• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Would Botham make it to your England ATG XI?

Does Botham make it to the England ATG XI?

  • Total voters
    36
Sliferxxxx

Sliferxxxx

State Vice-Captain
Northerner said:
I am completely chilled, and i disagree 100%, that Pollock was better than Willis and Ando and Broad where not the same level as Polly , and Larwood was better than all of them, you started the personal attack calling me insane, and its not a general consensus at all. just a couple of you,
Click to expand...
You put Gough on the same level as Pollock. Here's what you wrote:" [...] Gough are in the equation too." Don't like being called out, stop posting stuff like this. Anderson for his body of work is fine, even if I believe he's below Pollock but Broad, Snow, Bedser etc no. I also can't help but notice you neglected the other 3rd seamers from other teams I listed. So I guess you think Gough and Broad are also up there with Waqar or Garner or Lindwall.
 
N

Northerner

U19 12th Man
Sliferxxxx said:
You put Gough on the same level as Pollock. Here's what you wrote:" [...] Gough are in the equation too." Don't like being called out, stop posting stuff like this. Anderson for his body of work is fine, even if I believe he's below Pollock but Broad, Snow, Bedser etc no. I also can't help but notice you neglected the other 3rd seamers from other teams I listed. So I guess you think Gough and Broad are also up there with Waqar or Garner or Lindwall.
Click to expand...
In the equation of being a great fast bowler. so was Snow. and no i dont think they are up their with Garner, Waqar and Lindwall. and neither is Polly,, however Lindwalls strike rate is not as good as Broads or Andersons, if you dont like being called out then dont accuse me of being insane. its quite simple,
 
Sliferxxxx

Sliferxxxx

State Vice-Captain
Northerner said:
In the equation of being a great fast bowler. so was Snow. and no i dont think they are up their with Garner, Waqar and Lindwall. , however Lindwalls strike rate is not as good as Broads or Andersons, if you dont like being called out then dont accuse me of being insane. its quite simple,
Click to expand...
If you're offended by the "insane" comment, I apologize for that. I still disagree with your ratings though but we are all entitled to our opinions.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
Sliferxxxx said:
Mine is much stricter:

Aus:

Bradman, Chappell, Smith, Gilchrist, McGrath, Lillee, Warne, O'Reilly. On the fence: Waugh, Lindwall, Miller, Davidson, Grimmett, Ponting

Eng:

Hobbs, Hammond, Sutcliffe, Hutton, Barrington, Barnes, Trueman, Knott. On the fence: Laker, Verity, Root, Compton

WI

Headley, Sobers, Viv, Lara, Marshall, Ambrose. On the fence: Garner, Gibbs, Holding, Weekes, Walcott

RSA

Kallis, Pollock, Steyn, Pollock S Donald. On the fence: Tayfield, Faulkner, Adcock, Nourse, Rabada

NZ

Hadlee. Williamson on the fence

Pak

Wasim, Imran. On the fence: Waqar, Javed, Younis Khan

India

Sachin, Sunny. On the fence Ashwin, Bumrah, Dravid.

SL

Murali. Sanga on the fence

So I have 33 or so I consider bonafide atgs with the rest there or thereabout depending on my mood. Someone like Bumrah just needs a few more tests. I'm sure I'm forgetting a player or two fwiw.
Click to expand...
It's strictly the ATGs who makes the AT XI
 
Johan

Johan

International Coach
Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Hutton*
Hammond
Barrington/Compton
Root
Knott+
X
Laker
Trueman
Barnes

really that X is the one that is hard to fill for me, I can only really conclude four names with a strong case each – Ian Botham, James Anderson, Harold Larwood and Wilfred Rhodes, everyone has their arguments.

Wilfred Rhodes
  • maybe the best spinner from England at his peak. [+]
  • Adds in some of that left arm Variety. [+]
  • Very good Batsman at his peak. [+]
  • Batting peak and bowling peak completely did not coincide. [–]
Harold Larwood
  • Easily the fastest bowler from England alongside Frank Tyson, who'd break down and Mark Wood, who is not good enough. Extremely accurate too, Barry Richards esque peer rating and rated far above the likes of Voce (26) and Bowes (22). [+]
  • of the three pacers, definitely the most suited for the position of the third pacer. [+]
  • If need be, could bat somewhat in the lower order. [+]
  • Middling International record, due to injuries and one Sir Don. [–]
Ian Botham
  • Exceptional for a lower order batter/hitter. Can and most probably will bat over Knott [+]
  • An All time Great slip, and an exceptional fielder in every other position. [+]
  • An exceptional match winner with both the bat and the ball, until the end of the 1986-87 Ashes, had taken 27 fifers and made 14 hundreds in 88 games. [+]
  • Actually quite an effective first change bowler, has an excellent record as the first or second change bowler, thus rendering any discussion between us regarding his style worthless. [+]
  • Not a good player of bowlers like Garner, was okay against West Indies before 1986 but failed in 86. [–]
  • Kind of finished after his ribs broke in the 1986-87 Ashes, fell from Stuart Broad speeds to Sunil Gavaskar speed, about a 9-10 year career and then became a crowd drawer. [–]
James Anderson
  • England's third best bowler of all time and the highest fast bowler among all wicket takers, ever. [+]
  • Did bring Reverse to the table, which he could use on Asian wickets very well and was effective on flat wickets by that trick, also had cutters/great swing, a very impressive armory. [+]
  • Immense longevity, was a top class pacer for 13 years approximately and was a net positive for majority of the rest, played an immense 22 years for a modern fast bowler. [+]
  • Biggest bowling strenghts are genuinely not suited for first change, barely bowled as first change bowler and when he did, unlike Botham The Record does not justify or establish confidence. [–]
all in all, I'm starting to think Botham has an extremely good case.
 
Last edited:
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
I reckon he'd be totally bits and pieces at this higher level, it'd be like picking Ronnie Irani in Tests based on his county output. Hammond was a proper allrounder before the war anyway, I'd just have him operate as the fifth bowler and pick an extra bat.
 
Coronis

Coronis

Hall of Fame Member
I’m sticking with Anderson.

Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Hutton
Hammond
Barrington
Root
Knott+
Laker
Trueman
Barnes
Anderson

You’ve got the strongest top 6 of any team (excluding Aus but that’s like the Bradman effect) and you’re maximising your bowling while doing this. And you have 3 very useful 5th bowlers, with spin or pace options.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top