Who is the next highest ranked bat and bowler in your list? You can be faithful to your rankings without actually picking an allrounder- your tail isn't too weak as it stands, and you have Viv, and to a lesser extent Tendulkar to bowl, although you would want someone who offers something in a second discipline as well.
-
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
- Thread starter Red
- Start date
harsh.ag
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Want ABdV in my ATXI now. Please move over, Brian Lara.
Barry Richards
Sir Vivian Richards
Sir Donald Bradman
Sir Garfield Sobers
Abraham de Villiers
Adam Gilchrist (w)
Imran Khan
Sir Richard Hadlee
Malcolm Marshall
Shane Warne
Muttiah Muralitharan
__________________________
It's not just on a whim. He offers a combination of things no one else does:
- More fire and unorthodox-y in difficult circumstances than anyone else;
- Incredible number of gears, esp with his fourth innings shenanigans ;
- His exploits in difficult conditions in India;
- That catalogue of shot making and that chutzpah;
- Fits perfectly with the counter attacking mould of the side;
- Can take over keeping in case something happens to Gilly.
Barry Richards
Sir Vivian Richards
Sir Donald Bradman
Sir Garfield Sobers
Abraham de Villiers
Adam Gilchrist (w)
Imran Khan
Sir Richard Hadlee
Malcolm Marshall
Shane Warne
Muttiah Muralitharan
__________________________
It's not just on a whim. He offers a combination of things no one else does:
- More fire and unorthodox-y in difficult circumstances than anyone else;
- Incredible number of gears, esp with his fourth innings shenanigans ;
- His exploits in difficult conditions in India;
- That catalogue of shot making and that chutzpah;
- Fits perfectly with the counter attacking mould of the side;
- Can take over keeping in case something happens to Gilly.
Red
The normal awards that everyone else has
Interesting team. I like the idea of having three legit quicks plus two elite spinners. You can do this (as you've done) with smart use of the all-round capacity of most of your players.
And in spite of the fact that I usually like people in ATG teams in their proper positions, the thought of Viv opening the innings is something to sap about!
And in spite of the fact that I usually like people in ATG teams in their proper positions, the thought of Viv opening the innings is something to sap about!
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Mine;
Guptill
Turner
KW
M Crowe
Taylor
Cairns 5
McCullum* +
Vettori 4
Hadlee 1
Bond 2
Chatfield 3
Last bowling spot is a tight toss-up between Chats, Mills & Boult. Today I've lent towards Chats. Easy to forget he averaged 25 with the ball with a SR of 3.57, which was one of the very best in his era.
I'm also of the view that McCullum batting down the order gives us better balance.
Honourable mentions... Oram, Styris, Harris, Larsen, Mills, Twose, Boult & Astle.
Last edited:
Salivating at the thought of kohli and abdv in the same xi.
B. Richards
V.richards
Bradman
Sangakkara
Kohli
Abdv
Gilly
Procter
Marshall
McGrath
Murali
Victor Ian
International Coach
nice - got cover for Gilly in case he gets hurt and cover for ABDV in case he gets hurt covering.
Always nice for opposition to be given that Richards will be the first wicket to fall as well. That will help them relax more.
Always nice for opposition to be given that Richards will be the first wicket to fall as well. That will help them relax more.
Why a counterattacking theme? Wouldn't it be better to include a player or two of similar quality (not that there are many) who is more likely to stick around to build a partnership with whoever is in form, can grind a bowling attack down, tire them out and salvage a draw (on the rare occasion it's necessary).
All things being equal, I think an attacking batsman is better, but I don't know if this applies to an entire team or not.
Last edited:
Interesting idea on AB btw. I don't think he's one of the very top bats, but he might still belong in an ATG side. He's probably at least as capable of making runs as anyone ever in tough conditions, and while he doesn't pile up the runs in easier circumstances nearly as well as ATGs, do you really need this in a team that includes players like Bradman and Sobers?
Last edited:
The only problem with the team is the amount of didn't fully prove themselves at test level- Procter, Richards, and to a lesser extent Pollock and AB as wicket keeper. The most problematic of all in my book is Faulkner (playing in an era in which it's just about impossible to compare players from and bipolar record in top of that).
I'm still picking exactly the same team though- the quality difference between these players and similar replacements with full careers is just too great.
I'm still picking exactly the same team though- the quality difference between these players and similar replacements with full careers is just too great.
Ya. Test, 1st class and world Series records support this as well, and they all look good in the footage I've seen.
