The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[Red]

I also don't see the need to leave out the Don. The fact of the matter is, in his time Australian teams with the Don were tough to beat but not unbeatable. Even a minnowesque wi team took a test off Australia in 1930. Yes the Don would be part of an atg but so would the other teams.

The context of the conversation was how the Don makes Australia effectively have 12 players. There's no need to leave him out, sure. Same as there's no need to pick ATG XIs or discuss cricket history or think about existentialism or masturbate. But we do these things because we enjoy them.

Not even sure why he's being selected - it's one thing having an inferior player when you rely on the Bradman effect to cover up for his batting deficiencies but when you're taking Bradman out?

Eyes not spreadsheets.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Also, Warne wasn’t successful against WI

Well that isn't really true

 

[Slifer]

Well more accurately, warne sucked in the wi but was good overall. As I recall warne played 5 series vs the wi, 2 away and 3 at home. First one in 92 he had a big impact on one match but didnt do much else the rest of the series. In 95 he did very well against a strong wi team. Ditto 96-97 in Australia. In 99 warne was taken to the cleaners and got dropped for the first time in his career. I think some have alluded to the fact that warne was just returning from injury so that could explain his overall inadequacy. Then in 05 warne dominated a pretty poor wi batting lineup. Overall, warne was good vs the wi but no where near as dominant as he was say vs England or south Africa. Versus an atg WI team IN the WI he'd be taken apart no question in my mind.

 

[stephen]

That'd all be fine if cricket games and series were played in statistical vacuums where everyone just scored their average or bowled to their average exactly.

But we're talking about averages over a large sample size. I was overly generous to Knott in my calculations.

The gap, if it exists, between Gilchrist and Knott with the gloves would mean Gilchrist would lose you the occasional game with the gloves. More frequently he'd win you a game with the bat. If you're optimising for victories you take the occasional loss for the more frequent victory.

Keeping skills are asymptotic, which means that once a keeper makes very few mistakes it's better for them to make more runs than sharpen their keeping further.

 

[stephen]

Yeah don’t see Aussie team dominating WI or SA Xi with Don, Warne or Gilchrist playing. It’s not like other teams are planning to play monopoly and have no class players of their own.

It’s one thing to say which team is better but another to say one team would comfortably beat the others.

Other teams have ATG bowling attacks. I would imagine these hypothetical series completely dominated by bowling.

I disagree. Every time we've had ATG bowling attacks in real life, ATG batsmen have managed to score runs against them. I think many of the matches would see draws.

I'm specifically thinking of Chappell in WSC, Lara vs Australia in the 90s, Border vs the Windies in the 80s, Waugh vs South Africa in the 90s. The best batsmen always seem to find a way. Even Bradman in bodyline still averaged 57.

 

[Coronis]

Do we really have to argue about the degree to which Australia is the best? Is it not enough to simply say we are the best and move on with our lives?

Anyway, an XI to beat Australia.
Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Barrington
Pollock
Tendulkar
Hammond*
de Villiers+
Garner
Laker
Ambrose
Barnes

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Do we really have to argue about the degree to which Australia is the best? Is it not enough to simply say we are the best and move on with our lives?

Anyway, an XI to beat Australia.
Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Barrington
Pollock
Tendulkar
Hammond*
de Villiers+
Garner
Laker
Ambrose
Barnes

At home?

 

[TheJediBrah]

The logic doesn't follow - Australia were clearly the best team during his period and Australia's period of dominance, often a level or two better than the next best 2-3 sides, and several levels better than the rest.
In an ATG team, he'd be playing another ATG team, who presumably are relatively much more evenly matched - certainly an ATG West Indian XI or South African XI is not a 'level or two' below Australia. Chances are, he'd actually bat as much, if not more frequently.

Not to mention that a big reason why Gilchrist batted only 1.43x per game was because when Aus won by an innings (or a lot of wickets/runs) it was often because he made so many runs himself in the first innings

Well more accurately, warne sucked in the wi but was good overall. As I recall warne played 5 series vs the wi, 2 away and 3 at home. First one in 92 he had a big impact on one match but didnt do much else the rest of the series. In 95 he did very well against a strong wi team. Ditto 96-97 in Australia. In 99 warne was taken to the cleaners and got dropped for the first time in his career. I think some have alluded to the fact that warne was just returning from injury so that could explain his overall inadequacy. Then in 05 warne dominated a pretty poor wi batting lineup. Overall, warne was good vs the wi but no where near as dominant as he was say vs England or south Africa. Versus an atg WI team IN the WI he'd be taken apart no question in my mind.

Bit before my time but I've heard quite often about one of his tours of the WI where he was so bad because he just had a shoulder reco. and even ended up getting dropped because he was nowhere near his usual standard. I'm sure that couldn't have helped his stats in WI

 

[Chrish]

I disagree. Every time we've had ATG bowling attacks in real life, ATG batsmen have managed to score runs against them. I think many of the matches would see draws.

I'm specifically thinking of Chappell in WSC, Lara vs Australia in the 90s, Border vs the Windies in the 80s, Waugh vs South Africa in the 90s. The best batsmen always seem to find a way. Even Bradman in bodyline still averaged 57.

I don’t have access to statsguru as I am typing from cell phone, but without looking Lara dominated one series against Australian ATG attack but otherwise he blew hot and cold. Chappell shined in WSC but failed against them in tests. I don’t know how Border did in 80s, but isn’t his cumulative average against WI modest?

