The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[vcs]

This kind of analysis which strips away all context from a player's performances and uses an arbitrary number over a small sample to decide if he succeeded or not is pretty much meaningless.

I think he bowled on some roads in Pakistan in '98 when Mark Taylor scored a triple century in one of those games. Averaging 31 would have been a good result there I think. Also I remember a Robelinda video from that series.

How do you not give those LOL

In India, as good as he was, I think he really benefited from bowling along someone as good as Gillespie.

Obviously he was excellent, but I'd put Steyn's performances in India above McGrath's for sheer single-handed destructiveness.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Definitely. Never seen any other overseas bowler bowl the kind of spells Steyn has produced in Asia.

 

[bagapath]

Locks

Bradman
G.Chappell
Gilchrist
Lillee
McGrath
Warne

Unmissables

Miller
Border
Lindwall
O'reilley

Definite contenders

Trumper
Hayden
Ponting
Smith

Sinful to not consider

Benaud
McCabe
Harvey
Grimmett
Davidson

In the squad

Noble
Simpson
Morris
Healy
Spofforth

 

[bagapath]

Aussie ATG

Trumper
Hayden
Bradman ©
G.Chappell
Border
Miller
Gilchrist +
Lindwall/ O'reilley
Warne
Lillee
McGrath

 

[bagapath]

Second XI

Simpson
Morris
Ponting
Harvey
Smith
McCabe/ Noble
Healy +
Davidson
Benaud ©
Spofforth
Grimmett

 

[bagapath]

Definitely. Never seen any other overseas bowler bowl the kind of spells Steyn has produced in Asia.

Yup. As good as hadlee and marshall from what I've seen.

 

[a massive zebra]

And yes, that's right, the first bowlers to meddle with swing probably would have been SF Barnes & JB King.

Although Sydney Barnes was clearly a better bowler, a review of contemporary literature will show George Hirst was generally accepted as having played a more influential role in the development of swing bowling and almost certainly mastered it earlier.

A quote from his Wisden obituary:

After a long bounding run, he delivered with a free, easy action and he often made the new ball swerve and dip into the batsman so late that many of his victims confessed themselves as suspecting that they had been thrown out from cover. Hirst, in fact, has been described as the father of all modern seam and swing bowling. Before he showed its possibilities, bowlers rubbed the new ball in the dirt to take off the polish.

In the county championship between 1900 and 1902, Yorkshire won 49 matches and lost only 2. George Hirst's revolutionary swing bowling played a key role in making his side one of the most dominant county teams ever seen. Here is a quote from Wisden's review of Yorkshire's 1901 season:

Yorkshire did not, as in 1900, go through their county engagements unbeaten, but they again had a wonderful season, carrying off the championship without ever having been seriously threatened by any of their rivals, and proving themselves beyond all dispute one of the best all-round county sides ever seen in the field.

Hirst's success last summer was even more talked about than that of Rhodes, for the reason that it had in it the element of surprise. Everybody was prepared to see Rhodes do great things, but there had been nothing in Hirst's efforts in 1900 to suggest that in 1901 he would be the great fast bowler of the year. His brilliant success was, on the testimony of all the batsmen who faced him, due chiefly to the fact that, in combination with his great pace he at times made the ball swerve in the air in a way that was nothing less than bewildering... He could not keep up this swerve through a long innings, but while it lasted he was irresistible and quite independent of the condition of the ground, coming off just as well on a fast lively pitch as on one spoilt by rain. In match after match the best players were helpless against him, going down like mere schoolboys. His crowning triumph was gained in the middle of August against Essex at Leyton, when, thanks chiefly to his deadly bowling, the southern team were out for totals of 30 and 41. The most experienced members of the Essex eleven were unanimous in the opinion that they had never seen a more wonderful piece of bowling in their lives.

Here is a quote from R.S. Holmes book History of Yorkshire County Cricket 1833-1903:

In 1901 it was Hirst, not Haigh, who helped Rhodes, Haigh's knee giving him a lot of bother. Rarely, if ever, has a bowler been able to make the ball swerve in the air as Hirst did in match after match. More than one team pronounced his bowling as deadly as any they had ever met.

A quote from The Complete Cricketer by Albert Knight, published in 1906:

Some modern left-handers, Hirst supreme among them for pace and extent, curl in the air considerably.

 

[Red]

Australian ATVG XI
Slater
Langer
Hassett
M Waugh
Martyn
M Clarke
Cant decide on the 'keeper. Is Haddin good enough? Is Grout too good for this XI?
Alderman
Thomson
McDermott
Macgill

Perhaps there's a recency bias here. Maybe Red HIll and others can help.

Yeh, I like the idea of ATVG teams:


Jack Fingleton
David Boon
Ian Chappell *
Damian Martyn
Alan Kippax
Ian Redpath
Jack Gregory
Merv Hughes
Gil Langley *
Jason Gillespie
Arthur Mailey

These guys would make almost any test XI in history but they probably would be no higher than 3rd XI players in an Aust ATG context.

 

[Starfighter]

Although Sydney Barnes was clearly a better bowler, a review of contemporary literature will show George Hirst was generally accepted as having played a more influential role in the development of swing bowling and almost certainly mastered it earlier.

Also a good description by lob-bowling allrounder Digby Jepson in 1903's Cricket, edited by famous golfer Horace Hutchinson (!).

