Which country has the best 2nd ATG XI side?

[Tangles]

Hard to judge those before my time but of those I have seen Taylor wasn't good enough and Hayden didn't do it everywhere he played. Langer is just plain overrated IMO. Of the 3 Hayden was the best. Taylor would open with him in a best Oz 11 of the last 25 years.

 

[Red]

I don't think Langer is overrated. If anything he is a bit underrated. After he re-invented himself as an opener, his average was around 50. He became a real aggressor against pace bowling and loved to take it up to the opposition quicks.

Taylor was good and dependable. Bit of an old school opener, but had all the shots required and dealt with some pretty handy pace attacks. Add the fact that he was a brilliant slipper and excellent captain and he's a great cricketer who I'd rather have on my side than not.

 

[watson]

Actually, how many times did Langer get sconned during his career? From memory it was quite a lot. Here he is playing Ian Bishop, then Ntini with his cranium;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7PgPUSDdJU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqu79CaqbEo

However, I'd still feel OK about having Langer in my ATG team. Here is his best innings - taking Curtly Ambrose to the cleaners;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HYodF-l-0g

 

[watson]

And here is a Justin Langer cover-drive montage in case we forget how good he was at throwing his bat at anything over-pitched;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q09tRY_QZfw

 

[Prince EWS]

Absolutely kidding yourself if you think Langer was as good as the other blokes you mentioned IMO.

 

[Prince EWS]

Maybe we should just open with Border and Waugh (Steve) for the 1st XI :P Could be interesting. They would never get out.

Steve Waugh would've been a dire opener IMO.

 

[watson]

Absolutely kidding yourself if you think Langer was as good as the other blokes you mentioned IMO.

As far as lefties are concerned - Langer: better than Morris, about on a par with Taylor and Lawry, and slightly behind Hayden.

Incidently, here is Jim Maxwell's (long standing ABC cricket commentator) ATG team;

Hayden, Langer, Bradman, Ponting, G.Chappell, Miller, Gilchrist, Warne, Lillee, McGrath, O'Reilly

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/current/story/magazine/alltime.html?site_area=1929

 

[Red]

Regardless of how you rank them, his latter day cover drive was beautiful.

 

[harsh.ag]

Regardless of how you rank them, his latter day cover drive was beautiful.

Chameleon! But better than Morris is a tall claim.

 

[Red]

With Australia's openers, I'd take any of Trumper, Morris, Taylor, Langer, Hayden (gulp), Simpson, Lawry happily. Can mount claims for others such as Woodful, Barnes, Ponsford and Slater as well.

As someone said previously, there really isn't a stand out pair or trio. Like Hutton, Hobbs and Sutcliffe.

 

[kyear2]

Come now, you must admit that having the requisite skill and technique is not all that we look for here. You have to have delivered on the same, and our expectations are quite high. In that sense, if Faulkner was so capable, then it is a crime that his stats are what they are. I can only conclude that he under-performed.

Again, with Tayfield in the side, and Kallis as the 5th bowler already, where is the value in having Faulkner over Taylor at 6?

With Kallis in the team there is no need for another all rounder, also in this team there is no established No. 3. Faulkner was pne of those all rounders who seems to have scored runs in flat condition while failing with the ball and bowling well in helpful conditions but failing with the bat. There wasn't that much consistency. A better for me S.A XI would include an established No. 3 in Amla and would be

Barry Richards ^
Graeme Smith *^
Hashim Amla
Graeme Pollock
Jacques Kallis (5)^
Dudley Nourse
Mike Procter (3)
John Waite +
Hugh Tayfield (4)
Dake Steyn (1)
Allan Donald (2)

When you look at peoples' ATG Australian XIs there seems to be consistent disagreement as to who should open the batting. With England it's no problem, just throw in Hobbs and Hutton (or Sutcliffe if so inclined) and away you go. However, in more than a 100 years Australia does not have 2-3 stand out openers who pick themselves, and who I feel really comfortable with. Simpson. Lawry, Morris, Trumper, Hayden, Taylor, and Langer all bother me for some niggling reason that I don't understand.