No player has consistently dominated ATG attacks (pace attack in particular). As someone said in other thread, one or two series hundreds among several failures is to be expected for ATG batsman..

 

[Coronis]

At home?

Just versus Australia in general, these are the guys who dominated. Forgot Hadlee though actually, he goes ahead of Garner.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Just versus Australia in general, these are the guys who dominated. Forgot Hadlee though actually, he goes ahead of Garner.

Oh yeah...I wouldn't mind watching with a six pack next to me. Laker looks like the weak link in the team.

 

[Coronis]

Oh yeah...I wouldn't mind watching with a six pack next to me. Laker looks like the weak link in the team.

Had no problems against Australia though, 15 matches 79 wickets @ 18.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Why are we talking about versus Australia anyway? It's not like they were much good in the 70s or 80s anyway as far as I'm aware

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Had no problems against Australia though, 15 matches 79 wickets @ 18.

I was using a modernist lens to scrutinize him.

 

[Slifer]

I don’t have access to statsguru as I am typing from cell phone, but without looking Lara dominated one series against Australian ATG attack but otherwise he blew hot and cold. Chappell shined in WSC but failed against them in tests. I don’t know how Border did in 80s, but isn’t his cumulative average against WI modest?

No player has consistently dominated ATG attacks (pace attack in particular). As someone said in other thread, one or two series hundreds among several failures is to be expected for ATG batsman..

Awta

 

[trundler]

I find it very difficult to believe that the greatest left handed batsman, all rounder and opener were around in the same era when SA were isolated. Hadlee has massive batting creds if you only look at his County record. And he played in a pretty strong era too. So he surely would've seen a downgrade in either discipline at test level, like literally every other great all rounder eg Sobers, Hadlee and Miller. If you take out Mark Waugh's test record, his FC stats start looking seriously impressive. And then there's the style writers orgasm at. So I'm unsold on whether Richards was a significant upgrade on Trumper and Greenidge too. Pollock had decent sized career and he did some pretty glorious things in it so he walks in the SA ATXI.

This is before you even considering guys like VvDB and Rice who were apparently gods too.

 

[stephen]

I don’t have access to statsguru as I am typing from cell phone, but without looking Lara dominated one series against Australian ATG attack but otherwise he blew hot and cold. Chappell shined in WSC but failed against them in tests. I don’t know how Border did in 80s, but isn’t his cumulative average against WI modest?

No player has consistently dominated ATG attacks (pace attack in particular). As someone said in other thread, one or two series hundreds among several failures is to be expected for ATG batsman..

Steve Waugh dominated a consistently great SA attack in the 90s (Donald, Pollock, de Villiers etc...).

But they don't need to dominate. Just perform a shade below their normal selves and most matches will end in a draw. Remember that all sides will have 6 batsmen who would be considered the best batsman in their respective teams. Even if they performed 20% below normal you're still looking at 6 batsmen who would be averaging around 40 in each team.

Of course pitch conditions will make a huge difference. Any life at all and bowlers like Ambrose or McGrath will dominate, but on the majority of wickets I'd suggest that we'd see more draws than usual.

 

[Coronis]

I find it very difficult to believe that the greatest left handed batsman, all rounder and opener were around in the same era when SA were isolated. Hadlee has massive batting creds if you only look at his County record. And he played in a pretty strong era too. So he surely would've seen a downgrade in either discipline at test level, like literally every other great all rounder eg Sobers, Hadlee and Miller. If you take out Mark Waugh's test record, his FC stats start looking seriously impressive. And then there's the style writers orgasm at. So I'm unsold on whether Richards was a significant upgrade on Trumper and Greenidge too. Pollock had decent sized career and he did some pretty glorious things in it so he walks in the SA ATXI.

This is before you even considering guys like VvDB and Rice who were apparently gods too.

Did you really just compare Hadlee as a batsman to any of the other Fab Four or Procter? Poor from you. I have no problem with great players co-existing at the same time, seems to happen quite often actually, even in singular teams. England's greatest batsman and arguably greatest bowler played together, in fact most of their top batsman all had overlapping careers. Windies teams of the 70's and 80's, Australian teams of the 90's and 00's, even SA having Steyn, Kallis, Amla, Smith and AB all playing together. Also, wrt their first class stats at that time, the majority of test level cricketers all played in county cricket at the time, whereas players such as Miller and Waugh almost exclusively played in their domestic competitions at home.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I find it very difficult to believe that the greatest left handed batsman, all rounder and opener were around in the same era when SA were isolated. Hadlee has massive batting creds if you only look at his County record. And he played in a pretty strong era too. So he surely would've seen a downgrade in either discipline at test level, like literally every other great all rounder eg Sobers, Hadlee and Miller. If you take out Mark Waugh's test record, his FC stats start looking seriously impressive. And then there's the style writers orgasm at. So I'm unsold on whether Richards was a significant upgrade on Trumper and Greenidge too. Pollock had decent sized career and he did some pretty glorious things in it so he walks in the SA ATXI.

This is before you even considering guys like VvDB and Rice who were apparently gods too.

Trundler does actually make a very good point here. It's definitely possible that the best of SA's isolation-era players are rated as highly as they are because of the limited opportunity in international cricket, and given more chances may have reverted to a lower (but still very good) standard over time.

It's a reasonable question to ask

 

[harsh.ag]

Except that Graeme Pollock was still killing it in 90s charity games. And Barry Richards destroyed in the WSC and wherever else he cared to.