South Africa ATG - Open Voting

[BoyBrumby]

Richards & Mitchell.

Mitchell's tally of 42 tests over 20 years sounds meagre, but he actually played every one of the (then) Springboks' tests from debut to untimely dropping.

Nowadays it's a fair guess he'd have nigh on 200 tests to his name.

 

[harsh.ag]

Barry Richards and Graeme Smith.
Also, Bruce Mitchell's bowling record kinda shows that literally anybody could have a good bowling record during that period.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Barry Richards and Graeme Smith.

Barlow a simmed-match bully.

 

[JBMAC]

Barry Richards and Graeme Smith.

Barlow a simmed-match bully.

An explanation please. I was lucky enough to see Barlow's century at The Gabba in '63. As fine a knock as I have ever seen.Totally belligerent and in command of the Aussie bowling attack.Three things stand out in my mind from that match.
1. Barlows Hundred
2. Booths 160 odd
3. Benauds "five for" in the second SA innings

 

[Garson007]

Smith and Kirsten.

 

[watson]

An explanation please. I was lucky enough to see Barlow's century at The Gabba in '63. As fine a knock as I have ever seen.Totally belligerent and in command of the Aussie bowling attack.Three things stand out in my mind from that match.
1. Barlows Hundred
2. Booths 160 odd
3. Benauds "five for" in the second SA innings

And here is the scorecard from that Brisbane Test;
1st Test: Australia v South Africa at Brisbane, Dec 6-11, 1963 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

And here is the Lord's scorecard from that 'Simmed' series. Barlow scored 119 against Snow, Ward, Shuttleworth, Underwood, and Illingworth;
England v Rest of the World XI at Lord's, Jun 17-22, 1970 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Edgar Barlow was pretty close to being Barry Richard's partner for my ATG RSA team because he was also a great slips-fielder and handy 5th bowler/partnership breaker, besides being a highly competent batsman.

However, if you check out the bowlers he faced then it is obvious that he was lucky enough to play inbetween the eras of Davidson and Lillee, Hall and Roberts. He also missed out on playing against Trueman, and Snow or Willis in a real Series. No disrepect to Graham McKenzie (dismissed Barlow the most times - 8) but he not quite in the same class as any of those fast bowlers.

HowSTAT! Player Dismissal Analysis

 

[Rasimione]

Richards and Smith. surely its not too hard. Smith does not get the recognition he deservrs. the guy is a 4 innings monster ffs.

 

[Howe_zat]

I'm pretty sure that in the side we pick Barlow will struggle to get a bowl, he would be behind Kallis and as such be the 6th or maybe 7th bowler, depending on how many allrounders are picked.

 

[Teja.]

Richards and Mitchell

Barlow not picked for the reason given by Howe

 

[fredfertang]

I'm pretty sure that in the side we pick Barlow will struggle to get a bowl, he would be behind Kallis and as such be the 6th or maybe 7th bowler, depending on how many allrounders are picked.

I'm a great fan of Eddie Barlow and was tempted to pick him rather than the bloke I did eventually decide should partner Barry Richards, but this is an excellent point. As a minimum Kallis, Procter and Sean Pollock are going to be selected and, unless Eddie is skipper or just refuses to give the ball back until he gets a bowl, theyre all going to bowl before him

Overall I suspect there is going to be a greater degree of agreement on this side than the others, by a comfortable margin

 

[Howe_zat]

I actually think the number of allrounders available means there's much more room for manouvre in this side. For example you could say there's little need for Pollock when you have Procter (or vice versa) and there'll be some debate over whether Tayfield should be picked ahead of a 4-man pace attack when Faulkner will probably be there to provide spin. And if you go with only 1 or 2 specialist pace bowlers, then which of Donald, Steyn and Adcock miss out.

 

[watson]

I actually think the number of allrounders available means there's much more room for manouvre in this side. For example you could say there's little need for Pollock when you have Procter (or vice versa) and there'll be some debate over whether Tayfield should be picked ahead of a 4-man pace attack when Faulkner will probably be there to provide spin. And if you go with only 1 or 2 specialist pace bowlers, then which of Donald, Steyn and Adcock miss out.

I agree that there is little need for Shaun Pollock as an allrounder because of Faulkner-Waite-Procter in the lower-middle-order.

It may make more sense to play a third strike bowler of real pace like Adcock, Peter Pollock or Steyn to partner Donald and Procter. Then the RSA attack would be on a par with the Windies ATG attack. Peter Pollock, Steyn, and Tayfield are also handy lower-order batsman as well.

Incidently, Shaun Pollock's bowling average against Australia (1997-2006) is 36.85

 

[Jager]

Four man pace attacks are just plain wrong in my opinion, for all the credit that Warne/Murali get you'd think having at least one spinner of ATG level in each team would be a bare minimum.

 

[Prince EWS]

Bruce Mitchell
Graeme Smith

 

[Flem274*]

Graeme Smith
Gary Kirsten

 

[watson]

Four man pace attacks are just plain wrong in my opinion, for all the credit that Warne/Murali get you'd think having at least one spinner of ATG level in each team would be a bare minimum.

I agree, 3 x quicks, 1 x off-spinner, and 1 x leggie/left-armer is the ultimate attack as it covers all pitches and conditions. Not to mention dismiss batsman who play pace well, but spin not so well, and vice versa.

I remember Murray Bennett making the great Viv Richards look second rate at the SCG in 1985. He had absolutely no idea how to combat Bennett's flipper in the second innings and got his stumps smashed. I lept out of my lounge-room seat at the time.

Here we have a fabulous scorecard where Australia bat first and score 471 against Marshall, Garner, Holding, and Walsh (!!!), and then the Windies are bowled out twice by the leggies to lose by an innings;

5th Test: Australia v West Indies at Sydney, Dec 30, 1984 - Jan 2, 1985 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[SeamUp]

Barry Richards
Graeme Smith

Some would argue about including Barry over the rest (considering their records and service). Its just unfortunate we never got to see more of him at test level but there is no denying his quality. I'm a big fan of Eddie Barlow, he is someone you want in your team to fight by your side but unfotunately misses out.


Besides the other options mentioned above as openers (Gary Kirsten, Herschelle Gibbs, Eddie Barlow & Bruce Mitchell) who missed out in my selection.

Other notable mentions -

Herbie Taylor (1912-1932) opened succesfully at times for South Africa but would jump between opening and the middle order just like Eric Rowan (1935-1951) did. Jackie McGlew (1951-1962) was a stone-waller opener but there is no arguing with his test career record and his stature in SA cricket. Another was all-rounder Trevor Goddard (1955-1970) who opened for the majority of his career. Lastly Jimmy Cook (FC career 1972-1995) would have eventually taken over from Eddie Barlow as Barry Richard's opening partner in the mid to late 70's and into the 80's. I would have had no doubt that he would have had a successful test career barring isolation.

 

[Teja.]

Yeah, The only reason I did not pick Herbie Taylor to open because he's the first batsman I'd pick to bat in the middle order for SA, at No. 4.

The best batsman SA has ever produced, and the best batsman in the world between WG's peak and the entry of Sir Jack, in my opinion.

 

[Teja.]

500+ runs against England in 1913/1914 against Barnes taking 49 wickets @ 10.

Boggles the mind, really.

 

[Howe_zat]

God ****ing damnit it's going to be Smith isn't it