Geoff Armstrong- The 100 Greatest Cricketers

[Red]

I generally pick a straightforward team in an ATG discussion:

Hobbs
Sutcliffe/Gavaskar/Hutton
Bradman
Tendulkar/Chappell/Lara/Hammond
V. Richards
Sobers
Knott/ Gilchrist
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
Lillee


However, if I wanted to play two spinners, I think I'd have to include Miller:

Hobbs
Sutcliffe/Gavaskar/Hutton
Bradman
V. Richards
Miller
Sobers
Knott/Gilchrist
Marshall
Warne
Lillee
Murali


Imran is the other option, but I think Miller was a better batsman than Imran.

 

[MrPrez]

I generally pick a straightforward team in an ATG discussion:

Hobbs
Sutcliffe/Gavaskar/Hutton
Bradman
Tendulkar/Chappell/Lara/Hammond
V. Richards
Sobers
Knott/ Gilchrist
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
Lillee


However, if I wanted to play two spinners, I think I'd have to include Miller:

Hobbs
Sutcliffe/Gavaskar/Hutton
Bradman
V. Richards
Miller
Sobers
Knott/Gilchrist
Marshall
Warne
Lillee
Murali


Imran is the other option, but I think Miller was a better batsman than Imran.

My argument to your second team would be that if you felt the need to have two spinners in your team, you would be playing on a spinning track. In this case, you wouldn't want to be carrying a superfluous pacer if you're particularly selecting your team to suit the spinning conditions.

 

[Ikki]

And again this highlights our disagreement with regards to the role of the fifth bowler. Five genuine bowlers doesn't give one sufficient advantage over four, if you back your best four bowlers. You get much more benefit out of putting a superior batsman in. You see, in my mind a bowling line-up of Marshall, McGrath and A.N.Other ATG bowler along with Warne doesn't need a specialist, 22-averaging bowler as much as a top 5 with the names Hobbs, Hutton, Bradman, SRT and Viv needs a Sobers who averages 57 with the bat or whatever. It's a tried-and-tested formula, and the general conclusion as can be seen by the standard construction of a Test line up is the genuine 6th batsman gives more benefit than the genuine fifth bowler.

Yes, but why would you purposely risk that anyway? What you're saying, as far as it makes sense to me, is that you're basically using Sobers/Kallis as a part-timer not a genuine all-rounder.

You might assume you will not need it 9/10...but if this is an Earth XI vs a Mars XI and the fate of the World is on the line (silly, but this is what I mean for when I am picking the best side) why would you unnecessarily risk it? What if one of your specialist bowlers breaks down? You're ****ed. Not just for being a capable man down, but because now the guy who has to pick up the slack is nowhere near the requisite level.

I'd much rather need Miller the batsman to make up the difference than Sobers the bowler. Or furthermore; I'd rather that choice be out of my hands than the fault being of my own negligible selection.

Especially considering the dynamics of cricket. A batsman getting injured still has 10 other guys (more likely 5-6) to make the difference. If a bowler goes down you're ****ed in this scenario as the load now rests on 3 bowlers.

 

[MrPrez]

Yes, but why would you purposely risk that anyway? What you're saying, as far as it makes sense to me, is that you're basically using Sobers/Kallis as a part-timer not a genuine all-rounder.

You might assume you will not need it 9/10...but if this is an Earth XI vs a Mars XI and the fate of the World is on the line (silly, but this is what I mean for when I am picking the best side) why would you unnecessarily risk it? What if one of your specialist bowlers breaks down? You're ****ed. Not just for being a capable man down, but because now the guy who has to pick up the slack is nowhere near the requisite level.

I'd much rather need Miller the batsman to make up the difference than Sobers the bowler. Or furthermore; I'd rather that choice be out of my hands than the fault being of my own negligible selection.

Especially considering the dynamics of cricket. A batsman getting injured still has 10 other guys (more likely 5-6) to make the difference. If a bowler goes down you're ****ed in this scenario as the load now rests on 3 bowlers.

So you're selecting to cover all of your bases in case of an injury, as opposed to what the best team make-up is?

 

[Ikki]

So you're selecting to cover all of your bases in case of an injury, as opposed to what the best team make-up is?

Why is that any different? It's one and the same. You pick the best team, to get over the toughest adversary (opposition and situation) in my opinion.

For you the difference was slight between the difference in picking Sobers or Miller overall but sided with the batsman. But when you take into the consideration of how a match can actually play out you can see that the slight difference can make a huge impact. Why take such a real risk because of a perceived (and debatable) advantage?

In the recent past I've selected both Imran and Miller in my team. For the reasons above, I've started to put both Warne and Murali in it too. I used to think that 2 is overkill but in reality what if you pick one spinner and, like the above scenario, he gets injured? By picking 2 all-rounders and 2 spinners I cover almost all the bases. 3 front-line pacers (more than enough) 2 spinners (way more than enough).