Trumper was not a success as an opener and was actually better in the middle order, Hayden prospered after the best bowlers retired, Simpson was seen as a bit gimpy vs genuine pace, Lawry supposedly batted too slowly, Morris flourished with Bradman protecting him at 3 and in the initial post WW2 series when the English bolwing was at it's weakest and progesssively struggled as the attacks improved and Langer would have been killed in the pre helmet era. Most often I go with Morris and Simpson but feel like we uder estimate Hayden as he could just have gotten better with age and experience.

 

[kyear2]

W.I 2nd AT XI

Desmond Haynes
Roy Fredricks
Rohan Kanhai ^
Everton Weekes ^
Frank Worrell *
Clive Lloyd ^
Jeffrey Dujon +
Wes Hall
Andy Roberts
Colin Croft
Lance Gibbs

And no other team 2nd team beats that one. They would actually beat some of the first teams like India, New Zealnd and Sri Lanka in my opnion.

 

[harsh.ag]

With Kallis in the team there is no need for another all rounder, also in this team there is no established No. 3. Faulkner was pne of those all rounders who seems to have scored runs in flat condition while failing with the ball and bowling well in helpful conditions but failing with the bat. There wasn't that much consistency. A better for me S.A XI would include an established No. 3 in Amla and would be

Barry Richards ^
Graeme Smith *^
Hashim Amla
Graeme Pollock
Jacques Kallis (5)^
Dudley Nourse
Mike Procter (3)
John Waite +
Hugh Tayfield (4)
Dale Steyn (1)
Allan Donald (2)

Trumper was not a success as an opener and was actually better in the middle order, Hayden prospered after the best bowlers retired, Simpson was seen as a bit gimpy vs genuine pace, Lawry supposedly batted too slowly, Morris flourished with Bradman protecting him at 3 and in the initial post WW2 series when the English bowling was at it's weakest and progressively struggled as the attacks improved and Langer would have been killed in the pre helmet era. Most often I go with Morris and Simpson but feel like we under estimate Hayden as he could just have gotten better with age and experience.

How is Kallis not an established number 3? He's played 49 tests in that position. But Amla would be a worthy addition to the side, although I prefer Taylor for now.

I prefer Trumper and Simpson, because Morris was too inconsistent, especially against good attacks; because Simpson is better than Lawry, and because Trumper shades it to Hayden by a whisker because of Barnes rating him the best bat in the world. Close between Hayden and Simpson. It just doesn't feel right to include Langer, the pre-helmet era openers would look down upon him too much, not cool..

W.I 2nd AT XI

Desmond Haynes
Roy Fredricks
Rohan Kanhai ^
Everton Weekes ^
Frank Worrell *
Clive Lloyd ^
Jeffrey Dujon +
Wes Hall
Andy Roberts
Colin Croft
Lance Gibbs

And no other team 2nd team beats that one. They would actually beat some of the first teams like India, New Zealnd and Sri Lanka in my opnion.

Australia are as good, if not better. They just lack a third pacer but Spofforth was no mug with the ball, plus they have 3 extra bowling options.

Hayden | Morris | Harvey | McCabe | Border | Waugh | Healy | Davidson | Lindwall | Grimmett | Spofforth

Not bad, eh?

 

[kyear2]

How is Kallis not an established number 3? He's played 49 tests in that position. But Amla would be a worthy addition to the side, although I prefer Taylor for now.

I prefer Trumper and Simpson, because Morris was too inconsistent, especially against good attacks; because Simpson is better than Lawry, and because Trumper shades it to Hayden by a whisker because of Barnes rating him the best bat in the world. Close between Hayden and Simpson. It just doesn't feel right to include Langer, the pre-helmet era openers would look down upon him too much, not cool..

Australia are as good, if not better. They just lack a third pacer but Spofforth was no mug with the ball, plus they have 3 extra bowling options.

Hayden | Morris | Harvey | McCabe | Border | Waugh | Healy | Davidson | Lindwall | Grimmett | Spofforth

Not bad, eh?

Border and Morris makes my first Aussie team so my Aussie second team would be

Hayden | Trumper | Harvey | McCabe | Waugh | Miller | Healy | Lindwall | McDermott | O'Reilly | Grimmett |

Fredricks | Haynes | Kanhai | Weekes | Worrell | Lloyd | Dujon | Hall | Roberts | Croft | Gibbs |

And yes that time would give the W.I a great match and also be able to best the 1st teams from India, New Zealand and Sri Lanka.

