• 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.

Alan Knott VS Adam Gilchrist

Who the Better Cricketer

  • Alan Knott

    Votes: 2 6.1%

  • Adam Gilchrist

    Votes: 31 93.9%
  • Total voters
    33
subshakerz

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
kyear2 said:
Yes.

I've told you this before, the reasons I select him.

He was the greatest old ball bowler, and that's his primary responsibility here.

He had the traits I require, the ability to move the ball both ways, old and new ball, conventional and reverse.

His peer rating is immense and the fact that he made both the Cricinfo and Wisden teams, as well as guys like Crowe over his own team mate, makes an impression on me.

I've also said that we shouldn't have a world XI with only one player from the s / c.

Is it a welcome plus, yes. Part of the equation, no. Becuse if the 4 bowlers in contention for the spot, he's only better than Steyn with the bat, he's behind Imran and Hadlee.
Click to expand...
Was it clarify, who would be your number 8 bat in your ATG XI if Akram was a tailender? Warne? Really? I don't think you would go with Warne at no.8 in a ATG XI. Please clarify.
 
subshakerz

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
kyear2 said:
I swear the Benaud reference has become a meme despite the obvious reality.

A starting point for me is Wisden, Cricinfo, ours.

If you make all 3, you're in contention.

Then there's Willis's, Crowe's, Boycott's, Gower's, CMJ's, Armstrong's etc etc.
Click to expand...
How convenient. Guys who agree with you, you keep. Guys like Benaud and Bird who don't, you exclude.

kyear2 said:
Have you ever watched it?

He said, as I've said repeatedly, that it wasn't the best team, it was the one he wanted to represent him.

He was very clear.
Click to expand...
It's clear you didn't watch it. He also said in that, for example, that Lillee was the best fast bowler he saw and picked Barnes based on his being the best bowler based on rep, and picked Sobers and Imran based on wanting two ARs in his side. So he didn't pick Marshall based on his merit. You can't disregard it.

kyear2 said:
Yeah, until they drop two chances and you lose the match.
Click to expand...
You are fine with Warne at no.8 in a ATG XI (assuming Wasim has no batting ability). Sorry I don't go that far.
 
Last edited:
subshakerz

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
kyear2 said:
The legitimate AT World XI's that Marshall doesn't make.
Click to expand...
Benaud, Dickie Bird, Brearely. Rod Marsh, Blofeld, Bradman.

Also to quote Sean here.

The Sean said:
I definitely pick Marshall in my all time XI, but I think it's fair to say that the idea of him being a consensus "locked-in" pick for such a team has become more and more prevalent in recent decades.

At or around the turn of the century, give or take, I saw all time XIs selected by Peter Baxter, Christopher Martin-Jenkins, Henry Blofeld, Bill Frindall, Jonathan Agnew, Don Bradman, Richie Benaud and Ashley Mallett, and Marshall didn't make any of them.

TMS chose their 40th anniversary team for 1957-1997 and Marshall didn't make that team either.

And if the all time rankings of John Woodcock and Nick Brownlee around that time were converted into all time XIs then Marshall misses both those teams too, and by a long way.

To repeat, I disagree with all of these, but the idea that Marshall is a near-universal lock in an all time XI certainly wasn't the case until relatively recently.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
DrWolverine

DrWolverine

International Vice-Captain
Andy Roberts was considered to be second best among the WI pacers and he was considered on par with Lillee back then. Today especially on this sub he is behind the likes of Holding, Garner and even Walsh.
 
DrWolverine

DrWolverine

International Vice-Captain
No internet back then or at least I didn’t have it.

Everything was from news papers and from sports magazines like Wisden and Sportstar.
 
Johan

Johan

International Coach
tbh I feel like everything from 70s and before naturally gets underrated and everything from 90s gets disgustingly overrated, a little strange.
 
Line and Length

Line and Length

International Coach
capt_Luffy said:
Gilchrist is really as much of a lock as anyone bar Bradman and Sobers.
Click to expand...
Disagree. Knott was a superior gloveman and scored a higher percentage of 50s per innings than Gilchrist. In addition, Knott didn't have the benefit of playing against minnows such as Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. He also played against the Windies when they were at their peak.
I can see the rationale behind having Gilchrist in an ATG XI but not as a "lock".
 
sayon basak

sayon basak

Cricketer Of The Year
Line and Length said:
Disagree. Knott was a superior gloveman and scored a higher percentage of 50s per innings than Gilchrist. In addition, Knott didn't have the benefit of playing against minnows such as Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. He also played against the Windies when they were at their peak.
I can see the rationale behind having Gilchrist in an ATG XI but not as a "lock".
Click to expand...
Fair, but as Luffy already clarified, what he means is that Gilly is just as much of a lock as Marshall. If Gilly isn't a lock, neither is Marshall, which is a perfectly fine take.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
subshakerz said:
Was it clarify, who would be your number 8 bat in your ATG XI if Akram was a tailender? Warne? Really? I don't think you would go with Warne at no.8 in a ATG XI. Please clarify.
Click to expand...
You value the no 8 above all, you don't care who's in your slip cordon, and as we've discussed ad nauseum, that's been historically far more critical to the success of winning teams and certainly bowlers.

To definitively answer your question in a way that leaves no ambiguity. If Bumrah emerges over the next 4 years as we suspect he can, my all time attack will be

Marshall | McGrath | Bumrah | Warne

And yes, I'll be content with Marshall at 8 and Warne at 9, that's more than decent depth. Weren't you singing Warne's praises the other day of how he helped saves Australia's bacon a few times?

And as I'm writing this, I'm watching a (poor) panel electing an AT attack, and the highlight they're showing from Akram is a dropped catch at 2nd slip. Among Steyn's highlights is a catch by Kallis and Ambrose's is a stunner by Richie, just saying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top