The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[Malcolm]

Longevity is getting overlooked here. It is unusual for a fast bowler to operate for 17 years, especially in the longest format. I think Hadlee is the only modern-day genuine fast bowler to have played longer than Anderson.

Anderson at home is a bowler in the league of McGrath or Marshall and he is a good bowler away from home. He is clearly an ATG IMO. Philander and Ashwin are very similar to Anderson but they do not have his longevity. I'd say they are ATGs too if you factor in their batting prowess.

 

[stephen]

This is the problem with calling someone an "ATG". Who qualifies? For what reasons? How much of a factor is longevity? Is it the top 20? 30? 40? 50? in a discipline?

 

[mr_mister]

Wasim Akram and Imran Khan too

 

[Slifer]

Wait did someone really compare Walsh to Zaheer Khan?? Lol. Zaheer bowling on indian roads bla bla bla is just silly. He had plenty of opportunities to do well on more pace friendly wickets away but didnt. On the other hand, Walsh was excellent everywhere, except for Australia but what 90s bowler did well in Australia (not donald, pollock, waqar etc). He sure did excel on the roads of India and Pakistan though.

And this crap about Walsh not being atg because he isn't in a wi first xi is just that crap. It's obviously because wi have a ok depth where fast bowling is concerned. Just like Australia have border, Ponting, chappell, waugh, smith. At least 2 of those atg batsmen will miss out on the oz first xi, still doesn't stop them from being atg. Anyway Walsh is vastly better than vaas, kumble, zaheer etc. Lmao!!

 

[h_hurricane]

I seriously don't know what to deduce from these vague averages over small sample size.

Anderson did extremely well in India in '13, played his part in 11' Ashes victory and was the only English bowler who looked ominous in '17 Ashes. He has always delivered in Windies and did well in flat UAE pitches albeit in losing cause. I haven't checked, but I think SA is the only country he does not have a single good series.

Arguing Jadeja is a better traveling bowler than Anderson is laughable to say the least.

Jadeja too looked extremely good in SA in '13 and Aus in '18. The real laughable suggestion is to say some one averaging mid 30s to mid 40s in 5 different countries as an ATG. Just having some good series here and here is not good enough to be an ATG. You need to have an overall ATG record.

By the way, I am not saying Jadeja is an ATG, but Dukerson is clearly getting massively over-rated here.

There have been other great bowlers lasting more than decade and a half. Imran, Akram, Hadlee etc. But nobody is calling them ATGs because of long careers. They just have great records beyond the reach of Anderson who is clearly not good enough to tie their shoelaces.

 

[h_hurricane]

This is the problem with calling someone an "ATG". Who qualifies? For what reasons? How much of a factor is longevity? Is it the top 20? 30? 40? 50? in a discipline?

Rather than having a top 20 or 30 number, I feel one should look at their averages and balanced records in most conditions.

As a general thumb rule,
1) batsmen having average > 50
2) bowlers having average < 25
3) bowling all rounders having bowling avg < 30 and batting avg > 30 (Botham, Kapil etc)

 

[mr_mister]

Speaking of Walsh he had a longer career than Anderson too

 

[h_hurricane]

Wait did someone really compare Walsh to Zaheer Khan?? Lol. Zaheer bowling on indian roads bla bla bla is just silly. He had plenty of opportunities to do well on more pace friendly wickets away but didnt. On the other hand, Walsh was excellent everywhere, except for Australia but what 90s bowler did well in Australia (not donald, pollock, waqar etc). He sure did excel on the roads of India and Pakistan though.

And this crap about Walsh not being atg because he isn't in a wi first xi is just that crap. It's obviously because wi have a ok depth where fast bowling is concerned. Just like Australia have border, Ponting, chappell, waugh, smith. At least 2 of those atg batsmen will miss out on the oz first xi, still doesn't stop them from being atg. Anyway Walsh is vastly better than vaas, kumble, zaheer etc. Lmao!!

One could create 3-4 layers between Walsh and Zaheer and could find a lot of players comfortably placed in each category. (ATVG, All time good, All time reasonable, All Time Decent).

