The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[stephen]

Did McGrath strike fear?

Not as much as Ambrose.

Striking fear is overrated. I'm not sure anyone ever feared facing Warne. Ruthless, effective wicket taking is all that's important.

 

[trundler]

Pollock's all round credentials land him into that team. Certainly think Walsh is a good fit in a team with Chanderpaul, Turner and Benaud.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah for sure, as I said, I'm not saying he'd Dave Gilbert levels of bad here (as a bowler, not an administrator, which is even worse), I'm just saying I never really thought of him as ATG material. Others vary, and it depends on when you see them play and how they're going at the time.

 

[mr_mister]

I dunno. To me he's just a slighty inferior McGrath with the ball. Who could also actually bat

 

[bagapath]

Did McGrath strike fear?

honestly, yes. "What to do with McGrath" was always the question every team had to deal with for a decade.

Though, contrary to popular opinion I always felt pollock was the one who had the wood on Sachin - more than McGrath or Murali. Consistently got him out for low scores.

 

[Burgey]

Not as much as Ambrose.

Striking fear is overrated. I'm not sure anyone ever feared facing Warne. Ruthless, effective wicket taking is all that's important.

That's the fear I'm talking about. Ambrose wasn't express pace, but you always had it in your head he might turn up and do a 7 for 1 job on you. Warne was like that for Pommies and Saffas as well. Same with McGrath, but against most everyone - you're always worried something's gonna happen and it won't be good fro the batting side. I never got that from Pollock (nor Waqar, come to that, but I've revised my views of him more favourably recently, factoring in his tours here coincided with him either being a foetus, slowed down after injury or too old).

 

[mr_mister]

That's the fear I'm talking about.Ambrose wasn't express pace, but you always had it in your head he might turn up and do a 7 for 1 job on you. Warne was like that for Pommies and Saffas as well. Same with McGrath, but against most everyone - you're always worried something's gonna happen and it won't be good fro the batting side. I never got that from Pollock (nor Waqar, come to that, but I've revised my views of him more favourably recently, factoring in his tours here coincided with him either being a foetus, slowed down after injury or too old).

Ah okay. The 'hiding behind your lounge' analogy threw me

 

[bagapath]

Waqar is another Beefy. took 15-20 five-fers in no time and spent the next 8-10 years bowling hardly three spells that mattered.

 

[mr_mister]

Waqar is another Beefy. took 15-20 five-fers in no time and spent the next 8-10 years bowling hardly three spells that mattered.

So Viv with the bat?

 

[CricAddict]

Yes, definitely Mcgrath had the fear factor. A Mcgrath or Akram did not have the express pace of the others, but when they are at the start of the bowling crease, opposition fans always feared that their team might be 10/3 or 10/4 in no time. Had it for Donald too. But during my days of watching Pollock, I never had the same fear.

 

[mr_mister]

Well he took 421 test wickets @ 23 so maybe some of you guys should have feared him a bit. Since he seemed to get results. I'll admit I didn't know he stank that much against Australia though

 

[Burgey]

I would say I respected him but maybe not as much as a 23 average would suggest I should have, if that makes sense

 

[h_hurricane]

I don't think anyone is saying Pollock was the equivalent of Donald, Steyn or Waqar with the ball. He is a lower tier ATG bowler. Once you bring his batting into the picture, he is a bonafide ATG.

 

[bagapath]

So Viv with the bat?

Viv's fall was like Ponting's.

But Beefy and Waqar were completely different players in the two parts of their careers. In fact, I dare say Botham's fall was even more pronounced because as big a star as Waqar was, Beefy was even more impactful (as an allrounder).

Still.. Cant recall anything Waqar did of note post 1995.

 

[mr_mister]

I don't think anyone is saying Pollock was the equivalent of Donald, Steyn or Waqar with the ball. He is a lower tier ATG bowler. Once you bring his batting into the picture, he is a bonafide ATG.

Well said. A 7 run gap between batting and bowling average puts him in the elite class for bowling all rounders (since the same comparison doesn't work as well for batting all rounders)

 

[stephen]

After careful deliberation I'm returning to my original beliefs on Walsh. Not quite an ATG, but on the verge of it.

Here is my reasoning (other than watching him bowl).

His home average is very good, around Pollock's career average. His away average is over 25.

