The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[smash84]

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

exactly why do you say this?

 

[Red]

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.

Yeh, good point. I do get the feeling that he wasn't quite as potent as Lindwall, but perhaps if he didn't shoulder such a load he'd be better....

I personally think Lillee and McGrath are non-negotiables. Lindwall and Davidson for the last spot, but if you play Miller, neither of them are probably included.

 

[AndyZaltzHair]

exactly why do you say this?

Abdul Qadir was down right legend and revolutionized spin for Pakistan; he was the leading leg spinner at the time and from what I've read many including Imran Khan spoke highly of him and about his variations. He was very aggressive and always looked to pick up wickets. Batsmen he got- Viv Richards (3), Sunil Gavaskar (3), Gordon Greenidge (3), Martin Crowe (3)- speaks volume about his ability. Although his and Mushy's stats run close and Mushy has slightly better SR, I tend to believe Qadir was better than Mushy.

 

[smash84]

Abdul Qadir was down right legend and revolutionized spin for Pakistan; he was the leading leg spinner at the time and from what I've read many including Imran Khan spoke highly of him and about his variations. He was very aggressive and always looked to pick up wickets. Batsmen he got- Viv Richards (3), Sunil Gavaskar (3), Gordon Greenidge (3), Martin Crowe (3)- speaks volume about his ability. Although his and Mushy's stats run close and Mushy has slightly better SR, I tend to believe Qadir was better than Mushy.

having seen a bit of both (much more so of Mushy) I would say that Qadir was decent and nothing extraordinary. He was the first of his kind in a way (with his flippers and googlies) but he was not very effective in a lot of away series that he played. He was very hot and cold. Mushy learned his trade from Qadir and I thought was slightly more accurate than Qadir (which isn't saying much )

Saqlain and Ajmal are better than both the leggies IMO. Both Ajmal and Saqlain also attack most of the time and get wickets quicker and cheaper.

 

[Spooony]

So basically you guys are arguing who was the better chucker. Qadir, Ajmal or Saqlain?

 

[smash84]

So basically you guys are arguing who was the better chucker. Qadir, Ajmal or Saqlain?

hahahahhaha......man, you are hilarious

 

[Jager]

I really think the whole bias against Davidson might be down to the fact he wasn't express. For me that doesn't make any sense at all

 

[smash84]

I really think the whole bias against Davidson might be down to the fact he wasn't express. For me that doesn't make any sense at all

indeed.

That's like saying that Lillee was better than McGrath because he could do everything that McGrath could (except take wickets cheaper) and he could do it 10 miles quicker

 

[Dan]

I really think the whole bias against Davidson might be down to the fact he wasn't express. For me that doesn't make any sense at all

From everything I've read, he was never described as a medium pacer. I think he was a bit above mid-range in terms of pace.

 

[Flametree]

I'll weigh in on the Pakistan spinner debate... I've never quite understood the status Qadir has. Yes he was the first decent leggie in a while, and when he got his googly right it was a thing of beauty (still remember him bowling Jeff Crowe with one, Crowe probably still doesn't have a clue what happened), and yes, numbers aren't everything.... but he still bowled alongside two other spinners, Tauseef and Iqbal Qasim, who had better numbers (and in Qasim's case, considerably better - 28.1 vs 32.8 and barely a difference in strike rate). Most of the arguments in Qadir's favour (overseas pitches, umpires not being kind to spinners) also apply to the others.

 

[ankitj]

Vinoo Mankad was more of a batting all rounder was he? What position did he usually bat in?

He was a balanced all rounder I'd say. With Imran, Wasim, Waqar and Murali, guess you can do with a slightly lesser bowler. Mankad was no slouch with ball either, and his SLA will compliment Murali's off spin very well, hence making it a 3 pacers and 2 spinners attack. Kapil Dev, even though a greater bowler, would not add any extra value or dimension in the bowling given presence of other 3 great pacers.

Mankad played in both middle order and as opener. In fact, one option could be to play Mankad as opener with Gavaskar and then add extra depth in the batting by adding Jaywardene or Inzamam in the middle order. In general I feel Mankad is quite underrated. He certainly deserves to be mentioned more when talking about all rounders.

