-
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
_00_deathscar
International Regular
It's not a Peak XI - It's a Peak XI where they far outperformed their norm/career (while still being top notch players - so no random weirdos)
Smith's peak IS his career, the ****.
_00_deathscar
International Regular
Depends how long we define to be a peak, but from modern bowlers, it's hard to see beyond Imran. Staggering stats.
_00_deathscar
International Regular
You didn't follow/watch many Australia matches in India did you?
Between 2000-2009, Muttiah Muralitharan’s numbers are mind boggling.
565 wickets in 84 Tests at an average of 20 and a SR of 50. That includes 49 five wicket hauls and 20 ten wicket hauls.
335 wickets in 205 ODIs at an average of 20 and SR of 32. That includes 8 five wicket hauls.
Muralitharan should have been the undisputed “Player of the Decade”.
It was absolutely disgusting that he wasn’t even nominated among the Top 3 players of that decade. Clearly a bias. Against bowlers and SL.
565 wickets in 84 Tests at an average of 20 and a SR of 50. That includes 49 five wicket hauls and 20 ten wicket hauls.
335 wickets in 205 ODIs at an average of 20 and SR of 32. That includes 8 five wicket hauls.
Muralitharan should have been the undisputed “Player of the Decade”.
It was absolutely disgusting that he wasn’t even nominated among the Top 3 players of that decade. Clearly a bias. Against bowlers and SL.
Slifer
International Captain
Probably. I think it has more to do with the controversy surrounding his action for better or for worse.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
Red
The normal awards that everyone else has
Give me a coherent argument supported by facts of why Marshall and Hadlee are a tier above McGrath.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
McGrath's Australian. Hadlee's a kiwi. What more do you need.
He's lucky he was allowed to play at all tbh
Coronis
International Coach
Hasn’t this been done to death...
Depends how long and high you want the peak to be, but Vengsarkar (reasonable career otherwise, was ranked #1 for a fair bit of 1988) and Gatting (poor career otherwise, spent 1985-7 in or around the world's top ten) are contenders.
Since there are several other contenders, here's a team to play against them:
Arthur Shrewsbury
Warren Bardsley
Billy Murdoch
Stanley Jackson*
Warwick Armstrong
Monty Noble
Wilfred Rhodes
Jack Blackham+
George Lohmann
Tom Richardson
Charlie Blythe
(I'm assuming that Woolley, Taylor and Macartney, for instance, hadn't played enough by 1919 to convince the 1919 judges).
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Ideally I was looking for godlike peaks in an otherwise good/ very good career. Yousef and Clarke are the archetypes.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
Greatness comes in multiple colors especially the guys belonging to the very top.
Marshall was the complete quick. Performed against everyone everywhere.
Mcgrath's X factor was how he gunned out the best batsmen from the opposition. Amazing durability as well.
Curtly was the meanest and most frightening quick of them all.Several teams have cut a sorry figure against him umpteen times.
No quick bowler in history carried a weak team on his shoulders and made them as competitive as Hadlee.
Steyn was the most explosive of them all. Had a period of 70 odd tests when he had a strike rate of under 40 which is insane.
With a gun to my head, I will go with the below order.
1.Marshall
2.Hadlee
3.Mcgrath
4.Ambrose
5.Steyn
Anyone who says that one of these guys was a tier above the other 4 is being unfair and under-rating these once in a century quicks.
Big Bird and White Lightning follow.
Marshall was the complete quick. Performed against everyone everywhere.
Mcgrath's X factor was how he gunned out the best batsmen from the opposition. Amazing durability as well.
Curtly was the meanest and most frightening quick of them all.Several teams have cut a sorry figure against him umpteen times.
No quick bowler in history carried a weak team on his shoulders and made them as competitive as Hadlee.
Steyn was the most explosive of them all. Had a period of 70 odd tests when he had a strike rate of under 40 which is insane.
With a gun to my head, I will go with the below order.
1.Marshall
2.Hadlee
3.Mcgrath
4.Ambrose
5.Steyn
Anyone who says that one of these guys was a tier above the other 4 is being unfair and under-rating these once in a century quicks.
Big Bird and White Lightning follow.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Gambhir
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Yeah maybe it's the undiagnosed Aspergers in me, but there's always been an annoying continuity problem baked into this concept with me. Arguably the bloke who played the best shot I ever saw had the best peak, and if the argument against that is some players played good shots for longer than one ball then you can apply that effectively infinitely until there's no difference between peak and career.
smash84
The Tiger King
Stating the obvious but important is to balance the two. There is going to be some difference of opinion regarding what is a "reasonable" length of the peak obviously but almost everyone is going to take one shot as being too short of a time period to judge anybody.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
bagapath
International Captain
Sir Richard would be terribly offended by that statement. He was a far far better batsman than them all and he should be the no. 8. In this bunch, comparatively, Marshall and Warne clearly belonged at 9/10. And Steyn at 11.