The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[Red]

Lillee not having enough of a sample is his own fault for not touring again. Zero sympathy. Guy would have sucked. Didn't have the stomach for it clearly.

And in those 63% matches, there would also be some one to chant "Lillee,Lillee kill kill kill". Fine homely food to go with it. Expose him to air pollution in Delhi, he would bowl with an oxygen mask and average 1000. Fair weather player.

Amazing skill to get injured every time he played in alien conditions or a tough opposition.

Forget the fact that Lillee didn't tour alien conditions basically ever, his record against the best team of the era is hardly anything particularly great. He averaged 28 vs west indies in 12 tests, all but one in his own home conditions, and that's inflated by one 10fer on arguably the worst pitch of all time, the infamous MCG of 1981 on which dodda ganesh could've looked like Joel garner.

I don't think there's ever been a cricketer mythologized so much despite so many gaping holes in his statistical record. The guy made his career on knocking over Mike Brearley twice a week.

Social media has played a role in Dennis Lillee’s descent from legend to great bowler. Twenty years ago, every article I read about him used to praise him as the greatest/perfect fast bowler.

It is the other way around. Absence of social media in his playing days played a role in his ascent from favorable track bully to a legend.

Pre-90s, the English and Australians dominated the cricket scene. Apart from the West Indies team, very few individuals dared to raise their voice against them.

Sunil Gavaskar and Javed Miandad were the only two Asian cricketers who stood up to them. Of course, Miandad was more of a street fighter while Gavaskar was more polished and suave.

Allan Donald had a sub-23 average and sub-50 SR against every country except the mighty Australia. Donald’s record in Asian pitches is exemplary.

Still most people don’t place Donald among the top tier of ATG bowlers. If someone like Donald whose record is on par with McGrath and Ambrose isn’t thought by many as a Top Tier fast bowler, why is Lillee given a free pass?

Why do players with better records like Garner and Donald never given the same respect or recognition that Lillee gets?

Yeah Dennis Lillee has added mythology surrounding him due to his iconic look and personality

The comedy show Skithouse used his blueprint as basically the quintessential 'Australian fast bowler'

Devil’s Advocate here

Is Glen McGrath the greatest or even Top 3 bowler?

1. He averages 29 in SriLanka and 31 in Pakistan.

2. He has taken 1 5WPI in 17 Tests in Asia.

3. He never played against the best team of his era(Aus)

4. Against the second best team of his era(SA), he averages 27 and has a SR of 71.

Donald is often penalised for his mediocre record (Avg:31 and SR:71) in any ATG discussion.

But McGrath’s mediocre record(Avg:27 and SR:71) against the best team he faced(SA) never comes to discussion.

That’s what I meant.

I meant McGrath was lucky to have played for and not against the greatest team ever. Many modern day greats including Donald, Akram, Waqar, Pollock etc didn’t have a great record against the Aussies.

It’s pretty ******** to argue how player didn’t face his own team.

And difference of 4 runs in average is pretty significant.

Seriously, if we're going down the revisionist history path here of "McGrath and Lillee weren't as good at all their contemporaries and the people who watched them know they were" because there are 100 rabid Indians on the forum wanting to re-write cricket history in absurd and ridiculous ways, let me know and I'll just go on espncricinfo's Facebook page instead of logging in here to read absolute drivel.

 

[ankitj]

Seriously, if we're going down the revisionist history path here of "McGrath and Lillee weren't as good at all their contemporaries and the people who watched them know they were" because there are 100 rabid Indians on the forum wanting to re-write cricket history in absurd and ridiculous ways, let me know and I'll just go on espncricinfo's Facebook page instead of logging in here to read absolute drivel.

gagf.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Nothing you can do about it tbh. A decade from now with even more access to the internet, indian cricket fans will take over the web, Lillee will be relegated to ftb status, Bradman will be considered a myth and Sachin will take his rightful place as GOAT.

And you all will have to watch helplessly and cry. Can't wait.

 

[OverratedSanity]

gagf.

I like how he quoted some non Indian posters and some posts by Indian posters that were in unabashed support of Mcgrath.

 

[Red]

gagf.

What's the issue?