 

[AndyZaltzHair]

Here's a video i enjoyed: Abdul Qadir

 

[marc71178]

He was a balanced all rounder I'd say. With Imran, Wasim, Waqar and Murali, guess you can do with a slightly lesser bowler.

With those 4 you can pick an extra batsman.

 

[AndyZaltzHair]

He was a balanced all rounder I'd say. With Imran, Wasim, Waqar and Murali, guess you can do with a slightly lesser bowler. Mankad was no slouch with ball either, and his SLA will compliment Murali's off spin very well, hence making it a 3 pacers and 2 spinners attack. Kapil Dev, even though a greater bowler, would not add any extra value or dimension in the bowling given presence of other 3 great pacers.

Mankad played in both middle order and as opener. In fact, one option could be to play Mankad as opener with Gavaskar and then add extra depth in the batting by adding Jaywardene or Inzamam in the middle order. In general I feel Mankad is quite underrated. He certainly deserves to be mentioned more when talking about all rounders.

I guess with Imran, Wasim and Waqar there, Kapil would not add much value with the ball, it's true. I think a decent fifth bowling option is needed though, tempting to put Mankad/Mushtaq in the line up who could do the job with the bat as well. Mankad got all of his centuries opening the innings including a double ton and I also feel he is underrated. The thing with Inzi/Jaya/Hazare in this line up is that with no 3, no 4 and no 5 locked with Dravid, Sachin and Miandad, I'm not sure of placing Inzi/Jaya/Hazare at no 6 and pushing batsman of Sanga's caliber into no 7 or vice versa. The solution in my mind atm-

1. Sunil Gavaskar
2. Hanif Mohammad
3. Rahul Dravid
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. Javed Miandad
6. Kumar Sangakkara+
7. Vinoo Mankad
8. Imran Khan*
9. Wasim Akram
10. Waqar Younis
11. Muttiah Muralitharan

 

[ankitj]

With those 4 you can pick an extra batsman.

What is a subcontinent team without at least 2 spinners! Also, a decent fifth bowling option is really important IMO. You see it when watching a real test match that teams without a fifth bowler are forced to send a pie chucker.

I guess with Imran, Wasim and Waqar there, Kapil would not add much value with the ball, it's true. I think a decent fifth bowling option is needed though, tempting to put Mankad/Mushtaq in the line up who could do the job with the bat as well. Mankad got all of his centuries opening the innings including a double ton and I also feel he is underrated. The thing with Inzi/Jaya/Hazare in this line up is that with no 3, no 4 and no 5 locked with Dravid, Sachin and Miandad, I'm not sure of placing Inzi/Jaya/Hazare at no 6 and pushing batsman of Sanga's caliber into no 7 or vice versa. The solution in my mind atm-

1. Sunil Gavaskar
2. Hanif Mohammad
3. Rahul Dravid
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. Javed Miandad
6. Kumar Sangakkara+
7. Vinoo Mankad
8. Imran Khan*
9. Wasim Akram
10. Waqar Younis
11. Muttiah Muralitharan

That looks about perfect

 

[smash84]

I guess with Imran, Wasim and Waqar there, Kapil would not add much value with the ball, it's true. I think a decent fifth bowling option is needed though, tempting to put Mankad/Mushtaq in the line up who could do the job with the bat as well. Mankad got all of his centuries opening the innings including a double ton and I also feel he is underrated. The thing with Inzi/Jaya/Hazare in this line up is that with no 3, no 4 and no 5 locked with Dravid, Sachin and Miandad, I'm not sure of placing Inzi/Jaya/Hazare at no 6 and pushing batsman of Sanga's caliber into no 7 or vice versa. The solution in my mind atm-

1. Sunil Gavaskar
2. Hanif Mohammad
3. Rahul Dravid
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. Javed Miandad
6. Kumar Sangakkara+
7. Vinoo Mankad
8. Imran Khan*
9. Wasim Akram
10. Waqar Younis
11. Muttiah Muralitharan

nice team

 

[marc71178]

What is a subcontinent team without at least 2 spinners! Also, a decent fifth bowling option is really important IMO. You see it when watching a real test match that teams without a fifth bowler are forced to send a pie chucker.

In that case you surely need to pick an ATG 5th bowler as any "decent" bowler would be pie-chucker at this level.

How many teams in world cricket actually have a 5th bowler then?

