Na, I'm not playing the inferior half of a batting partnership. Which obviously leaves us with Sutcliffe and Barry as our openers.Or Hobbs/Sutcliffe
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Third name in an AT world XI
- Thread starter kyear2
- Start date
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
“Two similar players” as one might put it
sayon basak
International Coach
Nobody can say that it's a bad pick.
You give Hobbs too much credit here.
Glen Maxwell and Viv are very similar players.
But we all know Maxi is better.
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
Viv is closer to Crawley
Cipher
School Boy/Girl Captain
The 3rd name would need to be someone who is hardest to replace.
Gilchrist is better than the next group of keeper batsman (Pant, Ames, Sangakarra, Prior) by about 5-7 runs. You could point to batsman who can keep like Flower, AB Devilliers but their glovemanship isn't as good.
I'd argue that you might lose more missing out on Hadlee or Imran Khan because they are around the top 10 bowlers of all time who can also bat a lot better than other top 10 bowlers. I was going to make a thread discussing the value of bowlers who can bat but I need to comment on some threads first
I don't think a pure pace bowler is the 3rd name because they are well stocked & the difference between the very best isn't huge.
Spinners you've got Warne & Murali. You can make claims for others but those 2 seem to be of a higher regard.
Openers is interesting because you've got a lot of people who swear by Hobbs but Hutton & Gavaskar probably played against tougher bowlers & carried their team more. Sutcliffe is also up there with his average.
And there are a number of candidates amongst middle order batsman
So considering that Gilchrist has no equivalent peer I would go with him.
Gilchrist is better than the next group of keeper batsman (Pant, Ames, Sangakarra, Prior) by about 5-7 runs. You could point to batsman who can keep like Flower, AB Devilliers but their glovemanship isn't as good.
I'd argue that you might lose more missing out on Hadlee or Imran Khan because they are around the top 10 bowlers of all time who can also bat a lot better than other top 10 bowlers. I was going to make a thread discussing the value of bowlers who can bat but I need to comment on some threads first
I don't think a pure pace bowler is the 3rd name because they are well stocked & the difference between the very best isn't huge.
Spinners you've got Warne & Murali. You can make claims for others but those 2 seem to be of a higher regard.
Openers is interesting because you've got a lot of people who swear by Hobbs but Hutton & Gavaskar probably played against tougher bowlers & carried their team more. Sutcliffe is also up there with his average.
And there are a number of candidates amongst middle order batsman
So considering that Gilchrist has no equivalent peer I would go with him.
Red_Ink_Squid
Global Moderator
Bradman would be 3rd on my teamsheet as I'd probably list them in batting order.
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
Not as funny the second time
Red_Ink_Squid
Global Moderator
Good thing I haven't read the rest of the thread, so can continue to chuckle at my own post.Not as funny the second time
Athlai
Not Terrible
Pretty long tail
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I am going to eat some humble pie and admit that @kyear2 has a good case for Knott vs Gilly in an ATG XI that I didn't consider properly before.
If we assume that no.7 batting is not super important, then having the most immaculate keeper who will never drop will give a huge boost to the bowler. Knott was a decent enough bat and I think you could have Imran at 7 and Knott at 8.
It's closer between Gilly and Knott and I wouldn't call Gilly a lock unless batting is the most important criteria.
If we assume that no.7 batting is not super important, then having the most immaculate keeper who will never drop will give a huge boost to the bowler. Knott was a decent enough bat and I think you could have Imran at 7 and Knott at 8.
It's closer between Gilly and Knott and I wouldn't call Gilly a lock unless batting is the most important criteria.
DrWolverine
International Captain
If batting is not important, why not Bob Taylor who was considered better than his contemporary Knott?
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
It's not that it isn't important, it may be of secondary importance
DrWolverine
International Captain
Alan Knott : Great keeper + Good batsman
Adam Gilchrist : Good keeper + Great batsman
Both are the obvious choices and I prefer Gilly
Adam Gilchrist : Good keeper + Great batsman
Both are the obvious choices and I prefer Gilly
Migara
International Coach
This is not the batting order BTW
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Hence why I say Gilly can't be a lock
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
I think I would define a “lock” as “I cannot have an ATG team without this player”. That definitely applies to Bradman. You could make an argument (albeit a weak one imo) that it doesn’t apply to Sobers. I don’t think it applies to anyone else without stretching it.
Gilchrist isn’t a lock for me technically and neither are any of the others. There are very reasonable arguments that can be made to include other players over them. (hint; they get made here all the time)
The reason Gilchrist is my selection as 3rd because I personally believe the value he brings over the next player in line to replace him is the greatest.
Johan
Hall of Fame Member
Bradman is a level above either Imran or Sobers