George Hirst, I think, stands in a section of fast bowlers entirely his own.
It is a curious thing that we possess so few really fast left-handers. Hirst is equipped not only with great pace, but also with an extraordinary swerve, that is to say, he does not always have it under his immediate control, but when starting fresh and with a new ball, he swirls inwards in a stump -uprooting manner, and the swerve seems to take place in the last two or three yards of the ball's flight. I remember seeing Captain Bush confront him last year at Leeds for the first time. Hirst came up to the wicket with his swinging run, the ball left his hand ; Bush's left leg shot out for his slashing stroke by cover, and it was only by astonishing luck that at the very last moment he stopped a yorker almost behind his right foot, and in stopping it overbalanced and lay prone - thus emphasising the luck he had experienced and the amount of the swerve. With a new ball it usually stays with him from twenty minutes to an hour, and it can occur again after a sufficient rest and the acquisition of another new ball. I think I am doing Rhodes no injustice when I say that for some time now Hirst has dismissed, largely through this swerve of his, more of the first five or six batsmen than have fallen to his, Wilfred's, lot.

 

[Bolo]

Here's some series contributions/ impacts in Asia. If I'm misjudging series feel free to correct. Contribution is the role they played not dependent on result, and impact is the difference their contribution made to results. It's zero in a lost series and zero unless they perform in a won game.

McGrath:

Lanka: one series, lost one. Poor contribution. No impact

India. Three series. Lost two, won one. Contributed significantly in two. Major impact in the win- balanced series.

Pakistan: two series. Won one and lost one. Reasonable contribution and fairly low impact in the win.

Plus UAE: one series, one win. Major contribution, low impact on the series result (mismatch).

So he's lost one more series than he's won, contributed in one more series than not, and has been fairly limited in swinging series resuls.

Marshall:

Marshall has played 5 in total. Against India he won and contributed well without much impact on result in 1 (walkover), lost and contributed poorly in one.

Played three against Pakistan. Won one drew two. Contributed ok or better in all, had a solid impact on series result in all.

Won more than he lost, contributed in almost all and impacted on most.

Steyn:

He contributed significantly and had a major impact in series results in Lanka, Pakistan and India *2. Good contribution and impact in UAE in one series. Major contribution but little impact in Bangladesh. Didn't impact or contribute much in UAE and Lanka. Had a couple of series that he barely got a chance to bowl in.

Steyn averages 4.5 wickets a game to Marshall and McGraths 3.7, which is huge. 7.4 wickets per game in wins, with Marshall at 6 and McGrath at 4.9. Marshall and Mcgrath had more competition, but not by this margin. There isn't much doubt to me he was the best in Asia- even if you ignore the stats the miracle spells should do it. But in terms of impact on series results, there isn't that much difference between him and Marshall.

If the idea of impact on series seems overstated because it's a team game, flat pitches determined a lot of results etc., bear in mind that almost all of these series were won by one game or drawn. Performances in a single game(s) either did swing the series, or could have if they had contributed in a game that they failed in. All 3 played a very similar amount of games with a similar amount of wins and although number of draws differ, that is more of a batting/era factor.

 

[Red]

Fast bowlers who took more than 50 wickets in Asia and averaged under 25 in Asia in their careers:

Wasim
Waqar
Imran
Shoaib

Steyn
Walsh
McGrath
Marshall
Hadlee
S.Pollock
Gillespie
Hall

 

[Starfighter]

Andy Roberts' 49 at 21.53 worth a mention too.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Andy Roberts' 49 at 21.53 worth a mention too.

Nah 50 is statistically significant, but 49 isn't

everyone knows this

 

[trundler]

Most runs/dismissals XI:
Hobbs
Gavaskar
Lara
Tendulkar
Hammond
Sobers. Border unlucky to miss out.
Knott+
Hadlee
Trueman
Barnes because he held it the longest (alternatively Lillee)
Warne/Muralitharan

 

[Bolo]

Sobers needed.

Other than Bradman, this is as strong as anything you could put together without the record holder qualification, which is a bit surprising.

 

[trundler]

Aah, yes. Overlooked him for some reason. Was the leading run scorer for quite a while before Boycs. Sobers in for Border.
I was surprised to see Bradman never had the record. Hammond debuted a bit before him and played more cricket because he was English. I suppose that's one Hammond record Bradman didn't better (most hundreds, runs in a series, average and all that).

 

[Bolo]

Bradman not making it surprises me as well. 52 tests for Bradman, 85 for Hammond. Both had 20 year careers minus the loss to the war.

 

[trundler]

England have always played more matches. Cook would be a modern example of that. Bradman outclassed Hammond but the latter racked up the aggregates as he played more against WI, NZ, India, and SA.

 

[Bolo]

RSA family XI

Gary Kirsten
Keaton Jennings
Peter Kirsten
Graeme Pollock
Dudley Norse
Dave Norse
Albie Morkel
Shaun Pollock
Peter Pollock
Ray Jennings
Morne Morkel

Bit of juggling on the go to find a keeper. Neither Jennings actually played for RSA due to apartheid ban and shifting countries, and both weaken the batting. Still an exceptional batting lineup due to allrounders and a very good bowling outfit, even if it lacks a frontline spinner. Pollocks are overpowered as a family.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Aus family XI

S Marsh
G Marsh
G Chappell
I Chappell
M Waugh
S Waugh (c)
R Benaud
M Marsh
S Lee
I Healy
B Lee

reserves: T Healy/A Healy, T Chappell, J Benaud, Vic Richardson