The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[smash84]

All Great teams nufan, especially like your Pakistan team. The only trend that is evident is that you consistently went quick over spin for every close decision. Faulkner, and please correct me if I am wrong, was a batsman who could bowl spin a bit and was greatly aided by the matting pitch. Not sure if the W.I would get through 90 overs playing four quicks and to add to that Sobers was a better seamer than spinner. If you do go 4 quicks Dujon is the better keeper choice. Don't want to be accused of Davo hating, but to me Linwall was a bit better, but if one is looking for variety to make up for the loss of the second spinner, Davo is a good pick. Great England team, no romatism picks and Tyson was soooo good.

Yep, I also think NUFAN's Pakistan team looks really good. Its main weakness was batting which has been addressed to some extent.

you davo hater

 

[NUFAN]

Fair enough mate, that explains the lack of Herath.

You can post them in there if you want, don't really see the point of having another thread that's exactly related to this one.

 

[NUFAN]

Yep, I also think NUFAN's Pakistan team looks really good. Its main weakness was batting which has been addressed to some extent.

you davo hater

Pakistan's team was really easy for me. I picked the 3 best bowlers, six best bats and went for the spinner and keeper combo.

 

[Jager]

Don't want to be accused of Davo hating, but to me Linwall was a bit better, but if one is looking for variety to make up for the loss of the second spinner, Davo is a good pick.

I don't understand why Lindwall is better than Davidson to you...

 

[kyear2]

On due reflection if Abbas is batting at 6, might replace him with Mushtaq Mohammad. Gives the team that 5th bowler they need and doesn't hurt the batting that much.

 

[NUFAN]

On due reflection if Abbas is batting at 6, might replace him with Mushtaq Mohammad. Gives the team that 5th bowler they need and doesn't hurt the batting that much.

The sixth spot is always the hardest. For Pakistan I decided the four main bowlers were enough, while for India I went Mankad over better batsman in Hazare/Laxman.

For Pakistan, I feel as though Imran, Wasim and Qadir are very durable bowlers. If necessary Abbas, Younis Khan and Hanif Mohammad can bowl an over or two if the situation ever arrived.

Definitely the fifth bowling spot is weaker compared to say the West Indies and Australia lineups, but I felt Pakistan needed the extra batting to give them a very realistic chance of beating any of the other teams.

 

[Jager]

Don't reckon Qadir would be good enough when outside the subcontinent.

 

[kyear2]

I don't understand why Lindwall is better than Davidson to you...

Davidson's strike rate gives me pause, and while Lindwall's was also high Lindwall went to the West Indies on some pretty flat pitches and destroyed the batting line up with the exception of Walcott, similar to what he and Miller had done in '51 without exception. Lindwall also lost some of his great years to the war. Davidson also benefitted from some weak South African and Indian batting which is always a critism of Sir Everton.
Most importantly speed kills and Lindwall drove fear into his opponents and was the key factor to what was one of the three greatest teams of All Time and in a recent thread we had, it was acknowledged that until Lillee came around, Lindwall was seen as the Greatest Ever Fast Bowler.

Before someone asks about Mcgrath, as I have continuously said, both Mcgrath and Tendulkar makes my All Time XI basically because of their overall weight of numbers and sustained excellence which are impossible to ignore, and Mcgrath's contribution once again to one of the All Time Great teams. I think that Lara and Ambrose, among others were better at their peak and Akram more talented, but Mcgrath just kept going and was a winner.
I do not dislike Davidson, he was an ATG fast bowler, his left hand variety and lower order batting add even more to his value, but like Garner, the average doesn't tell the entire story. For the record was also an ATG bowler, but even tough he has a lower average I still see Holding as being his superior.

 

[smash84]

The sixth spot is always the hardest. For Pakistan I decided the four main bowlers were enough, while for India I went Mankad over better batsman in Hazare/Laxman.

For Pakistan, I feel as though Imran, Wasim and Qadir are very durable bowlers. If necessary Abbas, Younis Khan and Hanif Mohammad can bowl an over or two if the situation ever arrived.

Definitely the fifth bowling spot is weaker compared to say the West Indies and Australia lineups, but I felt Pakistan needed the extra batting to give them a very realistic chance of beating any of the other teams.

Yep. Which is what makes your Pakistan team look quite competitive. I think at their peak Imran, Wasim, and Waqar should be able to give any team a run for their money (I think Imran has the best peak of all post war bowlers and Waqar is right up there too)

Don't reckon Qadir would be good enough when outside the subcontinent.

