The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[bagapath]

changed the ROW XI. Think for the better, don't know what u guys would think.

If you bring in Kallis in place of G.Pollock, then you gain a bowler, which you need, without losing a great batsman.

And, please explain to me how Barry Richards edged out Gordon Greenidge!!! No. Actually don't do that. We have devoted tons of mails to this issue already.

 

[watson]

If you bring in Kallis in place of G.Pollock, then you gain a bowler, which you need, without losing a great batsman.

And, please explain to me how Barry Richards edged out Gordon Greenidge!!! No. Actually don't do that. We have devoted tons of mails to this issue already.

Kallis for Graeme Pollock? You're joking right?

 

[Coronis]

I'd move Headley to 3 (avg. of 71.17, 10 centuries from 32 innings), he never opened anyway. Hell, both Lara and Viv opened twice in tests. Sub one of those two out, and Greenidge in as an opener.

 

[watson]

Realistically, Richards and Headley are gunning for the same No.3 spot, and moving them out of that key position is a compromise.

01. Barry Richards ^
02. Gordon Greenidge
03. Sir I.V.A. Richards*
04. Graeme Pollock ^
05. Brian Lara ^
06. Sir Garry Sobers (5) ^
07. John Waite +
08. Richard Hadlee (3)
09. Malcolm Marshall (1)
10. Hugh Tayfield (4)
11. Curtly Ambrose (2)

 

[Coronis]

imo, Headley was the greatest west indian bat, but, to each their own.

 

[Riggins]

what are these ^ things for?

 

[Prince EWS]

what are these ^ things for?

Slips.

 

[kyear2]

If Headley not elligible to open then he beats out Viv for the no. 3 spot and Viv beats out Pollock for the no.4 spot for me. Best way to get Pollock in is to let Headley open, which for all intents and purposes he often was.

As far as who the best W.I batsman is I genaerally rate the top four as equals, with Viv slightly ahead as he did his best work at no. 3 and againts the better fast bolwers, but outside of that nothing much between the 4 of them and I rate them all in my top six of All Time middle order bats with SRT and the Don.

 

[Red]

Just messing with the most versatile bowling attack I can get while having a balanced side.

Ambrose, Akram, Miller, Warne, Murali & Sobers should do the job.

Tall quick with bounce. Skiddy LA quick with control of swing. Fast bowling all rounder who was great in bursts. Best leggie. Best offie. LA part time seam or spin.


- B. Richards
- L. Hutton
- D. Bradman
- V. Richards
- K. Miller
- G. Sobers
- A .Gilchrist
- W. Akram
- S. Warne
- C. Ambrose
- M. Muralitharan

 

[honestbharani]

Just messing with the most versatile bowling attack I can get while having a balanced side.

Ambrose, Akram, Miller, Warne, Murali & Sobers should do the job.

Tall quick with bounce. Skiddy LA quick with control of swing. Fast bowling all rounder who was great in bursts. Best leggie. Best offie. LA part time seam or spin.


- B. Richards
- L. Hutton
- D. Bradman
- V. Richards
- K. Miller
- G. Sobers
- A .Gilchrist
- W. Akram
- S. Warne
- C. Ambrose
- M. Muralitharan

lol.. pretty sure you would want Sir Gary to bat above Miller

 

[kyear2]

lol.. pretty sure you would want Sir Gary to bat above Miller

Despite the argument that Monk uses that Miller was best at no. 5, it's not plausible to bat him above arguably the second best batsman to play the game. Wouln't make sense no matter how you spin it.

 

[the big bambino]

You know you probably could. That's not to say Miller was better or diminish Sir Gary's rating in any way but Sobers did prefer to bat 6 did he not?

 

[Red]

Miller's preferred spot to bat was 5 and Sobers batted at 6 most of the time. Makes sense to me that they'd bat here in this team.

The argument that Sobers is the second best batsman in history so he should bat above Miller is stupid. Sobers mostly batted at 6 for WIs. Why didn't he just bat at 3?

Same argument's made for Clarke to bat at 3. Makes as little sense to me. Bat guys where they bat best/are most comfortable.

 

[kyear2]

He batted at 6 after he started to take on a greater bowling burden, In an ATG XI I can't see why I would bat Miller in the top 6 far less over Sir Garry. Additionally if my memory serves me correct he Sobers was more succesful at 3 and 4.

 

[the big bambino]

He pretty much reamed it from 3 down to 7. Even a useful stat as an opener.

 

[Red]

I don't care what anyone says. Miller is the man. And he'll bat at 5 in any of my fantasy teams I select him for!

 

[Red]

He batted at 6 after he started to take on a greater bowling burden, In an ATG XI I can't see why I would bat Miller in the top 6 far less over Sir Garry. Additionally if my memory serves me correct he Sobers was more succesful at 3 and 4.

So in the XI you have in your sig, why don't you have Sobers batting at 4?

 

[kyear2]

Because Richards and Tendulkar are far superior batsmen to Keith Miller and in that lineup, Sobers fits in best at no. 6.

 

[smash84]

incidentally, I noticed in your first XI that Sobers is the 5th bowler. Why not Tendulkar? They have pretty much the same bowling strike rate?

 

[Prince EWS]

Because Richards and Tendulkar are far superior batsmen to Keith Miller and in that lineup, Sobers fits in best at no. 6.

Yeah exactly. Richards and Tendulkar are very comparable in batting class to Sobers even if you're of the opinion that Sobers is better; there's nothing in it. Miller, at the theoretical level of cricket we're talking about, would not be anywhere close to the side as a specialist batsman. Throw in the fact that he'd have a bigger bowling workload and it makes all the sense in the world to stick him at six if not seven.