Cricinfo - Blogs - Eye on the Ashes - Glenn McGrath: The sting in the tail

It’s not that long since I watched McGrath use the Lord’s slope to rout England in the last Ashes series. An electron microscope could not have submitted the batsmen’s techniques to closer examination. Yet, since that Test, his figures have been 47 wickets at 28.14: respectable, but a falling off from his stellar standards. At times this summer he has genuinely laboured. At Adelaide he was comfortably the least of the Australian bowlers, denouncing the pitch as ‘ridiculous’, even though others made an impact where he did not. There is an argument, moreover, that Stuart Clark might be more effective still with unquestioned custody of the new ball, which he used adeptly in South Africa. Which raises the question: how effective would McGrath be without it?

In all, though, what a wonderful bowler. And, from everything I have observed of him off the field, what a decent man. About seven years ago, Wisden Australia, of which I was then editor, anointed him International Cricketer of the Year, and hosted him at a lunch in Brisbane. Quite prepared to take an altogether unreasonable dislike to him, I found McGrath improbably but naturally modest, and extremely perceptive about cricket in general, rather than simply about 'putting it in the right areas' and 'bowling in the corridor'. Funny, too: even now, nobody gives a more drolly self-deprecating press conference.

Oddly, perhaps, I’d also like to salute his batting. The sight of McGrath with a bat used to be as incongruous as an obese smoker in lycra: the impedimenta just seemed completely superfluous. But he worked his way to being a capable tailender – probably as good a number 11 as any in the world - and that old reputation became a subtle advantage. If McGrath kept a fielding team waiting even a few overs for his wicket, you could sense the irritation and frustration intensifying. ‘Can’t get McGrath out? Wassamatter with ya?’ In last year’s Boxing Day Test, he drove South Africa to distraction, keeping Michael Hussey company from 50 to a brilliant 100. Having started his career as Australia’s batting postscript, he became the sting in its tail.

'strangely fitting’ is just about right McGrath never did entertain like Warne. He wasn't any less effective than Warne, not was he less feared, yet McGrath ensured that he sporlight on him was purely for his cricketing and not his personal life. He came out of the media frenzy that comes with being an international sports icon unharmed and unscathed, with his senses (and marraige) intact and integrity untarnished. And being the "decent man" that he is, McGrath will without doubt treat this as a victory. The paparazzi and the tabloid press, you see, was the bunny this time, with little or no dirt to sling his way and no material on infedility or mental demons. A career as a PR manager now beckons.

Thanks for such a nice tribute to a tremendous player.

I can vouch for McGrath's nice-ness: in 1997 Australia played a minor counties English team in Newcastle, and although he was being rested McGrath walked around the crowd engaging people in friendly conversation (including my wife).

But the contrast between the retirements of McGrath and Warne is mainly about cricket as entertainment, rather than as technical excellence. Of course, cricketers have to be good, preferably very good indeed (as Warne is), to be effective entertainers (if they are too bad, they will not get picked, or won't play enough time to be noticeable).

But the best players are not necessarily, nor even usually, the best entertainers. Was Bradman (the best ever batter) a more entertaining batsman than Lara, or than Kevin Peterson? Not from what I hear.

Similarly there really is no question that Muralitheran is a better bowler than Warne, indeed Murali is probably one of the best half dozen of all time. But Warne is more entertaining - at least for Australian and English fans.

McGrath was not an especially entertaining bowler (except when he was being taken-apart - I can remember some fun with Graham Thorpe). Neither is Sean Pollock a terribly entertaining bowler, which is why he is so massively under-rated (Pollock has quite possibly been the single most valuable team player of recent years). By contrast, Shoaib is (whatever else he is) a hugely entertaining fast bowler.

My point is that we should not expect the very best position players to be the most _entertaining_ cricketers. The two attributes certainly tend to go together, but there is not a perfect coincidence.

And in the end, high level sporting entertainment should be regarded as more important than purely technical excellence; or else cricket will die.

"If the Aussie public do not get the instant revenge they are desperately seeking here, the spotlight will quickly focus on Shane Warne, Glenn McGrath and others, creating enormous tension within their ranks." -wrote BBC commentator Jonathan Agnew before the 1st Test

in the end, it didn't even need that failure for the focus to be on these 2..looks like they were destined to be talked about win, lose or draw..but of course the difference is they're leaving in every way on TOP..can't possibly be any more satisfying end..

