The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[honestbharani]

That David Boon's side is not bad at all.. I would venture to say if I could replace Viv with Lara and Border with Sachin, that might just be my Dream XI...


And amazing that Sobers is the most selected out of the players in those ATG teams..

 

[Lillian Thomson]

And amazing that Sobers is the most selected out of the players in those ATG teams..

Are you being ironic, or do you really think that's amazing that the greatest all-rounder ever who's good enough to get in purely as a batsman is the most selected?

 

[G.I.Joe]

Are you being ironic, or do you really think that's amazing that the greatest all-rounder ever who's good enough to get in purely as a batsman is the most selected?

His statement carries the obvious implication that 99.94 isn't the most selected player. If true, I'd go with "amazing" too.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

His statement carries the obvious implication that 99.94 isn't the most selected player. If true, I'd go with "amazing" too.

Not all that obvious. If that is the meaning why not just say it's amazing that everyone didn't choose Bradman. I don't see anyone not picking Bradman unless they're using a specific criteria for which he doesn't qualify.

 

[OverratedSanity]

His statement carries the obvious implication that 99.94 isn't the most selected player. If true, I'd go with "amazing" too.

It's pretty obvious that several of those XIs seem to be "XI I've seen" or "played with/against". Not necessarily all time.

 

[harsh.ag]

Probably people picking from those they have seen

 

[Lillian Thomson]

He also said in the same statement that replacing Viv with Border would make it a Dream XI.

 

[honestbharani]

Well, I did mean that it was amazing there seems to be that many people who selected Sobers but did not select Bradman. If we ever get a breakdown of how many of these were really because of the "best XI I have seen" deal, it will be enlightening. To me, it is just proof of how highly Sobers is regarded amongst the guys who did play the game at very high levels, compared to so many of us who just go by stats.

 

[watson]

While we're on the topic of Sobers, here are what some of his contemporaries have to say about him.

BOYCOTT
6) Garfield Sobers
Blessed with so much natural talent, gifted beyond imagination, a natural genius, he allied all that to concentration, determination and great stamina, which allowed him to play long innings and make big scores. If you’re picking any side he’s got to be number one because he can win you the game with his batting or bowling.

BRADMAN
5) Garfield Sobers
Garry would be in my team for his batting alone…Garry was by far the best player of short-pitched fast bowlers I ever saw. He was absolutely murderous, miraculous. He mastered anyone.

G. CHAPPELL
6) Garfield Sobers
He was the best all-round cricketer that I have ever seen and am ever likely to see. He could have played in any team as a fast bowler or as a batsman alone. Garry would walk into any side and be the outstanding player. He is the best batsman I have ever seen.

GAVASKAR
6) Garfield Sobers
The greatest cricketer ever – he could do anything. He could bat, bowl fast, bowl spin and was a great fielder anywhere. He could have kept wicket if he wanted to, and would have made a good job of it too. When you consider he batted at number six for most of his career and still got 26 hundreds, took over 200 Test wickets and over a hundred catches, you couldn’t find a better all-round cricketer than him.

HARVEY
6) Garfield Sobers
The best all-rounder I have ever seen in my life. He could annihilate any bowler, was a good left-arm seamer, a great fielder and could also bowl his spinners.

ILLINGWORTH
6) Garfield Sobers
Easily the best all-rounder the world has seen. He’s as good a batsman as has ever been produced and would make this team in that role alone. He was also a fine left-arm bowler and a great fielder.

LLOYD
6) Garfield Sobers
The best thing on two legs; simply the greatest player that ever walked on to a cricket field.

McKENZIE
7) Garfield Sobers
I played a lot of cricket against him and it’s hard to imagine that you could find a better all-rounder than Sobers. I would rank him in the top three batsmen that I ever bowled to. As a swing bowler, when he put his mind to it, he could be as sharp as anyone. He also bowled useful wrist spin when the conditions suited.

