The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[marc71178]

Why not? Economy rate of 5 per over in the era he played in is pretty good for a 5th bowler.

But he wasn't a 5th bowler if he wasn't even being used for 20% or so of the time.

He also doesn't fit in the lineup with the bat because he needs to bat higher in the order then he could justify being picked.

 

[Coronis]

Attacking XI

Victor Trumper
Virender Sehwag
Viv Richards
Kapil Dev*
Shahid Afridi
Maurice Tate
Gilbert Jessop
Adam Gilchrist+
Shane Warne
Waqar Younis
Shane Bond

Would pay a hefty fee to see this XI play.

 

[Prince EWS]

He also doesn't fit in the lineup with the bat because he needs to bat higher in the order then he could justify being picked.

This is also why I can't pick Flintoff. It hurts me so.

 

[kyear2]

Even if you jusifty Sobers’ failure in NZ, how would you justify Sobers’ failure against NZ at home?

Sobers vs NZ in NZ : 250 runs in 8 innings

Sobers vs NZ in NZ : 150 runs in 10 innings

BTW, I don’t agree with your reasons about Sobers’ failure in NZ. The reasons just seems to be an excuse to justify his failure.

And all of this just because one poster said he though Sobers was better than Tendulkar and stoked by nationalistic vanity. Just like that stupid multi page argument with Stephen and Monk.

 

[stephen]

First XI (normally I'd split Asia/RoW teams but not this time)

Tendulkar
Gilchrist +
Richards
Kohli
De Villiers
Bevan
Klusener
Akram
Warne
Garner
McGrath

Second XI

Rohit
Jayasuriya
Ponting
Sangakkara
Lara
Dhoni+
Symonds
Starc
Waqar
Saqlain
Donald

Klusener is 5th bowler for the first XI and Jaya+Symonds can cover the ten overs needed from the 2nd XI part timers.

 

[kyear2]

Never said stats are the sole basis. Just said stats are more important than views of eminent cricket writers and historians.

When it suits your purposes. Basically it seems as instead of using statistics to come to a conclusion, you have come to a conclusion and then cherry pick stats to prove them.

You have been basically hinting that writers and historians have an English and Australian historical bias and so you discredit it. The problem here though is that you , like most, also have biases.

 

[Logan]

It is just human nature to be biased.

Since the Aussies and English were in powerful position, they would have been biased.

 

[harsh.ag]

Tendulkar
Viv
Kohli
ABdV
Dhoni (c)
Gilly (w)
Jayasuriya
Wasim
Starc
McGrath
Murali

Gilly and Jayasuriya at 6 and 7 break the opposition's back. Solve the opener's conundrum by having the GOAT open.

I like having a mix of part timers as the #5 bowler. It doesn't feel like an ODI XI to me otherwise. Jayasuriya, Viv, and Tendulkar to bowl at least 10 overs between them.

 

[ankitj]

Yuck.

 

[Logan]

Most ODI hundreds in a decade

1. Kohli : 42 (2010s)

2. Rohit : 27 (2010s)

3. Sachin : 24 (1990s)

4. Ponting : 23 (2000s)

5. Jayasuriya : 21 (2000s)

6. Sachin : 20 (2000s)

Will anybody break Kohli’s record the next decade?

 

[honestbharani]

Tendulkar
Viv
Kohli
ABdV
Dhoni (c)
Gilly (w)
Jayasuriya
Wasim
Starc
McGrath
Murali

Gilly and Jayasuriya at 6 and 7 break the opposition's back. Solve the opener's conundrum by having the GOAT open.

I like having a mix of part timers as the #5 bowler. It doesn't feel like an ODI XI to me otherwise. Jayasuriya, Viv, and Tendulkar to bowl at least 10 overs between them.

Gotta be kidding with the Gilly keeping over Dhoni.. I mean seriously, you got Jayasuriya there to bowl. Dhoni guarantees at least two stumping dismissals there.

 

[honestbharani]

Most ODI hundreds in a decade

1. Kohli : 42 (2010s)

2. Rohit : 27 (2010s)

3. Sachin : 24 (1990s)

4. Ponting : 23 (2000s)

5. Jayasuriya : 21 (2000s)

6. Sachin : 20 (2000s)

Will anybody break Kohli’s record this decade?

Maybe Kohli himself?

 

[ataraxia]

First XI (normally I'd split Asia/RoW teams but not this time)

Tendulkar
Gilchrist +
Richards
Kohli
De Villiers
Bevan
Klusener
Akram
Warne
Garner
McGrath

Second XI

Rohit
Jayasuriya
Ponting
Sangakkara
Lara
Dhoni+
Symonds
Starc
Waqar
Saqlain
Donald

Klusener is 5th bowler for the first XI and Jaya+Symonds can cover the ten overs needed from the 2nd XI part timers.

Bevan has the same problem as Rohit on a whole new level. Inability to score fast at all.

 

[Red]

Agree. Its like Gilchrist and how his test match greatness is often relayed to ODIs where he was not great.

I also literally said I can give you the statistical side of it when I had time, thought since you did not respond it was not needed. If you insist though will do it later today.


And if you think he is the best keeper batsman you have seen in ODIs fair enough. But that is not what you said in the post I quoted. I think your hatred towards the Indian posters here has started affecting your actual posting quality. And for every two articles you can link me on Gilly, you know I will have 10 on Dhoni.

No, hold on a minute. Don't start pulling the "hatred for Indian" card. I have no issue with anyone due to their nationality and race, and I won't have you pinning that **** on me here. I do not hate anyone because of their race. I do hate when people post bullshit in blocs, which is what is happening here a fair bit, and there has been antagonism toward Aust cricketers from a bloc of Indian posters. But meh.

