The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[jimmy101]

The funny thing is Lara could so easily slide into either an ATG dustbowl XI or an ATG greentop XI.

 

[kyear2]

I actually agree. Was throwing stuff against the wall. Didn't want Sobers in his historical workhorse role. But Murali and Warne are so great and has such amazing stamina, they can practically bowl all day if required.

If using the entire 18 man squad though, woukd still slot Lara in for Richards possibly.

 

[kyear2]

It's in the original post.

 

[kyear2]

I fully understand what you are saying re Hobbs and Imran. Akram is interesting though, the guy made the cricinfo and Wisden all time teams, that's insane. Though it's possible they were factoring in all cricket and were influenced by his odi exploits.

Back on topic, Hobbs was a giant. He (as well as imran) makes my honorary, official 11. But the criteria for my other team is that if invited to a training camp and I got to see them all, the players that I believe would be best suited to win on the field. The very best, don't think there is any doubt that was Richards. Hobbs played in a time with different rules, the lbw one being the most obvious one. There are other concerns, but I'm just not sold that he woukd be as successful or proficient as Hutton and Richards who would also complement each other perfectly.

The bowling is tricky. I'm sold as Marshall, McGrath and Steyn and being the three best. Of the all genuine frontline bowling all rounders, Imran was the best bat, Hadlee the best bowler (But so similar to McGrath) and Proctor the most potential.

On a separate note. I earlier referenced my three way player to make the squad and I selected Kallis by a hair over Chappell and Hammond. By chance watched 2 hours of WSC cricket last night. Hard to choose Kallis over Chappell. Still not sold on Greg's bowling (compared to Kallis) but he was tidy enough, peerless in the cordon and just an amazing bat, that's a difficult decision. The vid also was a brilliant reminder how absolutely gun young Viv was at the crease and surprisingly at 3rd slip. Not quite in that absolute top tier (Simpson, Chappell, Sobers, Hammond, Mahela, Waugh, Hooper etc but just below). Damn.

With regards to your comments regarding McGrath and Hadlee. Yes they were similar types of bowlers with similar career numbers and I do concur that Hadlee is criminally under rated by the larger cricketing community. But I do give McGrath the slight edge because he did it in much more batting friendly conditions. So I still go with McGrath first. At least one of the bowlers can be chosen for that primary role alone and I can forgive and make allowance my no. 11 for not being handy with the bat. I totally get you argument though and see how having Hadlee over McGrath automatically solves the no. 8 and corridor bowler problem in one go. I also try to have guys from different eras and see McGrath and Maco as an unbeatable opening combination.

 

[Bolo]

I fully understand what you are saying re Hobbs and Imran. Akram is interesting though, the guy made the cricinfo and Wisden all time teams, that's insane. Though it's possible they were factoring in all cricket and were influenced by his odi exploits.

Back on topic, Hobbs was a giant. He (as well as imran) makes my honorary, official 11. But the criteria for my other team is that if invited to a training camp and I got to see them all, the players that I believe would be best suited to win on the field. The very best, don't think there is any doubt that was Richards. Hobbs played in a time with different rules, the lbw one being the most obvious one. There are other concerns, but I'm just not sold that he woukd be as successful or proficient as Hutton and Richards who would also complement each other perfectly.

The bowling is tricky. I'm sold as Marshall, McGrath and Steyn and being the three best. Of the all genuine frontline bowling all rounders, Imran was the best bat, Hadlee the best bowler (But so similar to McGrath) and Proctor the most potential.

On a separate note. I earlier referenced my three way player to make the squad and I selected Kallis by a hair over Chappell and Hammond. By chance watched 2 hours of WSC cricket last night. Hard to choose Kallis over Chappell. Still not sold on Greg's bowling (compared to Kallis) but he was tidy enough, peerless in the cordon and just an amazing bat, that's a difficult decision. The vid also was a brilliant reminder how absolutely gun young Viv was at the crease and surprisingly at 3rd slip. Not quite in that absolute top tier (Simpson, Chappell, Sobers, Hammond, Mahela, Waugh, Hooper etc but just below). Damn.

With regards to your comments regarding McGrath and Hadlee. Yes they were similar types of bowlers with similar career numbers and I do concur that Hadlee is criminally under rated by the larger cricketing community. But I do give McGrath the slight edge because he did it in much more batting friendly conditions. So I still go with McGrath first. At least one of the bowlers can be chosen for that primary role alone and I can forgive and make allowance my no. 11 for not being handy with the bat. I totally get you argument though and see how having Hadlee over McGrath automatically solves the no. 8 and corridor bowler problem in one go. I also try to have guys from different eras and see McGrath and Maco as an unbeatable opening combination.

