Is AB de Villiers an ATG?

[marc71178]

Technically very good.
Great hand eye co-ordination and soft hands.
Pretty good against both pace and spin.

The only thing in question could be his temperament to play test cricket but then looking at his FC record abolishes that doubt.

Bullshit does his FC record abolish any doubt, bloke doesn't even average 40 in County Cricket (a significant proportion of which was in division 2).

Serious the guy is one of the most overrated players on here.

 

[stephen]

Why? You dismissed JK that he wasnt the best batsman or the best bowler so he wasnt worrhy of a spot. Gilly wasn’t the in the best 7 batsman in history. He wasnt th best keeper ever. He can’t be picked based on his batting or keeping. It is his all around talents makes him an ATG and the same way Kallis’s all around talent with bowling and batting merits selection. Kallis would be the first pick for batting all rounder’s spot. There is competition from Sobers but arguably he’s the first pick.

A batting all-rounder isn't going to be needed to bowl every innings. Their secondary skillset isn't as valuable as their primary skillset. A keeper/bat has to do both every innings, so equal weight should be given both disciplines.

Keeping is an asymptotic discipline as well, meaning the difference between the very good and the great is nowhere near the difference between the average and the good. The difference between a very good keeper and a great keeper is one drop every two to three matches and maybe one or two byes over the course of the match. The difference between a great batsman (like Gilchrist) and a standard number 7 is 15 runs per innings (probably 25 runs per match), which is a much bigger gap. Having a great #7 also gives the top/middle order a better batting partner below them, giving them more opportunities to score big.

I rate Kallis very highly but he's behind a number of others in his era and quite a few others if we look at the history of the game.

 

[Daemon]

Haha, who the hell was better than Kallis in his era? No one comes close really.

unless you mean just as a batsman ofc

 

[harsh.ag]

Just as a batsman, he means.

 

[srbhkshk]

If you are looking at both skills together then McGrath/Marshall should be replaced by Imran/Hadlee in any ATG lineup.

 

[sledger]

LOL at excluding Knott then saying that Boucher is the closest to selection - do you even watch cricket?

Yeah, much as I like Boucher, the argument that he is 2nd greatest WK of all time is pretty grim.

 

[harsh.ag]

2nd greatest wk-bat tbf but yeah, it's still pretty thin. Sangakkara exists. Knotty of course. Ames ahead too.

 

[sledger]

2nd greatest wk-bat tbf but yeah, it's still pretty thin. Sangakkara exists. Knotty of course. Ames ahead too.

Prior probably ahead of Boucher as well imo.

 

[Tom Flint]

LOL at excluding Knott then saying that Boucher is the closest to selection - do you even watch cricket?

Im yet to see a decent post or opinion from this guy

 

[Dendarii]

A batting all-rounder isn't going to be needed to bowl every innings. Their secondary skillset isn't as valuable as their primary skillset. A keeper/bat has to do both every innings, so equal weight should be given both disciplines.

Keeping is an asymptotic discipline as well, meaning the difference between the very good and the great is nowhere near the difference between the average and the good. The difference between a very good keeper and a great keeper is one drop every two to three matches and maybe one or two byes over the course of the match. The difference between a great batsman (like Gilchrist) and a standard number 7 is 15 runs per innings (probably 25 runs per match), which is a much bigger gap. Having a great #7 also gives the top/middle order a better batting partner below them, giving them more opportunities to score big.

Just throwing this out there, although not as something which I seriously entertain, but if the argument for picking Gilchrist is that you gain substantially more in terms of batting than you lose because of being a slightly less good glovesman, then AB De Villiers averages 57.41 as keeper, 10 runs more than Gilchrist. Of course, Gilchrist did it for 96 matches and scored his runs at a strike rate of 81.95, compared with De Villiers' 24 matches and strike rate of 53.02 (and De Villiers didn't bat at 7), which does make all the difference.

 

[srbhkshk]

Just throwing this out there, although not as something which I seriously entertain, but if the argument for picking Gilchrist is that you gain substantially more in terms of batting than you lose because of being a slightly less good glovesman, then AB De Villiers averages 57.41 as keeper, 10 runs more than Gilchrist. Of course, Gilchrist did it for 96 matches and scored his runs at a strike rate of 81.95, compared with De Villiers' 24 matches and strike rate of 53.02 (and De Villiers didn't bat at 7), which does make all the difference.

Sanga/Flower can also be considered.

 

[Dendarii]

Sanga/Flower can also be considered.

Sangakkara only averaged 40.48 as keeper, but good point about Flower, who averaged 53.70.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Flower was a crap keeper though

awaits pews like

 

[Teja.]

Haha, who the hell was better than Kallis in his era? No one comes close really.

unless you mean just as a batsman ofc

murali/warne more valuable as cricketers over their careers to majority of test class teams through 95-2011ish, even as overall cricketers imo.

 

[Coronis]

Eh, Kallis should be a shoe-in for any ATG XI if Sobers didn't exist. Boucher as keeper gave me a chuckle. People always rag on Gilly's keeping but it wasn't anywhere near as bad as people here seem to want to make out.

 

[akilana]

No, but he is unquestionably the best number 7 batsman in history.

At that position maybe but he wasnt the top 7 in history.

 

[akilana]

A batting all-rounder isn't going to be needed to bowl every innings. Their secondary skillset isn't as valuable as their primary skillset. A keeper/bat has to do both every innings, so equal weight should be given both disciplines.

Keeping is an asymptotic discipline as well, meaning the difference between the very good and the great is nowhere near the difference between the average and the good. The difference between a very good keeper and a great keeper is one drop every two to three matches and maybe one or two byes over the course of the match. The difference between a great batsman (like Gilchrist) and a standard number 7 is 15 runs per innings (probably 25 runs per match), which is a much bigger gap. Having a great #7 also gives the top/middle order a better batting partner below them, giving them more opportunities to score big.

I rate Kallis very highly but he's behind a number of others in his era and quite a few others if we look at the history of the game.

Kallis isnt the greatest bowler or batsman ever. Gilly wasn’t the greatest batsman or keeper ever. What makes them hard to ignore is that they hVe managed to be good at 2 discipline.
When picking an ATG, I will probably pick the best keeper ever.

 

[Chrish]

Hadlee averaged 27 with the bat vs Mcgrath's only 7.

Yet lot of people would go for Mcgrath due to his superior bowling (IMO anyways), while neglecting the substantial difference of 20 runs. At least I try to pick players who were best at their main discipline in my Xi.

 

[Adders]

Eh, Kallis should be a shoe-in for any ATG XI if Sobers didn't exist. Boucher as keeper gave me a chuckle. People always rag on Gilly's keeping but it wasn't anywhere near as bad as people here seem to want to make out.

Eh? Who's ragging on Gilly's keeping? All I've seen said is that he isn't the best gloveman of all time.......and he isn't. That doesn't mean he wasn't very good.

 

[Coronis]

nb off 136 km/h