The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[Coronis]

I think what it boils down to is that Gilchrist has a bigger advantage in batting than Knott does in keeping, imo.

 

[smash84]

Isn't it comparable to Imran being included? Most would not consider Imran the third best fast bowler, but he is the best combination of bowler and batsman to fill the number eight slot. Similarily Gilly is the best combination of batting and wicket keeping skill, where the defecit in wicket keeping skill is relatively neglegible while being a potential game changer/ match winner batting at 7.

No problem though if someone prefers Knott for the spot. He is certainly worthy.

yeah awta

 

[marc71178]

I'd say Imran is much closer to being an ATG bowler than Gilchrist is as a pure glovesman so the comparison doesn't really work for me.

 

[Red]

I'd like to question the orthodoxy that makes Adam Gilchrist the first choice keeper for the bulk of people who select ATG World teams.

From what I can gather, the majority opinion in cricketing literature is that Alan Knott is the best wicket-keeper of all time. In terms of pure skill he is the 'doyen' of the art - as Dickie Bird puts it.

I'm sure that Adam Gilchrist was an excellent gloveman, but still not quite up to the standard of Alan Knott. Gilchrist was a better batsman, but I would suggest not that much better. Knott's ability to cope with a battery of Australian and West Indian fast bowlers during the 1970s was better than many top-order batsman of the time. Mike Brearley called Knott a 'genius' for good reason.

There is also the point that the batsmanship of Gilchrist becomes less important, and kind of redundant, with Sobers batting at No.6, and either Imran or Marshall at No.8.

Therefore, I propose that Alan Knott should be the first choice keeper in an ATG World XI because each position in an ATG team should be represented by the best. And Knott was the best.

No disagreement. What Gilchrist gives is an insane ability to actually change the course of a match in a very short time. Some of his brutal innings produced wins. Knott was a good batsman, but he didn't have that match winning ability.

Everything in me wants to select Knott (or Godfrey Evans). But then I imagine Gilchrist in a partnership with Sobers or Viv.....

And Gilchrist was no slouch with the gloves. The fact that he kept to Warne for basically his entire career speaks volumes. Keeping to Warne is the most difficult thing a keeper has had to do in my time of watching, and Gilchrist did it very well.

In essence, the whimsical in me wants Knott. But I sincerely believe Gilchrist would be the better choice over 20 tests, as he might singlehandedly win you two or three, and certainly not cost you anything along the way.

 

[Red]

I'd say Imran is much closer to being an ATG bowler than Gilchrist is as a pure glovesman so the comparison doesn't really work for me.

What was wrong with Gilchrist as a keeper?

 

[watson]

No disagreement. What Gilchrist gives is an insane ability to actually change the course of a match in a very short time. Some of his brutal innings produced wins. Knott was a good batsman, but he didn't have that match winning ability.

Everything in me wants to select Knott (or Godfrey Evans). But then I imagine Gilchrist in a partnership with Sobers or Viv.....

And Gilchrist was no slouch with the gloves. The fact that he kept to Warne for basically his entire career speaks volumes. Keeping to Warne is the most difficult thing a keeper has had to do in my time of watching, and Gilchrist did it very well.

In essence, the whimsical in me wants Knott. But I sincerely believe Gilchrist would be the better choice over 20 tests, as he might singlehandedly win you two or three, and certainly not cost you anything along the way.

Yeah, very good point Monk. I suppose that the counter-argument would be that the point of having Lara-Richards-Sobers in the team is that they are capable of producing a 'brutal innings' that can 'single-handedly ' win the team a game. Therefore, if you already have 2 or 3 match-winning batsman in the team, do you really need another one? But of course, there's no such thing as having too many match-winning batsman.

Still like the idea of a 'match-winning keeper' though.

 

[pskov]

I've been thinking about the terrific performances Cook and Clarke have been putting in since taking over the captaincy verses how usually the captaincy is seen as a burden on player performance.

So what would an All-Captain XI, based on player performance when captaining the side, look like? My go:

Alistair Cook
Graham Gooch
Don Bradman*
Michael Clarke
Steve Waugh
Garry Sobers
Andy Flower+
Daniel Vettori
Kapil Dev
Imran Khan
Shaun Pollock

Okay, so Vettori is a bit of a leftfield pick, but his stats when he was captain are really remarkable - averaged nearly 40 with the bat and around 32 with the ball for over 30 test matches. Plus look at that batting depth! Opposition bowling attacks would have convolutions just thinking about it.