Gideon appeals to a comparison in music when describing McGrath's retirement. Most will judge him not singularly, but as a pair with Warne. They meshed, and operated in an improbable lockstep that was more than the sum of it's parts; that Warne is indisputably great alone, and will not always be mentioned in the same breath as McGrath in no way lessens this remarkable synergy...and it's here that the tenuous musical segue enters. If not being the upbeat, melodic McCartney to Warne's waspish Lennon, perhaps McGrath being a cricketing Billy Bragg might be entertained? Stark, unembellished, uncluttered, professionally spartan, but privately optimistic, the surnames are surely apposite; McGrath's predictions of 5-Nil this year and last are/were boastful, while the MCC may yet be converted into a circular mausoleum...

The Clash cleared the decks with their lyrics "No Elvis, Beatles or the Rolling Stones...in 1977!" and wondered, in a more famous line, "Should I stay, or should I go?" Well, both great men have decided they should go, with experts and guess-merchants portending doom from the resulting talent vacuum. Ironically, The Clash have long since gone, but the Rolling Stones endure, and they leave us all with a sage, if somewhat hackneyed piece of advice: "You can't always get what you want...but if you try, sometimes...you just might find...you get what you need!" We all wanted McGrath and Warne to stay, but perhaps what we need is a few years of honest cricket, untouched by the hand of genius, to dent our hubris and test our loyalty.

Another fine piece of writing Gideon , well done. I am looking forward to seeing how Australia will regroup after losing Mcgrath and Warne. I believe that they will not slip to the point that they were in the eighties.

Perhaps England will meet Duncan Fletcher's goal of being the no.1 side in cricket by 2007.

Bruces comment that "there really is no question that Muralitharan is a better bowler than Warne"
needs to be queried.

It can be argued that Murali is better but there will always be questions. Bradman will always be considered the best batsmen however it can be argued George Headly was a greater batsmen on sticky wickets.

hey hey everybody seems to compare Mcgrath with warne. for me Mcgrath used to set the scene for warne for dancing. i m not saying warne is not a good player, yes he is. but before warne gets his magic going, Mcgrath steps in and torments openers.
just look at 2005 ashes when warne had to deal with openers. Ponting will remember Mcgrath when lee gets a 4, before turning his head for spinners.

as for me and many more Mcgrath will remain as a hero, my pride.

First up Gideon your article shows that with due diligence you can make statistics prove anything. The statistics you present suggest that McGraths powers are waning when in fact they show he has had 2 bad tests since Lords. Statistics can show many things, I can show McGrath is at the peak of his powers by pointing out that in his last 3 innings McGrath's victims have come at a tad under 20 and in the Ashes to date he has 14 wickets at 23.8 despite going wicketless for over a hundred at Adelaide. The average of 27 you quote is grossly inflated because in the last six tests McGrath (very unusually for him) only picked up one wicket each for plenty in Perth and Adelaide last year against Sth Africa. I wonder how many wickets and what average he would have if he'd played on the fast bowler friendly South African pitches where Clarke prospered or against little Bangladesh?

Bruce

Are you dreaming?? No doubt that Murali is better than Warne. Murali has over 100 wickets against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, Warne has only 1 test against Zimbabwe to his name.

Warne had the ability to step up to the plate when it really mattered. Murali may have taken more wickets per test but he has no other bowler in his side taking wickets from him. Also his record in Australia is pathetic and will never get any better if he refuses to play here.

By the way he has been reported again for his doosra

Shane

A very sad day indeed! Glenn is a brilliant cricketer and sportsman! What I would give for his control!

Hats off to you Glenn! My favourite cricketer an certainly the player I've tried to model my own game, attitude and temporament on. Thanks for some wonderful years Glenn and good luck with the World Cup!

Just a quick note to "Bruce G Charlton" on his stepping on Shane Warne in preference for Murali. Shane Warne is unquestionably 'the best' spin bowler of all time. He has the most wickets, he has more 10 wicket hauls than any other, he has more big name wickets than anyone, and is simply one of the best cricket minds of the last era.

Murali, while still a decent bowler, has almost HALF his wickets again second rate sides like Bangladesh, Kenya, etc. The majority of his wickets against better sides are the tail. He is not in the same league as Warne for dimissing the likes of Lara, Tendulkar, Fleming, or any top order batsman. He will most likely over take Warne as the highest wicket taker, but that does not make him better, merely in a better situation to take cheap wickets.

If you were to ask ANY cricket expert to pick a team of all time, Warne would be picked by all in front of Murali. No question indeed!

