Interesting Martyn article (was Marto selfish!)

[simon says]

M.Waugh is defintely a class above Martyn......bootiful to watch when on song.

I know his average isnt as good,and I put this down to his inabilty to turn a ton into a really big score.

He would get to 100 and be in such good touch and try to hit eveything for six.......and give his wicket away too easily.

I rate him as high as a bloke that averages fifty,and as far as style and grace goes he is up there with Greg Chappell and Martin Crowe as the most bootiful bats to watch.

Pure class.....shame the averages dont agree.

 

[fish eel]

I wouldn't consider Pollock and Ntini weak opposition.

Pollock 2006?

Yep. Weak. Well past his best. Only played in two tests of that series and took 4 wickets.

So Mark Waugh's excuse is that he was only an average batsmen because he faced average bowlers?

Yep, I think mentally Mark Waugh would get comfortable and switch off.

 

[waltzing Meninga]

M.Waugh is defintely a class above Martyn......bootiful to watch when on song.

I know his average isnt as good,and I put this down to his inabilty to turn a ton into a really big score.

He would get to 100 and be in such good touch and try to hit eveything for six.......and give his wicket away too easily.

I rate him as high as a bloke that averages fifty,and as far as style and grace goes he is up there with Greg Chappell and Martin Crowe as the most bootiful bats to watch.

Pure class.....shame the averages dont agree.

Martyn never made a big score either, so the point regarding his average is irrelevant.

In terms of scoring hundreds - Mark waugh scored 20 in 128 matches, while marto scored 13 in hundreds in half the matches Waugh played, so its clear martyn has the better strike rate of scoring hundreds between the 2.

Sure Mark Waugh was great to watch, but that doesn't win you cricket games. You can't say someone is a better player because they were "great to watch"

 

[JJ]

Yep, I think mentally Mark Waugh would get comfortable and switch off.

again, don't let the facts get in the way of a good story or a creative perception...

funnily enough, the bolwers that dismissed Waugh most were Ambrose, Walsh, and Donald - all very good, and all quick! Only played 15 tests against RSA and Donald got him 10 times - does that mean that DOnald was rubbish and Waugh switched off, or Waugh was owned?

Hald as many tests, but the bowlers that dismissed Martyn most were Ambrose, Harmison, Kumble and Vetorri

 

[Red Bear]

Mark wugh was one of the finest batsmen i have sen, but maybe not the smartest. The best to watch tho.

Martyn was simila in that way. i'd take M Waugh over him but he was still an excellent player

 

[Twizzle]

beauty is in the eye of the beholder

how do you define best ?

record, stats, technique, all round ability ?

just look at some one's record and forget everything else they've done ?

not to mention the conditions they bat under and thier opponents who bowl to them

 

[waltzing Meninga]

beauty is in the eye of the beholder

how do you define best ?

record, stats, technique, all round ability ?

just look at some one's record and forget everything else they've done ?

not to mention the conditions they bat under and thier opponents who bowl to them

Fact is the conditions they faced and the bowlers who bowled to them are very similar.

I would assume that everything a player has done is captured in his records................

 

[JJ]

just look at some one's record and forget everything else they've done ?

good point, Waugh has his bowling and slips catching, Martyn has the better performance with the bat...

But we're all forgetting that Waugh should have been banned for life for his disgraceful involvement with bookies...

 

[Twizzle]

good point, Waugh has his bowling and slips catching, Martyn has the better performance with the bat...

But we're all forgetting that Waugh should have been banned for life for his disgraceful involvement with bookies...

since when do you speak for all of us

 

[JJ]

never said I did, just taking your point into account

 

[fish eel]

again, don't let the facts get in the way of a good story or a creative perception...

funnily enough, the bolwers that dismissed Waugh most were Ambrose, Walsh, and Donald - all very good, and all quick! Only played 15 tests against RSA and Donald got him 10 times - does that mean that DOnald was rubbish and Waugh switched off, or Waugh was owned?

I dont see what that means, Donald was a terrific bowler, it was only natural he'd get Mark Waugh out on more than a few occasions. But what about in the crunch? I referred to a test earlier, around '97, on the last day Mark Waugh won that test and owned Donald. Same with Steve Waugh and Ambrose....look how many times Ambrose knocked Waugh over, yet, in the crunch, Tugga came through.

That's the great thing about cricket. So much of it is judgemental....and there are lies, damn lies and statistics. The stats are important, but only tell part of any given story.

I mean, if a players record was the be all and end all, would Shane Warne have ever been picked to play test cricker based on his first class stats? And is Mike Hussey the best since Bradman?

 

[JJ]

I dont see what that means, Donald was a terrific bowler, it was only natural he'd get Mark Waugh out on more than a few occasions. But what about in the crunch? I referred to a test earlier, around '97, on the last day Mark Waugh won that test and owned Donald. Same with Steve Waugh and Ambrose....look how many times Ambrose knocked Waugh over, yet, in the crunch, Tugga came through.

isn't every test performance "the crunch"?? I'd disagree strongly and suggest that Ambrose and Donald came through "in the crunch" just as often, probably moreso that Mark Waugh (certainly) and Steve Waugh (probably).

The batsmen came through "in the crunch" sometimes, but lets take Ambrose

128 wickets @ 21 against Aust - 8 x 5 wicket bags and Mark Waugh dismissed 15 times...

Mark Waugh 4 centuries in 28 tests against the Windies at an average of 41...

I'd say Ambrose 'came through in the crunch' more often there!!

As for Donald, he (like a number of RSA players) was relatively unsucessful against Australia

53 wickets at 31 (10 higher than his career figure), 2 5 wicket bags... but Mark Waugh was 10 of those 53 wickets!!!

Waugh - 2 centuries in 18 tests at 42

So, the argument that he was best against the best attacks has no merit whatsoever - in reality as with his whole career there were brilliant moments, interspersed with a lot of mediocre batting. Stats are not everything, but they are performances, in this case we're not talking about some derivative measure that obscures what really went on - they can't be ignored

 

[lockyno1]

I'd take Waugh every time over Martyn. He could bowl well and is in the top 2-3 fieldmen ever! All-round ability Waugh is so much better than Martyn!

 

[fish eel]

Bottom line for me is this:

Who would I rather watch in full flight?
Mark Waugh

Who I pick in my side, Mark Waugh or Damien Martyn?
Mark Waugh

 

[JJ]

Bottom line for me is this:

Who would I rather watch in full flight?
Mark Waugh

Who I pick in my side, Mark Waugh or Damien Martyn?
Mark Waugh

fair enough

 

[Parra Guru]

I don't know about that article, but I do believe that Damien Martyn has to be one of the most selfish cricketers to ever wear the baggy green and I am glad he's finally gone.

 

[fish eel]

I don't know about that article, but I do believe that Damien Martyn has to be one of the most selfish cricketers to ever wear the baggy green and I am glad he's finally gone.

why so? come on...unload, get it off your chest :lol: ;-)

 

[waltzing Meninga]

Bottom line for me is this:

Who would I rather watch in full flight?
Mark Waugh

Who I pick in my side, Mark Waugh or Damien Martyn?
Mark Waugh

Glad your'e not a selector

Andrew Symonds also looks great in full flight, but I would never pick him in a test side.

 

[fish eel]

Glad your'e not a selector

Andrew Symonds also looks great in full flight, but I would never pick him in a test side.

nor would I.

But the selectors have, so there you go. :lol:

 

[waltzing Meninga]

nor would I.

But the selectors have, so there you go. :lol:

He wouldn't be there if Watson was fit and Marto didn't retire.

Anyway you get my point.