Page 50 of 209 FirstFirst ... 40484950515260100150 ... LastLast
Results 736 to 750 of 3131
Like Tree147Likes

Thread: The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

  1. #736
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Pakistan
    Posts
    21,417
    Let me dig up some useful threads for you to realize how useful Davo really was
    And smalishah's avatar is the most classy one by far Jan certainly echoes the sentiments of CW

    Yeah we don't crap in the first world; most of us would actually have no idea what that was emanating from Ajmal's backside. Why isn't it roses and rainbows like what happens here? PEWS's retort to Ganeshran on Daemon's picture depicting Ajmal's excreta

  2. #737
    State 12th Man Flametree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    700
    Questions for KYear...

    So was it "intellectually dishonest" of the Australian selectors in the 90s to pick David Boon at 3? or the English selectors when they picked Vaughan or Butcher to play and not open....

    (Given the bowling line-ups these alltime sides will be facing in the mythical contest we're considering, I think having a 3rd opener to come in at 3 is a pretty sensible strategy myself...)

    If you can't play Hutton and Sutcliffe together because you don't want them at the crease at the same time, does this mean you didn't pick Dravid in your all-time Indian xi because you wouldn't want him batting with Gavaskar? (later edit... oh I see you did?)

    If players can only be picked to play in their best positions, does this mean I can only pick one of Bradman, Ponting and Harvey in an all-time Aussie xi, since they all batted at 3?

    And re the McGrath/Davidson discussion, who's this "we" who picked McGrath in an all-time xi?

    Bowlers I consider better than McGrath :
    Marshall, Lillee, Trueman, Ambrose (plus Barnes though I'm a bit confused still if they perform similar roles)

    Bowlers as good as McGrath who offer more to the whole team due to batting/fielding/variety :
    Procter, Miller, Lindwall, Davidson, Hadlee, Imran, Wasim

    He was a great, but he's nowhere near my all time xi. And I happily pick Davidson ahead of McGrath in an all-time Australian side, for the left-arm variety and the batting.
    Last edited by Flametree; 12-10-2012 at 11:43 PM.

  3. #738
    State 12th Man Flametree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    700
    Oh, and I see you picked Zaheer at number 3 for Pakistan. Average in that position 39.

    I think I'd trust Hutton at 3 for England over Zaheer at 3 for Pakistan....

  4. #739
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Pakistan
    Posts
    21,417
    Quote Originally Posted by Flametree View Post
    Questions for KYear...

    So was it "intellectually dishonest" of the Australian selectors in the 90s to pick David Boon at 3? or the English selectors when they picked Vaughan or Butcher to play and not open....

    (Given the bowling line-ups these alltime sides will be facing in the mythical contest we're considering, I think having a 3rd opener to come in at 3 is a pretty sensible strategy myself...)

    If you can't play Hutton and Sutcliffe together because you don't want them at the crease at the same time, does this mean you didn't pick Dravid in your all-time Indian xi because you wouldn't want him batting with Gavaskar? (later edit... oh I see you did?)

    If players can only be picked to play in their best positions, does this mean I can only pick one of Bradman, Ponting and Harvey in an all-time Aussie xi, since they all batted at 3?

    And re the McGrath/Davidson discussion, who's this "we" who picked McGrath in an all-time xi?

    Bowlers I consider better than McGrath :
    Marshall, Lillee, Trueman, Ambrose (plus Barnes though I'm a bit confused still if they perform similar roles)

    Bowlers as good as McGrath who offer more to the whole team due to batting/fielding/variety :
    Procter, Miller, Lindwall, Davidson, Hadlee, Imran, Wasim

    He was a great, but he's nowhere near my all time xi. And I happily pick Davidson ahead of McGrath in an all-time Australian side, for the left-arm variety and the batting.
    :


  5. #740
    International Debutant Jager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    The land of Siddle
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Flametree View Post
    Questions for KYear...

    So was it "intellectually dishonest" of the Australian selectors in the 90s to pick David Boon at 3? or the English selectors when they picked Vaughan or Butcher to play and not open....

    (Given the bowling line-ups these alltime sides will be facing in the mythical contest we're considering, I think having a 3rd opener to come in at 3 is a pretty sensible strategy myself...)

    If you can't play Hutton and Sutcliffe together because you don't want them at the crease at the same time, does this mean you didn't pick Dravid in your all-time Indian xi because you wouldn't want him batting with Gavaskar? (later edit... oh I see you did?)

    If players can only be picked to play in their best positions, does this mean I can only pick one of Bradman, Ponting and Harvey in an all-time Aussie xi, since they all batted at 3?

    And re the McGrath/Davidson discussion, who's this "we" who picked McGrath in an all-time xi?

