• 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

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
I think Miller isn't as good as Mock thinks and not as bad as kyear2 is making out.

If you are going to play GIlchrist as your keeper and go in with 2 spinners, Miller at 7 is an excellent choice.
But I agree with your anaylst as I would bat him at 7 and as a 3rd seamer in a 5 man attack, but thats the only way he plays. He is not strong enough of a batsman to earn a place in an ATG scenario and as a bowler his wpm showed he wasn't strong enough to be part of a traditional 4 man attack.

Yeh, I get your point. I'm not a blind advocate for Miller, but I think he was pretty special in terms of being a cricketer. And in my opinion, he is the complete all-rounder.

Had he not been a bowler, he would've been selected as a top 6 batsman. And I can only speculate on this, but I think his test average as a batsman unburdened by bowling would've been a lot closer to 50 than it was. He was a proper top 6 batsman, unlike some others mentioned.

Also, he was without doubt second choice bowler for Australia in his era, and some would argue he was a better pace bowler than Lindwall.

Regarding his wickets per match ratio, he was actually very cleverly captained by Bradman and Hassett. Used as an opening strike bowler for fewer overs than he might've bowled, with Bill Johnston and Lindwall doing the heavy work. Admittedly he had back problems which probably stopped him bowling more than he did as well.

Many of the players listed (Dev, Vettori, Cairns, Khan) were not really top 6 batsmen, and spent a lot of their careers at 7 or 8 in the batting order. Similarly, it's debatable whether Greig or Sobers or some others would be selected as bowlers without their batting. Possibly, but maybe not.

As an overall package Miller was undeniably good though. Top 6 bat, genuine opening bowler. True all rounder. Giving a team the ability to play two spinners and three quicks.




I don't think i'm really saying Miller was better than he was. I'm mostly saying that as a cricketer he adds a ridiculous amount of versatility to a team.
Sobers actually was burdened by a heavier bowling work loan than Miller (230 deliveries pm compared to 190 for Miller) and still maintained his batting average and againts better bowling atacks. But according to your theory wonder where Sobers average would have been without having to bowl all of those overs, plus the rediculous amount of first class cricket he played all over the world.
 
Last edited:

The Sean

Cricketer Of The Year
For me, when it comes to all-rounders it’s always the overall value they add to a cricket team which I consider when picking them, and what you’d gain or lose by picking specialists instead.

There’s always going to be a compromise somewhere - there has never been an all-rounder who batted like Sobers and bowled like Imran, so invariably either your batting or bowling will be weakened to some degree when you pick an all-rounder over a specialist.

It seems that we (CW collectively) are generally more forgiving of a loss of strength in bowling than batting. I suppose this is at least in part a product of the modern era where 6 batsmen/4 bowlers is the norm, the prevailing wisdom being that you need as much batting strength as possible but that four bowlers is enough to take the 20 wickets required. Projecting this into the mythical level-above-Test-cricket match against the Martian XI, the school of thought seems to be that you need a great batsman coming in at 6 – because a merely good one won’t cut it at that level – but that your four bowlers, whoever they are, will unquestionably be enough so that you can get away with Sobers, Kallis or even Hammond as the fifth bowler. A sixth great batsman is a necessity, the thinking seems to be, but a fifth world class bowler is redundant.

I’m not sure I necessarily agree with that, and think the choice for me would often depend on the balance of the team and the opposition. Obviously, if you’ve got a player as great as Sobers available to you then you pick him – the relative loss of bowling quality through having a good rather than great fifth bowler is more than made up for by the extra runs he’ll contribute. But if you decide that this level above Test cricket is going to be run feast – and if, say, you’ve got someone like Gilchrist playing the role essentially of another specialist bat, then I can certainly see the point of playing someone like Miller or Botham. Not great batsmen, but good enough to play their role and score valuable runs and, importantly, giving the bowling attack five exceptional bowlers rather than four. Depending on the Alien XI you’re facing, that might make all the difference.
 

smash84

The Tiger King
Sean, I think at CW we are a little more forgiving for a loss in bowling because the way cricket is by design everybody might be needed to bat but not everybody might needed to bowl. Hence bowling all rounders (the good ones) are highly valued because they are at an ATG level in their core discipline and are competent in the discipline that everybody is required to do (batting).
 

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
Here's my point. I'm going to pick Miller, Sobers and Gilchrist in my ATG team. Here is how I'm going to bat them...

5. Miller
6. Sobers
7. Gilchrist

Because, for the majority of their test careers, these are the positions they batted in.

If I bat them like this...

5. Sobers
6. Gilchrist
7. Miller

they all bat out of the position they batted most in during their test careers.

I'm aware all of this doesn't matter a pinch of **** either way, but i'm batting them the way I see fit!
 

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Here's my point. I'm going to pick Miller, Sobers and Gilchrist in my ATG team. Here is how I'm going to bat them...

5. Miller
6. Sobers
7. Gilchrist

Because, for the majority of their test careers, these are the positions they batted in.

If I bat them like this...

5. Sobers
6. Gilchrist
7. Miller

they all bat out of the position they batted most in during their test careers.

