• 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.

The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

Coronis

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Rank the 5 teams.
Tough to do. The goal was to have pretty even teams tbh. I’d be curious how you and others would rank them.

If I had to pick one, its the ODI era. Has my entire ATG bowling attack, keeper, and Tendulkar.

Between the wars has the best batting, I would say pre wwi probably has the best bowling (certainly the most options)
 

DrWolverine

Cricketer Of The Year
Tough to do. The goal was to have pretty even teams tbh. I’d be curious how you and others would rank them.

If I had to pick one, its the ODI era. Has my entire ATG bowling attack, keeper, and Tendulkar.

Between the wars has the best batting, I would say pre wwi probably has the best bowling (certainly the most options)
Shall I make a thread with your teams?
 

capt_Luffy

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
ATG XIs by era - must have played the majority of their tests in selected era,

Pre WWI (1877-1914)

Rhodes
Grace*
Hill
Ranji
Shrewsbury
Trumper
Faulkner
Blackham+
Lohmann
Barnes
Spofforth

More than a few guys unlucky here. The team I’m least sure of.

Between the Wars (1920-1939)

Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Bradman*
Hammond
Headley
McCabe
Tate
Oldfield+
Larwood
Grimmett
O’Reilly

Spent a bit of time choosing between Gregory and McCabe for the final spot. Verity could also sub in for Grimmett but Tiger loved Grum so much that I’m hesitant to break them up.

Post WWII (1946-1970)

Hutton*
Simpson
Barrington
Pollock
Walcott+
Sobers
Miller
Lindwall
Davison
Laker
Trueman

Odd layout but I wanted Miller. Rip Waite and Weekes.

ODI (1971-2005)

Gavaskar
Boycott
Lara
Tendulkar
Chappell*
Kallis
Gilchrist+
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
McGrath

Very tight between Chappell and Richards. Ponting also worth a mention due to the time period.

T20 (2005-2026)

Smith*
Sehwag
Sangakkara
Smith
Root
Younis
Watling+
Ashwin
Cummins
Steyn
Bumrah

Could be Ashwin or Lyon.
No Ames? And I would rather have the bowler Rhodes than batsman, hence opening with Shrewsbury.
 

peterhrt

State Vice-Captain
ATG XIs by era - must have played the majority of their tests in selected era,

Pre WWI (1877-1914)

Rhodes
Grace*
Hill
Ranji
Shrewsbury
Trumper
Faulkner
Blackham+
Lohmann
Barnes
Spofforth

More than a few guys unlucky here. The team I’m least sure of.
Four actual teams were published covering this period. In 1911, 1919, 1926 and 1932, chosen by Frank Iredale, Pelham Warner, The Cricketer magazine and Wisden's records man. The last two took into account performances after the war but still largely favoured pre-war players. Combined appearances in the four teams were:

4 - Grace, Trumper
3 – Spofforth, Blackham, Ranji, Noble, Hill, Lockwood, Hobbs
2 - Jackson, Rhodes, Barnes, Woolley
1 – Lohmann, Peel, Richardson, Lilley, Armstrong, Macartney, Bradman

Shrewsbury and Faulkner were not chosen in any team.

Hobbs and Woolley played most of their Tests after the war. Excluding them leaves eleven men chosen for two or more teams. From the side picked by Coronis, Shrewsbury, Faulkner and Lohmann would be replaced by Jackson, Noble and Lockwood. Noble would be captain. All four selectors wanted an Australian in charge. None of Tate, Sutcliffe, Hammond, Gregory, McDonald or Grimmett were seriously considered for either of the post-war chosen teams. As late as 1932 there was still a feeling that pre-war cricketers were generally superior.

The published selections tend to follow a structure of one fast bowler (Lockwood or Richardson), a left-arm spinner (Rhodes, Peel or Woolley), and one or two medium-pacers (Spofforth, Barnes, Lohmann). It was acknowledged that Spofforth was fast in his younger days before varying his speed either side of medium. Three of the four selectors said they wanted several all-rounders in their team. Two specifically mentioned fielding, with an emphasis on outfielders. Mobility in the field could be an issue back then, and athletic outfielders were especially valued.
 