Congratulations to both McGrath & Warne on their magnificent careers. I think Warne is narrowly the best leggie of all time and Murali is the best offie (by some margin). I would like to comment on the "criticism" of Murali and his wickets against Zimbabwe & Bangladesh. It is not Warne's or Murali's fault regarding the scheduling of Aust & SL games against Zim & Bangladesh. To correct Mike, in Test cricket Murali has more 5 wkt innings (57 to Warne's 36) and 10 wkt matches (19 to Warne's 10), and Kenya is not a Test-playing nation. Murali has taken 137 wickets in 20 Tests (6.85/ Test - as opposed to his overall 6.12/ Test), which is nowhere near half his wickets. S Bell also states that Murali has been reported for his doosra, but it is merely Martin Crowe raising his concerns. He also says no other bowler is taking wickets, but Chaminda Vaas has taken a couple. Also just because no-one else takes any doesn't mean Murali will - if you use that logic I could have taken many Test wickets, as long as the other bowlers were worse than me.

This month has truly been a cricket fan's rollercoaster..... with the recovery of the ashes - to the retirement of 3 fantastic players.
It's the first time as a young bloke that I have reflected back to the retirement of anyone.
Ive realised something very evident. In the last decade or so we have have watched something truly special in McGrath and Warne - something so special I doubt it will be replaced any time soon.
It makes me sad to be honest - that this time is over.....
As for the subject of Murali - I dont want to buy into the debate about him - the cricket purists everywhere knows why he gets the wickets he does.
Question - would Murali been allowed to play in the 70's and 80's when cricket was pure and the rules were not able to be adjusted , bent and manipulated?

Sure , I hate the fact that Murali will pass Warne as the highest wicket taker - what cricket purist wouldn't hate that?
I won't dwell on the negative.
Most of all , I will miss Shane Warne - in Australia's hour of need lick his lips and weave his magic.... I am truly lucky to have witnessed this great man in action.
Its a huge era for cricket tragics like me - because if your like me ... I was Shane Warnes number 1 fan !! As I'm sure many were.
I bet I wasnt the only idiot with a tear in his eye during his retirement day ??

Ahhh - bless this sport of cricket ...

Posted by: Peter 15 hours, 24 minutes ago

Perhaps England will meet Duncan Fletcher's goal of being the no.1 side in cricket by 2007.
--------------------------------------------------------

ummm, no. :)

That's crazy, look at the state england are in now (who knows if vaughan and flintoff will be able to contribute in future to the same level, with their ongoing injuries), and even with losing mcgrath and warne, australia have very good like-for-like replacements in clark and macgill. And if they want, they can form their attack differently to before, with 4 bowlers and an alrounder who can bowl. Either way, australia have plenty of very good players to to step into an already excellent team, of which 6 players will not be going anywhere till the next ashes.

Good article gideon haigh. Funky picture in the guardian! Compared to the portrait here anyway.

Glenn McGrath was always my favourite bowler, period.

Mike: while I totally agree with you the Shane Warne is far better spin bowler & cricketer than Murali. You really do need to get your facts straight. Murali has almost double the amount of 10 fers (19) compared to Warney (10). Kenya has never ever played test cricket either. For the record Murali has 137 Zimbabwean & Bangladeshi test wickets.

Congratulations Ooh Ah. Sheer brilliance. Loved & adored by all Aussie fans. You will sorely missed mate. Rip out a few more Poms before you go mate!