MAJID KHAN
5) Garfield Sobers
He would be in the team just as a wrist spinner, never mind his ferocious batting. He’s a four-in-one cricketer and on every type of pitch. He would have to be the best all-rounder ever because of the versatility in his bowling.

MUSHTAQ MOHAMMAD
6) Garfield Sobers
He is the greatest human being that ever walked on a cricket field in all departments of the game. Batting, bowling, fielding – he was superlative.

G. POLLOCK
5) Garfield Sobers
A genius all-round cricketer. As far as I am concerned there has never been a better all-rounder than him in first-class cricket. He was explosive with both bat and ball and a marvellous fielder too.

PRASANNA
5) Garfield Sobers
In only my second Test, when on tour in the Caribbean, I realised what a great player he was, when he scored 153 and took a few wickets as well. There cannot have been a better all-rounder.

PROCTER
6) Garfield Sobers
The greatest all-rounder the world has seen and is likely to see. He was great whether batting, bowling or fielding. He could bowl spin or seam, and when he came off his long run he could be really quick.

B. RICHARDS
6) Garfield Sobers
He could make a Test side as a batsman, bowler or a fielder, which is an amazing feat; the complete cricketer.

ROBERTS
7) Garfield Sobers
His record says it all. He is the greatest cricketer that ever lived. It’s pretty obvious that he is the best all-rounder of all time, but he is also not far from being the best batsman as well.

TYSON
6) Garfield Sobers
He was a three-in-one bowler and a genius with the bat. Could win matches with the ball, was a tremendous catcher close to the wicket and with the bat at number six he was not a very pleasant prospect for a tiring attack.

UNDERWOOD
6) Garfield Sobers
Garry is the greatest of them all. I was young and impressionable when I first played against him and it could be intimidating with him standing there. He was frustrating to bowl to: after one delivery he would say ‘well bowled’, and then, when I bowled an identical ball, he would hit it for four. That’s what geniuses are able to do.

VALENTINE
6) Garfield Sobers
I believe that he blossomed into the best all-rounder this world has ever seen: a great batsman, superb fielder and he could bowl spin or fast-medium pace.

WALCOTT
6) Garfield Sobers
The best all-round cricketer I have ever seen and a natural ball player. As a batsman he had the ability to pick up the ball early and get in to the perfect position to play his shots. As a bowler he could bowl seam or orthodox spin and either role would have got him in to a Test team. When bowling seam, he wasn’t as quick as guys like Lindwall and Miller, but he swung the ball a lot.

WALTERS
6) Garfield Sobers
The best cricketer that I ever played with or against, certainly the best all-rounder, possibly the greatest batsman too.

ZAHEER ABBASS
4) Garfield Sobers
I didn’t play that much against him, but he was the complete cricketer. We played together for a World XI team in Australia in 1971–72 when he was my captain. He wasn’t just a good captain, he was a good batsman, spinner, paceman, fielder, everything. His name would still be prominent in a World XI in many years to come.

What I get from the quotes is that we tend to devalue his bowling because his stats aren't quite up to scratch. However, those players who saw him up close, or had to face him, rate his bowling highly. Some like Clive Lloyd are happy to have him as the first change seamer so they can pick 2 spinners in their ATG XI (ie. Lillee - Marshall - Sobers - Benaud - Laker)

 

[smash84]

Unfortunately, the book doesn't have Allan Border's XI smali.

However, here is Boon's team with Border in it;



Not sure why Marshall bats above Hadlee. Healy is a contentious but understandable choice over Gilchrist.

Note: Not sure how many of these teams we can quote before we breach copywrite.

That book doesn't feature his XI in it. But I have Allan Border's "Cricket as I see it" in which Border does select his dream teams.

World XI (from those who played against Border)

Gavaskar
Greenidge
Richards
Tendulkar
Lara
Botham
Knott (wk)
Akram
Marshall
Garner
Qadir
12th man: Ambrose

He mentions ABDV as one of his current favourites.

