Is AB de Villiers an ATG test batsman?

[shortpitched713]

Border had a **** side for the first four years of his captaincy. Basically if he got out the side was ****ed. Have a look at some of the line ups he had around him. It's not his fault a lot of them were rubbish. Fmd if Aus avoided the follow-on in the mid 80s the publicans would buy a round for the front bar. It's genuinely difficult to fathom how utterly woeful those sides were unless you saw them play. They were a one man band.

No doubt they were bad. I still think it's weird to say Border's a better batsman, because he was a better captain. Especially when the other is a rather interesting what if story, not just in Pakistan cricket history, but in world history generally.

 

[shortpitched713]

The problem is both were great cricketers in their own way. But Miandad was more entertaining to watch but if you ask me to choose a player in my test side I will go for Border and definitely laid the foundation for Australian Dominance in 90s. But the point with Pakistan players is it’s very difficult to manage them and you need different skills which only Imran Khan had. So Captaincy is not a criteria we can bring into discussion as to become a successful Pakistan captain is very tough as the board and players are very corrupted.

Generally curious what this means. Did he make a big effort to start influencing the picks into the side, like Imran did?

I mean, I don't think he was running the youth sides in Australian cricket while also playing and captaining, so why exactly should he get credit for historically unmatched (except for Bradman's Invincibles) talent surge into Australian cricket as he was leaving?

 

[Burgey]

I'm not factoring in captaincy though. He was just a better batsman. My comments were in response to the posts regarding tons in winning sides. You can make as many tons as you like, but if you're the only bloke doing it and your attack has the likes of Dave Gilbert, Peter Sleep, Tony Dodemaide and a young Merv Hughes in it, you aren't going to be taking 20 wickets very often.

 

[Burgey]

Generally curious what this means.

If you think Steve Waugh was a hard nosed SOB, Border was him squared. The players of Waugh's generation were taught how to be tough and what it took to win by Border. Ask any of the blokes who played under him what his biggest influence was, and they will all say that was it.

He basically spent his first four years as skipper having the **** kicked out of him everywhere and it made him really uncompromising. It probably wasn't the best thing for his captaincy tbh, because he became risk averse for a lot of years, especially after the tied test in 86. But it's what moulded his approach and that of those who played under him.

 

[Prince EWS]

To me Miandad and Border were obviously of similar quality. I suppose you have to draw the line somewhere but to say one is an ATG and one isn't seems odd to me.

 

[CricketFan90s]

If you think Steve Waugh was a hard nosed SOB, Border was him squared. The players of Waugh's generation were taught how to be tough and what it took to win by Border. Ask any of the blokes who played under him what his biggest influence was, and they will all say that was it.

He basically spent his first four years as skipper having the **** kicked out of him everywhere and it made him really uncompromising. It probably wasn't the best thing for his captaincy tbh, because he became risk averse for a lot of years, especially after the tied test in 86. But it's what moulded his approach and that of those who played under him.

Border was a defensive captain and could not beat West Indies during his time as he did not promote an attacking approach. However, from 1989 he slowly changed his strategy to be a better captain. Imran Khan was a better Captain but no one blames Border’s captaincy as his defensive approach still made the Team become better over the years like winning 1987 World Cup and Ashes victories from 1989.

 

[CricketFan90s]

To me Miandad and Border were obviously of similar quality. I suppose you have to draw the line somewhere but to say one is an ATG and one isn't seems odd to me.

I feel Border and Miandad are like Apple ? and Orange ?.

 

[shortpitched713]

Don't be caught calling these guys fruits. They some hard, fighting men who would do you one for.

 

[CricketFan90s]

Man I have tried to support Miandad ? as much as I can but Border ? is not an ordinary cricketer himself a World Cup and Ashes Winning Captain, World Record Run Scorer in Test Cricket he holds his own credibility to be in the discussion of All Time Greats ?