Lillee started a trend. Marshall continued it. The best bowlers of all time were the most complete. Akram was even more complete, and looked so good doing it. Ambrose-mcgrath-steyn showed something different. Pick the most effective thing. Repeat. Don't mix it up much. Akram didn't figure this out and wasn't particularly effective.

He's a leftie, can go round the wicket and offers something with the bat, which is a big deal. And he offers reverse, which almost nobody had got right before him and was a massive plus, almost a reason by itself to pick him. But reverse is better understood. And there is the is the fact that Imran and Steyn are two of the 3 greatest reverse bowlers ever, with so much else to recommend them on.

Anyway, he's legitimate. Balance counts. Just not for me.

Hobbs is the 3rd greatest bat ever in my mindl, clearly. But WG isn't making it, and Hobbs deserves a rethink. I figured he played so long, across eras and conditions that he was ok. But your logic is good and I'm kicking him out. I actually remember you and someone else from reading through this thread a few years ago because I liked your logic a couple of times, so this isn't a first.

I'm not sure about his partner. It's hard to see how Barry would end up wrong, but I'm not sure. And if I do I will want to put g Pollock and Procter in and have a whole team of question marks.


Kallis is underrated. My opinion of him just keeps climbing. Faultless slip to pace until the very end of career, when he was merely excellent. You need someone agile against spin though. I feel like he's probably the second best bat of his era. This still puts him behind Chappell, who is probably behind Hammond if the era is disregarded (why?). IDK much, but.he is as much of a part timer as Chappell until proven otherwise to me.

You never want to see a part timer as your 5th.

You will seldom need overs from a 6th. Variety always helps. If you can find the space.

Kallis went though a whole lot of phases as a bowler with different responsibilities where he aquired or leaned on a different skillset. Pick any bowler and you will find a couple of things that they either can't do at all or you would rather have him do. But he really just did a couple of things at a time. Can't average him out. Can't allow him his career skillset-he isn't an ATG. If there is a way to pay him some dues instead of representing him as a statistically teribble bowler, he deserves a spot

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Akram played almost 20yrs.
With the support of (or the lack of it) bad fielders.
Also Pak team of 90s was a mess especially in the dressing room.

 

[trundler]

Which bowling attack is better:
Hadlee
Marshall
Steyn
Warne

OR
Imran
Marshall
Warne
McGrath

 

[srbhkshk]

So basically Hadlee + Steyn vs Imran + McGrath , I see Imran as the weakest link here by a very small margin. So the first one.

 

[trundler]

So basically Hadlee + Steyn vs Imran + McGrath , I see Imran as the weakest link here by a very small margin. So the first one.

Basically, yes. What if it was Wasim instead of Imran?

 

[srbhkshk]

Basically, yes. What if it was Wasim instead of Imran?

Same imo.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Imran > Wasim with the ball anyway

 

[OverratedSanity]

At that level it's just pointless to try and split hairs between bowling attacks anyway. It's like asking if you'd prefer ****ing Scarlett Johannson or Kate Beckinsale.

Actually that's a bad example since anyone in their right mind would choose Beckinsale.

 

[srbhkshk]

At that level it's just pointless to try and split hairs between bowling attacks anyway. It's like asking if you'd prefer ****ing Scarlett Johannson or Kate Beckinsale.

Actually that's a bad example since anyone in their right mind would choose Beckinsale.

Peak Scarlett Johannason is like Peak Waqar - would be picked every single time.

 

[trundler]

As someone who fancies Imran + McGrath more, I'd shag ScarJo first.

 

[harsh.ag]

At that level it's just pointless to try and split hairs between bowling attacks anyway. It's like asking if you'd prefer ****ing Scarlett Johannson or Kate Beckinsale.

Actually that's a bad example since anyone in their right mind would choose Beckinsale.

**** off

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Which bowling attack is better:
Hadlee
Marshall
Steyn
Warne

OR
Imran
Marshall
Warne
McGrath

There is no Clear better Attack here.

Hadlee, Marshall, Steyn +Warne for me

Because I rate quicks in following order. (Barnes is the best, but I am not sure about his Style)

Akram
Marshall =Hadlee
Steyn = Lillee
Mcgrath = Trueman

1st attack features 3 of my top 7.

 

[kyear2]

Which bowling attack is better:
Hadlee
Marshall
Steyn
Warne

OR
Imran
Marshall
Warne
McGrath

I genuinely have no idea. If I had to rank them I guess it would be
Maco, McGrath, Steyn, Hadlee, Imran.