 

[ankitj]

In that case you surely need to pick an ATG 5th bowler as any "decent" bowler would be pie-chucker at this level.

How many teams in world cricket actually have a 5th bowler then?

Irrespective of whether they have a 5th bowler or not, they always use one. Mankad is about as good as Kallis, and I will happily take Kallis as a 5th bowler in an all time team.

 

[Prince EWS]

In that case you surely need to pick an ATG 5th bowler as any "decent" bowler would be pie-chucker at this level.

If you assume that the jump from Test cricket to this theoretical level of cricket is similar to the jump between domestic cricket to Test cricket, Mankad's bowling would be about the equivalent to someone like Hafeez, who has been very useful at times at Test level.

 

[watson]

Australia
01. Bob Simpson
02. Bill Lawry
03. Don Bradman*
04. Greg Chappell
05. Keith Miller
06. Allan Border
07. Adam Gilchrist+
08. Ray Lindwall
09. Shane Warne
10. Dennis Lillee
11. Bill O’Reilly

Comments
Bill Lawry just edges out Victor Trumper as he has a proven technique and temperament against genuine fast bowling. It is not clear how Victor Trumper would cope with a new ball attack of Malcolm Marshall and Michael Holding, or Alan Donald and Neil Adcock. Bob Simpson and Bill Lawry also have a wonderful record as opening partners, and are second only to Jack Hobbs and Herbert Sutcliffe.

Allan Border’s role at No.6 is to consolidate the innings and protect the tail. This allows Keith Miller to act as a ‘pinch hitter’ and therefore accelerate the innings. A slightly weaker middle-order, but stronger bowling attack, is justified because the batting skills of Adam Gilchrist make-up the deficit.

The most difficult choices were leaving out Glenn McGrath and Alan Davidson for Dennis Lillee and Ray Lindwall. However, there is little need for two ‘corridor’ bowlers so Dennis Lillee takes the new ball with Ray Lindwall who is almost equivalent to Alan Davidson in batting. Both these fast bowlers are superior to Alan Davidson in bowling.


England
01. Jack Hobbs
02. Len Hutton
03. Walter Hammond
04. Dennis Compton
05. Maurice Leyland
06. Peter May*
07. Alan Knott+
08. Hedley Verity
09. John Snow
10. Fred Trueman
11. Sydney Barnes

Comments
It was tempting to play Len Hutton at No.5 because he nominated himself to bat in that position while drafting his own ATG England team in 1977. However, Len Hutton deservedly gets his preferred No.2 spot over Herbert Sutcliffe because of his record against Lindwall and Miller. Hammond, Compton, Leyland, and May are expert middle-order batsman and I can’t imagine that either Herbert Sutcliffe or Len Hutton would be a significant improvement on any of them if played out of position in a real Test match. Leyland is an unusual choice but remains one of England’s best players of spin bowling. He is famed for his skill and ease when batting against Bill O’Reilly and Clarrie Grimmett.

Ian Botham is omitted because he is not good enough to bat at No.6 and would subsequently leave the tail vulnerable. He is also inferior to John Snow, Fred Trueman, and Sydney Barnes in bowling. Harold Larwood is not selected because his only significant series coincided with atypical field placings. He makes way for John Snow who dominated more than one away series in their own right. His 27 wickets at 18.66 runs a piece against Garfield Sober’s team in the West Indies (1967-68), and his 31 wickets at 22.83 runs a piece against Bill Lawry’s side in Australia (1970-71) remain pivotal to English fast bowling lore.

There is very little difference between the skills of Jim Laker and Hedley Verity. However, Hedley Verity is more able to bat at No.8 and was revered by Bradman who admitted that he ‘did not have a breaking point’ like other great bowlers.


West Indies
01. Gordon Greenidge
02. Roy Fredericks
03. Viv Richards*
04. Brian Lara
05. George Headley
06. Garfield Sobers
07. Jeff Dujon+
08. Malcolm Marshall
09. Michael Holding
10. Curtly Ambrose
11. Lance Gibbs

Comments
The first difficulty was deciding who to partner Gordon Greenidge in the opening spot. Roy ‘Kid Cement’ Fredericks gets the nod because he had the skill and audacity to counter-attack the fast bowlers of the 1970s.

