The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[Coronis]

Originally Posted by kyear2

Which is the best middle order in history:

Compton, May, Cowdrey
Dravid, Tendulkar, Laxman
Worrell, Weekes, Walcott
Bradman, Harvey, Hassett
Kanhai, Sobers, Nurse

Worrell, Weekes, Walcott. Fun stats.

Also fits in with your partnership XI, kyear, plug Weekes and Walcott in there and you have a gun team. Plus they're partners with Sobers. Which leaves Bradman as the sole exception, though, if you wanted a pure partnership XI, shove in Hammond.

[SJS]

Originally Posted by kyear2

Partnership XI

Jack Hobbs
Herbert Sutcliffe
Don Bradman


Garry Sobers
Adam Gilchrist
Malcolm Marshall
Shane Warne
Joel Garner
Glenn Mcgrath

Bradman and Sobers have to be pat of any team, but which partnership should take the #4 and #5 slot.

We all like to fit Sobers at number six, which is understandable for he gives you the option to fit in some top drawer batsmen above him and below the openers ( or below the Don if it is an ATG world xi. But is that really what a captain would do knowing the gifts of Sobers as a batsman and without the historical baggage of his magnificent record at all positions from 3 to 7 .

Since no one ever puts him at 7 ( where he averages 67+ with 610 runs) lets see how he fares at the other four

# 3 - 72.1
# 4 - 63.8
# 5 - 59.2
# 6 - 53.4

Why must he bat at number six is a question we must ask ourselves. He walks into any ATG side on the strength of his batting alone and this is acknowledged by all cricketers and the top writers of the game, even without bothering to go into the comparative stats of others.

It is understandable that in an ATG World XI the one drop spot is reserved for the Don, why should Sobers not bat at four. The reasons for his not batting at number three for the West Indies, after his batting talent flowered in the late fifties, are well recorded but there is no reason to have him bat anywhere else other than the spot which would do most good for the side. There have been few cricketers in the history of the game, barring Bradman, with the unique talent of building big innings while remaining a supremely aggressive stroke player and this was because he was a stroke player with impeccable technique.

The fact that he scored so many big hundreds in the lower half of the West Indian side and rescued his side so often in the company of the tail only makes the mind boggle at what he would have done with the cream of the West Indian side for company. To conclude, in a convoluted twist of logic, from his awesome record in the company of tail-enders that he would, somehow, not do as well higher up the order is unfair to one of the greatest batsmen the world has seen and the greatest left hander ever.

Coming to a West Indian side and in the context of the limited and non-serious purpose of choosing ATG sides with restrictions, it is interesting to see how Sobers and the three W's fared at different places in the order.

Walcott :

I take him first since other than Sobers, he has the finest record in all four positions under debate

3 - 51.9
4 - 78.4
5 - 59.2
6 - 72.3

It is interesting to see how most batsmen fare better at number 4 than at number 3 . I am also reminded, again and again, of Bedser's comment on how, after the openers the next best technique against the moving ball is required of the one drop and then by the number five( who often gets to face the second new ball) Numbers 4 and 6 are relatively cushier assignments than the one just preceding them.

Batting at these four positions, these four scored 6004 runs in Test matches at a combined average of 64.6

Worrell
3 - 54.0
4 - 76.2
5 - 59.5

Weekes

3 - 60.1
4 - 63.2

So if one was to choose the best numbers 3-6 for West Indies, who actually played together, you can't look much beyond these four. In an exercise, just for fun, I found that the best order for these four is

#    Player.   Runs.       Avg.    100's.   Highest

3.   Sobers.    1009       72.1.     3.        365 no (his best)
4.   Weekes.    3372.      63.6.     11.       207 (his best)
5.   Worrell.   1189.      59.5.      3.       197 no
6.   Walcott.   434.       72.3.     3.        168 no

Overall.         6004.     64.6.      20.      365 no (a world record for decades)

Maybe one will find another foursome with an equally awesome record batting at these four positions and it will be fun looking at those :-)

[vic_orthdox]

Really, most people are picking Sobers at six anticipating that he'll have some bowling to do, aren't you? Mind you, he' probably rather get all his work done as early as possible so he can slip off and have a good rest after playing, rather than before batting.

[Coronis]

Originally Posted by vic_orthdox

Really, most people are picking Sobers at six anticipating that he'll have some bowling to do, aren't you? Mind you, he' probably rather get all his work done as early as possible so he can slip off and have a good rest after playing, rather than before batting.

Nah, he'll be too busy taking his amazing catches. Also, thanks for that post SJS, very informative as always!

[Monk]

Interesting re. Sobers SJS.

For my ATG sides, like everyone, it's inevitable that Bradman is at 3. Then I gravitate between Hammond, Pollock, Tendulkar & Lara at #4. 5 and 6 are always Viv and Sobers. After the openers, Bradman, and whichever #4 plays, I want Viv and Sobers to absolutely cane the bowlers. Having Gilly as keeper (which I usually don't), makes this even more brutal. I love the thought of Viv, Sobers and Gilchrist...

