ATG XI- Open Voting

[watson]

A last word on the two South Africans;

I consider Barry Richards to be the best batsman I have ever seen, and it was very sad that he was lost to international cricket because of apartheid. He played in only 4 Tests, during which he averaged 75. I know that people will argue that you cannot judge a man on four Tests, but I maintain that he was the best, and there are a lot of very knowledgeable people in the game who would agree with me.


Umpire "Dickie" Bird - My 'Autobiography' (page312)

Barry Richards once made a fifty against a club side while turning the bat sideways and using the edge, back in the day when the edge of a bat was slightly thicker than a padded envelope. David English recalled the time that Richards turned out for his charity side, the Bunburys: "He flew from Queensland specially to play against Norma Major's XI at Alconbury. He had no gear, just a well worn pair of golf shoes. With hastily borrowed equipment and a bat so old cobwebs still adorned the handle, the Master, bespectacled, stood at the crease and proceeded tentatively at first, to perform his strokes from memory. He had not lifted a bat for 12 years but scored 52."


http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2012/jun/24/tom-maynard-old-batsman

Then we come to Graeme Pollock at number five. Now I believe he was the best left-hander I have ever seen, and I've seen some great ones - Neil Harvey (Australia), Brian Lara (West indies), Allan Border (Australia), and David Gower and Willie Watson (England).....

If you think that I have possibly gone over the top in assessing Pollock as the greatest left-hander of them all, I remember Sir Donald Bradman being quoted in a newspaper many years ago as saying that Pollock was the best player he had seen, which coming from Sir Donald must mean something, Pollock really was something very special.


Umpire "Dickie" Bird - 'My Autobiography' (pages 318-19)

Admittedly, if you looked hard enough you'd probably find about 10 supposed quotes on 10 batsman where Sir Donald thought that so-and-so was the 'best player he had seen'. However, this still doesn't detract from the fact that Pollock was a highly regarded batsman.

 

[ankitj]

Eagerly waiting for the day when people stop pretending with a straight face that Warne is a certainty/non-negotiable in a world XI. There's competition guys, very strong one at that.

 

[Coronis]

Would add Hobbs to that list as well.

Bradman, Sobers, Marshall, Hobbs, Warne.

Replace Warne with Gilchrist and thats my 5. Warne is definitely not clearly better than Murali.

 

[centurymaker]

Bradman Sobers and Marshall were the best of what they did, probably Warne as well, the others even though they may be as brilliant would you still say they're a level below those guys?

Well,

Imran-- best bowling all-rounder ever. This guy is the best player to have come out of the subcontinent at the bare minimum.
Richards-- This is Sir Vivian Richards. Not only did he excel in batting like other greats, he also intimidated every bowler along the way in a era where bowlers had everything their way. He is only 2nd to Bradman.
Tendulkar-- If you don't let short term memory bias affect your judgment then you realize what a freak he has been. Don't even need to consider his perfectionist way of batting, his legacy, etc. His numbers alone warrant him a spot.
Hobbs-- You can call him the pioneer of batting and he was well ahead of his peers, so ATG XI is incomplete without him.


Warne -- Best leg-spinner ever, so he has to be there.

Went with McGrath over Lille due to his consistency and longevity. Say whatever but it is always harder to perform at the very high level for longer.
Gavaskar over Hutton because he played in a far more demanding era and he excelled when all his teammates around him were almost sitting-ducks

 

[smash84]

Bradman Sobers and Marshall were the best of what they did, probably Warne as well, the others even though they may be as brilliant would you still say they're a level below those guys?

There isn't really anything to suggest that Warne was better than Murali (at least as a bowler).

And would you like to make a case as to why Imran would be a level below Marshall, Warne and Sobers as a cricketer?

 

[watson]

In hindsight this is a poll-only sort of thread, and so while Smalis point is a good one, it probably belongs in the ATG arguing discussing thread, or whatever it's called.

 

[The Battlers Prince]

There isn't really anything to suggest that Warne was better than Murali (at least as a bowler).

And would you like to make a case as to why Imran would be a level below Marshall, Warne and Sobers as a cricketer?