I think Zaheer belongs to ATD category.

 

[Slifer]

Rather than having a top 20 or 30 number, I feel one should look at their averages and balanced records in most conditions.

As a general thumb rule,
1) batsmen having average > 50
2) bowlers having average < 25
3) bowling all rounders having bowling avg < 30 and batting avg > 30 (Botham, Kapil etc)

Looks about right. And people can argue over the cut off all they want, but in life that's just how it is. Typically 90% and above is an A in school but 89% is a B. Not a huge difference statistically but there has to be a cut off somewhere.

Oh fwiw atg batting all rounders should bowling avg < 35 and batting avg > 50

 

[Jack1]

Neither Ashwin nor Jadeja are going to play anywhere close to 17 years. If you expect them to play another 4-5 years, they just need to be decent/average to end up with Anderson like figures.

Yes, Jadeja is nowhere close to what his figures suggest, so is Anderson. Averaging 35 in Aus, 33 in Ind, 33 in NZ,46 in SL, 40 in SA. In fact has more holes than Jadeja.

Anderson is no where near ATG basically. Dude averages 27 with the ball

Longevity is getting overlooked here. It is unusual for a fast bowler to operate for 17 years, especially in the longest format. I think Hadlee is the only modern-day genuine fast bowler to have played longer than Anderson.

Anderson at home is a bowler in the league of McGrath or Marshall and he is a good bowler away from home. He is clearly an ATG IMO. Philander and Ashwin are very similar to Anderson but they do not have his longevity. I'd say they are ATGs too if you factor in their batting prowess.

The difference is Anderson improved as he aged. His stats are improving, not getting worse. He still only averages 27. He can't bat for toffee either and it's not like he's the type of bowler that puts in a big workload either. All things considered it's cheeky to suggest he's ATG status.

 

[Malcolm]

Jadeja too looked extremely good in SA in '13 and Aus in '18. The real laughable suggestion is to say some one averaging mid 30s to mid 40s in 5 different countries as an ATG. Just having some good series here and here is not good enough to be an ATG. You need to have an overall ATG record.

I understand you love stats but I am sorry to say you are not good at analyzing it.

By the way, I am not saying Jadeja is an ATG, but Dukerson is clearly getting massively over-rated here.

There have been other great bowlers lasting more than decade and a half. Imran, Akram, Hadlee etc. But nobody is calling them ATGs because of long careers. They just have great records beyond the reach of Anderson who is clearly not good enough to tie their shoelaces.

Yup. Massively overrated.

 

[h_hurricane]

I understand you love stats but I am sorry to say you are not good at analyzing it.

And would you explain that to me please ? I presented stats as they are.

 

[h_hurricane]

Anderson is no where near ATG basically. Dude averages 27 with the ball


The difference is Anderson improved as he aged. His stats are improving, not getting worse. He still only averages 27. He can't bat for toffee either and it's not like he's the type of bowler that puts in a big workload either. All things considered it's cheeky to suggest he's ATG status.

There is a very low bar set for ATG status. The likes of Kumble and Anderson struggled for better part of a decade before finally becoming serviceable abroad.

What comes next ? Ishant Sharma lasts for another 7 years, somehow gets his average to 29.99 and gets ATG status because he has played 160 tests.

 

[Malcolm]

And would you explain that to me, please? I presented stats as they are.

That is exactly the problem.

 

[Malcolm]

The difference is Anderson improved as he aged. His stats are improving, not getting worse. He still only averages 27. He can't bat for toffee either and it's not like he's the type of bowler that puts in a big workload either. All things considered it's cheeky to suggest he's ATG status.

Not at all.

I am not arguing he is on par with McGrath, Marshall, Akram, et al but he is a great bowler.

 

[stephen]

Wait did someone really compare Walsh to Zaheer Khan?? Lol. Zaheer bowling on indian roads bla bla bla is just silly. He had plenty of opportunities to do well on more pace friendly wickets away but didnt. On the other hand, Walsh was excellent everywhere, except for Australia but what 90s bowler did well in Australia (not donald, pollock, waqar etc). He sure did excel on the roads of India and Pakistan though.