Congratulations to Pigeon for an outstanding career.Truly,he has done Australia proud.Greatest pacie in the current generation,no doubt.All the best mate,thanks for the memories.
With respect to the above comment by mike,murali has not taken half his wickets against sides like bangladesh and kenya.Kenya isnt even a test playing nation.Granted,he has taken over a hundred wickets against the weaker teams of Zim and Bangla but that still leaves a hell of a lot of wickets against the stronger nations.Furthermore, thats not unlike Warne picking on weak english batting line-ups that had no real answer to spin till Peitersen came along.
Regarding the fact that Warne has 'competitors' for wickets unlike Murali,i think that has been a catalyst for him taking so many wickets.Most often its McGrath who takes out the batsman better equipped to deal with Warne,making his job a whole lot easier, while Murali, more often than not, has to go about getting most of the opposing batsman by himself.Saying that this has contributed to his exhorbitant tally, and hence makes him a lesser bowler than warne, is unjust as his strike rate and average is significantly lower than warne's.And,for the record, he has the largest number of ten wicket hauls in history.
Australia has been the dominator it has been over the last decade due to a combination of a magnificent batting line-ups,two 'all-time great' keepers,an awesome battery of pace bowlers spearheaded by pigeon,and a very special spinner, while sri lanka has been competetive,just a couple of decades after its inception into the test arena, solely due to one man. So give that man credit where its due,instead of belittling him at every turn just so that one of our own can look better.Talks of his action are rubbish and a fallback for the ugly Australian who regard their own eyes as sophisticated measuring devices capable of ascertaining the degree of flex in a bowlers' arm during delivery over sophisticated measuring devices capable of ascertaining the degree of flex in a bowlers' arm during delivery. Discounting his action would be discounting the actions of many bowlers past and present,including pigeon.
Both bowler's are champions who have fought and won against adversity and instead of diluting one to strenghten the other, we should celebrate and reflect on how fortunate we have been to have seen the two greatest spin bowlers in the history of cricket in our lifetime.

Were Warne & McGrath really were that great?

I couldnt forget that one over in 1998 when McGrath was hit for 5 fours by Razzak and evrytime McGrath responded by the same line and lenght? Surely a so-called Champion Bowler should have some variations to avoid such a record to be brought upon his name.

If a machine is built for net-practice and then set to throw bowl at good lenght and the same line, it would do so much less better than McGrath who was as unimaginable as such machine if there ever would be.He is The most boring bowler of this era though effective cuz of his machine like unimaginable bowling.

Now why was he so effective.Why not read this piece from an Expert- Ian Chappell apearing in Cricinfo today-

"If Australia becomes more beatable in the post Warne-McGrath era it will be confirmation that the team has been diminished by their retirements. However, it will also be an indictment of those teams who didn't rise to the challenge when the Australian side included two champion bowlers."

I agree that it is unfortunate McGrath has retired at the same time as Warne. As great a bowler as McGrath is he will no doubt be put in the shade by Warnie bowing out.

The reality is that as much as you might admire McGrath as a bowler he never created the same excitement and cult hero status as Warnie. But then again who does. Lets face it, World War 3 could break out and it would still take a back seat to Warnie retiring.

I think the other main difference between these two greats is that McGrath can be replaced, ie. Stuart Clark. However replacing Warnie is out of the question. Even if in the extremely unlikely event you could find a leg spinner that was as good as Warne, you can never replace his aura and intimidating personality.

To Mr. Bell
The only reason murali does not and perhaps will never tour australia is the pathetic reception he gets there.All the idiots in australia seem to congregate in the stadiums and heckle him,taunt him and of course ,being aussies,racially abuse him.Not to mention that idiot-in-chief, john howard whose mouth spews nothing but rubbish.Warne never had to endure such idiots in india(of course he had other traumatic experiences such as being clobbered into nightmares by sachin,laxman,sidhu etc.)

ARKAN "I couldnt forget that one over in 1998 when McGrath was hit for 5 fours by Razzak and evrytime McGrath responded by the same line and lenght? Surely a so-called Champion Bowler should have some variations to avoid such a record to be brought upon his name."

You seem somewhat clueless about bowling. McGrath, as does any decent bowler, always worked to a plan. 99% of the time a batsman hitting 5 fours in 5 balls off him would in fact be hitting 4 fours and be out caught on the fifth ball. McGrath's accuracy has been legendary for exactly this reason. His captain always knows how to set the fields for him. McGrath gives the batsmen nothing to work with - and so the batsmen get themselves out continually to him.

An obvious and recent example of a bowler working to a plan is how Monty Panesar got Andrew Symonds out in the first innings of the third Ashes test in Perth the other week. Monty got, was it 2 sixes, hit off him in the same over. He was itching to get back for his next over, because he was going to deliver exactly the same ball and Symonds was going to try hitting it for six again, and Monty knew if Symonds kept doing that to good bowling he was going to get out to Monty. Which he did.

Good stuff Gideon.I felt that all the hoopola surrownding Warne ( no doubt deserved ) has certainly diminished the importance of Mcgrath's retirement.As many has said here, Mcgrath has been an outstanding fast bowler for a long long time and will certainly figure in the list of all time fast bowler greats.As for the relative merits of warne and Murali,it is a no contest.Murali is a freak and will be treated as one where as Warne is a delight to sore eyes.I don't demean Murali's achievement which is substantial.Havindg accepted his bowling action and allowed him to bowl so long, I think continued sniping by Crowe is a disgrace and in poor taste.