    Bowlers I consider better than McGrath :
    Marshall, Lillee, Trueman, Ambrose (plus Barnes though I'm a bit confused still if they perform similar roles)

    Bowlers as good as McGrath who offer more to the whole team due to batting/fielding/variety :
    Procter, Miller, Lindwall, Davidson, Hadlee, Imran, Wasim

    He was a great, but he's nowhere near my all time xi. And I happily pick Davidson ahead of McGrath in an all-time Australian side, for the left-arm variety and the batting.
    So many great points there.

    Also kyear I don't understand how you classify Hobbs as a greater runscorer than Sutcliffe when the latter averages more and had a better conversion rate of fifties to hundreds as well.
    Oh for a strong arm and a walking stick

  6. #741
    International 12th Man AndyZaltzHair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,706
    Quote Originally Posted by fredfertang View Post
    Always an interesting exercise - I had a go here last year - we're on the same wavelength
    Thanks for the article; enjoyed it

    I wanted to ask about your opinion on Mahadevan Sathasivam; all I know Garry Sobers said him as "the greatest batsman ever on earth" and Frank Worrell said, "the best batsman he had ever seen." I found a short article on him though: http://blogs.espncricinfo.com/tourdi...olourful_t.php
    Last edited by AndyZaltzHair; 13-10-2012 at 12:48 AM.
    Originally Spoken by Brendon McCullum
    You have got to earn the right to be aggressive.

  7. #742
    Dan
    Dan is offline
    Global Moderator / Cricket Web Staff Member Dan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    A small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse
    Posts
    6,141
    Quote Originally Posted by Jager View Post
    Dujon was the only wicketkeeper I came to a compromise on, because a WI XI is always heavily based around pace bowling. I wanted someone with experience to the modern WI giants.

    I reckon we think in dichotomies too much with wicketkeepers. If they batted well, they must be **** with the gloves and vice versa.

    Just my $0.02 for the day.
    My sworn enemy:
    Quote Originally Posted by Hurricane View Post
    I hate s smith.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hurricane View Post
    I give out points for style of which Steve(n) Smith has none.

  8. #743
    International Regular kyear2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    w.i
    Posts
    3,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Flametree View Post
    Questions for KYear...

    So was it "intellectually dishonest" of the Australian selectors in the 90s to pick David Boon at 3? or the English selectors when they picked Vaughan or Butcher to play and not open....

    (Given the bowling line-ups these alltime sides will be facing in the mythical contest we're considering, I think having a 3rd opener to come in at 3 is a pretty sensible strategy myself...)

    If you can't play Hutton and Sutcliffe together because you don't want them at the crease at the same time, does this mean you didn't pick Dravid in your all-time Indian xi because you wouldn't want him batting with Gavaskar? (later edit... oh I see you did?)

    If players can only be picked to play in their best positions, does this mean I can only pick one of Bradman, Ponting and Harvey in an all-time Aussie xi, since they all batted at 3?

    And re the McGrath/Davidson discussion, who's this "we" who picked McGrath in an all-time xi?

    Bowlers I consider better than McGrath :
    Marshall, Lillee, Trueman, Ambrose (plus Barnes though I'm a bit confused still if they perform similar roles)

    Bowlers as good as McGrath who offer more to the whole team due to batting/fielding/variety :
    Procter, Miller, Lindwall, Davidson, Hadlee, Imran, Wasim

    He was a great, but he's nowhere near my all time xi. And I happily pick Davidson ahead of McGrath in an all-time Australian side, for the left-arm variety and the batting.
    One, there is a distinction between moving up and down the middle order and moving from opening to the middle order. Two, Boon, Vaughn ect actually did those things, Hutton never batted at three and was BY FAR more succesful when opening. The example that everyone is ignoring is that, is it ok as The West Indies has a relatively weak second opener if I can just say open with Sir Everton instead of Sir Conrad, similarily replace Anwar with Mohammad Yousuf. It doesn't work that way. You have openers to choose from for the openers and middle order batsmen to choose from for the middle order. Keep it separate.

    Again to state, I am not dissing Davidson, he was a Great fast bowler and one of the top two LHF bolwers in the history of the game. What I was saying is that he isn't mentioned when discussing who is the very Best Fast Bowler of All Time, Mcgrath is.
    Aus. XI
    Simpson^ | Hayden | Bradman | Chappell^ | Ponting | Border* | Gilchrist+ | Davidson3 | Warne4^ | Lillee1 | McGrath2


    W.I. XI
    Greenidge | Hunte | Richards^ | Headley* | Lara^ | Sobers5^ | Walcott+ | Marshall1 | Ambrose2 | Holding3 | Garner4

    S.A. XI
    Richards^ | Smith*^ | Amla | Pollock | Kallis5^ | Nourse | Waite+ | Procter3 | Steyn1 | Tayfield4 | Donald2

    Eng. XI
    Hobbs | Hutton*^ | Hammond^ | Compton | Barrington | Botham5^ | Knott | Trueman1 | Laker4 | Larwood2 | Barnes3

  9. #744
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Pakistan
    Posts
    21,417
    Quote Originally Posted by kyear2 View Post
    What I was saying is that he isn't mentioned when discussing who is the very Best Fast Bowler of All Time, Mcgrath is.