And this crap about Walsh not being atg because he isn't in a wi first xi is just that crap. It's obviously because wi have a ok depth where fast bowling is concerned. Just like Australia have border, Ponting, chappell, waugh, smith. At least 2 of those atg batsmen will miss out on the oz first xi, still doesn't stop them from being atg. Anyway Walsh is vastly better than vaas, kumble, zaheer etc. Lmao!!

I threw them in the same bucket which is "below ATG level but were great servants for their country". Here's what I said:

Anderson's career stats are around about McDermott's (with a lot better longevity) and that's generally about how good he was. Great on his day, ordinary at other times. ATVG level player. Fans of the side will love them for their servanthood to their country and will remember the highlights while non fans won't think too much about them when they're gone.

Other ATVG players:

Gillespie
Kumble
Vaas
Zaheer
Walsh (though many people would consider him an ATG, he was certainly a step down from Ambrose)
Benaud
Inzimam

There's quite clearly a huge spectrum and maybe you could split a whole bunch of players. Zaheer would be at the bottom of that pile and Walsh at the top (though TBF maybe I'm slightly underrating him because I mostly watched him against Australia). You don't get 300 test wickets while being complete and utter garbage. That's something only 24 pace bowlers in history have managed.

Whether you place Walsh at the bottom of the ATG tree or at the top of the ATVG tree is largely a matter of how many players you put in each category.

Frankly though, there are 20 or more bowlers in history I'd have ahead of Walsh. From the top of my head - Marshall, Ambrose, Garner, Holding, Croft, Roberts, Bishop, Hadlee, Donald, Pollock, Steyn, Philander, Trueman, Statham, McGrath, Lillee, Davidson, Lindwall, Wasim, Waqar and Imran. There are a few others like Reid and Harris who had quite short careers but were better while they played who I wouldn't consider to be ATG. Walsh is somewhere in the mix with those guys for me.

 

[stephen]

One could create 3-4 layers between Walsh and Zaheer and could find a lot of players comfortably placed in each category. (ATVG, All time good, All time reasonable, All Time Decent).

I think Zaheer belongs to ATD category.

This is fair and reasonable.

Anyone who takes 300 wickets for their nation deserves recognition as being a very good cricketer though. Well, anyone except Broad .

 

[h_hurricane]

That is exactly the problem.

Well, I could explain this. Jadeja's average in most countries abroad is better than Anderson's in likewise countries. These are small sample sizes admittedly, but they are already rough equivalent of Anderson's best performances abroad. Which means, Jadeja has to be thrash abroad for the second half of his career(a rough equivalent of Anderson's worst performances abroad). I don't see this coming as Jadeja is on an upward curve as a cricketer in alien conditions (much like Anderson a decade back or Kumble 2 decades back).

And, I do have my short comings as an individual, stats analysis is certainly not one of them. I don't even need to look at cricinfo to look at the averages of several great cricketers as it is already in my subconscious mind.Could do a 3 by 3 digit multiplication without a calculator if it gets to that point. Not exaggerating it one bit

 

[stephen]

The problem is that Jadeja only tends to get picked abroad when conditions suit him. He's a bit like MacGill in that ultimately his stats probably flatter him somewhat because he didn't tend to play in unfavourable conditions.

 

[h_hurricane]

The problem is that Jadeja only tends to get picked abroad when conditions suit him. He's a bit like MacGill in that ultimately his stats probably flatter him somewhat because he didn't tend to play in unfavourable conditions.

This is no longer true though there were cases like that a few years back. Jadeja is also fighting for a place abroad with Ashwin and one of them gets picked. That does not mean the guy who gets dropped is not good.

As things stand, Jadeja has played 35% of his test career abroad. In Anderson's case, it is 43%. I don't see any reason to think that Jadeja's average would have dropped below Anderson's if he played as much as Jimmy away from home.