Nothing you can do about it tbh. A decade from now with even more access to the internet, indian cricket fans will take over the web, Lillee will be relegated to ftb status, Bradman will be considered a myth and Sachin will take his rightful place as GOAT.

And you all will have to watch helplessly and cry. Can't wait.

Nah, there will be people who will know what the truth is, they'll just congregate in places where bull**** isn't constantly spoken.

 

[h_hurricane]

Seriously, if we're going down the revisionist history path here of "McGrath and Lillee weren't as good at all their contemporaries and the people who watched them know they were" because there are 100 rabid Indians on the forum wanting to re-write cricket history in absurd and ridiculous ways, let me know and I'll just go on espncricinfo's Facebook page instead of logging in here to read absolute drivel.

A bit more effort in reading the context of all these posts will help you I reckon.

 

[ankitj]

What's the issue?

Play the poster, not his nationality. That used to be the golden rule.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Play the poster, not his nationality. That used to be the golden rule.

Lol what it's play the post, not the poster.

However, I do think your suggestion is better if it means we can insult posters as long as we don't mention their nationality.

 

[Red]

A bit more effort in reading the context of all these posts will help you I reckon.

Haha. Ok.

 

[Red]

Play the poster, not his nationality. That used to be the golden rule.

Well, there's multiple Indian supporters talking revised history drivel. Next time I'll just mention each of your individual names.

 

[h_hurricane]

Nah, there will be people who will know what the truth is

Truth is what triggered you right ?

 

[Red]

Truth is what triggered you right ?

I'm not triggered. At all.

 

[Logan]

Nah, there will be people who will know what the truth is, they'll just congregate in places where bull**** isn't constantly spoken.

Telling Bradman wasn’t the best is bull****.

Telling Lillee’s record has huge gaps, Muralitharan being just as good as Warne and Donald being just as good as McGrath isn’t bull****.

 

[aussie tragic]

Warning : This thread has become painful to read if you are a real fan that actually watched cricket and not just looked up and compared player stats.

Should just move the last 20 pages or so to a new thread named "re-written ATG history based on nit-picking stats that mean more than how it actually was"

 

[srbhkshk]

It's funny how people will default to "oH i wAtChed hiM pLaY" when they don't actually have a defence. I watched Ashwin bowl in India and there hasn't been a greater bowler ever in the world.

 

[jimmy101]

Might be time to split this into two separate threads. One thread for those who want to talk about past players, another thread for the stat-*******s who wanna regurgitate numbers to each other.

 

[h_hurricane]

Most of us have watched cricket from a very young age, grew up loving this game and its heroes regardless of the nationality. There would be many indians who liked to watch Mcgrath, Lara, Donald, Marshall etc in their prime as those who would watch Tendulkar. Which is why you see many Indians debating why Garner was as good as Lillee or Donald was as good as Mcgrath. That is not rabidity. An Indian player was not among the discussion there lol. You don't have to mandatorily watch them play( though in reality most of us have watched a lot of them) to gauge that a few are ridiculously over-rated and a few others are criminally under-rated.
Nit picking of stats would give an uncomfortable feeling to many if it exposes over-reliance of some players on their comfort zones

 

[aussie tragic]

Since stats mean everything, ATG Aussie bowling attack (min 20 Tests) based purely on SR

Cummins 46.0
Starc 50.0
Harris 50.7
Johnson 51.1

Pattinson next in after 1 more test as has 48.9 after 19 tests.

Ummm, maybe it's just statistical noise that these are all recent players?

 

[srbhkshk]

Since stats mean everything, ATG Aussie bowling attack (min 20 Tests) based purely on SR

Cummins 46.0
Starc 50.0
Harris 50.7
Johnson 51.1

Pattinson next in after 1 more test as has 48.9 after 19 tests.

Ummm, maybe it's just statistical noise that these are all recent players?

Why not base the ATG attack purely on player weight + mustache width?

 

[trundler]

Warning : This thread has become painful to read if you are a real fan that actually watched cricket and not just looked up and compared player stats.

Should just move the last 20 pages or so to a new thread named "re-written ATG history based on nit-picking stats that mean more than how it actually was"

Absurdly boomer post