Which current players are/will be ATGs?

[CricAddict]

Allan Donald is an atg imo. The other two no they're great but they just lack 'something'. For my World XI, Donald's not making it over Hadlee, McGrath or Malcolm but he is in the short list of fast bowlers in the conversation. Some have suggested tiers for atg which kinda makes sense to me.

Not sure how Donald is in a shortlist for the world XI. He might not even make the 90s XI over Mcgrath, Ambrose, Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis as one of top two pacers. The third pacer of the 90s will be Shaun Pollock for his batting.

But to me, he is still an ATG since I don't define ATG by that way. For Aus, Eng, WI, everyone in the first two teams are ATG to me while Ind, Pak, NZ, SA and SL first XI guys are all ATGs.

 

[Slifer]

Not sure how Donald is in a shortlist for the world XI. He might not even make the 90s XI over Mcgrath, Ambrose, Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis as one of top two pacers. The third pacer of the 90s will be Shaun Pollock for his batting.

But to me, he is still an ATG since I don't define ATG by that way. For Aus, Eng, WI, everyone in the first two teams are ATG to me while Ind, Pak, NZ, SA and SL first XI guys are all ATGs.

Allan Donald is a definite for South Africa's XI and doesn't look out of place in an ATG XI. Coincidentally, 3 of the bowlers you listed are also atg imo: Ambrose, Glenn and Wasim. And respectfully, nobody ranks Shaun Pollock over Donald as a bowler.

From a statistical pov, when I look at atg fast bowlers they have to meet/come close to certain criteria which Donald does. They are:
Average below 25
SR below 55
WPM ~ 4
Great home/away ie </=25.
At least one 10 for.

You'd be surprised how few bowlers meet the above criteria. Post WW2 : From WI alone only 3 meet the above, for Australia 2, RSA 2, Pak 2, Eng zero.

 

[Bolo.]

Not sure how Donald is in a shortlist for the world XI. He might not even make the 90s XI over Mcgrath, Ambrose, Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis as one of top two pacers. The third pacer of the 90s will be Shaun Pollock for his batting.

But to me, he is still an ATG since I don't define ATG by that way. For Aus, Eng, WI, everyone in the first two teams are ATG to me while Ind, Pak, NZ, SA and SL first XI guys are all ATGs.

Their 2nd XI bowlers will be pleasantly surprised.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Allan Donald is an atg imo. The other two no they're great but they just lack 'something'. For my World XI, Donald's not making it over Hadlee, McGrath or Malcolm but he is in the short list of fast bowlers in the conversation. Some have suggested tiers for atg which kinda makes sense to me.

Big wraps for Devon

 

[Nintendo]

Allan Donald is a definite for South Africa's XI and doesn't look out of place in an ATG XI. Coincidentally, 3 of the bowlers you listed are also atg imo: Ambrose, Glenn and Wasim. And respectfully, nobody ranks Shaun Pollock over Donald as a bowler.

From a statistical pov, when I look at atg fast bowlers they have to meet/come close to certain criteria which Donald does. They are:
Average below 25
SR below 55
WPM ~ 4
Great home/away ie </=25.
At least one 10 for.

You'd be surprised how few bowlers meet the above criteria. Post WW2 : From WI alone only 3 meet the above, for Australia 2, RSA 2, Pak 2, Eng zero.

How would you factor someone like Anderson into this? Overall he doesn't mean the criteria, but he has a 9 year peak where he took 348 wickets in the middle where he meets all the criteria you put down.

 

[Slifer]

How would you factor someone like Anderson into this? Overall he doesn't mean the criteria, but he has a 9 year peak where he took 348 wickets in the middle where he meets all the criteria you put down.

I look at the overall. Because for example, I could do the same for a player like Walsh but how fair would that be to others who maintained they're excellence throughout their career. And I'm a huge Walsh fan.

 

[Athlai]

Rachin Ravindra

 

[Nintendo]

I look at the overall. Because for example, I could do the same for a player like Walsh but how fair would that be to others who maintained they're excellence throughout their career. And I'm a huge Walsh fan.

Walsh only has 405 wickets and meets the criteria overall anyway, doesn't he? Just feels weird to penalize anderson when he's had a peak as long as marshall/ambrose's career that meets the critera.

 

[howszat]

Smith
Kohli
Cummins
Jaiswal

 

[TheJediBrah]

Johnson Charles

 

[Nintendo]

Johnson Charles

He's got an ATG ****.

 

[Socerer 01]

Walsh only has 405 wickets and meets the criteria overall anyway, doesn't he? Just feels weird to penalize anderson when he's had a peak as long as marshall/ambrose's career that meets the critera.

yeah longevity tends to get a bit underrated on this forum in direct and atg comparisons

 

[Socerer 01]

Some people are setting the bar pretty bloody high for the modern guys, especially batsmen in this era.

60 seems to be a bit of a cap across eras for people not called Bradman, but Kohli, Root and KW plus a few Tier 2 batsmen like Babar and Mathews would go to absolute pound town if they played in 2004.

It's an interesting chat on Bumrah since I'm not sure we'll get many more 3 format pace bowlers racking up big wicket tallies. That is already the case for the best ODI bowlers going around due to rotation, and it's starting to become standard across the sport. I think joining the 300 club is about the absolute most we can expect from now on, with Anderson, McGrath, Walsh etc being outliers forever. 250 @ 21 is going to become a pretty golden career (kinda is anyway tbh you take that if offered it).

what an atg post

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Smith is the only ATG. Cummins probably will be as well. Root, Williamson, Kohli imo aren’t quite ATG.

 

[Socerer 01]

if NZ’s greatest batsman isnt an atg then the criteria for who is an atg needs serious revision

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

if NZ’s greatest batsman isnt an atg then the criteria for who is an atg needs serious revision

Or NZ needs better batsmen.

 

[honestbharani]

Or NZ needs better batsmen.

Should have traded Woakes when they gave away Stokes.

 

[ma1978]

It's only 20 because I used 3 countries. They'd be more once we include the other teams.

India: Sachin, Sunny , Bumrah (in the future)
Pakistan: Imran, Wasim
SL: Murali
Etc.

What we're not going to do, is say every Tom, Dick and Harry is an atg because then that term loses it's meaning. Atg for me means the elite of the elite.

How do you reconcile the statistical improbability that India and the Windies have played nearly the same amount of tests, India has a better W/L record but you ascribe six ATGs to the Windies and two to India.

Do you not see the deep limitations with your minimalist definition

 

[Sunil1z]

How do you reconcile the statistical improbability that India and the Windies have played nearly the same amount of tests, India has a better W/L record but you ascribe six ATGs to the Windies and two to India.

Do you not see the deep limitations with your minimalist definition

That is because when WI were good they were very good . When they are bad they are very bad .
While India has never touched the highs and lows of WI .

 

[ma1978]

That is because when WI were good they were very good . When they are bad they are very bad .
While India has never touched the highs and lows of WI .

Most of the ATGs he articulated were out of the period of WI greatness. His analysis was so bad it excluded people who contributed to the great period like Lloyd, Holding and Garner