 

[smash84]

as captain I don't think anybody else lifted their game as much as Imran

 

[harsh.ag]

as captain I don't think anybody else lifted their game as much as Imran

Smali, you didn't need to tell us that. We all had an imaginary post in our head with you saying just that

 

[harsh.ag]

So what would an All-Captain XI, based on player performance when captaining the side, look like? My go:

Alistair Cook
Graham Gooch
Don Bradman*
Michael Clarke
Steve Waugh
Garry Sobers
Andy Flower+
Daniel Vettori
Kapil Dev
Imran Khan
Shaun Pollock

There can be two types of teams made here. One where the captains performed extremely well, and second where the captains performed not only extremely well, but much better than they otherwise did during their non-captaincy days, i.e. captains who lifted their game. So, even though Bradman averages 101 as captain he won't get into the latter team. Nor will Waugh, Chappell and Border (52, 55 and 50 resp)

My Captains-Who-Lifted-Their-Game XI nominees (average as captain vs average as whole in brackets):

Openers
Graham Gooch (58 vs 42) 34 tests as captain (tac)
Hanif Mohammad (58 vs 43) 11 tac
Alastair Cook (72 vs 49) 9 tac (Btw, how the f*** has he already played 90 tests!)
Bob Simpson (54 vs 46) 39 tac

Middle Order
Brian Lara (57 vs 52) 47 tac
Clive Lloyd (51 vs 46) 74 tac
Kumar Sangakkara (69 vs 53) 15 tac
Mahela Jayawardene (59 vs 49) 38 tac
Michael Clarke (66 vs 52) 24 tac
Martin Crowe (54 vs 45) 16 tac
Misbah ul-Haq (54 vs 43) 20 tac
Peter May (54 vs 46) 41 tac
Ian Chappell (50 vs 42) 30 tac

All Rounders
Imran Khan (52 vs 37, 20 vs 22) 48 tac
Monty Noble (38 vs 30, 24 vs 25) 15 tac
Shaun Pollock (41 vs 32, 21 vs 23) 26 tac

Wicket-Keepers
Jack Blackham (22 vs 15) 8 tac
MS Dhoni (44 vs 39) 47 tac

Spinners
Richie Benaud (25 vs 27) 28 tac [Not much here, tbh, plus his batting fell from 24 to 22]
Bishan Singh Bedi (24 vs 28) 22 tac

Pacers
Bob Willis (21 vs 25) 18 tac
Kapil Dev (26 vs 29) [His batting remained the same at 31 vs 31]

Honorary mention:

Stanley Jackson (70 vs 48, 15 vs 33) Only played 5 tests as captain, so I am not strictly counting him. Others are, of course, welcome to.

Please pick a team from the nominees. I think longevity period of captaincy should also be taken into account.

Imran, Pollock, Willis and Gooch are a lock for mine. I would also definitely take Blackham, but others might consider Dhoni's batting a plus (SJS discluded of course ). Among keepers, Flower's average dropped and Stewarts' remained the same. Others are up for grab.

 

[watson]

Inspired by the recent discussions on Sydney Barnes I think that there is good case for including him in an ATG World team. However, if Barnes is included there are a number of flow on effects;

1. I'm not sure how Gilchrist would go standing up to Barnes bowling at 70 or 80 mph. Since Alan Knott had few problems keeping to Underwood or Norman Gifford I believe that Knott is mandatory.

2. Barnes should not replace Shane Warne because Warne is a genius, and the different styles of a finger and wrist spinner complement eachother. Both Barnes and Warne operating together on day 5 of a Test match would be irresistable.

3. I agree with NUFAN that an ATG team must have 3 top-notch fast bowlers as a matter of principle. Therefore, Keith Miller is the obvious batting-allrounder.

4. The tail will need to be strengthened since Miller will be batting in the top 6. Therefore, Imran Khan is the obvious bowling-allrounder.

5. Both Lillee and Marshall cannot be included in the team because there is not enough room. Lillee is selected over Marshall since Imran and Marshall bowled similar wicket taking deliveries. For example, the 145 kph inswinger.

Therefore;

01. Jack Hobbs
02. Len Hutton
03. Don Bradman
04. Sachin Tendulkar
05. Gary Sobers
06. Keith Miller
07. Alan Knott
08. Imran Khan
09. Shane Warne
10. Dennis Lillee
11. Sydney Barnes

 

[Coronis]

Gilly didn't seem to have a problem standing up to McGrath on occasion.