The two teams he played the most during his career were Australia and England. Australia were very good tbf, but England were not great and Walsh averaged 25 against them in what would have been mostly good bowling conditions.

The teams he played less tests against, Pakistan, New Zealand, India and Sri Lanka he generally performed very well against (except Sri Lanka, who he averaged nearly 35 against, though only over 3 tests).

The problem is that other than Pakistan who had a decent team at the time, India he only played when they were a glorified minnow and he basically played the worst NZ teams of the last 50 years.

Home and away against Australia he averaged around 29 and a lot of that was played on some really poor pitches.

The 90s were an exceptional era for fast bowling. Yet he averages more than every other fast bowler from the era you would consider great, and more than some who definitely wouldn't make that list (de Villiers, Fleming, Streak). In fact he averages virtually the same as Merv Hughes and McDermott in the 90s.

I just can't rate him as an ATG for those reasons. His longevity makes him stand out, as does his partnership with Ambrose. The other reason he stands out is the dross that replaced him. But individually he just wasn't up there with the best.

So I've reconsidered and I have come to the same conclusion as before - he was very good but not up there with the very best.

 

[Red]

Can't see any reason why you wouldn't classify Walsh an ATG.

He would clearly make NZ's ATG XI.

 

[h_hurricane]

After careful deliberation I'm returning to my original beliefs on Walsh. Not quite an ATG, but on the verge of it.

Here is my reasoning (other than watching him bowl).

His home average is very good, around Pollock's career average. His away average is over 25.

The two teams he played the most during his career were Australia and England. Australia were very good tbf, but England were not great and Walsh averaged 25 against them in what would have been mostly good bowling conditions.

The teams he played less tests against, Pakistan, New Zealand, India and Sri Lanka he generally performed very well against (except Sri Lanka, who he averaged nearly 35 against, though only over 3 tests).

The problem is that other than Pakistan who had a decent team at the time, India he only played when they were a glorified minnow and he basically played the worst NZ teams of the last 50 years.

Home and away against Australia he averaged around 29 and a lot of that was played on some really poor pitches.

The 90s were an exceptional era for fast bowling. Yet he averages more than every other fast bowler from the era you would consider great, and more than some who definitely wouldn't make that list (de Villiers, Fleming, Streak). In fact he averages virtually the same as Merv Hughes and McDermott in the 90s.

I just can't rate him as an ATG for those reasons. His longevity makes him stand out, as does his partnership with Ambrose. The other reason he stands out is the dross that replaced him. But individually he just wasn't up there with the best.

So I've reconsidered and I have come to the same conclusion as before - he was very good but not up there with the very best.

His away average is over 25. It is 25.03

 

[h_hurricane]

Waqar is another Beefy. took 15-20 five-fers in no time and spent the next 8-10 years bowling hardly three spells that mattered.

Certainly not. Waqar was still a very good bowler post mid 90s. Beefy was absolute thrash from mid 80s.

 

[Burgey]

After careful deliberation I'm returning to my original beliefs on Walsh. Not quite an ATG, but on the verge of it.

Here is my reasoning (other than watching him bowl).

His home average is very good, around Pollock's career average. His away average is over 25.

The two teams he played the most during his career were Australia and England. Australia were very good tbf, but England were not great and Walsh averaged 25 against them in what would have been mostly good bowling conditions.

The teams he played less tests against, Pakistan, New Zealand, India and Sri Lanka he generally performed very well against (except Sri Lanka, who he averaged nearly 35 against, though only over 3 tests).

The problem is that other than Pakistan who had a decent team at the time, India he only played when they were a glorified minnow and he basically played the worst NZ teams of the last 50 years.

Home and away against Australia he averaged around 29 and a lot of that was played on some really poor pitches.

The 90s were an exceptional era for fast bowling. Yet he averages more than every other fast bowler from the era you would consider great, and more than some who definitely wouldn't make that list (de Villiers, Fleming, Streak). In fact he averages virtually the same as Merv Hughes and McDermott in the 90s.

I just can't rate him as an ATG for those reasons. His longevity makes him stand out, as does his partnership with Ambrose. The other reason he stands out is the dross that replaced him. But individually he just wasn't up there with the best.

So I've reconsidered and I have come to the same conclusion as before - he was very good but not up there with the very best.

Ok