The second difficulty was deciding between Curtly Ambrose and Andy Roberts. Curtly Ambrose is preferred because his brilliance kept the West Indian team great for far longer than they should have been.

Lastly, Jackie Hendricks is a brilliant wicket keeper, but neither he nor Malcolm Marshall are a natural No.7. Consequently the agile Jeff Dujon comes into the team because of his unblemished record that lasts a full decade. His batting average of 31.94 is suitably adequate.


South Africa
01. Barry Richards
02. Bruce Mitchell
03. Jacques Kallis
04. Graeme Pollock
05. Dudley Nourse*
06. Aubrey Faulkner
07. John Waite+
08. Mike Procter
09. Hugh Tayfield
10. Alan Donald
11. Neil Adcock

Comments
This team virtually picks itself with the only difficulty being the selection of Bruce Mitchell over Graeme Smith.

Because John Waite and Mike Procter follow Aubrey Faulkner the batting skills of Shaun Pollock are not required. Neil Adcock therefore comes into the team as he matches Alan Donald for pace, skill, and aggression.


India
01. Sunny Gavaskar
02. Virenda Sehwag
03. Rahul Dravid
04. Sachin Tendulkar
05. Vijay Hazare
06. Vinoo Mankad
07. Farouk Engineer+
08. Kapil Dev*
09. Javagal Srinath
10. Erapalli Prasanna
11. Bhagwath Chandrasekhar

Comments
Since India has a lack of quality fast bowlers there is little choice but to select attacking spinners such as Erapalli Prasanna and Bhagwath Chandrasekhar who are expensive but both capable of bowling an ‘unplayable ball’. There is little difference in skill between Bhagwath Chandrasekhar and Subhash Gupte. It is significant that their Strike Rates in England , Australia, and the West Indies are similar or better than their Strike Rate in India. This is unusual for an Indian spinner and hence gives both bowlers an edge over other spinners such as Anil Kumble. However, Bhagwath Chandrasekhar gets the nod as it was his magnificent bowling in 1971 that gave India their first series win in England.


Pakistan
01. Saeed Anwar
02. Hanif Mohammad
03. Younis Khan
04. Javed Miandad
05. Inzamam ul-Haq
06. Mushtaq Mohammad
07. Imran Khan*
08. Wasim Bari+
09. Wasim Akram
10. Saqlain Mushtaq
11. Waqar Younis

Comments
Younis Khan gains the No.3 spot as he averages 50.81 in that position. Zaheer Abbas was a prime candidate but was not included because of his dismal record against pace bowling. In 15 innings against the West Indies he averaged only18.50. When facing Richard Hadlee’s New Zealand he averaged slightly worse, 17.83.

Saqlain Mushtaq was preferred over Abdul Qadir because of his better consistency. The off-spin of Saqlain Mushtaq also allows the inclusion of Mushtaq Mohammad who averaged 29.22 with his leg-spin.

The No.5 spot came down to a two way tussle between Inzamam ul-Haq and Yousuf Youhana. Inzamam ul-haq is included because of his slightly better record against fast bowling.


New Zealand
01. Glenn Turner
02. Stewie Dempster
03. Bert Sutcliffe
04. Martin Crowe
05. Martin Donnelly
06. John Reid*
07. Daniel Vettori
08. Richard Hadlee
09. Ian Smith+
10. Shane Bond
11. Jack Cowie

Comments
The selection of the New Zealand team was straight forward with the only consideration being whether Chris Cairns or Daniel Vettori should gain the No.7 spot. Daniel Vettori gives the attack balance and variety and is therefore included.


Sri Lanka
01. Sanath Jayasuriya
02. Marvan Atapattu
03. Kumar Sangakarra
04. Aravinda de Silva
05. Mahela Jayawardene*
06. Thilan Samareewa
07. Prasanna Jayawardene+
08. Chaminda Vaas
09. Ashantha de Mel
10. Rumesh Ratnayake
11. Muttiah Muralitharan

Comments
In order to win a Test match the skills of Kumar Sangakarra will need to be uninterrupted by wicket-keeping. The talented Prasanna Jayawardene therefore comes into the side. Ashantha de Mel is included because he is apparently the only Sri Lankan bowler of genuine pace and accuracy.Lasith Malinga was considered but offers no real benefit over Rumesh Ratnayake who gained good respect in the 1980s.