[SJS]

Originally Posted by vic_orthdox

Really, most people are picking Sobers at six anticipating that he'll have some bowling to do, aren't you? Mind you, he' probably rather get all his work done as early as possible so he can slip off and have a good rest after playing, rather than before batting.

It is true that Sobers did a lot of bowling in a West Indies side which did not have the unending pool of bowlers that they had after his retirement. Particularly in the second half of his career, he used himself almsot like a stock bowler which really took a heavy toll on him phyisically. Any lesser athlete than him would have crumbled under the workload for he combined his heavy duties with West Indies with full workloads as a county professional and many seasons in the Australian domestic seasons. On top of that he was a part of all World XI versus the rest type of games and played them with the same seriousness and his performances there too were mind boggling. On top of that he rarely, if ever, refused any requests for exhibition games from around the globe and since he was, by a HUUUUUGE mile the greatest draw in the game, he got many such requests.

In his first 35 Test matches he bore a relatively more reasonable workload of 24 overs per Test. Over the next 35 it nearly doubled to 47 per Test !!

Even as he was approaching the end of a 20 year long Test career he bowled an amazing 42 overs per Test in the last 23 Test matches with as many as 223 in the last four !!

Remember he was 40 when he stopped playing in Tests. I have absolutely no doubt that if West Indies had the fast bowling resources they got from the late 80's onwards while Sobers was captain, not only would he have been able to extend his international career but that his bowling returns would have been far far more impressive than they appear to the from his average/strike rate.

It was clear from the latter part of his career that his best and strongest suite in four different types of bowling genres was as a fast medium left arm swing bowler. He was the best left armer i that genre in the world in these years and with a couple of other bowlers, he could have bowled in shorter, deadlier bursts rather than the hour long (and more) marathons he had to indulge in. Not that he either complained or bothered about what it did to his stats. The stats had to take care of themselves, Gary couldn't be bothered with them.

Similarly, with lesser work load as a stock bowler, he could have batted higher up and scored even more than the awesome record he produced.

[L Trumper]

Originally Posted by Monk

Interesting re. Sobers SJS.

For my ATG sides, like everyone, it's inevitable that Bradman is at 3. Then I gravitate between Hammond, Pollock, Tendulkar & Lara at #4. 5 and 6 are always Viv and Sobers. After the openers, Bradman, and whichever #4 plays, I want Viv and Sobers to absolutely cane the bowlers. Having Gilly as keeper (which I usually don't), makes this even more brutal. I love the thought of Viv, Sobers and Gilchrist...

More or less same reasons for me also. Don at 3, Sachin at 4, Viv at 5, Sobers at 6, Gilly at 7.

[kyear2]

Originally Posted by SJS

It is true that Sobers did a lot of bowling in a West Indies side which did not have the unending pool of bowlers that they had after his retirement. Particularly in the second half of his career, he used himself almsot like a stock bowler which really took a heavy toll on him phyisically. Any lesser athlete than him would have crumbled under the workload for he combined his heavy duties with West Indies with full workloads as a county professional and many seasons in the Australian domestic seasons. On top of that he was a part of all World XI versus the rest type of games and played them with the same seriousness and his performances there too were mind boggling. On top of that he rarely, if ever, refused any requests for exhibition games from around the globe and since he was, by a HUUUUUGE mile the greatest draw in the game, he got many such requests.

In his first 35 Test matches he bore a relatively more reasonable workload of 24 overs per Test. Over the next 35 it nearly doubled to 47 per Test !!

Even as he was approaching the end of a 20 year long Test career he bowled an amazing 42 overs per Test in the last 23 Test matches with as many as 223 in the last four !!

Remember he was 40 when he stopped playing in Tests. I have absolutely no doubt that if West Indies had the fast bowling resources they got from the late 80's onwards while Sobers was captain, not only would he have been able to extend his international career but that his bowling returns would have been far far more impressive than they appear to the from his average/strike rate.

It was clear from the latter part of his career that his best and strongest suite in four different types of bowling genres was as a fast medium left arm swing bowler. He was the best left armer i that genre in the world in these years and with a couple of other bowlers, he could have bowled in shorter, deadlier bursts rather than the hour long (and more) marathons he had to indulge in. Not that he either complained or bothered about what it did to his stats. The stats had to take care of themselves, Gary couldn't be bothered with them.

Similarly, with lesser work load as a stock bowler, he could have batted higher up and scored even more than the awesome record he produced.

Superbly articulated as usual, and all good reasons as to why Sobers is without doubt one of the two top Test Cricketers of All Time, .......but who is number three.
To be continued.

[smalishah84]

Originally Posted by kyear2

Superbly articulated as usual, and all good reasons as to why Sobers is without doubt one of the two top Test Cricketers of All Time, .......but who is number three.
To be continued.