I'm aware all of this doesn't matter a pinch of **** either way, but i'm batting them the way I see fit!
Personally think somebody like Miller would be an excellent influence on the team by bringing harmony, humor and lowering the ego of the dressing room. But, don't think he and Don should be in the same team. Warne and Sobers are already there to chill things. Don certainly shouldn't be captain. Either Warne or Imran (if he is there).

Also, it wouldn't be the worst idea to have Sir Jadeja as 12th man. Would sit well with the other knights.
 

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
XI Who Didn't Get The Chance To Expose Their Full Talents at Test Level

1. Barry Richards
2. Sid Barnes
3. Stewart Dempster
4. WG Grace
5. Archie Jackson
6. Lee Irvine
7. Mike Proctor
8. Garth Le Roux
9. Vincent van der Bijl
10. Rajinder Gael (sp?)
11. Shane Bond

Anyone I missed?
 
Last edited:

Coronis

Cricketer Of The Year
XI Who Didn't Get The Chance To Expose Their Full Talents at Test Level

1. Barry Richards
2. Sid Barnes
3. Stewart Dempster
4. WG Grace
5. Archie Jackson
6. Lee Irvine
7. Mike Proctor
8. Garth Le Roux
9. Vincent van der Bijl
10. Rajinder Gael (sp?)
11. Shane Bond

Anyone I missed?
Clive Rice, Duleep.
 

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
Personally think somebody like Miller would be an excellent influence on the team by bringing harmony, humor and lowering the ego of the dressing room. But, don't think he and Don should be in the same team. Warne and Sobers are already there to chill things. Don certainly shouldn't be captain. Either Warne or Imran (if he is there).

Also, it wouldn't be the worst idea to have Sir Jadeja as 12th man. Would sit well with the other knights.
Well, I guess if the Don and Miller can't be in the same team, someone has to make way.


- Barry Richards
- Len Hutton
- Viv Richards
- Greg Chappell
- Keith Miller (captain)
- Garry Sobers
- Adam Gilchrist
- Wasim Akram
- Shane Warne
- Curtly Ambrose
- Muttiah Muralitharan

:ph34r:
 

smash84

The Tiger King
Well, I guess if the Don and Miller can't be in the same team, someone has to make way.


- Barry Richards
- Len Hutton
- Viv Richards
- Greg Chappell
- Keith Miller (captain)
- Garry Sobers
- Adam Gilchrist
- Wasim Akram
- Shane Warne
- Curtly Ambrose
- Muttiah Muralitharan

:ph34r:
:laugh:
 

MartinB

School Boy/Girl Cricketer
XI Who Didn't Get The Chance To Expose Their Full Talents at Test Level

1. Barry Richards
2. Sid Barnes
3. Stewart Dempster
4. WG Grace
5. Archie Jackson
6. Lee Irvine
7. Mike Proctor
8. Garth Le Roux
9. Vincent van der Bijl
10. Rajinder Gael (sp?)
11. Shane Bond

Anyone I missed?
2 more to consider:

  • Colin McCool, missed most of
    hist potential career due to the second world war. Before the war he was young and competing with O'Rielly / Grimmet etc. After the war he was competing with Miller for the all rounder spot. Bowling Average=26 is not bad for a Leg Spiner and batting Average=35 is Ok for an alrounder.
  • Laurie Nash is another worth reading about.
    I suspect bodyline may have played a part with his career.
 

The Battlers Prince

International Vice-Captain
Personally think somebody like Miller would be an excellent influence on the team by bringing harmony, humor and lowering the ego of the dressing room. But, don't think he and Don should be in the same team. Warne and Sobers are already there to chill things. Don certainly shouldn't be captain. Either Warne or Imran (if he is there).
.
Why should the Don not be captain. I'm wondering if there is any particular reason for him not to be, he had a great mind for his game and over time developed a great overall cricket brain. Anyway, any reasons?
 

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Why should the Don not be captain. I'm wondering if there is any particular reason for him not to be, he had a great mind for his game and over time developed a great overall cricket brain. Anyway, any reasons?
If the team has a majority of average players, and players who need to be pressed a bit to go for victory, then he would be a valuable captain. But in an all time team, I think his attitude would be over kill and perhaps, if not counter productive, of low value. And less fun (which is always a factor) :D
 

Dan

Hall of Fame Member
That actually brings up an interesting discussion - in a thread where we've selected guys based on batting position, slip fielding or longevity alone as tiebreakers, why haven't we equally emphasised good captaincy?

I'd like to see Frank Worrell in the discussion - ATG batsman averaging a shade under 50, arguably the greatest leader of men of all time, and a great tactical captain as well. Should that captaincy not count for something in this discussion - particularly if it is a 'XI to play the Martians' style scenario?
 

smash84

The Tiger King
NO. And Imran is not the best captain.

Pick your team then the best captain from among them.
Of course he is the best captain. Denied a series win in the caribbean in the 1980s due to cheating umpires and the only one to probably take the WI to sword at their home in the 1980s. Series wins in England, India, and SL. Great eye for picking talent and excellent man manager. And not being stupid enough to declare and lose the match (like Garry Sobers :p).
 

Top