As a bowler Imran's record wasn't as strong everywhere as Marshall, I think he averaged high 20's in Australia and India. A great record, not the same as Marshall's class. I won't deny Warne is a hardr case, but leg spin is different to Akram's Game.
Also find that Akram is often held up against Keith Miller, both are bowling allrounders, and everyone has their own favourite.
Sobers, wasn't a great fast bowler like Akram, but he had off and leg spin and all round fielding.
Akram was great, and won't be left out of many ATG teams, BUT he will miss some.

 

[smash84]

There isn't really anything to suggest that Warne was better than Murali (at least as a bowler).

And would you like to make a case as to why Imran would be a level below Marshall, Warne and Sobers as a cricketer?

As a bowler Imran's record wasn't as strong everywhere as Marshall, I think he averaged high 20's in Australia and India. A great record, not the same as Marshall's class. I won't deny Warne is a hardr case, but leg spin is different to Akram's Game.
Also find that Akram is often held up against Keith Miller, both are bowling allrounders, and everyone has their own favourite.
Sobers, wasn't a great fast bowler like Akram, but he had off and leg spin and all round fielding.
Akram was great, and won't be left out of many ATG teams, BUT he will miss some.

 

[kyear2]

Eagerly waiting for the day when people stop pretending with a straight face that Warne is a certainty/non-negotiable in a world XI. There's competition guys, very strong one at that.

As i have recently stated in the ATG thread, as bowlers I can find nothing to separate them and for me they are equals. What separates them for me and I would guess for others as well is is that Warne unquestionably tyhe better cricketer with his batting and just as important his slip fielding.

 

[kyear2]

Replace Warne with Gilchrist and thats my 5. Warne is definitely not clearly better than Murali.

I agree to a certain degree, as in a list of my top cricketers Gilly is in the top 5. For a ATG XI though while Gilchrist is the best keeper batsman ever, a lot of people do prefer a superior keeper and as such he is not seen as totally non negotiable. With Warne, while not clearly better strictly as a bowler he does bring more to a team.

I personally have seven non negotiables and in order of how I rank them. Sobers, Bradman, Marshall, Gilchrist, Richards, Hobbs and Warne. Sachin and Glenn gets in because of their amazing longevity and consistency but mainly their astounding numbers and their success everywhere. Hutton has been more succesfull againts great bowlers than any other opener and he bests out Richards, though I prefer more assertive batsmen, he would anchor the team. Imran is the best bowling all rounder and along with Akram and Garner the best old ball bolwers.

There isn't really anything to suggest that Warne was better than Murali (at least as a bowler).

And would you like to make a case as to why Imran would be a level below Marshall, Warne and Sobers as a cricketer?

Sobers was the best All Rounder to play the game and has been unanimously accepted as such. Where he separates from Imran is that he has dominated series with the bat, ball and as a fielder at the same time. He is one of a handful of batsmen (probably 4 or 5) who can be legitimately seen as the best after Bradman, he is arguably and probably the greatest fielder ever and the most versatile bolwer the game has seen. Warne mastered the most difficult skill in the game and the first and only to do since covered pitches and was seen as a match winner and along with Gilchrist and Mcgrath seen as the cornerstone of one of the two greatest teams ever. My top three players as stated above are Bradman, comfortably the greatest batsman, Sobers the best All Rounder and Marshall for me clearly the greatest bolwer and matchwinner. He was equally great and succesful everywhere and againts everyone mastering all conditions and he took the W.I over the top as arguably the greatest team of All Time despite the declining skills of Richards and the retirement of Lloyd, Holding, Roberts ect. Imran was a great bolwer, but no where as good on the road as he was at home, he was seen as a bolwing all rounder, but his batting never came on until after his injury and his bolwing decline, he never dominated a series with bat and ball like Sobers or even Miller or Botham. He was a below average fielder and other perhiperal issues that prevent me from placing him above the others I named and additionally Gilchrist who revolutionised his position.

 

[Coronis]

Curious to see which 4 or 5 batsmen you consider to be up there behind Bradman. Sobers, Hobbs, Richards and...?