We've seen enough of AB as wk to see he would have been fine- even if his batting suffered due to having the the gloves permanently (which there isn't any evidence of), he'd still be a world class wk bat.
Faulkner more of an unknown but he's exactly the type of player this team needs for balance.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I know Tayfield was an excellent spinner, but so was Faulkner in his own right, in which case I'd have both Neil Adcock or even Shaun Pollock ahead instead of Tayfield, have have the 4-pronged pace attack (plus Kallis as bonus) & the one excellent spinning all-rounder in Faulkner.
jimmy101
Cricketer Of The Year
True, but with Tayfield & Faulkner you get that leggie/offie combo. Something of a luxury for South African cricket. Although this would most likely work best for an away Test in Asia or something.
jimmy101
Cricketer Of The Year
Obviously Procky would have played a lot more than that if it wasn't for the political situation in SA. It's not like he got dropped after those 7 tests.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
If that's your stance presumably you'd have the likes of Amla or Gibbs as opener instead of Barry Richards (who played just 4 tests) and even at a stretch the likes of Amla over the amazing Graeme Pollock who played a relatively low number of 23 tests himself.
Those 3 (Richards, G Pollock & Procter) were quite clearly exception cricketers only held back by politics at the time.
If you're not convinced by Procter's almost freakish 41 wickets @ 15 in just 7 tests, take a look at his FC numbers... averages 36 with the bat (with 48 hundreds) along with over 1400 wickets with the ball at just 19.... He was every bit as talented as B Richards or G Pollock.
Last edited:
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Don't get me wrong Bagas, S Pollock was an amazing cricketer in his own right, but those above-mentioned 3 were once in a life-time players who just happened to play in the same era... according to everything I've read, especially from neutrals who played with or against them in that time.
I think Pollock is vastly underappreciated, but I think Procter is still the way to go. Pollock to me is definitely a step below the very best bowlers. There is nothing in Procters record to suggest that he would have been anything below the best, but even if you allow for some discount of his potential performances at international level based on the unknown, you still end up with a bowler of similar quality to Pollock. The upside of picking Procter is that it is likely you end up with a superior bowler, while there isn't really a downside.
Similar analysis on the batting side with Procter being a genuine allrounder rather than a bowling allrounder, even if his international stats are not great.
Similar analysis on the batting side with Procter being a genuine allrounder rather than a bowling allrounder, even if his international stats are not great.
SeamUp
International Coach
I think it should widely acknowledged the genius of Barry Richards & Mike Procter (obviously G.Pollock) with Lee Irvine not to be forgotten who pretty much only played single figures in games like them from the same time.
Eddie Barlow, Trevor Goddard, Graeme Pollock, Colin Bland, Denis Lindsay, Peter Pollock all played a decent amount of test matches who started early 60s and a little before for Goddard to have it in numbers who were still around in those last 2 series wins over Australia. Obviously some would have carried on for a while yet.
Those with minimal games or none (leaving out those playing for other countries like D' Oliveira, Greig, Lamb, Wessles)
On Richards and Procter level I suppose you could make cases for Peter Kirsten, Clive Rice , Vince Van der Bijl, Garth Le Roux but probably in Cat B with Lee Irvine but some could easily argue their point.
The level below the above in Cat C but still very very high you looking at Jimmy Cook , Ken McEwan , Alan Kourie, Denys Hobson, Rupert Hanley, Kenny Watson
Cat D : Henry Fotheringham , Hylton Ackerman, Kevin McKenzie, Ray Jennings, Stephen Jefferies
Eddie Barlow, Trevor Goddard, Graeme Pollock, Colin Bland, Denis Lindsay, Peter Pollock all played a decent amount of test matches who started early 60s and a little before for Goddard to have it in numbers who were still around in those last 2 series wins over Australia. Obviously some would have carried on for a while yet.
Those with minimal games or none (leaving out those playing for other countries like D' Oliveira, Greig, Lamb, Wessles)
On Richards and Procter level I suppose you could make cases for Peter Kirsten, Clive Rice , Vince Van der Bijl, Garth Le Roux but probably in Cat B with Lee Irvine but some could easily argue their point.
The level below the above in Cat C but still very very high you looking at Jimmy Cook , Ken McEwan , Alan Kourie, Denys Hobson, Rupert Hanley, Kenny Watson
Cat D : Henry Fotheringham , Hylton Ackerman, Kevin McKenzie, Ray Jennings, Stephen Jefferies
Last edited: