The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[Zinzan]

Z, we should just agree to disagree here as you seem to rate Vettori waaaaay higher than most other folks would as an ODI player. Even if I were to give you that trade off, surely you can see that the match up between the AT NZ and IND XI is still even stevens. 3 ATG batsmen Vs 3 ATG bowlers ( at least per your opinion.)

I really don't think because 2-3 in this thread don't rate Vettori as one of the ATG ODI spinners, that means it's so, but clearly that is the opinion of those 3.

Re: India ATG vs NZ ATG, I repeat, I think NZ are stronger & I maintain a combined NZ/Ind XI would only include 4 Indians, Sachin, Kohli, Dhoni & Kapil.

 

[vcs]

Dont forget that performance of his in the 96 semi either. Else it was Windies who would have made it through and who knows, might well have won the trophy. Lara in king form, and a team full of players who can handle the spinners well... Might have been a better match up than that Aussie side

That was another one for the "Disappointing collapse" thread.. how did WI manage to mess that chase up.

They also had Australia 4 down for under 20 and let them post 200+ in the first innings (Bevan yet again).

 

[Zinzan]

Zinny, Vettori's ER is 4.12 while Warne's is 4.25, while Warne's SR is 36.3 and Vettori's is 46.0

I mean, surely you can see why most people would prefer Warne. In 100 overs, Warne would take 3 more wickets and give away 13 more runs. Pretty handy trade-off that.

Few extra points to Vettori given that he kept his ER intact in the faster batting period post 2010 though.

I really do prefer to look at Vettor's career from the early 2000s onwards, and it's not a small period, we're talking 13-14 years. Only because he wasn't very good at all in his first few years and then developed in an ATG from about 2002-2015.

 

[Red]

Why don't you like Bevan and what makes you think Lee was better than Lillee?

My thoughts on Bevan have been expressed elsewhere, but largely I think he is overrated because he has an overinflated average due to not outs, and his reputation as a "finisher" is overblown. Great OD batsman, don't get me wrong, but I'd rather have Hussey in that same role, or a batsman like Smith, SWaugh or Martyn batting out of position than Bevan at 6 or 7.

I don't think Lee was necessarily better than Lillee, but Lee was an absolute white ball gun and deserves a spot. Lillee out and out a better test bowler, but Lee marginally in ODIs. I'd be happy with either of them TBH.

 

[OverratedSanity]

That was another one for the "Disappointing collapse" thread.. how did WI manage to mess that chase up.

Bigger choke than anything SA have ever done imo. Sending sloggers up the order to get quick runs because the proper batsmen were scared, everyone slashing at every single ball hoping to finish it quickly, panicky running... such a pathetic choke job.

 

[honestbharani]

All while Richie Riichardson, one of the better batsmen in the world, was standing there at the other end. All one of them needed to do was to feed him the strike and stay with him till the end.

 

[Shri]

Only a kiwi would rate Turner more than Ganguly, Gambhir, Sharma, Baz and Guptill, or Vettori over Cairns/Kumble without a second thought.

Turner
Tendulkar
Kohli
Crowe
Taylor
Dhoni+
Cairns
K Dev
Vettori
Hadlee
Bond

Vs

Ganguly
Tendulkar
Kohli
Yuvraj
Dhoni
Taylor
Cairns
K Dev
Vettori
Hadlee
Bond

 

[Zinzan]

Yuvraj over Crowe at number 4 is ghastly idea, even if you think he's a good hitter. Classic case of confusing the periods.

Could Yuvraj have dominated all-comers like this? Cricket Records | Records | Benson & Hedges World Cup, 1991/92 | Most runs | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[OverratedSanity]

Makes sense to pick Yuvraj if you want his bowling. And posting WC stats isn't going to work as an argument vs Yuvraj at all, Zinzan. His WC record is incredible.

 

[Shri]

Yuvraj over Crowe at number 4 is ghastly idea, even if you think he's a good hitter. Classic case of confusing the periods.

Could Yuvraj have dominated all-comers like this? Cricket Records | Records | Benson & Hedges World Cup, 1991/92 | Most runs | ESPN Cricinfo

They were both Player of the Series in a World cup and there is not much difference between them as ODI batsmen.

 

[ankitj]

Yuvraj over Crowe at number 4 is ghastly idea, even if you think he's a good hitter. Classic case of confusing the periods.
Could Yuvraj have dominated all-comers like this? Cricket Records | Records | Benson & Hedges World Cup, 1991/92 | Most runs | ESPN Cricinfo

Yuvraj won Player of the Series award in 2011 world cup, so answer is Yes.

 

[Red]

Makes sense to pick Yuvraj if you want his bowling. And posting WC stats isn't going to work as an argument vs Yuvraj at all, Zinzan. His WC record is incredible.

Team already has Hadlee, Bond, Kapil, Cairns and Vettori. Hardly gonna need Yuvraj's bowling.

 

[harsh.ag]

My Ind-NZ Combined XI would be

Tendulkar
Sehwag
Kohli
Yuvi
Dhoni* +
McCullum
Cairns
Kapil
Vettori
Hadlee
Bond

Fireworks everywhere! Ross, Crowe, Williamson, Ganguly all unlucky to not get a spot.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Team already has Hadlee, Bond, Kapil, Cairns and Vettori. Hardly gonna need Yuvraj's bowling.

6th bowler is always handy. In fact wasn't that your logic for picking Symonds in an AT XI?

 

[harsh.ag]

Yuvi is just more fun. Gotta have the 6 sixes man (even though that was in T20s).

This time doesn't even need Yuvi for the 6th bowler role. Sachin's more than enough by himself. Plus Sehwag if you pick him.

 

[Red]

6th bowler is always handy. In fact wasn't that your logic for picking Symonds in an AT XI?

It was like a quarter of my logic

 

[stephen]

My thoughts on Bevan have been expressed elsewhere, but largely I think he is overrated because he has an overinflated average due to not outs, and his reputation as a "finisher" is overblown. Great OD batsman, don't get me wrong, but I'd rather have Hussey in that same role, or a batsman like Smith, SWaugh or Martyn batting out of position than Bevan at 6 or 7.

I don't think Lee was necessarily better than Lillee, but Lee was an absolute white ball gun and deserves a spot. Lillee out and out a better test bowler, but Lee marginally in ODIs. I'd be happy with either of them TBH.

As always, context is everything. Of his 67 not outs, only 14 were in losses. To put that in context, he won 155 matches and lost 71, so if he ended not out it usually meant we won.

In the first innings his strike rate was 80 and he ended up with 37 not outs, compared to the second innings where he struck more cautiously at 67 and ended with 30 not outs.

Even more impressively, when Australia bowled first and won, Bevan averaged 86, compared to having an average of 40 in losses.

Not outs by Bevan usually meant Australia won, particularly when we were chasing. He's rated so highly by so many for a reason.

 

[Red]

As always, context is everything. Of his 67 not outs, only 14 were in losses. To put that in context, he won 155 matches and lost 71, so if he ended not out it usually meant we won.

In the first innings his strike rate was 80 and he ended up with 37 not outs, compared to the second innings where he struck more cautiously at 67 and ended with 30 not outs.

Even more impressively, when Australia bowled first and won, Bevan averaged 86, compared to having an average of 40 in losses.

Not outs by Bevan usually meant Australia won, particularly when we were chasing. He's rated so highly by so many for a reason.

This is what I'm talking about though. I agree he was a good/great LO batsman. But the guy played in an era when Australia were virtually invincible in ODIs. He played his role in that team, but he was no where near the best.

 

[Mike5181]

This is what I'm talking about though. I agree he was a good/great LO batsman. But the guy played in an era when Australia were virtually invincible in ODIs. He played his role in that team, but he was no where near the best.

During Hussey's ODI career Australia actually had a higher W/L record than in Bevan's.

 

[stephen]

This is what I'm talking about though. I agree he was a good/great LO batsman. But the guy played in an era when Australia were virtually invincible in ODIs. He played his role in that team, but he was no where near the best.

Through the 90s Australia was not considered the best ODI team. We won the 1999 World Cup but the WIndies were better in the early 90s and SA/SL were as good as us for the rest of the decade. It was only from the introduction of Hayden and elevation of Ponting to 3 in the early 00s that we became clearly the best side.

When you look at Bevan's stats closely it becomes very apparent that he carried our batting throughout his career.

He averaged 40 in losses and 60 in wins where we set a total and 86 in wins where we chased. He ended up not out 1/3 of the time we won and only 1/5 of the times we lost.

If he has any statistical weakness it's in World Cups where he didn't set the world on fire (but was still quite good).