Australia XI (from those who played with him)

Hayden
Taylor
Boon
G.Chappell
S.Waugh
M.Waugh
Healy (wk)
Warne
Lillee
McGrath
Thomson

12th man: Alderman

Gilly seems to be one of his favourites.

thanks guys

 

[Coronis]

Yeah a lot of teams were selected from players they've seen, or played against and with. Or players they've seen plus Sobers and Bradman.

 

[watson]

Pace Wicket XI
01. Len Hutton
02. Sunil Gavaskar
03. Stan McCabe
04. Viv Richards
05. Garry Sobers
06. Allan Border
07. Alan Knott
08. Imran Khan
09. Michael Holding
10. Dennis Lillee
11. Jeff Thomson



Spinners Wicket XI
01. Len Hutton
02. Victor Trumper
03. Brian Lara
04. Neil Harvey
05. Maurice Leyland
06. Jacques Kallis
07. Adam Gilchrist
08. Shane Warne
09. Jim Laker
10. Bill O'Reilly
11. Sydney Barnes

 

[bagapath]

Some like Clive Lloyd are happy to have him as the first change seamer so they can pick 2 spinners in their ATG XI (ie. Lillee - Marshall - Sobers - Benaud - Laker)

It was very interesting to see that Lloyd went for Benaud and Laker - besides the kind of obvious choices of Lillee and Marshall - and not for two more fast bowlers. Forget legends like Imran, Hadlee, Trueman, McGrath, Donald, Davidson and Akram... just from the pool of speedsters who served under Lloyd he could have picked any two of Holding, Garner, Roberts and Croft or even from the later day real life combo of Ambrose, Walsh and Bishop he could easily have selected two more and built a four man Caribbean pace battery like he did in his days as Windies skipper. Was pleasantly surprised to read that he actually wanted variety in his bowling attack and not additional firepower.

 

[Coronis]

Some players (Lawrence Rowe I think?) went with an all pace attack. Glenn McGrath had surprisingly few mentions, though some teams were received in the late nineties. Hadlee turned up in a lot of teams, which was a pleasant surprise

 

[Howe_zat]

England post war

1. Hutton
2. Cook
3. Barrington
4. Compton
5. Pietersen
6. Grieg
7. Botham
8. Knott
9. Trueman
10. Bedser
11. Underwood

 

[Lillian Thomson]

It was very interesting to see that Lloyd went for Benaud and Laker - besides the kind of obvious choices of Lillee and Marshall - and not for two more fast bowlers. Forget legends like Imran, Hadlee, Trueman, McGrath, Donald, Davidson and Akram... just from the pool of speedsters who served under Lloyd he could have picked any two of Holding, Garner, Roberts and Croft or even from the later day real life combo of Ambrose, Walsh and Bishop he could easily have selected two more and built a four man Caribbean pace battery like he did in his days as Windies skipper. Was pleasantly surprised to read that he actually wanted variety in his bowling attack and not additional firepower.

It's no surprise that Clive Lloyd would pick two spinners. He was always of the opinion that you pick your best bowlers and not a spinner for the sake of it. After Lance Gibbs retired they came to England with Padmore and Jumadeen. They played one Test each but he decided that no matter what the conditions were Holding, Roberts, Daniel and Holder were still better options than an inadequate spinner.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Not all that obvious. If that is the meaning why not just say it's amazing that everyone didn't choose Bradman. I don't see anyone not picking Bradman unless they're using a specific criteria for which he doesn't qualify.

Would it help if we typed slower for your benefit?

 

[G.I.Joe]

It's pretty obvious that several of those XIs seem to be "XI I've seen" or "played with/against". Not necessarily all time.

That is indeed true. Nevertheless it does not make it any tougher to interpret what HB was attempting to convey.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Would it help if we typed slower for your benefit?

No. If you think someone posting that it's amazing that Sobers was most selected is an obvious reference to Don Bradman I'm quite happy to bow to your superior intellect.

 

[G.I.Joe]

No. If you think someone posting that it's amazing that Sobers was most selected is an obvious reference to Don Bradman I'm quite happy to bow to your superior intellect.

Are you always this touchy?