Hobbs
Hutton
Bradman
Richards
Miller
Sobers
Gilchrist
Imran
Warne
Lillee
Murali

I have a genuine spearhead in Lillee who, if need be, can bowl monster long spells. I have Imran and Miller who are ATG pacers and both who provide even more batting depth (as a whole, more valuable than picking 2 of Hadlee/Marshall/McGrath IMO). And I have 2 of the greatest spinners whose performances are so good they rival ATG pacers. I have a side where if nothing goes wrong (no one gets injured) can rival any other team and I also have the kind of side that can adjust to most any problem that may arise (like an injury or horrifically out of form player). That Miller batting in the top 5 may hinder the middle-order somewhat is offset by the long tail - although, compositionally it makes the most sense that he bats #5.

 

[kyear2]

What I personally belive is that optimally one should select both a batting and bowling all rounder in any team, once they do not compromise in the top six or the bowling attack. It is always a good idea to have a decent #8 batsman to shepherd the tail for a couple extra runs or help save the team on the final day of a test. Similarily no matter how good your bowling attack, there is always the need for a handy fifth bowler either to provide rest before the next new ball, be a partnership breaker or just to extend the bowling rotation. Again though, not at the expense of the batting or bowling lineups.

 

[kyear2]

Yes, but why would you purposely risk that anyway? What you're saying, as far as it makes sense to me, is that you're basically using Sobers/Kallis as a part-timer not a genuine all-rounder.

You might assume you will not need it 9/10...but if this is an Earth XI vs a Mars XI and the fate of the World is on the line (silly, but this is what I mean for when I am picking the best side) why would you unnecessarily risk it? What if one of your specialist bowlers breaks down? You're ****ed. Not just for being a capable man down, but because now the guy who has to pick up the slack is nowhere near the requisite level.

I'd much rather need Miller the batsman to make up the difference than Sobers the bowler. Or furthermore; I'd rather that choice be out of my hands than the fault being of my own negligible selection.

Especially considering the dynamics of cricket. A batsman getting injured still has 10 other guys (more likely 5-6) to make the difference. If a bowler goes down you're ****ed in this scenario as the load now rests on 3 bowlers.

Is an All Time XI supposed to be an honour/ reward for the best test players (careers) or as Ikki says the team we would play againts Mars for the sake of the Earth. If it's the latter then I would go with.

Len Hutton
Barry Richards ^
Don Bradman *
Viv Richards ^
Sachin Tendulkar/ Greg Chappell/ Brian Lara/ George Headley
Garry Sobers ^
Adam Gilchrist +
Mike Procter
Malcolm Marshall
Shane Warne
Glen Mcgrath/ Dennis Lillee

All about balance, Hutton to be the anchor, batting depth with match winners in the middle order, best batting all rounder, attacking and metronomic bolwers, pace and accuratcy and an amazing cordon and outfield. Besides myself and Jager not many others place an emphasis on the cordon, but bowlers like Marshall, Lillee and Mcgrath depended heavily on their cordons for wickets, as well as Warne and it must be a factor for me when choosing such sides.

 

[watson]

I generally pick a straightforward team in an ATG discussion:

Hobbs
Sutcliffe/Gavaskar/Hutton
Bradman
Tendulkar/Chappell/Lara/Hammond
V. Richards
Sobers
Knott/ Gilchrist
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
Lillee


However, if I wanted to play two spinners, I think I'd have to include Miller:

Hobbs
Sutcliffe/Gavaskar/Hutton
Bradman
V. Richards
Miller
Sobers
Knott/Gilchrist
Marshall
Warne
Lillee
Murali


Imran is the other option, but I think Miller was a better batsman than Imran.

Just to carry on the Earth V Mars theme......

It's 1-1 heading into the 5th Test and Earth has to win the final Test against Mars otherwise Earth the planet gets obliterated by a massive Ray Gun. The Mars groundsman has prepared a flat track to favour his team (just like the Indian ones generally do at Mumbai or where-ever).

Therefore: Earth is going to need the X-factor of Miller in the team because his inclusion gives the team greater bowling variety and depth. A batting centric team won't do in a 'must-win situation'. The second option it is to save us all from doom.

 

[fredfertang]

Just to carry on the Earth V Mars theme......

It's 1-1 heading into the 5th Test and Earth has to win the final Test against Mars otherwise Earth the planet gets obliterated by a massive Ray Gun. The Mars groundsman has prepared a flat track to favour his team (just like the Indian ones generally do at Mumbai or where-ever).

In that case you need Jardine as skipper and a pace attack of Larwood, Thommo, Roy Gilchrist and Sylvers

 

[kyear2]

Will Gilchrist will at least hurt some of them with some well placed beamers.