For me though the W.I batting just looks stronger and so does the pace attack, the Aussies have the advantage in the spin department.

 

[watson]

Faulkner was pne of those all rounders who seems to have scored runs in flat condition while failing with the ball and bowling well in helpful conditions but failing with the bat.

I haven't heard this summation re Faulkner before kyear. Not saying that it can't be true - but evidence?

Also, since Kallis (like Sobers) would make any ATG team on his batting skills alone so it seems OK to play Faulkner in the ATG South African team. Sure the No.6 batting position is weakened a little, but the side gains a brilliant leg-spinner who can bowl in tandem with Tayfield when the conditions suit (or don't for that matter). Also, in a First XI, Waite and Procter follow immediately after in the batting order, so there's so desperate reliance on Faulkner to score runs.

 

[kyear2]

I haven't heard this summation re Faulkner before kyear. Not saying that it can't be true - but evidence?

Also, since Kallis (like Sobers) would make any ATG team on his batting skills alone so it seems OK to play Faulkner in the ATG South African team. Sure the No.6 batting position is weakened a little, but the side gains a brilliant leg-spinner who can bowl in tandem with Tayfield when the conditions suit (or don't for that matter). Also, in a First XI, Waite and Procter follow immediately after in the batting order, so there's so desperate reliance on Faulkner to score runs.

Don't see the point of sacrificing a potential border line ATG genuine No. 3 batsman for a 6th bowler and weaker No. 6 batsman.

 

[watson]

Don't see the point of sacrificing a potential border line ATG genuine No. 3 batsman for a 6th bowler and weaker No. 6 batsman.

But Faulkner is not just any allrounder who bowls dime-a-dozen fast-medium stuff - rather he is a Top Class Googly bowler with a batting average of 40 in an era of uncovered pitches. In other words, he is a rarity with only Richie Benaud coming close to his allround skills.

Also, I doubt very much whether Faulkner would bowl after Kallis. Instead he would be 5th bowler on most occasions, and the 2nd bowler on wickets with turn, or the 5th day. And because he is the 5th bowler his batting is unlikely to impacted because he wouldn't have to 'bowl right through the innings' as he was sometimes called to do if Jack Hobbs recollections are anything to go by.

 

[sumantra]

Here you go. Pick the country with the best 2nd ATG XI side. Couldn't make viable ones for New Zealand and Sri Lanka (and nearly India)


India

Vijay Merchant
Gautam Gambhir
VVS Laxman
Mohammad Azharuddin
Dilip Vengsarkar
Gundappa Viswanath
Farooq Engineer (w)
Zaheer Khan
Amar Singh
Bishan Singh Bedi
Bhagwat Chandrasekhar

What about Mohinder Amarnath? He doesn't even make the 2nd best ATG side of India? How is it that Dilip Vengsarkar is a superior test player than Jimmy? IMO Mohinder should be there in the best Indian team of All Time (specially if it is playing outside India, barring England may be...having said that the guy never really got a fair chance to play against England in England)...

 

[harsh.ag]

India

Vijay Merchant
Gautam Gambhir
VVS Laxman
Mohammad Azharuddin
Dilip Vengsarkar
Gundappa Viswanath
Farooq Engineer (w)
Zaheer Khan
Amar Singh
Bishan Singh Bedi
Bhagwat Chandrasekhar

What about Mohinder Amarnath? He doesn't even make the 2nd best ATG side of India? How is it that Dilip Vengsarkar is a superior test player than Jimmy? IMO Mohinder should be there in the best Indian team of All Time (specially if it is playing outside India, barring England may be...having said that the guy never really got a fair chance to play against England in England)...

For a while in the mid 80s, Vengsarkar was in the top 3 batsmen in the world. This during a time of Viv, Border, Crowe, Miandad, Gower, Gooch. So I will have him as a bat ahead of Jimmy. Jimmy's away form was special, I agree with you. But the inconsistency was special too. He is right behind Vengsarkar, though, I agree.

 

[harsh.ag]

Faulkner as a bowler is overrated. Averaging 26 in that era would be the equivalent of 35 today. Not much to write home about. And despite a lower average, Taylor was a superior batsman to Faulkner. He was the one to make 508 runs in the series against England where Barnes was rampant with 49 wickets in four tests.