The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[Line and Length]

There is always one Joker in the pack

You'll find another one in my survey of top bowlers poll.

 

[CricAddict]

You'll find another one in my survey of top bowlers poll.

Which bowler do you mean?

 

[Coronis]

Sir Jack Hobbs
Graeme Smith^*
Sir Donald Bradman
Sir I. V. A. Richards^
Sachin Tendulkar
Sir Garfield Sobers^(5)
Adam Gilchrist +
Malcolm Marshall (1)
Shane Warne (4)
Dale Steyn (3)
Glenn McGrath (2)

Sir Leonard Hutton
Steve Smith
Sir Richard Hadlee
Muttiah Muralitharan

Injured reserve / 18 man squad
Imran Khan
Brian Lara / Jacques Kallis
Allan Knott

I assume you’re just picking Smith for L/R?

 

[Coronis]

Which bowler do you mean?

A certain poster has been voting Ashwin at the top of his list for each vote.

 

[kyear2]

I assume you’re just picking Smith for L/R?

The more I thought about it, the more right it felt.

Been saying for quite a while that the only thing missing from an ATG XI is an aggressive LH opening bat who could catch and would be a bonus if he could bowl a bit. So until Jaiswal gets there, this makes too much sense for me to ignore.

So yes... The L/ R opening combination, the aggression, his hands at first and he's captaining the squad.

 

[kyear2]

Pakistan has been the worst fielding side of all time. If we were to account for bad fielding (and the knock on effect that has), the stats of Akram or Imran would be just like your Steyn, Hadlee or McGrath who had wonderful fielders taking even half chances.

So if I am choosing an ATG attack, I am factoring everything in and the overall skill level of a bowler and what extra they bring to the table. Because attacks work as a group and you need variety to trouble every kind of batsman. With Wasim the left arm angle is a huge plus and certain batsmen are simply not as effective against it coupled with his extravagant swing. Then Ambrose brings his height to the table and how awkward he is to face for any batter.

I agree with all of your philosophical points. I believe that it's not about picking the 3 best bowlers but ones who complement each other and fill different roles.

I equally feel that as we're nuanced with the bowling attack, you should give them the support they had that contributed to their success, otherwise you end up with the same scenario that Wasim had. The guys capable of taking the half chances, you need at least two guys of that quality.

The cheat is that Sobers is already there, so hw dulls 3 rules. In addition to being as good as any batsman in the team BB, he's also the 5th bowler capable of filling in if either pace or spin is required depending on the pitch, and he's our specialist 2nd slip. Yeah, he's one of the 3 most valuable members of the team and one of the 3 first names written down.

One of the less than a handful of gentlemen in contention for the best after Bradman, a test standard swing and Chinaman bowler and an unsurpassed slip fielder in the class of Simpson and Hammond. He every bit the freak that Bradman was.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Pakistan has been the worst fielding side of all time. If we were to account for bad fielding (and the knock on effect that has), the stats of Akram or Imran would be just like your Steyn, Hadlee or McGrath who had wonderful fielders taking even half chances.

So if I am choosing an ATG attack, I am factoring everything in and the overall skill level of a bowler and what extra they bring to the table. Because attacks work as a group and you need variety to trouble every kind of batsman. With Wasim the left arm angle is a huge plus and certain batsmen are simply not as effective against it coupled with his extravagant swing. Then Ambrose brings his height to the table and how awkward he is to face for any batter.

I mean, if we are being fair then Wasim and especially Imran did had some wonderful umpires to balance the odds....

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Hobbs
Gavaskar
Bradman
Tendulkar
V Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist
Warne
Wasim Akram (3)
Marshall (1)
McGrath (2)

12th man: Ambrose replaces Wasim on certain pitches.

Variety in attack is much more important IMO instead of having somewhat similar bowlers. You have Marshall you don't need Steyn, you have McGrath don't need Hadlee.

Batting wise I'd go Wasim, Marshall, Warne rather than Warne, Wasim, Marshall

 

[bagapath]

even if they averaged 0 with the bat, Imran and Hadlee are top contenders to open an ATG attack.

There is nothing separating Imran, Hadlee, McGrath, Marshall, Steyn and Ambrose at the top layer from one another except our personal preferences.

Lillee, Akram, Donald, Holding and Trueman will be slightly below that layer because one one factor (overseas records) or the other (not so stellar record against one opponent) etc. Barnes is tough to juxtapose against them line by line because we don't know enough. But will be in contention at the third plane anyways with Davidson, Waqar, Lindwall, Cummins, Garner, S Pollock, Roberts and Anderson completing the Top 20.

