The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[stephen]

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

I did include him in my list.

 

[stephen]

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

In an ATG XI Bevan exists solely as an insurance policy. If the side were to run into a rampaging Ambrose and lose 4 wickets quickly, Bevan could rebuild the innings and get the side to a defensible total. Most of the time he would not bat. I'd promote Klusener above him if the 4th wicket fell with less than 10 overs to go. Also, Bevan was master of the quick single and turning ones into twos. He'd be ideal to be at the other end of de Villiers or Kohli were firing.

And Bevan could and did score quickly when he needed to. His first innings strike rate was 80, which was considered quite good in his era. Chasing he batted slower to ensure his side won.

 

[stephen]

Respect for Jayasuriya. Man was revolutionary.

He also had extraordinary longevity which affected his average somewhat. Was part of a very strong Sri Lankan ODI outfit for many years.

 

[stephen]

Going back to my previous point about "modem ODI batting stats should be taken with a grain of salt", I looked up Tendulkar and Kohli and how many ODIs they played against McGrath and Starc.

Tendulkar played 44 ODIs against Australia during McGrath's career. Of those, McGrath played in 23.

Kohli has played 37 ODIs vs Australia but Starc has only played in 8 of those.

The presence of these bowlers had a substantial impact on the batsman's average but McGrath would have had a larger impact on Tendulkar's average simply because they played against each other more often.

Since the late 00s/ early 10s, more and more sides use ODIs to rest their best bowlers and it shows in the stats of both bowlers and batsmen. Starc, for example, has played 85 ODIs in the last decade and 55 tests, for a ratio of 2:3 tests: ODIs. McGrath had a ratio above 2:4 tests: ODIs and McGrath was never dropped as a test match bowler, while Starc has missed at least 5 tests over his career when other bowlers have been preferred.

 

[jimmy101]

Absolutely right Stephen, Tendulkar & Kohli's batting averages probably would have skyrocketed had they had more chances to pick up easy runs against McGrath/Starc.

 

[Logan]

Won’t it work both ways? Wouldn’t the bowlers stats also worsen if they played against the best batsman of their generation?

 

[stephen]

Absolutely right Stephen, Tendulkar & Kohli's batting averages probably would have skyrocketed had they had more chances to pick up easy runs against McGrath/Starc.

Wtf are you on?

I'm talking about era differences and you think I'm making some kind of nationalistic point? Did you ever bother reading the post?

 

[stephen]

Won’t it work both ways? Wouldn’t the bowlers stats also worsen if they played against the best batsman of their generation?

It's just that the bowlers are bowling less. Starc facing India 8 times is comparable to McGrath playing India 23 times - both are just under 10% of their entire careers. Batsmen are just on average facing more bowlers who aren't first choice.

 

[Logan]

Even in Tests I mean.

Everybody points out Sachin and Lara who have an overall average of 50+ averaged in the mid 30s against McGrath and Donald.

Doesn’t that also mean McGrath and Donald whose bowling average is around 21 average in the mid-30s against Sachin and Lara?

 

[honestbharani]

Rohit better start hitting the nets ASAP.

2 T20Is a day should do it

 

[ataraxia]

Wtf are you on?

I'm talking about era differences and you think I'm making some kind of nationalistic point? Did you ever bother reading the post?

It was just a joke. Calm down.

 

[honestbharani]

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.

I said "your hatred for Indian posters here" coz that is how you have yourself been responding to a bunch of posts. Like you literally mentioned Indian posters and stuff in your posts. If it is not true, then sorry. I apologize. I don't wanna get into an argument over something like this. I respect you enough to take you on your word for it. Cheers. Hope you can accept my apology.

And my very next post on the Gilly subject was to clarify that I did think Gilly is a great in ODIs, just not an ATG. I think I have provided enough explanations and reasons over my earlier posts here so no need to rehash it. Guess we both get where each other stands and honestly I don't think we differ that much in any of our views.

 

[CricAddict]

He also had extraordinary longevity which affected his average somewhat. Was part of a very strong Sri Lankan ODI outfit for many years.

Yes. Both his initial years when he played as a bowler and the final years prior to his retirement pulled down his average. If not for that, his average could be well into the 40s and coupled with his awesome strike rate, he would have been in everyone's first choice ATG ODI XI.

 

[stephen]

It was just a joke. Calm down.

I'm sorry, I didn't recognise it due to its lack of humour content.

 

[stephen]

Yes. Both his initial years when he played as a bowler and the final years prior to his retirement pulled down his average. If not for that, his average could be well into the 40s and coupled with his awesome strike rate, he would have been in everyone's first choice ATG ODI XI.

Yeah maybe. I think most players end up having a worse average than they did for the majority of their career. Because the truly great players tend to play for too long and get picked too early.

 

[Coronis]

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.

Nah, England just hasn’t had that many great players post war.

 

[jimmy101]

England just hasn’t had that many great players post war.

 

[Coronis]

Relatively speaking compared to their pre-war quality and the glut of post-war ATG’s from other nations.

 

[Slifer]

Even in Tests I mean.

Everybody points out Sachin and Lara who have an overall average of 50+ averaged in the mid 30s against McGrath and Donald.

Doesn’t that also mean McGrath and Donald whose bowling average is around 21 average in the mid-30s against Sachin and Lara?

Dont know about tendy but Lara averaged mid 40s vs McGrath not mid 30s

 

[ankitj]

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?

Tendulkar had scored only 4 ODI hundreds before 1996 world cup. Then in little under 4 years, he scored 20 more. What a phase that was!