Last edited:

Coronis

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Four actual teams were published covering this period. In 1911, 1919, 1926 and 1932, chosen by Frank Iredale, Pelham Warner, The Cricketer magazine and Wisden's records man. The last two took into account performances after the war but still largely favoured pre-war players. Combined appearances in the four teams were:

4 - Grace, Trumper
3 – Spofforth, Blackham, Ranji, Noble, Hill, Lockwood, Hobbs
2 - Jackson, Rhodes, Barnes, Woolley
1 – Lohmann, Peel, Richardson, Lilley, Armstrong, Macartney, Bradman

Shrewsbury and Faulkner were not chosen in any team.

Hobbs and Woolley played most of their Tests after the war. Excluding them leaves eleven men chosen for two or more teams. From the side picked by Coronis, Shrewsbury, Faulkner and Lohmann would be replaced by Jackson, Noble and Lockwood. Noble would be captain. All four selectors wanted an Australian in charge. None of Tate, Sutcliffe, Hammond, Gregory, McDonald or Grimmett were considered for either of the post-war teams. As late as 1932 there was still a feeling that pre-war cricketers were generally superior.

The published selections tend to follow a structure of one fast bowler (Lockwood or Richardson), a left-arm spinner (Rhodes, Peel or Woolley), and one or two medium-pacers (Spofforth, Barnes, Lohmann). It was acknowledged that Spofforth was fast in his younger days before varying his speed either side of medium. Three of the four selectors said they wanted several all-rounders in their team. Two specifically mentioned fielding, with an emphasis on outfielders. Mobility in the field could be an issue back then, and athletic outfielders were especially valued.
Noble was a tough split with Faulkner. I know obviously FC was considered more important for much of that period, and that was where Noble excelled, but I can’t really ignore Faulkner’s test work. Trumble was also very much considered for the slow bowler slot. I’m very much ok with Barnes/Spofforth/Lohmann as the fast/medium bowlers, whilst sacrificing out and out pace.

The other main ones I considered were Turner and Richardson. Richardson obviously has the marvellous peer rep, also remarkably in Ashes tests alone he has 88 @ 25.22, his other teammates not listed as spinners had just 62 @ 38.73. Australians overall in those tests (non spinners) also averaged 25.49.

Just checking on Lockwood since he was such a strong choice by those teams.. his teammates also averaged 33, whereas he averaged 20. However his WPM is much lower compared to all these other contemporaries, who all had 5+ WPM vs Lockwood’s 3.6

All in all I could possibly take out Lohmann for Richardson, but Lockwood isn’t as much in the conversation. Though if I had Richardson I’d want him and Spofforth opening and that would piss Barnes off…
 

Fuller Pilch

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Ramprakash and Hick would have been considered batting legends if they were born 50 years before.
Might've struggled through the great depression and severely injured or worse in WW2.

Hick, as a Zimbabwean (Rhodesian) probably would've played for SA.

Ramprakash's father was from British Guiana (now Guyana) and his mother Britain. There is no way he would've made the WI team with the 3 Ws or England
 

capt_Luffy

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Nourse better at batting, but with McCabe's bowling and genius (ability for ATG knocks) he was a better cricketer.
Nah, think if Nourse is a better bat, that's after taking McCabe's High quality knocks into account. His bowling was handy, don't think enough to bridge nearly the tier gap in batting tho. Might be a better fit for the team here still.
 

Coronis

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
An XI made up of the best test players from each test cricket nation.

Garry Sobers
Wally Hammond
Don Bradman*
Sachin Tendulkar
Jacques Kallis
Andy Flower+
Shakib Al Hasan
Imran Khan
Richard Hadlee
Rashid Khan
Muttiah Muralitharan

12th man probably… Lorcan Tucker?

Batting order could probably be shuffled somewhat. Was unsure who would be best suited to open in this hypothetical.