Agree with you

Actually I feel that all the spinners succeeding Qadir were somewhat better than him. I mean I would probably pick Mushy, Saqlain, and Ajmal over them. I think Ajmal is a really good spinner. Should be an ATG in the coming few years (assuming he plays until 40)

 

[kyear2]

Don't reckon Qadir would be good enough when outside the subcontinent.

Agreed, but I always feel he is over rated anyway. For me personally I would even take Gibbs over him.

Just my take.

 

[smash84]

Agreed, but I always feel he is over rated anyway. For me personally I would even take Gibbs over him.

Just my take.

For once we agree on something

 

[smash84]

Davidson's strike rate gives me pause, and while Lindwall's was also high Lindwall went to the West Indies on some pretty flat pitches and destroyed the batting line up with the exception of Walcott, similar to what he and Miller had done in '51 without exception. Lindwall also lost some of his great years to the war. Davidson also benefitted from some weak South African and Indian batting which is always a critism of Sir Everton.
Most importantly speed kills and Lindwall drove fear into his opponents and was the key factor to what was one of the three greatest teams of All Time and in a recent thread we had, it was acknowledged that until Lillee came around, Lindwall was seen as the Greatest Ever Fast Bowler.

.

I doubt Lindwall would be driving fear into the heart of batsmen like Greenidge or Viv. It might be the other way around

Davo will get the job done because he will get Viv bored as **** and then he will get impatient and play a loose shot and get out.

hence

davo > lindwall

 

[Jager]

Lindy had the benefit of a new ball every 55 overs and was also exceedingly successful when bowling on the flat pitches of the subcontinent.

 

[kyear2]

As far as I understand that was just for one series in '48.

 

[Red]

Davidson was a real workhorse. He got his wickets through attrition and frustrating the batsmen. He was very economical and skilful , but had a high SR because he lacked real strike power. Benaud would bowl and bowl and bowl him, and is on record saying how he'd coerce more and more overs out of him (Largely because the attack was often not much more than Benaud & Davo, with guys like MacKay for support, until McKenzie came along).

Davo is a reasonable choice. But he really lacked the firepower and ability to strike that Lindwall, Lillee and McGrath had.

 

[NUFAN]

Don't reckon Qadir would be good enough when outside the subcontinent.

This is one of those exercises where its impossible to win all the time. For my West Indies and South African teams I picked them with the assumption that I'm tight with the groundsman and can make the pitch tailor made to suit my bowlers. I didn't pick the team with a Chennai dustbowl in mind.

Also, no I didn't look at everyone's home stats in picking my XI's. Realistically 15 man touring parties is probably the easiest way to fix this so you could change your starting XI depending on conditions and series situation.

 

[smash84]

Davidson was a real workhorse. He got his wickets through attrition and frustrating the batsmen. He was very economical and skilful , but had a high SR because he lacked real strike power. Benaud would bowl and bowl and bowl him, and is on record saying how he'd coerce more and more overs out of him (Largely because the attack was often not much more than Benaud & Davo, with guys like MacKay for support, until McKenzie came along).

Davo is a reasonable choice. But he really lacked the firepower and ability to strike that Lindwall, Lillee and McGrath had.

McG also had Warne at the other end which Davo didn't.

Secondly, he only takes what 8 or 9 balls more than McG to strike? Additionally he brings so much more to the team with his batting and fielding. Not to forget that even if he does strike at a slower rate than McG he also gets them out cheaper. Davo is greater value for money

 

[Prince EWS]

Davo's strike rate needs to be taken into context a bit as well, for he played in an era which much slower scoring rates across the board. His performances were the equivalent of someone with a higher average but a lower strike rate in today's game.

 

[NUFAN]

Davidson was a real workhorse. He got his wickets through attrition and frustrating the batsmen. He was very economical and skilful , but had a high SR because he lacked real strike power. Benaud would bowl and bowl and bowl him, and is on record saying how he'd coerce more and more overs out of him (Largely because the attack was often not much more than Benaud & Davo, with guys like MacKay for support, until McKenzie came along).

Davo is a reasonable choice. But he really lacked the firepower and ability to strike that Lindwall, Lillee and McGrath had.

Ever get the feeling that if his captain didn't bowl and bowl and bowl him, that his strike rate might be a little lower?

In an all time team he's not going to be the main go to guy, but having an economical, skillful left arm quick with top stamina who averages 20 is only going to help his bowling partners.

 

[AndyZaltzHair]

Actually I feel that all the spinners succeeding Qadir were somewhat better than him. I mean I would probably pick Mushy, Saqlain, and Ajmal over them. I think Ajmal is a really good spinner. Should be an ATG in the coming few years (assuming he plays until 40)

For me Abdul Qadir is still the best spinner for Pakistan, he's above Mushtaq Ahmed for sure and may be neck and neck/slightly above Saqlain and Ajmal