Lillee, McGrath..... Cummins ?

Remove this Banner Ad

For those who saw both, how did Lillee compare with Malcolm Marshall? I've always heard Marshall called the best of the great WI quicks and those two seem to come up most often in discussions of greatest fast bowler of all time.
Marshall was very very good. I have him probably second to Michael Holding as best West Indies fast bowlers I seen.
Andy Roberts and Marshall I rate about the same. Marshall tended to swing it more. Then Joel Garner and then Ambrose.
I have Marshall ahead of McGrath but probably just behind Wasim Akram. Maybe Marshall about same level as Imran Khan. There no much between Imran and Marshall. I'd pick Imran before McGrath too. For me, the best pace bowlers I rate that I seen go in order of Lillee, Hadlee and Wasim Akram. Holding next and not much difference to Marshall at all. All great bowlers.
 
I like the story of David Boon facing up to Marshall, who simply said to him, "David - are you going to get out now, or will I be forced to come around the wicket and kill you?" :)
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Marshall was very very good. I have him probably second to Michael Holding as best West Indies fast bowlers I seen.
Andy Roberts and Marshall I rate about the same. Marshall tended to swing it more. Then Joel Garner and then Ambrose.
I have Marshall ahead of McGrath but probably just behind Wasim Akram. Maybe Marshall about same level as Imran Khan. There no much between Imran and Marshall. I'd pick Imran before McGrath too. For me, the best pace bowlers I rate that I seen go in order of Lillee, Hadlee and Wasim Akram. Holding next and not much difference to Marshall at all. All great bowlers.

Agree with that.
 
Ryan Harris would be in the conversation if his body was even remotely close to durable
That ball that bowled Cook in Perth (first ball of the second innings I think) was one of the best deliveries I've seen.
 
That ball that bowled Cook in Perth (first ball of the second innings I think) was one of the best deliveries I've seen.

That it was the first ball of ENG's second innings, in the match which ultimately secured The Ashes after over 4 years, just made it even greater.

In context, arguably the best ball bowled since 2000.
 
Ryan Harris would be in the conversation if his body was even remotely close to durable

Yep.

The most skilful quick AUS have had since McGrath's retirement.

On that line of conversation, I consider James Pattinson to be one of the great what-ifs of Australian cricket. Early Pattinson could generate prodigious movement (both conventional/reverse) at express pace, and could use cutters as well. That made him almost as dangerous on the subcontinent as it did here. When he was fit for a relatively prolonged period in 2019/20, he was more consistent, but he lost some of that pace that made him so dangerous.
 
Mitchell Johnson. When he was good he was so damn good. When ordinary very ordinary.
If Johnson was in form I woudl pick him ahead of McGarth,

McGarth was perhaps the best organized and constant fats bowle, generlay very reilable and an 8/10 80% ofthe time. Johnson was 10/10 25% but 3/10 25% of the time and perhrpas 6 the rest,

Johnson a hard player to rate, in Career terms McGarth got him covered easily, but a in form impact Bowler Johnson easily.

If I was touring England and picking players at their peak Alderman better than McGarth.
I didn't see Alderman, but I think you're barking if you're picking anyone instead of McGrath.
 
Marshall was very very good. I have him probably second to Michael Holding as best West Indies fast bowlers I seen.
Andy Roberts and Marshall I rate about the same. Marshall tended to swing it more. Then Joel Garner and then Ambrose.
I have Marshall ahead of McGrath but probably just behind Wasim Akram. Maybe Marshall about same level as Imran Khan. There no much between Imran and Marshall. I'd pick Imran before McGrath too. For me, the best pace bowlers I rate that I seen go in order of Lillee, Hadlee and Wasim Akram. Holding next and not much difference to Marshall at all. All great bowlers.
Whispering Death was the scariest bowler I saw growing up, he was a little robotic like McGrath yet about 15-20 kms faster. Like you I rate him just ahead of Marshall and Roberts with Garner, Ambrose, Croft and Walsh not far behind.
 
I didn't see Alderman, but I think you're barking if you're picking anyone instead of McGrath.
Alderman was a nightmare to face in England. I think he twice got over 40 wickets in a series the two times he went there.
Whispering Death was the scariest bowler I saw growing up, he was a little robotic like McGrath yet about 15-20 kms faster. Like you I rate him just ahead of Marshall and Roberts with Garner, Ambrose, Croft and Walsh not far behind.
Ha ha.
Robotic is one word I never associate with Holding.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Alderman was a nightmare to face in England. I think he twice got over 40 wickets in a series the two times he went there.
I just had a look:

That is both Alderman's and McGrath's stats by country; location rather than opposition. Both average - ironically enough - 19.34 in England and Wales, but McGrath has a strike rate of 39.47 compare to Alderman's 42.96.