 

[jaideep]

First 11

1.Jack Hobbs
2.Len Hutton
3.Don Bradman
4.Brian Lara
5.Viv Richards
6.Gary Sobers
7.Adam Gilchrist
8.Shane Warne
9.Malcolm Marshall
10.Sydney Barnes
11.Glenn Mcgrath

Second 11

1.Barry Richards
2.Herbert Sutcliffe
3.George Headley
4.Graeme Pollock
5.Greg Chappell
6.Keith Miller
7.Imran Khan
8.Alan Knott
9.Richard Hadlee
10.Muttiah Muralitharan
11.Bill o'Reilly

 

[smash84]

.

Sobers was the best All Rounder to play the game and has been unanimously accepted as such. Where he separates from Imran is that he has dominated series with the bat, ball and as a fielder at the same time. He is one of a handful of batsmen (probably 4 or 5) who can be legitimately seen as the best after Bradman, he is arguably and probably the greatest fielder ever and the most versatile bolwer the game has seen. Warne mastered the most difficult skill in the game and the first and only to do since covered pitches and was seen as a match winner and along with Gilchrist and Mcgrath seen as the cornerstone of one of the two greatest teams ever. My top three players as stated above are Bradman, comfortably the greatest batsman, Sobers the best All Rounder and Marshall for me clearly the greatest bolwer and matchwinner. He was equally great and succesful everywhere and againts everyone mastering all conditions and he took the W.I over the top as arguably the greatest team of All Time despite the declining skills of Richards and the retirement of Lloyd, Holding, Roberts ect. Imran was a great bolwer, but no where as good on the road as he was at home, he was seen as a bolwing all rounder, but his batting never came on until after his injury and his bolwing decline, he never dominated a series with bat and ball like Sobers or even Miller or Botham. He was a below average fielder and other perhiperal issues that prevent me from placing him above the others I named and additionally Gilchrist who revolutionised his position.

Your arguments are so fallacious as usual. Let me point out a few of them?

First of all just because Warne was the cornerstone of one of the greatest ever team automatically makes him a greater cricketer?
So reviving an art in bowling makes him a great bowler not getting wickets cheaper?
Thirdly, which is something so stupid and which you always fail to address that you penalize Imran for being godly at home and being very good away from it?
And before you bring in the home umpires argument please do remember the patriotic WI umpires who ensured that the WI didn't lose a series at home in the 1980s.
What Imran loses in his fielding he more than makes up for it with leadership and mentorship. Also by your logic you need to give some credit to Imran for being one of the pioneers of reverse swing (bringing in a new art and all that )

 

[kyear2]

Replace Warne with Gilchrist and thats my 5. Warne is definitely not clearly better than Murali.

Curious to see which 4 or 5 batsmen you consider to be up there behind Bradman. Sobers, Hobbs, Richards and...?

Can't ignore Tendulkar's career and record(s). Have we forgotten already how great he has been for 20 years? Additionally Lara was arguably better than Sachin and while not in the aformentioned 4/5 Headley deserves a mention, minnow team with no batting support who was seen second only to Bradman in his era, but more attractive to watch. He was adaptable, a quick learner and had to be Atlas for our fledging team while on his way to being known as the black Bradman.

But I digress, Sachin and probably Lara.

 

[kyear2]

Replace Warne with Gilchrist and thats my 5. Warne is definitely not clearly better than Murali.

Your arguments are so fallacious as usual. Let me point out a few of them?

First of all just because Warne was the cornerstone of one of the greatest ever team automatically makes him a greater cricketer?
So reviving an art in bowling makes him a great bowler not getting wickets cheaper?
Thirdly, which is something so stupid and which you always fail to address that you penalize Imran for being godly at home and being very good away from it?
And before you bring in the home umpires argument please do remember the patriotic WI umpires who ensured that the WI didn't lose a series at home in the 1980s.
What Imran loses in his fielding he more than makes up for it with leadership and mentorship. Also by your logic you need to give some credit to Imran for being one of the pioneers of reverse swing (bringing in a new art and all that )

The last point I will give you, as even though he didn't start it, he did perfect it.

As for the rest, Marshall was godly at home as away and regarding the umpires, you keep referencing three decisions by one umpire in one innings in one match, because they arn't that much to choose from, not quite the same. Reputation wise we were better than India, Australia, New Zealand and Pakistan from that or any era. When there is that big a difference for a bowler between home a away average there is probably a good reason why.