Building an ATG XI where Imran and Hadlee take the two ball is perfectly legit IMO without factoring in their batting abilities.

 

[kyear2]

even if they averaged 0 with the bat, Imran and Hadlee are top contenders to open an ATG attack.

There is nothing separating Imran, Hadlee, McGrath, Marshall, Steyn and Ambrose at the top layer from one another except our personal preferences.

Lillee, Akram, Donald, Holding and Trueman will be slightly below that layer because one one factor (overseas records) or the other (not so stellar record against one opponent) etc. Barnes is tough to juxtapose against them line by line because we don't know enough. But will be in contention at the third plane anyways with Davidson, Waqar, Lindwall, Cummins, Garner, S Pollock, Roberts and Anderson completing the Top 20.

Building an ATG XI where Imran and Hadlee take the two ball is perfectly legit IMO without factoring in their batting abilities.

We can agree to disagree. Marshall (skill set, bullet proof overall record), McGrath (consistency, longevity, accuracy) and Hadlee (lone wolf with excellent record) all separate themselves in books from the next 3.
From being less consistent or more expensive, to having less stellar away records, I believe the next three are in a group slightly below.

And like Sachin, I believe Maco had done enough to be seen as the best.

 

[TheJediBrah]

There is nothing separating Imran, Hadlee, McGrath, Marshall, Steyn and Ambrose at the top layer from one another except our personal preferences.

Yes there is

Kyear has it right. Marshall, McGrath and Hadlee stand slightly above the others

 

[bagapath]

sure... you can argue that. but please argue.
the true pleasure in participating in this forum is reading detailed arguments, even if you don't agree with them, from other posters;
especially in the not-so-clear cut cases like this one.

I am imagining Ambrose with the new ball in his hand. And Imran at the top of his bowling mark.
Who else could be more intimidating and effective than these two as the opening pair, in any condition against any opposition?

I love Marshall and Hadlee; and I selected them in my all-time XI

Bagapath's Greatest XI

Someone else should do one these. Suggesting Bagapath so we can detest his side as well. Thanks to Furball's excellent thread and Pothas' challenge, I am very tempted to share my Greatest XI with you. I started following cricket in the early '80s. But we bought our first TV only in 1985...

www.cricketweb.net

But I am not sure if they would be better than Imran and Ambrose.
Or, may be, they will be. In India, perhaps.
But which pair would be better in Pakistan? Or Australia? Or England? In West Indies?

It is an interesting trip to go into the what-ifs.
It is not easy for me to split the six pacers I have mentioned.
I have always voted for Marshall and Hadlee in all the polls;
but I am not sure if I was not wrong in each and every one of those occasions.

 

[kyear2]

sure... you can argue that. but please argue.
the true pleasure in participating in this forum is reading detailed arguments, even if you don't agree with them, from other posters;
especially in the not-so-clear cut cases like this one.

I am imagining Ambrose with the new ball in his hand. And Imran at the top of his bowling mark.
Who else could be more intimidating and effective than these two as the opening pair, in any condition against any opposition?

I love Marshall and Hadlee; and I selected them in my all-time XI

Bagapath's Greatest XI

Someone else should do one these. Suggesting Bagapath so we can detest his side as well. Thanks to Furball's excellent thread and Pothas' challenge, I am very tempted to share my Greatest XI with you. I started following cricket in the early '80s. But we bought our first TV only in 1985...

www.cricketweb.net

But I am not sure if they would be better than Imran and Ambrose.
Or, may be, they will be. In India, perhaps.
But which pair would be better in Pakistan? Or Australia? Or England? In West Indies?

It is an interesting trip to go into the what-ifs.
It is not easy for me to split the six pacers I have mentioned.
I have always voted for Marshall and Hadlee in all the polls;
but I am not sure if I was not wrong in each and every one of those occasions.

I think Marshall was just better, your wrote up said it as well as I could, he just had everything and excelled against everyone in all conditions. No one else can say that.

McGrath had that ridiculous accuracy, the bounce, the consistency, transitioning well between eras and didn't miss a beat.

They both were the keys to dynasties and lifted their games against the very best.

Hadlee carried a team on his back performed as well as any man could, the records seem almost superhuman.

-

Steyn on the other hand could spray it about a bit, but always maintained his hyper aggression. He probably also had the best home conditions of everyone involved, and the away record again not as good as the top 3.