Suffice to say, both were brutal in England, but even then McGrath was more likely to get you out.
 
Last edited:
And 42 and 41 wickets are absolutely ****ing amazing, 1981 and 1989 respectively. But McGrath got 36 at 19.47 in 1997, 32 at 16.94 in 2001n and 19 at 23.16 in 2005.

There's also the fact that there's only 10 wickets in each innings available to bowlers, and in the same series McGrath played Warne took 24 at 24.04, 31 at 18.71, and 40 at 19.93. As far as I know, there was no equivalent to Warne in the Australian side at the time for Alderman to compete with.

McGrath would be inside my first 2 players picked for an all time XI, with the first being Bradman.
 
h
And 42 and 41 wickets are absolutely ******* amazing, 1981 and 1989 respectively. But McGrath got 36 at 19.47 in 1997, 32 at 16.94 in 2001n and 19 at 23.16 in 2005.

There's also the fact that there's only 10 wickets in each innings available to bowlers, and in the same series McGrath played Warne took 24 at 24.04, 31 at 18.71, and 40 at 19.93. As far as I know, there was no equivalent to Warne in the Australian side at the time for Alderman to compete with.

McGrath would be inside my first 2 players picked for an all time XI, with the first being Bradman.

One DK Lillie picked up 39 Wickets in 1981.
 
One DK Lillie picked up 39 Wickets in 1981.
Don't forget 31 wickets in 1972 as well.

This was just before his back injury, he was a tearaway - fast and ferocious. Many wouldn't know just how quick and intimidating he was at this time.

 
Don't forget 31 wickets in 1972 as well.

This was just before his back injury, he was a tearaway - fast and ferocious. Many wouldn't know just how quick and intimidating he was at this time.


Never saw the young raw tearaway version of Lillee so wonder how quick he was in comparison to Thommo at their peak.
I've always thought the young version of Lillee was probably as quick as Brett Lee at top pace but I assume Thommoa was another 10km/h quicker than anyone at their top pace. Wish I'd had seen the quickest of both, although I am certain the older version of Lillee I saw was a more skilled version than the young raw one. I wonder if Lillee never got injured if that greatness fully would have been unpacked to see all those different style of swing, seam and cutters he could do when I saw him.
 
If I was touring England and picking players at their peak Alderman better than McGarth.

i'm talking all round package.

aldermans 2 awesome series in england yielded 12 tests 83 wickets @ 19
the rest of his career yielded another 29 tests 87 wickets @ 34

he's definitely a tier or 2 below lillee & mcgrath.
 
For those who saw both, how did Lillee compare with Malcolm Marshall? I've always heard Marshall called the best of the great WI quicks and those two seem to come up most often in discussions of greatest fast bowler of all time.

Asked this of a friend of mine who has been obsessed since his youth.

He had Marshall out in front of everyone, then Wasim, Steyn, Holding, Lillee, McGrath, Imran. I'm probably missing one or two there that he mentioned. He was clear on Marshall being out in front.

Edit: Alan Donald was in there somewhere.

I agree with him on Steyn too. His strike rate during an era of flat pitches was phenomenal.
 
Last edited:
For me Lillee & McGrath have been our best 2 quicks since the end of WSC. For me those 2 are hard to split.

Cummins is certainly on track to be mentioned in the same breath at the rate he is going. Could he be the best ?

mcgrath 563 wkts @ 21.64 (124 tests)
lillee 355 wkts @ 23.92 (70 tests) - another 90 wkts @ 23 in 18 unofficial tests
.

lillee 70 tests / 355 @ 24
cummins 36 tests / 174 @ 21

cummins is now half way to lillee's career and number's are strikingly similar and well on track to match him providing he can play another 40 odd tests.
 
Asked this of a friend of mine who has been obsessed since his youth.

He had Marshall out in front of everyone, then Wasim, Steyn, Holding, Lillee, McGrath, Imran. I'm probably missing one or two there that he mentioned. He was clear on Marshall being out in front.

Edit: Alan Donald was in there somewhere.

I agree with him on Steyn too. His strike rate during an era of flat pitches was phenomenal.

Ambrose and Walsh were fun too
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Lillee, McGrath..... Cummins ?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top