Regarding Warne, what he managed to do on covered pitches (along with Murali) and perform well at home and away and the way he won matches is enough for me to be in my top seven, which is where I rate him. As far as leadership goes, it is subjective and for me over rated as you are only as good as your players and different people rate captains based on different criteria (tactics/leadership/performance/motivation) so fielding is more tangible and again thats another place where Imran drops for me. He makes my first team so obviously he is highly rated, just not as high as you rate him.

 

[smash84]

The last point I will give you, as even though he didn't start it, he did perfect it.

As for the rest, Marshall was godly at home as away and regarding the umpires, you keep referencing three decisions by one umpire in one innings in one match, because they arn't that much to choose from, not quite the same. Reputation wise we were better than India, Australia, New Zealand and Pakistan from that or any era. When there is that big a difference for a bowler between home a away average there is probably a good reason why.

Regarding Warne, what he managed to do on covered pitches (along with Murali) and perform well at home and away and the way he won matches is enough for me to be in my top seven, which is where I rate him. As far as leadership goes, it is subjective and for me over rated as you are only as good as your players and different people rate captains based on different criteria (tactics/leadership/performance/motivation) so fielding is more tangible and again thats another place where Imran drops for me. He makes my first team so obviously he is highly rated, just not as high as you rate him.

So you finally concede on reverse swing.

And really now? Since when did you come up with this self proclaimed ranking of WI being the torch bearer of best umpiring? There are quite a few stories that can be dug up as to how WI umpires let their bowlers use intimidatory tactics without stepping in and I am sure it won't be too difficult to dig out WI umpires generosity to their own batsmen either.

And you rate Warne's away record as being really good when he clearly didn't do so well against the best team of his era and in their home country. So how come he doesn't get penalized for that while Imran's average is criticized for being different home and away. A fair bit of hypocrisy

 

[kyear2]

Tally Update

Don Bradman- 150
Garry Sobers- 150
Malcolm Marshall- 150

Jack Hobbs- 144
Adam Gilchrist- 133
Shane Warne- 126
Viv Richards- 119
Len Hutton- 118

Imran Khan- 105
Richard Hadlee- 87
Brian Lara- 85
Glenn McGrath- 83
Sachin Tendulkar- 78
Muttiah Muralitharan- 75

Sunil Gavaskar- 62
Alan Knott- 58
Curtly Ambrose- 56
Wally Hammond- 54
Graeme Pollock- 49
Dennis Lillee- 47
Barry Richards- 47
Herbert Sutcliffe- 47
Greg Chappell- 47
George Headley- 42
Jacques Kallis- 37
Syd Barnes- 35
Bill O'Reilly- 32

Keith Miller- 29
Wasim Akram- 24
Fred Trueman- 15
Mike Procter- 13
W.G. Grace- 12
Clyde Walcott- 11
Harold Larwood- 10
Joel Garner- 10

Ricky Ponting- 8
Kumar Sangakkara- 8
Dale Syeyn- 6
Ian Botham- 5
Waqar Younis- 5

 

[Red]

Lara getting 85 votes while Ponting only has 8 says something. I'm not exactly sure what it is, but is says something...

 

[smash84]

short term memory bias

 

[watson]

First 11

1.Jack Hobbs
2.Len Hutton
3.Don Bradman
4.Brian Lara
5.Viv Richards
6.Gary Sobers
7.Adam Gilchrist
8.Shane Warne
9.Malcolm Marshall
10.Sydney Barnes
11.Glenn Mcgrath

Second 11

1.Barry Richards
2.Herbert Sutcliffe
3.George Headley
4.Graeme Pollock
5.Greg Chappell
6.Keith Miller
7.Imran Khan
8.Alan Knott
9.Richard Hadlee
10.Muttiah Muralitharan
11.Bill o'Reilly

I like both those teams, and I especially like the balance of the second team. Imran-Knott-Hadlee provide enough batting depth to compensate for the inclusion of Keith Miller at No.6, and allow O'Reilly to partner Murali.

(And no, I don't think that the batting of Imran and Hadlee is over-rated, although ironically, I think that Miller's probably is)