 

[kyear2]

If one would insist on Warne and Barnes, and I personally wouldn't and as not to significanly weaken the batting order by including Miller in the top 6, I would propose.

Len Hutton
Jack Hobbs
Don Bradman
Garry Sobers
Sachin Tendulkar
Adam Gilchrist
Keith Miller/ Richard Hadlee
Imran Khan
Malcolm Marshall
Shane Warne
Syd Barnes

To me still not as effective as my original 11 and not sure what Barnes brings to the table that Mcgrath doesn't and the batting is weakened.

 

[Red]

Finding a spot for Barnes XI


- Jack Hobbs
- Gordon Greenidge
- Don Bradman
- Viv Richards
- Keith Miller
- Garry Sobers
- Adam Gilchrist
- Imran Khan
- Shane Warne
- Dennis Lillee
- SF Barnes


Any perceived loss of batting by having Miller in the middle order is offset by Gilchrist at 7 and Imran at 8 (I don't personally think you lose much by having Miller there).

Bowling attack is outstanding. Lillee, Imran, Miller, Warne, Barnes & Sobers.

I actually love this team. It's my new ATG team.

 

[watson]

Gilly didn't seem to have a problem standing up to McGrath on occasion.

Fair enough. Good point.

 

[NUFAN]

I feel a little dirty saying this but Watson I actually agree with MOST of your reasoning when including Barnes, especially point number 3

Personally I would still include Marshall or I would even go for Ambrose over Lillee but yeah solid ATG team.

Monk, why Greenidge? What did Hutton, Sutcliffe, Gavaskar or someone like Hayden or Sehwag* not do well enough to be picked.

What do future world openers have to do to knock out GG?



* I rank Greenidge higher than the two but wanted to include a few attacking openers who average more.

 

[Red]

Monk, why Greenidge? What did Hutton, Sutcliffe, Gavaskar or someone like Hayden or Sehwag* not do well enough to be picked.

What do future world openers have to do to knock out GG?

* I rank Greenidge higher than the two but wanted to include a few attacking openers who average more.

Greenidge was in his pomp when I was a kid, which probably sways my thinking a bit. All the openers you mentioned are valid choices, but I like the pairing of Hobbs with Greenidge at the moment.

Regarding Hayden and Sehwag- I never saw Hayden really play well against a high quality attack. He was really good, no doubt, but I had doubts about him when the opposition attack was really good. He went missing in the 2005 Ashes for the most part. I love Sehwag, but I think GG was a very similar player, with a bit more consistency.

 

[watson]

Finding a spot for Barnes XI


- Jack Hobbs
- Gordon Greenidge
- Don Bradman
- Viv Richards
- Keith Miller
- Garry Sobers
- Adam Gilchrist
- Imran Khan
- Shane Warne
- Dennis Lillee
- SF Barnes


Any perceived loss of batting by having Miller in the middle order is offset by Gilchrist at 7 and Imran at 8 (I don't personally think you lose much by having Miller there).

Bowling attack is outstanding. Lillee, Imran, Miller, Warne, Barnes & Sobers.

I actually love this team. It's my new ATG team.

Just realised that we have rehashed Richie Benaud's attack from his ATG team - minus Keith Miller. Obviously Richie didn't feel the need to have a third fast bowler.

 

[Coronis]

Just realised that we have rehashed Richie Benaud's attack from his ATG team - minus Keith Miller. Obviously Richie didn't feel the need to have a third fast bowler.

Great minds think alike Though Barnes in some ways is also a fast-medium bowler, pitch dependant.

 

[harsh.ag]

Just realised that we have rehashed Richie Benaud's attack from his ATG team - minus Keith Miller. Obviously Richie didn't feel the need to have a third fast bowler.

Yup, although it was a risky eleven in terms of bowling. Barnes-Lillee opening with Imran-Warne to follow.

My quirky Barnes ATG XI

Hobbs
Barry
Don
Viv
Sobers
Gilly +
Imran
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
Barnes

Generally prefer McGrath to Hadlee (did it on worse pitches), and Wasim to Imran (because of left arm variety), but the batting aspect overcomes that. Marshall-Warne at 9-10 is not a bad combo.

As an aside, what do folks here think of a Marshall-McGrath-Robers (Andy) bowling attack, with Warne/Murali?