 

[CricketFan90s]

@shortpitched713 you have made an interesting discussion today but just explain why you have chosen each player in the list you have specified. You have your own criteria for selection and doesn't need to win an argument to prove your point. It looks like you like players who are more entertaining to watch.

 

[subshakerz]

If you think Steve Waugh was a hard nosed SOB, Border was him squared. The players of Waugh's generation were taught how to be tough and what it took to win by Border. Ask any of the blokes who played under him what his biggest influence was, and they will all say that was it.

He basically spent his first four years as skipper having the **** kicked out of him everywhere and it made him really uncompromising. It probably wasn't the best thing for his captaincy tbh, because he became risk averse for a lot of years, especially after the tied test in 86. But it's what moulded his approach and that of those who played under him.

The undermining of Border and Waugh on CW is quite criminal.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Border and even ****s like Ranatunga deserve credit for being tough guys in terrible to mediocre teams. Waugh had it way easier.

 

[ZK$]

The undermining of Kallis on CW is quite criminal.

I agree.

 

[Flem274*]

Border was a rare 50+ batsman in his era. He's underrated if anything since we've just come off a glut of those guys.

Like, if you remove your nostalgia or modern bias goggles, that era was pretty similar to this one (albeit less teams). Most sides had some strong bowlers and 50+ batsmen were rare.

On Philander, classic ATVG imo. Not great everywhere, but an instant win button at home and pretty similar sometimes overseas. Being overshadowed by Steyn is no disgrace and Philander would make nearly every team in history.

 

[271 & 16/166]

...just wondering when AB was last mentioned in this thread

 

[shortpitched713]

The undermining of Border and Waugh on CW is quite criminal.

Very, very good players, and excellent leaders. But we're talking about the ATGs of batting. I'm not bringing the other intangibles that made them really great, and led to Australia's dominance, into the picture.

 

[shortpitched713]

@shortpitched713 you have made an interesting discussion today but just explain why you have chosen each player in the list you have specified. You have your own criteria for selection and doesn't need to win an argument to prove your point. It looks like you like players who are more entertaining to watch.

They're all pretty self explanatory. They're all the top 1-2 batsmen or bowlers at the time they were playing. There are a few gaps where I think the players standard isn't high enough, but it covers almost all of the history from ( 70- ), exclusing the current batch of players. The only thing to justify were the exclusions, which I think I did in this thread.

 

[Senile Sentry]

you got people out here putting george headley in their atg xi ffs

Or that dude who retired after just 52 tests.

 

[Senile Sentry]

I think AB has inherently more talent and skillset than Kallis but lacked the mental fortitude to push it up a level above. To do so well across wherever he played is no mean thing. AB didn't have a real weakness and it's just confounding then that why he didn't go on to average like 60+ that he probably should have.

For some damned reason, he averaged only 39 vs India, despite averaging 45 plus in India. That's insane really.

Anyhoo not much to separate him from Kallis averages wise if one removes Ban and Zim from the mix. AB is underrated as much as Kallis is overrated imho.

 

[CricketFan90s]

I think AB has inherently more talent and skillset than Kallis but lacked the mental fortitude to push it up a level above. To do so well across wherever he played is no mean thing. AB didn't have a real weakness and it's just confounding then that why he didn't go on to average like 60+ that he probably should have.

For some damned reason, he averaged only 39 vs India, despite averaging 45 plus in India. That's insane really.

Anyhoo not much to separate him from Kallis averages wise if one removes Ban and Zim from the mix. AB is underrated as much as Kallis is overrated imho.

ABD role was different from that of Kallis. Kallis usually came a No 3 or 4 and ABD at No 5 or 6. Kallis has to do a supporting role on the other hand ABD has to play generally a quick innings with tailenders to increase the lead before the Team gets All out. ABD is like Steve Waugh a good No 5 player. Kallis and Lara are the right comparison as both usually played at No4 with occasionally coming up at No3.