A bit spin heavy, thanks to Rashid and Shakib. I think you’d have Murali tying up an end and Hadlee and Imran sharing the other for large portions of innings.
 

Fuller Pilch

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
An XI made up of the best test players from each test cricket nation.

Garry Sobers
Wally Hammond
Don Bradman*
Sachin Tendulkar
Jacques Kallis
Andy Flower+
Shakib Al Hasan
Imran Khan
Richard Hadlee
Rashid Khan
Muttiah Muralitharan

12th man probably… Lorcan Tucker?

Batting order could probably be shuffled somewhat. Was unsure who would be best suited to open in this hypothetical.

A bit spin heavy, thanks to Rashid and Shakib. I think you’d have Murali tying up an end and Hadlee and Imran sharing the other for large portions of innings.
I'd say Hobbs is better than Hammond even including the latter's bowling which would improve the team balance. If Bumrah could possibly eclipse Tendulkar one day (can't - would need to be 5 years younger and injury free) that would improve balance further.
 

capt_Luffy

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
An XI made up of the best test players from each test cricket nation.

Garry Sobers
Wally Hammond
Don Bradman*
Sachin Tendulkar
Jacques Kallis
Andy Flower+
Shakib Al Hasan
Imran Khan
Richard Hadlee
Rashid Khan
Muttiah Muralitharan

12th man probably… Lorcan Tucker?

Batting order could probably be shuffled somewhat. Was unsure who would be best suited to open in this hypothetical.

A bit spin heavy, thanks to Rashid and Shakib. I think you’d have Murali tying up an end and Hadlee and Imran sharing the other for large portions of innings.
Would go with Grace from England and open with Kallis instead of Sobers
 

Coronis

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Would go with Grace from England and open with Kallis instead of Sobers
Best test cricketers specifically, so Grace doesn’t qualify.

I'd say Hobbs is better than Hammond even including the latter's bowling which would improve the team balance. If Bumrah could possibly eclipse Tendulkar one day (can't - would need to be 5 years younger and injury free) that would improve balance further.
I did think long and hard about Hobbs vs Hammond but it felt like I’d be cheesing it by picking Hobbs just to have an opener.
 

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
There was an interesting conversation in another thread about which player would make the best captain of an AT XI.

Think that in general for better or worse, as with most scenarios, it wiuld default to the best player, so basically Bradman.

But with lots of names being floated around, some of whome for the most part doesn't make the team, it's interesting as to objectively what the best team would be. And how to identify it.

If we go purely by a consensus squad, it's actually less contentious than one would think.

There's literally only three spots that are even remotely close. The 2nd opener, and the 2nd and 3rd bowling spots. Gavaskar, Barnes and Wasim takes those spots, barely and I mean barely edging out Hutton, McGrath and Lillee. Benaud being the one to push Gavaskar and Barnes over the others.

We easily prefer Hutton over Sunny here and McGrath as a modern analog of Barnes and is comfortably seen as a top 2 bowler ever on the forum.

That 3rd spot, that 3rd spot is a very interesting pick.

There are two, and only two AT teams that comes close to being official, Wasim makes both. That is impressive.

Of all the players who have made and published XIs, only Crowe has faced all of Imran, Hadlee and Wasim, actually playing with Hadlee, he also chose Wasim.

CW would easily vote Imran over him though.

Me personally, an honors board recognition Hobbs, Hutton. To take the field, Hutton takes on spot no discussion, my first pick to partner him no argument, has to be B.A. Richards, if he's not allowed, Gavaskar is a more than worthy replacement.

3rd bowler, my most impressive memory of Wasim is forcing Dessie to completely change his technique to survive. I get it.

But overall, would we with the necessary concessions see the below as a good starting point for a captaincy or other conversation?

Hobbs | Hutton
Bradman | Richards | Tendulkar
Sobers | Gilchrist
Marshall | Warne | McGrath

I've left out the 3rd spot, even though Imran not even making our team is juxtaposed agaist Wasim making the most important two.

But yeah Bradman?
 

Top