without them.
Post a Comment