Yeah, if Imran retired around 87/88, this wouldnt be a debate, Imran would be a clear favorite and be a contender with Hadlee/Marshall. Those last few years where he was a proper bat and a part-time bowler took him down a notch. I still think he is better than Steyn though who was not as good as posters are making out to be.I know,I was just telling that if Imran retired in 1987 I would put him in top 3.
If you pick Steyn, he will be unlikely to get the new ball ahead of Hadlee and Marshall which reduces his effectiveness.So going by the results of two recent polls, and taking into account Subshakerz's objections.
It appears that we believe that Steyn is better than Imran and McGrath is also slightly more highly rated than Hadlee.
But in a all time XI with Marshall and Warne, most wouldn't want Steyn and McGrath, preferring a more accomplished bat at no. 8. McGrath and Hadlee are too similar and while the bat deep crew would say Imran and Hadlee, they would be the ones who both came out 2nd best in the last two comps and personally wouldn't want all 3 bowlers from the same era.
So that leaves options (to me) of either.
Imran and McGrath
Hadlee and Steyn
To accompany Marshall and Warne.
I lean towards the former, McGrath is my clear no. 2 overall and Imran the best bat of the 4 options, so best suited to 8, but also possibly the (slightly) worst bowler of the 4.
But Hadlee is seen by most to be just a hair below McGrath, while being the better bat, and Steyn is a better bowler than Imran and with Hadlee at 8 already the better bowler can be chosen.
So what do you guys think is the better combination of the two?
Was going to make this a thread, but think we've had enough comps of late.
Yeah, this supports my theory that matches between ATGS will inevitably be low scoring affairs, since no batsman barring Bradman can be expected to withstand that kind of firepower for long unless its a flat pitch.In an all time side, the balance question is definitely different than if you were just picking individual vs individual. If you had batting lineup of say - Hobbs, Hutton, Bradman, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist all in their prime - it would be a fair question about why you would need anyone else that can even hold a bat. But I suppose you have to assume that this lineup will go up against a second all time XI or similar, which may have a bowling attack of any four of the following: Marshall, Lillee, McGrath, Ambrose, Imran, Warne, Murali, Akram, Steyn, Trueman, Barnes - all of them also in their primes. I think ANY four of those are potentially even scarier than the batitng line up and are certainly capable of causing a collapse in *any* all time XI, especially if the conditions were even slightly in their favor. So I still think you'd want to take batting into consideration and pick the guy who can bat more if the bowling was otherwise of a similar-ish level.
There will be no significant difference between Warne and Murali with the bat, if the opposing side is sporting 5 ATG bowlers. Infact the edge in bowling would matter more.Yeah, this supports my theory that matches between ATGS will inevitably be low scoring affairs, since no batsman barring Bradman can be expected to withstand that kind of firepower for long unless its a flat pitch.
Which is why I am going for Imran, Hadlee, Marshall and Warne as my tail. The difference in bowling is minimal compared to the run value.