• 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.

From the last 50 years, who has the worst ATG XI from the big 8? SL, NZ or England?

The Sean

The Sean

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
Viv's peak was from 1976 to 1981, averaging well over 60, while from 1981 to 1989, he still averaged 45, before a dip towards his career end. However, in terms of perception, he was still considered the best batsman in world cricket for much of the 80s even though his output decreased from his peak. He wasnt as consistent but was regularly scoring a century a series until around 1986.
Click to expand...
I know and don't disagree with any of that, but I'm not sure how it responds to what I said. You said he didn't have a dip between 1976 and 1988 - but he had a three-year, 27 Test run in the middle where he averaged 36. For a player who had been averaging 62 up until that point, that's a dip.
 
F

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
Yeah but Viv was clearly the big wicket in world test cricket for about a decade. Only for a short window when Smith was banned was Kohli's the big wicket. He's a long way behind Smith and slightly behind Williamson as the best batsman of the generation. And now with Root's dominant year and the emergence of the likes of Labuschagne, Rohit, Babar, and Conway, Kohli looks just like another batsman.
 
Last edited:
ankitj

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
ma1978 said:
I don’t think it was that clear. A couple years in the 70s yes but for that period it’s really hard to say he was indisputably better than Gavaskar, Chappell and Miandad. Even in his team you could argue for long periods Greenidge or Richardson were better.

inner circle ATG though
Click to expand...
Viv Richards was ranked #1 consistently through the 80s too. More so than Gavaskar.
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
Smith is the biggest wicket of this era. I think we all have to admit that. The other three are fighting for second place.
 
M

ma1978

International 12th Man
ankitj said:
Viv Richards was ranked #1 consistently through the 80s too. More so than Gavaskar.
Click to expand...
yep - in my deeply unscientific analysis, on Jan 1 each year of the 80s the top ranked icc batsman was

viv -4
Lloyd - 2
One each for Gavaskar, Border, Miandad and Vengsarkar

was surprised to see Lloyd there
 
Migara

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
Gob said:
He didn't keep to many great fast bowlers though
Click to expand...
He didn't, you are correct. Keeping to great fast bowlers is not difficult. Keeping to Dilhara Fernando and Lasith Malinga who is bowling 140-145k and spraying it around is much more challenging.
 
Gob

Gob

International Coach
Migara said:
He didn't, you are correct. Keeping to great fast bowlers is not difficult. Keeping to Dilhara Fernando and Lasith Malinga who is bowling 140-145k and spraying it around is much more challenging.
Click to expand...
In cricket 07 they called him Dilhara Ferrari
 
OverratedSanity

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Never really bought that Kohli was Sachin level even at his peak in 2016. He's still an ATG who will turn it around and get back to somehwere close to his best soon enough I think, but he has quite a few more holes to his game than top tier ATGs like Sachin or Lara. He follows the ball which is obviously less than ideal in conditions where the ball moves sideways consistently. The reason he's succeeded in places like SA even though the ball has moved in some of the games he's played there is that generally on the up strokeplay tends to get rewarded more than in Eng/NZ.

Even apart from his defensive game, its only recently that people have kinda realized he's not a has-all-the-shots type maestro like some of the very best. He barely does any scoring square on the wicket on the off side these days apart from the front foot cover drive. Doesnt have a square cut because he opts to pull most of the time but doesnt do the backfoot punch or the dab down to third man well either. Other ATGs have their own flaws as well obviously but he's never really had the all around complete game to merit Tendulkar comparisons. In ODIs yeah, probably, but even there Tendulkar was arguably the best batsman at 3 separate WCs and Kohli's been decent but failed to dominate a single one so far.
 
G

gftw

U19 12th Man
Root is definitely ahead of Williamson for me currently, but that could change in the future. Root averages 52 in England, 50 in India, 50 in South Africa, 66 in Sri Lanka, 57 in UAE, and 54 in West Indies. His lowest 2 averages out of the top 8 are still around 40 (39 In New Zealand and 38 in Australia). Thats a ridiculously good away record in my opinion. He also has to bat half the time in England, which most batsmen consider the hardest batting conditions in the world, and is part of arguably one of the worst batting lineups ever so has no support and is always under pressure. Williamson averages 33 in England, 35 in India, 21 in South Africa, 27 in Sri Lanka. He averages 43 in Australia which is pretty good but you'd expect it to be higher if its the best of those 5 countries. He does have the disadvantage of playing less, so the future series in India and England will be very important for him and the next time he tours South Africa and Sri Lanka will be very important for him too. Root is probably tied with/slightly ahead of kohli for me. The upcoming ashes will be an opportunity for him to solidify himself as second place for me if he can have a solid series by scoring a few hundreds and as a result also boost his average in Australia into the 40s.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Very long ago, on the fab 4, I commented Root could be the Tendulkar to Smith's Lara. Virat being the Ponting and KW being the Dravid. I should have stuck with that, but I was deceived by that 2016 from Virat.
 
Spark

Spark

Global Moderator
Ponting was always the most appropriate comparison for Kohli in numerous ways, right down to similar technical strengths and weaknesses.
 
Pap Finn Keighl

Pap Finn Keighl

International Debutant
subshakerz said:
What is an all-time great (ATG)?

To me, it is someone who is best of the best, and merits consideration for an ATG XI selection from all eras (to be shortlisted if not actually enter the XI, like Tendulkar, Warne, Kallis, etc.)

Below that are great cricketers (among the best their team has produced in their country history but not quite rated best of the best, like Waqar, Dravid, Walsh, Michael Clarke, Anderson, Martin Crowe etc.).

Below that are world class cricketers (among the best when they played but didnt play long enough to be considered a great, Shane Bond, Shoaib, Ian Bishop, Saeed Anwar, etc).

Then you have frontline cricketers who are the top cricketers and automatic selections of their specific team at the time they played (like Mark Waugh, McDermott, etc.)

By the criteria, in the last 50 years, you have the below ATGs:

Australia: Lillee, Greg Chappell, Border, Warne, Ponting, Steve Waugh, McGrath, Gilchrist, Steve Smith

WI: Sobers, Viv, Marshall, Ambrose, Lara, maybe Holding

England: Trueman, Botham

NZ: Hadlee

Pakistan: Imran, Wasim

India: Gavaskar, Sachin, maybe Kohli

Sri Lanka: Murali, maybe Sanga

Zimbabwe: maybe Andy Flower

South Africa: Graeme Pollock, Allan Donald, Steyn, Kallis
Click to expand...
Waquar, Miandad, Dravid, Garner.... And KAPIL DEV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top