What an awful day for Australian Cricket. Seeing Glenn McGrath retire was one of the worst sporting moments i could have witnessed. But i will always remember the best fast bowler the world has seen, and i also think he was not only the best fast bowler, but the best bowler the world has seen. While many say Shane Warne was a master mind and got so many wickets, no one will ever compare to McGraths average while having such a miserable economy rate. Befor Warne got the ball it was McGrath destroying top orders, and history shows how good McGrath was by the fact his most frequent victims were the legends of the game such as Lara. I will always feel privledged to say i lived in the time of McGrath.

A Few highlights were his catch in Adelaide, his 5 for at lords in the 05 ashes, his 8-24 at the WACA (which i was lucky enough to witness) and also his successes against india, where ever the game was being played. His removal of Tendulka in the 03World Cup final will always be remembered. The indian fans were thinking their god Tendulka would save them, he hit McGrath for 4, but then McGrath got him caught and bowled and the crowd suddenly was silent. It will take Generations to compete with the brilliance that is McGrath

Warne is an great entertainer but not an great bowler as being hyped up.
Murali is an far superior bowler to Warne.A measure of an great bowler is about how
he measures up against the best. And Warne has been pretty ordinary in this respect.
His record against Indians is very bad for an supposedly great bowler.And it was not just tendulkar...Laxman , Sidhu , Azhar and even Ravi shastri had toyed around with him.

When Indians play Murali, they give him more respect than they what they show for Warne.
Only Lara has consistently taken Murali for runs.

Also Warne just uses the pressure created by Mcgrath.Mcgrath softens up the opposition most often for Warne to share the spoils.

So let us accord an good farewell to Warne, an very good bowler but not in the same league as Murali or Mcgrath.

When we were young we were told that great fast bowlers hunt in pairs-Lindwall and Miller, Trueman and Statham,Lillee and Thomson.But this was a pair that was perhaps better than these.You could sense the pressure in your living room.Yes Murali has had his fair share of success and yet ...Warne is a character and Mcgrath a performer.To me reared on the sub-continent where batsmen rule the roost, it has been a great spectacle.Maybe watching Austalia bowl will no longer be as entertaining as it has been for the last decade.Thank you for the memories guys!!

Thanks, Gideon, for yet another top piece.
Now, I'm partcularly interested in Messrs Warne and McGrath's record and performance against Virender Sehwag. A wag here tells me that in their few encounters, Sehwag is the one batsman who appeared to get the measure of Warne and McGrath. I know Sehwag can dismantle ANY bowler when in his element, but I would nevertheless like to verify his supposedly lofty record against Warne and McGrath.
Gideon? Anyone?

Jason Buddy!!!
Exactly thts my point !! Mcgrath can only get a wicket wid the so-called 'plan' of pitching the ball in the same spot over n over again-a plan which seems to have leaked out to all the batsmen all over the world and still they get out..
tht points to their apathy not McGrath's greatness. As i said a champion bowler should be able to punish a batsmen the next ball he dare to blast him - or atleast send a decent ball..
McGrath is boring to watch,every1 knows where he is gonna pitch and just to show McGraths face at his haplessness I would suggest to you to search for that video in youtube.com (search 'Razzaq mcgrath')..n there r alots of such instances,esp against Lara,i shud say!!

going by arkan's standards
afridi is a better batsman than kallis

given a overpitchedball outside off, kallis is always going to drive it to the cover-point region. thats just predictable and boring

on the other hand, afridi could do any number of things.. drive to the off, play a cross-batted swipe to send it to leg.. anything. therefore, since afridi is more unpredictable and hence more entertaining to watch, he is a better batter than kallis

arkan buddy, id like you to go out and try to pitch 3 balls on the same spot in a row. once you try and abjectly fail, then maybe you might have a glimmer of hope of realizing what a feat it is to do what mccgrath has done over the course of his career

and this to the so-called purists who keep on complaining about murali's actions when comprehensive scientific tests show that the 'chucking' lies in the eyes of the beholder..
if purists were to have had their way,
a) test match wickets would still be left uncovered at the end of a day's play
b) all bowling would be underarm
c) no one-day cricket or 20/20 matches
d) umpires would still be getting run-out and stumping decisions wrong as no third umpire
e) etc etc etc
in other words, a cricket purist is an idiotic 'back in the day' snob who dosent know what is good for the game