 

[kyear2]

Jack Hobbs
Len Hutton
Donald Bradman *
Viv Richards ^
Sachin Tendulkar
Garfield Sobers ^
Adam Gilchrist +
Imran Khan
Malcolm Marshall
Shane Warne ^
Glen Mcgrath

Sunil Gavaskar
Herbert Sutcliffe
George Headley
Brian Lara ^
Greg Chappell *^
Jacques Kallis ^
Keith Miller
Allan Knott +
Curtly Ambrose
Dennis Lillee
Muttiah Muralitharan

Gordon Greenidge ^
Barry Richards
Wally Hammond ^
Graeme Pollock
Ricky Ponting ^
Frank Worrell *
Les Ames +
Richard Hadlee
Michael Holding
Fred Trueman
Bill O’Reilly

Arthur Morris
Bobby Simpson ^
Kumar Sangakkara
Everton Weekes ^
Allan Border *
Clyde Walcott +
Ian Botham ^
Ray Lindwall
Jim Laker
Joel Garner
Sydney Barnes

Victor Trumper
Geoffrey Boycott
Rahul Dravid ^
Neil Harvey ^
Javed Miandad * ^
Aubrey Faulkner
Mike Procter
Alan Davidson
Hedley Verity
Jack Blackham +
Allan Donald

Graeme Gooch ^
Matthew Hayden ^
Rohan Kanhai ^
Kevin Pietersen
Steve Waugh *
Andy Flower +
Kapil Dev
Wasim Akram
Andy Roberts
Dale Steyn
Clarrie Grimmett

Graeme Smith ^
Vijay Merchant
Ken Barrington
Stan McCabe ^
Clive Lloyd *^
Charlie Macartney
John Waite +
Shaun Pollock
Anil Kumble
Harold Larwood
Courtney Walsh

Bruce Mitchell ^
Virender Sehwag
Denis Compton
Inzamam Ul-Haq ^
Dudley Nourse
Tony Greig ^
Farokh Engineer +
Richie Benaud *
Ian Bishop
Waqar Younis
John Snow

Conrad Hunte
Eddie Barlow ^
Ian Chappell *^
Ted Dexter
Martin Crowe ^
Shivnarine Chanderpaul
Ian Healy +
Wes Hall
Alec Bedser
Colin Croft
Subhash Gupte

Trevor Goddard

Made some adjustments as per Watson's suggestions. Tough to leave out Lawry from the revamped last 11, but Barlow brings his bowling ability and superb slip catching.

 

[akilana]

You pick B richards in 1st XI (at least 2nd) or you don't pick him at all. If the sample size isn't enough to put him in the 1st XI then it's not for 5th or 6th XI. Same goes for G pollock

 

[kyear2]

You pick B richards in 1st XI (at least 2nd) or you don't pick him at all. If the sample size isn't enough to put him in the 1st XI then it's not for 5th or 6th XI. Same goes for G pollock

I just find it really difficult to rate Procter and Richards, talent wise they are first team, but at least the guys in the first two teams have accomplished so much for their teams its difficult to omit them for Richards.
With Pollock, that is just where I rate him. Third team isn't bad by any means.

 

[Red]

My argument to your second team would be that if you felt the need to have two spinners in your team, you would be playing on a spinning track. In this case, you wouldn't want to be carrying a superfluous pacer if you're particularly selecting your team to suit the spinning conditions.

The thing is, I've seen Warne on numerous occasions bowl on a "seamers" wicket on the first morning of a test and get turn and get wickets. I'd imagine Murali did the same on occasions. Even on a "non-spinning" track Warne was a massive handful for great batsmen.

Plus, I also consider the fact that if the game is in the fifth day and is there to be won, and the wicket is getting rough, Warne from one end and Murali (or O'Reilly etc) from the other end will be a massive nightmare of survival.

 

[Coronis]

The thing is, I've seen Warne on numerous occasions bowl on a "seamers" wicket on the first morning of a test and get turn and get wickets. I'd imagine Murali did the same on occasions. Even on a "non-spinning" track Warne was a massive handful for great batsmen.

Plus, I also consider the fact that if the game is in the fifth day and is there to be won, and the wicket is getting rough, Warne from one end and Murali (or O'Reilly etc) from the other end will be a massive nightmare of survival.

This.

Also, whilst researching all rounders previously, it seems to go pretty much like this in their individual attributes.

Batting: Sobers and Kallis >>> Miller > Procter/Botham/Imran/Kapil >> Hadlee
Bowling: Hadlee > Procter/Imran > Miller/Botham/Kapil >> Sobers/Kallis

 

[kyear2]

So ironic, Sobers and Kallis the best batsmen, but by some distance the worst bowlers, and inverse for Hadlee. Is that better of a Procter/Miller who is lies in the middle of both catergories?


2000

 

[MrPrez]

Ok then chaps, so my question for you:

Should Ryan McLaren bat at 6 when Kallis retires?

 

[akilana]

Please post that in the right thread and people will answer you

 

[social]

So ironic, Sobers and Kallis the best batsmen, but by some distance the worst bowlers, and inverse for Hadlee. Is that better of a Procter/Miller who is lies in the middle of both catergories?


2000

To be fair to Sobers, he suffered from chronic knee problems and that severely curtailed his pace bowling abilities as his career wore on

 

[Coronis]

To be fair to Sobers, he suffered from chronic knee problems and that severely curtailed his pace bowling abilities as his career wore on

The fact remains that both Sobers and Kallis are easily the worst bowlers of the "great" all rounders.