My point is, you started this. You literally said Gilly "was not great" in ODIs. I've quoted it above. Any amount of articles you can link to regarding Dhoni being great are moot, because I have never said Dhoni "was not great". Quite the opposite in fact, I consider him a true great of the format, and I would be more than happy to have him over Gilchrist in an ATG team. Both played their respective (different) roles equally well.

 

[Red]

But he wasn't a 5th bowler if he wasn't even being used for 20% or so of the time.

He also doesn't fit in the lineup with the bat because he needs to bat higher in the order then he could justify being picked.

Symonds was a 5th bowler. Lol

 

[ataraxia]

Last night I realised that 10/11 players in my unorthodox English XI played pre-WWII.

JB Hobbs
H Sutcliffe
L Hutton
WG Grace*
WR Hammond
KS Ranjitsinhji
LEG Ames +
MW Tate
H Verity
FS Trueman
SF Barnes

I'm mad.

 

[_00_deathscar]

Most ODI hundreds in a decade

1. Kohli : 42 (2010s)

2. Rohit : 27 (2010s)

3. Sachin : 24 (1990s)

4. Ponting : 23 (2000s)

5. Jayasuriya : 21 (2000s)

6. Sachin : 20 (2000s)

Will anybody break Kohli’s record this decade?

Asking Rohit to hit 16 centuries in 13 days or so is a bit much...

 

[jimmy101]

Rohit better start hitting the nets ASAP.

 

[Tom Flint]

I wanted to clarify the thoughts I had earlier in the Rohit vs Gilchrist for opener.

Gilchrist was, at worst, the second best keeper/batsman in ODI history. If you don't want to pick Dhoni for whatever reason (and you're not picking Buttler) then he's really the only choice (I guess you could pick De Kock, but Gilchrist was better than De Kock).

As a keeper he has no holes in his resume. He kept very well to both top shelf pace (McGrath, Gillespie and Fleming, who were all very different quicks) and spin (including both Warne and Hogg). As an aggressive opener he was the best of his generation, being arguably a better batsman than both Jayasuriya and Sehwag. While he wasn't Tendulkar, literally nobody else has been as good as Tendulkar, so that barely matters.

If Rohit did what he did ten years ago I'd have a lot more respect for it. But right now I think his statistics flatter him. Like Mark Waugh, his average as opener is significantly higher than his overall average but that probably is because he learned the game in the middle order before getting promoted in his prime. The game is also significantly easier for openers and the problem I have with Rohit in an ATG side is that he can cost you runs because he takes too long to get started and only makes it up once he gets to 40 or 50. His strike rate is nothing flash for his era either. There's nothing wrong with it by any means, but it's not exceptional.

Paradoxically I think Rohit would be more valuable the worse the rest of the team was. Because he tends to go large, and only improve his strike rate as his innings progresses, I think he'd be the perfect opener for a side that had a weak middle order. Sure, they would lose when he failed, but when he went large they would definitely win more often. Contrast that to an AT XI, he'd hurt the team when he played a 25(35) type of innings. Gilchrist would be better with his 30(30) innings'. Gilchrist was tested more against quality bowling attacks than Rohit as well.

One area where Rohit really does stand out above his peers (i.e. openers of the last ten years) is his extraordinary ability to get a score of 50+. Most of his best contemporaries are scoring a 50+ score around 30-33% of the time, but Rohit gets there a whopping 40% of the time. That's a phenomenal statistic.

In isolation, Rohit is certainly in the top tier of openers in history. In fact it would be fair to say that he is almost certainly the best "high averaging" opener after Tendulkar. For an ATG side though I think there are better options because building an ODI side is about managing resources and Rohit up top means that the faster scoring middle order bats will likely not get as much time in the middle to really pile on the hurt. His average (and his tendency to go large) is what really stands out and that's something that disproportionately helps weaker sides. For stronger sides, strike rate is more important in an opener. And as I said, his strike rate is very good, but not exceptional.

Personally, I genuinely believe that the best balance historically in an ODI side has been an aggressive opener partnered with a high averaging opener. Waugh/Gilchrist, Hayden/Gilchrist, Ganguly/Tendulkar (Tendulkar played both roles), Tendulkar/Sehwag, Amla/De Kock etc... The current English openers are bucking the trend somewhat by both filling the "aggressive opener" role. This probably only works because they have such a strong batting lineup down the order. If we split and rank openers historically into the two categories, we get two lists that look a bit like this:

High average (era adjusted) (not in order):
Tendulkar
Sharma
Greenidge
Hayden
Amla
Waugh
Dilshan
Haynes
Guptill
Watson

Aggressive (era adjusted) (not in order):
Tendulkar
Roy
Bairstow
Gilchrist
Jayasuriya
Warner
Sehwag
Gayle
De Kock
Gibbs

Personally I think for most sides, pairing someone from the first group and someone from the second group works well. Tendulkar kind of breaks the rules because he was both, but for an AT side, I'd rather pair him with another aggressive opener since that gives a better platform for the middle order. Jayasuriya and Gilchrist are both great options because they bring a second skill to the table.

Dilshan was a good keeper batsman opener, with a higher average but bit lower sr. Deserves to be in the conversation

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Most ODI hundreds in a decade

1. Kohli : 42 (2010s)

2. Rohit : 27 (2010s)

3. Sachin : 24 (1990s)

4. Ponting : 23 (2000s)

5. Jayasuriya : 21 (2000s)

6. Sachin : 20 (2000s)

Will anybody break Kohli’s record this decade?

Respect for Jayasuriya. Man was revolutionary.