Ambrose wasn't the most attacking in his second half and while never losing his accuracy wasn't as consistently menacing in the later years as the rest here. I'm his prime a beast though.

Imran has the home away / gap and again his strike rate was basically on par with Sit Curly's and worse away from Pakistan. Away from Pakistan he just wasn't the same level ATG as he was at home..

There's layers to this imo

 

[kyear2]

Top 16 Batsman
Bradman

Tendulkar
Sobers
Hobbs

Richards
Smith
Lara
Hutton

Gavaskar
Ponting
Hammond
Chappell

Kallis
Sangakkara
Headley
Sutcliffe



Top 14 bowlers
Marshall
McGrath
Hadlee

Steyn
Warne
Muralitharan
Ambrose

Imran
Donald
Lillee
O'Reilly

Wasim
Trueman
Garner



Top 12 Slip fielders
Hammond
Simpson
Sobers
Chappell
Taylor
Waugh
Ponting
Richardson
Hooper
Kallis

Jayawardene
Dravid



Top 10 all rounders
Sobers
Imran
Gilchrist
Kallis
Miller
Botham
Hadlee
Pollock
Jadeja
Kapil



Top 8 Captains
Benaud
Ranatunga
Taylor
Flemming

Worrell
Jardine
Lloyd
Imran

All Time XI & Squad

Sir Jack Hobbs
Graeme Smith^*
Sir Donald Bradman
Sir. I. V. A. Richards^
Sachin Tendulkar
Sir Garfield Sobers^(5)
Adam Gilchrist +
Malcolm Marshall (1)
Shane Warne (4)
Dale Steyn (3)
Glenn McGrath (2)

Sir Leonard Hutton
Steve Smith
Sir Richard Hadlee
Muttiah Muralitharan

Injured reserves
Imran Khan
Jacques Kallis / Brian Lara
Allan Knott


Top 25 cricketers of All Time

Tier 1
Bradman / Sobers / Marshall / Hobbs / Hadlee / McGrath / Tendulkar

Tier 2
Richards / Steyn / Warne / Imran / Muralitharan / Smith / Lara / Hammond / Hutton / Kallis / Gilchrist / Gavaskar / Ambrose / O'Reilly / Headley / Ponting (or Chappell) / Wasim / Sutcliffe.

 

[Victor Ian]

Why do we not rate Murali or Warne higher? Not only are these guys taking a huge chunk of wickets per match, but they are essential to keeping the other bowlers fresh and the over rates up and keeping the threat on while the ball is ****.

 

[Coronis]

Why do we not rate Murali or Warne higher? Not only are these guys taking a huge chunk of wickets per match, but they are essential to keeping the other bowlers fresh and the over rates up and keeping the threat on while the ball is ****.

This is very important no doubt. Personally I have them 4th and 5th, mainly due to their ineffectiveness in certain countries (yes, India), making them liabilities there, compared to the three i have above them who do not have such glaring holes over such a sample size (lol) of tests.

 

[kyear2]

Why do we not rate Murali or Warne higher? Not only are these guys taking a huge chunk of wickets per match, but they are essential to keeping the other bowlers fresh and the over rates up and keeping the threat on while the ball is ****.

To start,. Spinners by default are less efficient, but they somewhat make up for it by volume. They are of ten less effective early in matches and definitely more conditions dependent.

With specific regards to these two, they have glaring holes the top 4 just don't have. Australia, Lara and India for Murali, Lara and India for Warne. Australia possibly also would have put him to the sword. Those can't be over looked.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Murali dominated both India and Australia in SL at least tbf.

 

[Coronis]

Murali dominated both India and Australia in SL at least tbf.

Yes but say you have an ATG attack of Marshall/McGrath/Hadlee (generally top 3 pacers) and either Murali/Warne. You take this XI to a specific country and Murali/Warne become a liability. The other 3 aren’t - this is why I rate them below.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Yes but say you have an ATG attack of Marshall/McGrath/Hadlee (generally top 3 pacers) and either Murali/Warne. You take this XI to a specific country and Murali/Warne become a liability. The other 3 aren’t - this is why I rate them below.

Yeah no doubt. I just think that it's still some uber specific scenarios where they struggle and it matters less than the sheer volume of wickets they bring. I understand they're less impactful per wicket but they're definitely making up for it imo. Would probably still have them 4th or so anyway so I dont disagree with you.