CW50 2nd Edition - No 03

[watson]

Originally Posted by L Trumper

More or less same reasons for me also. Don at 3, Sachin at 4, Viv at 5, Sobers at 6, Gilly at 7.

There has always been a question mark (albeit a small one) hanging over Viv Richards with respect to spin bowling. So while he can throttle any pace attack, I don't think he could do the same against quality spin bowling.

Tendulkar was beautiful to watch against spin bowlers like Warne, and was equally good against fast bowlers. That's why his away record is so good. However, Tendulkar rarely, if ever, dominated a Test series. He is just not the dominating type.

Which is why Lara and Graeme Pollock are preferable to Viv Richards and Tendulkar. Both batsman had no problem smashing either a pace or spin attack, or dominating an entire Test series with the bat.

[kyear2]

CW50 2nd Edition - No 06

This guy for me, no surprise I am sure.

This game is about winning, and Marshall never lost a test series and only four games as an opening bowler. That is just amazing in my book.
If I had to do over my list it would read something like.

01) Bradman/ Sobers
03) Marshall
04) Hobbs
05) Warne
06) Richards
07) Tendulkar
08) Gilchrist
09) Headley
10) Imran
11) Lara
12) Mcgrath
13) Muralitharan
14) Kallis
15) Hammond
16) Hutton
17) Ambrose
18) Gavaskar
19) Lillee
20) Chappell
21) Miller
22) Trueman
23) Ponting
24) Verity
25) Holding

Just of the top of my head and of course subject to drastic change.

[Monk]

Originally Posted by watson

There has always been a question mark (albeit a small one) hanging over Viv Richards with respect to spin bowling. So while he can throttle any pace attack, I don't think he could do the same against quality spin bowling.

Tendulkar was beautiful to watch against spin bowlers like Warne, and was equally good against fast bowlers. That's why his away record is so good. However, Tendulkar rarely, if ever, dominated a Test series. He is just not the dominating type.

Which is why Lara and Graeme Pollock are preferable to Viv Richards and Tendulkar. Both batsman had no problem smashing either a pace or spin attack, or dominating an entire Test series with the bat.

Viv being Viv is enough for me. He was completely awesome. Best batsman I've seen.

[Coronis]

I'm currently on a Procter craze. Have him in my first XI. Amazing first class record. If only I had a time machine, and could go back and get rid of apartheid.

21936 runs @ 36.01 with 48 centuries, 6 in successive innings.
1417 wickets @ 19.53 with 70 5 fors.

Of the great all rounders (Miller, Sobers, Procter, Imran, Hadlee, Botham, Dev and Kallis), Procter is the best batsman besides Sobers/Kallis and Miller, and a clear second in the bowling behind Hadlee. This is just based on their first class stats of course, but every indication shows that he would've been one of, if not the greatest test all rounder of all time.

Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Bradman*
Pollock
Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist+
Procter
Warne
Marshall/Murali
McGrath

Not sure whether to have two spinners in Warne and Murali, or have a Procter/Marshall/McGrath pace attack, with Warne and Sobers of course. Thoughts?

[watson]

Originally Posted by Coronis

I'm currently on a Procter craze. Have him in my first XI. Amazing first class record. If only I had a time machine, and could go back and get rid of apartheid.

21936 runs @ 36.01 with 48 centuries, 6 in successive innings.
1417 wickets @ 19.53 with 70 5 fors.

Of the great all rounders (Miller, Sobers, Procter, Imran, Hadlee, Botham, Dev and Kallis), Procter is the best batsman besides Sobers/Kallis and Miller, and a clear second in the bowling behind Hadlee. This is just based on their first class stats of course, but every indication shows that he would've been one of, if not the greatest test all rounder of all time.

Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Bradman*
Pollock
Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist+
Procter
Warne
Marshall/Murali
McGrath

Not sure whether to have two spinners in Warne and Murali, or have a Procter/Marshall/McGrath pace attack, with Warne and Sobers of course. Thoughts?

In his autobiography Harold "Dickie" Bird rated Procter just behind Sobers as the greatest allround cricketer he ever saw. That's pretty good praise.

However, I've always thought Hobbs and Sutcliffe slightly over-rated due to the lack of quality fast bowlers they faced - even allowing for uncovered pitches. And therefore rate Hutton as the greatest English opening batsman.

[Coronis]

Originally Posted by watson

In his autobiography Harold "Dickie" Bird rated Procter just behind Sobers as the greatest allround cricketer he ever saw. That's pretty good praise.

However, I've always thought Hobbs and Sutcliffe slightly over-rated due to the lack of quality fast bowlers they faced - even allowing for uncovered pitches. And therefore rate Hutton as the greatest English opening batsman.

Fair enough, Australia didn't have many quality fast bowlers in those days iirc (please someone correct me if I'm wrong). To be honest my XI has changed quite a lot. The only shoe-ins for me are Hobbs, Bradman, Sobers, Gilchrist, Warne. (Sorry Viv)