But not to be the idiot in the room, but what's wrong with

Marshall
Steyn
Warne
McGrath

And asking Maco and Warne to kindly take it seriously. Would that tail be unacceptable.

 

[trundler]

I genuinely have no idea. If I had to rank them I guess it would be
Maco, McGrath, Steyn, Hadlee, Imran.

But not to be the idiot in the room, but what's wrong with

Marshall
Steyn
Warne
McGrath

And asking Maco and Warne to kindly take it seriously. Would that tail be unacceptable.

That is my base attack without batting considerations. I like it. Hopefully my XI wont need runs from my bottom 4 and they would in turn run through sides enough.

 

[kyear2]

Lillee started a trend. Marshall continued it. The best bowlers of all time were the most complete. Akram was even more complete, and looked so good doing it. Ambrose-mcgrath-steyn showed something different. Pick the most effective thing. Repeat. Don't mix it up much. Akram didn't figure this out and wasn't particularly effective.

He's a leftie, can go round the wicket and offers something with the bat, which is a big deal. And he offers reverse, which almost nobody had got right before him and was a massive plus, almost a reason by itself to pick him. But reverse is better understood. And there is the is the fact that Imran and Steyn are two of the 3 greatest reverse bowlers ever, with so much else to recommend them on.

Anyway, he's legitimate. Balance counts. Just not for me.

Hobbs is the 3rd greatest bat ever in my mindl, clearly. But WG isn't making it, and Hobbs deserves a rethink. I figured he played so long, across eras and conditions that he was ok. But your logic is good and I'm kicking him out. I actually remember you and someone else from reading through this thread a few years ago because I liked your logic a couple of times, so this isn't a first.

I'm not sure about his partner. It's hard to see how Barry would end up wrong, but I'm not sure. And if I do I will want to put g Pollock and Procter in and have a whole team of question marks.


Kallis is underrated. My opinion of him just keeps climbing. Faultless slip to pace until the very end of career, when he was merely excellent. You need someone agile against spin though. I feel like he's probably the second best bat of his era. This still puts him behind Chappell, who is probably behind Hammond if the era is disregarded (why?). IDK much, but.he is as much of a part timer as Chappell until proven otherwise to me.

You never want to see a part timer as your 5th.

You will seldom need overs from a 6th. Variety always helps. If you can find the space.

Kallis went though a whole lot of phases as a bowler with different responsibilities where he aquired or leaned on a different skillset. Pick any bowler and you will find a couple of things that they either can't do at all or you would rather have him do. But he really just did a couple of things at a time. Can't average him out. Can't allow him his career skillset-he isn't an ATG. If there is a way to pay him some dues instead of representing him as a statistically teribble bowler, he deserves a spot

Yes Kallis is underrated, his stats are amazing and he was so reliable with a good technique. But I saw him bat, and for me I the era I would rate the batsmen
Tendulkar = Lara > Ponting > Kallis. He just didn't impress me or leave me in awe or scaredme like the others.

From a historical perspective as an (batting) all rounder (leaving out sobers as I rate as many others would Bradman for batsmen) / "three way" cricketer he is in rare company. He is comparable only to Wally Hammond and Greg Chappell. And even though none were exactly game changers with the ball and Hammond and Kallis in particular reluctant bowling contributors, they all served a valuable role to their respective teams with Kallis easily being the best bowler.

But how would you guys rate in order Hammond, Chappell and Kallis as overall cricketers. Or which would you choose for the 16 man touring squad for the all time XI.

For me in a team with colleagues like Viv and Don, probably don't need an imposing batsman, and purely as a batsman I would probably rate Kallis just below Chappell and again just ahead of Hammond. Even though he would probably rate 3rd behind the brilliance of the other 2, he wasn't that far behind and nothing short of excellent in the cordon and of course he was by far the most productive bowler. Though if Hammond could have been persuaded to bowl more he possibly could have been been just as inpactful. If I recall correctly even Bradman rated his bowling.

Difficult choice, but while my heart says Chappell, my head says Kallis

 

[Bolo]

Best pure bats of relevant times middle order:
Bradman
Sobers
Viv
Tendulkar
Chappell
Kallis

If you need to ditch someone- worst 3-tenduklar doesn't bowl. Chappell is a handy part timer. Hope to never see him bowl, but good for backup. Kallis is an allrounder and proper 5th bowler. I guess you decide by conditions.

Righ now, my second name chosen is Pollock, but you area bit crowded