Australian ATG Team- Open Voting

[NUFAN]

Yeah Bill Brown was a fine bat, but he would have been at the end of his career when Miller came into the side. Still maintain Miller was one of the countries 5 best bats throughout his playing career. He is clearly going to be the 7th best bat if Gilchrist as expected is chosen.

BTW, I hope in years to come Mark Waugh goes up in peoples estimations and he gets rated higher due to his grace and style.

 

[watson]

Yeah Bill Brown was a fine bat, but he would have been at the end of his career when Miller came into the side. Still maintain Miller was one of the countries 5 best bats throughout his playing career. He is clearly going to be the 7th best bat if Gilchrist as expected is chosen.

BTW, I hope in years to come Mark Waugh goes up in peoples estimations and he gets rated higher due to his grace and style.

No one is saying that Miller is a better batsman than Border or Gilchrist. I think that Monk and I are more concerned with team balance.

Gilchrist would be out-of-position at No.6.

Plus I would like to see Miller swing the bat at 3 down. It would either put the icing on the cake if Bradman and Chappell have scored a ton each, or swing the momentum back to Australia if the top order has collapsed. If Miller does go down swinging, then there's always Border and Gilchrist to settle the innings again.

 

[NUFAN]

No one is saying that Miller is a better batsman than Border or Gilchrist. I think that Monk and I are more concerned with team balance.

Gilchrist would be out-of-position at No.6.

Plus I would like to see Miller swing the bat at 3 down. It would either put the icing on the cake if Bradman and Chappell have scored a ton each, or swing the momentum back to Australia if the top order has collapsed. If Miller does go down swinging, then there's always Border and Gilchrist to settle the innings again.

See I don't get this. If Australia are 3 down for not many, why not just bring in the best batsman right away in Border and see if he can build a partnership with the other top class batsman.

Having a pinch hitter with a license to swing the bat and sometimes go down swinging is unusual option for your Test number 5 when almost all the time he is going to have Bradman or Chappell up the other end.

If Australia are 3/350 I don't really mind who comes in next. Border was good enough to adapt though and he would easily look to push the run rate. He just didn't have that situation occur much throughout his career, particularly early doors.

 

[kyear2]

The way that I see it, Miller is in the team for the primary purpose of his bowling, providing the balance required to play O'Reilly and Warne. Lets not pretend that his batting was good enough to make it into this team on it's own, for mine he bats 6, or 7 after Gilly. Border would not have been my choice as in a team like this one is looking for match winners, not match savers so Ponting or Harvey would have been preferred.

 

[Jager]

Miller at 5, Border at 6.

Don Tallon obviously

 

[NUFAN]

Border can win matches. I have no problem with a gritty, fighter in our all time XI. There are going to be situations when the team will need a batsman that has these qualities.

I really don't want AB stereotyped completely as a dour, fighting but limited stroke maker or anything like that and Miller shouldn't be stereotyped as a master blaster. They are ATG's and have proven that they are adaptable.

 

[kyear2]

Didn't expect anything different Jager.

 

[Cabinet96]

Gilly

 

[kingkallis]

Gilly

 

[Michaelf7777777]

Adam Gilchrist

 

[BoyBrumby]

Gilchrist, obvz.

Genuinely good chap too.

 

[fredfertang]

Old Iron Gloves for me - Gilchrist far too decent a bloke - this is an Australian ATG side so you need a proper old-fashioned Ocker and Marsh always tried to be that even if he did ultimately fail sometimes eg attitude to underarm incident as referred to

 

[kyear2]

Really?

 

[watson]

The way that I see it, Miller is in the team for the primary purpose of his bowling, providing the balance required to play O'Reilly and Warne. Lets not pretend that his batting was good enough to make it into this team on it's own, for mine he bats 6, or 7 after Gilly. Border would not have been my choice as in a team like this one is looking for match winners, not match savers so Ponting or Harvey would have been preferred.

Good point. The 'Miller conundrum' only exists because we want to play Warne AND O'Reilly.

So let's suppose that we are happy with Warne (or O'Reilly) as the lone spinner, and that Miller's batting is not good enough - who would be the 5th bowler?

Is the 5th bowler idea over-rated and therefore Greg Chappell rolling his arm over good enough for the bush?

Do we still want 2 spin bowlers in the team, and therefore select Macartney?

Or is Steve Waugh the obvious choice here?

But now that I think about it, Stan McCabe's medium pacers weren't too bad. He'd probably go OK (along with G.Chappell) as the 'batsman who can bowl' to give the front-line 4 a breather.

 

[Red]

I like the idea of having both Warne and O'Reilly in the team. Both different styles of leggies, and would compliment each other well, especially on day 4 and 5 of a test, when they would become irrepressible. I can imagine them feeding off each other's ego and bluster!

I think Miller's inclusion is great in this regard. A genuine third quick who is capable of batting top 6. And really, Miller's average of 40 at number 5 is hardly cause for alarm.

I sway back and forth with this, but I think Miller's inclusion provides a ridiculous amount of team balance that offsets the 10 or so runs difference you'd get by including a batsman with an average of 50ish. Miller's stroke play, pace bowling, slip catching and general aura are surely worth 10 runs an innings. Plus, he'd keep Bradman on his toes.

 

[watson]

I like the idea of having both Warne and O'Reilly in the team. Both different styles of leggies, and would compliment each other well, especially on day 4 and 5 of a test, when they would become irrepressible. I can imagine them feeding off each other's ego and bluster!

I think Miller's inclusion is great in this regard. A genuine third quick who is capable of batting top 6. And really, Miller's average of 40 at number 5 is hardly cause for alarm.

I sway back and forth with this, but I think Miller's inclusion provides a ridiculous amount of team balance that offsets the 10 or so runs difference you'd get by including a batsman with an average of 50ish. Miller's stroke play, pace bowling, slip catching and general aura are surely worth 10 runs an innings. Plus, he'd keep Bradman on his toes.

Good point.

A blinding catch, or a wicket-taking leg-cutter to Headley or Hutton and he's suppressed the opposition's score by more than 10-20 runs.

 

[kyear2]

I recall reading some places that like his batting, Miller's slip fielding was inconsistent and that he dropped a few. Not having Simpson, Harvey, Ponting or even Macabe in the team weakens the cordon as well. As it stands now it's Warne, Chappell and Miller.

 

[Saint Kopite]

Gilly.

 

[kyear2]

Similar to the Bradman slot this is a no contest, think we can call this one. Gilchrist was probably the best Australian cricketer after Bradman and the key to this and the 90's Australia's team success. Balance and destruction and a very under rated gloveman.

 

[doesitmatter]

Ian Healy ..this team may not need the vital runs from this man let alone any runs..He was selected as the 20th century Aussie WK and this was no fluke..