  10. #745
    State 12th Man Flametree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    700
    Quote Originally Posted by kyear2 View Post
    One, there is a distinction between moving up and down the middle order and moving from opening to the middle order. Two, Boon, Vaughn ect actually did those things, Hutton never batted at three and was BY FAR more succesful when opening.
    I tend to agree, but I think a great opener is more likely to be able to bat at 3 than a
    successful number 5. So I'm happy that Hutton was a great opener, and would have scored runs at 3. (Your last point is wrong. In his 7 innings for England where he didn't open, he averaged 57...)

  11. #746
    Eds
    Eds is offline
    International Debutant Eds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    2,109
    I think kyear is missing the point of these teams. It's not just to put players in where they played. It's based on what we think would assemble the most successful possible side based upon only players from a single country. If you think Worrell would add more to the team than Roy Fredericks, even when out of position, then put him in. If you think Len Hutton would contribute more than Denis Compton, even when out of position, then put him in.
    "If that Swann lad is the future of spin bowling in this country, then we're ****ed." - Nasser Hussain, 1997.

  12. #747
    Cricket Web Staff Member fredfertang's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Cloud Cuckoo Land
    Posts
    11,827
    Quote Originally Posted by Flametree View Post
    I tend to agree, but I think a great opener is more likely to be able to bat at 3 than a
    successful number 5. So I'm happy that Hutton was a great opener, and would have scored runs at 3. (Your last point is wrong. In his 7 innings for England where he didn't open, he averaged 57...)
    Hutton deals with this point in his autobiography - he wrote that he always, with one exception, wanted to go in at number one and he didn't like going in in the middle order - the one exception was against the West Indies in 1950 after he carried his bat for 202*, albeit not enough to help England avoid the follow on as the other 10 could only get 131 between them, so understandably keen on a break he asked to be excused opening duties second time round, was refused, and was out for 2 as Ram and Val shot England out in no time

  13. #748
    International Debutant Jager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    The land of Siddle
    Posts
    2,889
    I also can't understand that you complain about Hobbs-Sutcliffe-Hutton being too defensive yet place Ken Barrington your lineup

  14. #749
    Hall of Fame Member NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    17,895
    Quote Originally Posted by kyear2 View Post
    Captains decided on

    Australia: Sir Don Bradman
    West Indies: George Headley
    South Africa: Graeme Smith
    England: Sir Len Hutton
    Pakistan: Imran Khan
    India: Kapil Dev
    New Zealand: Martin Crowe
    Sri Lanka: Kumar Sangakkara ?
    ROW: Frank Worrell
    Surely Ranatunga is the SL captain from the XI you've picked. He doesn't deserve a spot, if you aren't going to make him captain.

    Quote Originally Posted by rvd619323 View Post
    I reckon we think in dichotomies too much with wicketkeepers. If they batted well, they must be **** with the gloves and vice versa.

    Just my $0.02 for the day.
    Haha yep I agree.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jager View Post
    I also can't understand that you complain about Hobbs-Sutcliffe-Hutton being too defensive yet place Ken Barrington your lineup
    Yeah, that's what I couldn't work out. Thought KP was a chance of making kyear's XI.

  15. #750
    International Regular kyear2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    w.i
    Posts
    3,948
    Quote Originally Posted by NUFAN View Post
    Surely Ranatunga is the SL captain from the XI you've picked. He doesn't deserve a spot, if you aren't going to make him captain.



    Haha yep I agree.



    Yeah, that's what I couldn't work out. Thought KP was a chance of making kyear's XI.
    Question mark next to Sangakkara meant that didn't have a clue. Just recalled that his batting avrage went up when he was captain. The selections are not absolute, rather starting points for discussion. Not that big on S.L. or N.Z. Cricket history.
    As far as K.P goes he does make my XI over Barrington, those teams were partially based on teams selected and conversations by Forum members here. Not a fan of Barrington.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Thread Hijacks
    By sledger in forum Site Discussion
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: 10-02-2010, 04:32 PM
  2. Sri Lanka Thread
    By chaminda_00 in forum 2009 ICC World Twenty20
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-05-2009, 05:29 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •