• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
All Rounders ATXI

Wilfred Rhodes | Charles Macartney | Jacques Kallis | Garry Sobers | Aubrey Faulkner | Keith Miller* | Adam Gilchrist +| Ian Botham | Imran Khan | Mike Procter | Richard Hadlee

I was confused between Trevor Goddard and Wilfred Rhodes? I wanted the best spin all rounder, and I assumed Rhodes was better. Anybody know more about him? WG Grace, Eddie Barlow, Kapil Dev, Clive Rice, Shaun Pollock, Shane Watson, Freddie Flintoff, Tony Greig, Mushtaq Mohammad and Vinoo Mankad come the closest. Not counting Wasim Akram and Alan Davidson as all rounders. Better openers, anybody?
 

watson

Banned
All Rounders ATXI

Wilfred Rhodes | Charles Macartney | Jacques Kallis | Garry Sobers | Aubrey Faulkner | Keith Miller* | Adam Gilchrist +| Ian Botham | Imran Khan | Mike Procter | Richard Hadlee

I was confused between Trevor Goddard and Wilfred Rhodes? I wanted the best spin all rounder, and I assumed Rhodes was better. Anybody know more about him? WG Grace, Eddie Barlow, Kapil Dev, Clive Rice, Shaun Pollock, Shane Watson, Freddie Flintoff, Tony Greig, Mushtaq Mohammad and Vinoo Mankad come the closest. Not counting Wasim Akram and Alan Davidson as all rounders. Better openers, anybody?
As strange as it sounds, Wilfred Rhodes was not a true allrounder. When he became a specialist batsman he more-or-less gave up bowling. Although obviously, there must have been a transitional stage where he was competent at both disciplines. However, the greatest of Rhodes is derived exclusively from his bowling skills, not batting.
 

Jager

International Debutant
All-round XI
1. Wilfred Rhodes
2. Trevor Goddard
3. Garfield Sobers
4. Jacques Kallis
5. Keith Miller
6. Aubrey Faulkner
7. Adam Gilchrist †
8. Mike Procter
9. Imran Khan
10. Richard Hadlee
11. Alan Davidson

Who takes the new ball!? Argh!
 

watson

Banned
Incidently, Wildred Rhodes averaged 36.72 (2 centuries) when opening the innings.

Otherwise 23.13 (2 fifties).
 

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
Need Trevor Goddard. Not sure if Charles Macartney qualifies as an allrounder with just 45 wickets in 35 matches.
 

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
Benaud as a spinner in the all rounders XI?

1. Trevor Goddard (6)
2. Jack Gregory (5)
3. Jaques Kallis (10)
4. Garry Sobers (9)
5. Keith Miller (c) (3)
6. Ian Botham (8)
7. Adam Gilchrist (wk)
8. Richie Benaud (7)
9. Imran Khan (2)
10. Richard Hadlee (1)
11. Alan Davidson (4)
 

watson

Banned
Benaud as a spinner in the all rounders XI?

1. Trevor Goddard (6)
2. Jack Gregory (5)
3. Jaques Kallis (10)
4. Garry Sobers (9)
5. Keith Miller (c) (3)
6. Ian Botham (8)
7. Adam Gilchrist (wk)
8. Richie Benaud (7)
9. Imran Khan (2)
10. Richard Hadlee (1)
11. Alan Davidson (4)
I suppose that if Davidson is classed as an allrounder then Richie should be too.
 

watson

Banned
01. Farokh Enginner+
02. Trevor Goddard
03. Jaques Kallis
04. Garfield Sobers
05. Aubrey Faulkner
06. Frank Woolley
07. Keith Miller
08. Mike Proctor
09. Imran Khan*
10. Richie Benaud
11. Richard Hadlee

Engineer was a regular opening batsman for India from 1965 to 1975 so he slots nicely into the No.1 spot.

Also, I like a balanced attack so I've included 3 spinners, or 4 if you count Sobers
 
Last edited:

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
Not sure if we are any closer to a consensus on any of the XI's, but in what order do we rate the different teams so far?
 

doesitmatter

U19 Cricketer
cannot believe Kapil Dev Nikhanj is not there in the allrounders XI..Man had the best record against the best team of the era or may be forever..
 

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
Not sure if we are any closer to a consensus on any of the XI's, but in what order do we rate the different teams so far?
1 Australia
2 West Indies
3 England


The gap is marginal. If no Don, Australia wouldn't be first. In fact I think we'd be third if he was replaced by a Ponting/McCabe/Waugh/Harvey (whoever is next) type.

South Africa, Pakistan and India are next but I haven't worked out the order quite yet, but it's probably the order I've named them.

New Zealand in seventh, followed by Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.
 

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Benaud as a spinner in the all rounders XI?

1. Trevor Goddard (6)
2. Jack Gregory (5)
3. Jaques Kallis (10)
4. Garry Sobers (9)
5. Keith Miller (c) (3)
6. Ian Botham (8)
7. Adam Gilchrist (wk)
8. Richie Benaud (7)
9. Imran Khan (2)
10. Richard Hadlee (1)
11. Alan Davidson (4)
Great team Monk. Two things though. What about Eddie Barlow ahead of Goddard, and Charles Macartney ahead of Gregory? Benaud is a great addition here.
 

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
1 Australia
2 West Indies
3 England


The gap is marginal. If no Don, Australia wouldn't be first. In fact I think we'd be third if he was replaced by a Ponting/McCabe/Waugh/Harvey (whoever is next) type.

South Africa, Pakistan and India are next but I haven't worked out the order quite yet, but it's probably the order I've named them.

New Zealand in seventh, followed by Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.
I think that it is too close to call for the top spot, but for the rest

1) Australia
1a) West Indies

3) South Africa

4) England
5) Pakistan

6) India

7) Sri Lanka
7a) New Zealand
 

Jager

International Debutant
Australia beat WI in batting (Bradman), spin (Warne/O'Reilly/Grimmett) and fielding overall (the latter is my opinion). The pace attacks would be very close - I'd give it to WI but not by all that much. I can't separate SA and England - the batting lineups are too hard to split, England win the spin battle but SA are ahead in fast bowling, Procter being the deciding factor. NZ and SL are hard to split, too, but Hadlee and Bond give NZ the edge.

1. Australia
2. West Indies
3. South Africa/England
5. Pakistan
6. India
7. New Zealand
8. Sri Lanka
9. Zimbabwe
10. Bangladesh
 

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Australia beat WI in batting (Bradman), spin (Warne/O'Reilly/Grimmett) and fielding overall (the latter is my opinion). The pace attacks would be very close - I'd give it to WI but not by all that much. I can't separate SA and England - the batting lineups are too hard to split, England win the spin battle but SA are ahead in fast bowling, Procter being the deciding factor. NZ and SL are hard to split, too, but Hadlee and Bond give NZ the edge.

1. Australia
2. West Indies
3. South Africa/England
5. Pakistan
6. India
7. New Zealand
8. Sri Lanka
9. Zimbabwe
10. Bangladesh
Australia do not beat WI in batting mate. Esp if we take this WI side:
Greenidge | Headley | Viv | Sobers | Lara | Weekes | Walcott +| Marshall | Holding | Garner | Ambrose |

How does
Trumper | Simpson | Bradman | Chappell | Ponting/Border/Waugh/Harvey | Miller | Gilchrist | Warne | Lillee | O'Reilly | McGrath |
beat the above batting line-up?

Pace too is better for Windies. Only in spin does Australia take a major win.

The rest of the list is good.
 

smash84

The Tiger King
Aus and WI up for top spot

I think that it is close b/w Pak, SA and Eng. Do think that SA probably have the edge over Eng and Pak.
 

Jager

International Debutant
Australia do not beat WI in batting mate. Esp if we take this WI side:
Greenidge | Headley | Viv | Sobers | Lara | Weekes | Walcott +| Marshall | Holding | Garner | Ambrose |

How does
Trumper | Simpson | Bradman | Chappell | Ponting/Border/Waugh/Harvey | Miller | Gilchrist | Warne | Lillee | O'Reilly | McGrath |
beat the above batting line-up?

Pace too is better for Windies. Only in spin does Australia take a major win.

The rest of the list is good.
First of all Headley never opened the batting for WI - stupid to play him there. Secondly I am putting Gilchrist in this team, not because I want him there but because everyone else does. Thirdly, your team has no spinner, and WI experienced much less success when they ran all 4 of the quartet together.

So batting only...

Greenidge v Trumper
Headley v Simpson (as an opener, Simpson is tried, tested and bloody good.)
Viv v Bradman
Sobers v Chappell (Chappell is equal to Viv and Bradman beats Sobers, but I didn't switch them even if it would assist my argument.)
Lara v Harvey (draw)
Weekes v Miller
Walcott + v Gilchrist (whilst wicketkeeping, Gilchrist shreds Walcott)
Marshall v Warne (draw)
Holding v Lillee (not by a huge margin)
Garner v O'Reilly (draw)
Ambrose v McGrath (it should be noted McGrath improved a whole lot towards the end of his career)

So it ends 4-4, with WI winning two points in their tail so they do not count for much.

Realistically it's more like 5-3 because of Bradman's crushing of whoever he goes up against should mean he gets 2 points, and for the WI tail victories only being worth half a point since they are far less important.

Then it comes to bowling, your WI side has no spin, whereas Australia has five absolute legend-status bowling options and far more variety.
 

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
Struggle to get anything out of that sort of analysis.

And how is it true that the Windies had less success when they had a four pronged pace attack?
 

Top