The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread (white ball edition)

[ImpatientLime]

The thing is that with Tendulkar and Viv both capable part time options the ATG ODI XI arguably doesn't need a fifth bowler anyway. Whoever bats number 7 should provably be picked based on pitch conditions more than anything else. If it's a highway then favour bowling, if it's got anything at all for the bowlers, favour batting.

if i'm picking an atg odi xi that are to play someone elses atg odi xi i sure as **** don't want viv/tendulkar/symonds as my fifth bowling option. they are gonna get humped.

 

[jimmy101]

I think the simplest way to resolve this would be to just pick Ian Harvey at no. 7 & be done with it.

 

[mr_mister]

I think the simplest way to resolve this would be to just pick Ian Harvey at no. 7 & be done with it.

Would definitely hold the record for bloke with the most man of the match awards who never took a five fer or scored a fifty

 

[Migara]

The thing is that with Tendulkar and Viv both capable part time options the ATG ODI XI arguably doesn't need a fifth bowler anyway. Whoever bats number 7 should provably be picked based on pitch conditions more than anything else. If it's a highway then favour bowling, if it's got anything at all for the bowlers, favour batting.

Pick Jayasuriya and you solve the problem. And he is a specialist death bowler too.

 

[Burgey]

You might want to ask the same question but with one of them needing to make a clutch 70-80 odd.

I wouldn’t have Symonds in that role in an ATG side personally, but I also wouldn’t have Kluesner anywhere near an ATG side. Bloke had a great 18 months but tbh he doesn’t belong in that sort of company.

 

[ankitj]

The thing is that with Tendulkar and Viv both capable part time options the ATG ODI XI arguably doesn't need a fifth bowler anyway. Whoever bats number 7 should provably be picked based on pitch conditions more than anything else. If it's a highway then favour bowling, if it's got anything at all for the bowlers, favour batting.

Multiple bowlers capable of bowling pies is not better than one bowler bowling pies.

 

[harsh.ag]

You might want to ask the same question but with one of them needing to make a clutch 70-80 odd.

But you don't pick based on one particular scenario. You pick based on all the possible scenarios that can take place.

 

[h_hurricane]

The thing is that with Tendulkar and Viv both capable part time options the ATG ODI XI arguably doesn't need a fifth bowler anyway. Whoever bats number 7 should provably be picked based on pitch conditions more than anything else. If it's a highway then favour bowling, if it's got anything at all for the bowlers, favour batting.

You absolutely need a 5th bowler with these 2 in the team. If you are relying on a bloke who averaged 35 with the ball, and further down the pit, another bloke who averaged a ****ing 44 with the ball, you are not going to escape disastrous consequences 80-90% of the time. They are going to get butchered.

 

[Daemon]

imagine running into a rampant Buttler on 68 (45) and you still got 6 overs of Symonds/Viv/Tendulkar to go

 

[Daemon]

Or you have them 3 down for sfa but have to bowl Symonds/Viv/Tendulkar through the middle overs only for them to recover and post a good total.

But hey that extra batting at 7 sure will make all the difference

 

[jimmy101]

Multiple bowlers capable of bowling pies is not better than one bowler bowling pies.

Whilst it might not be ideal & doesn't look strong on paper, a healthy stock of bowling options can be a plus. There's a chance that one of them might have a really good day, or at the very least effect a catch on the boundary or a stumping opportunity.

One thing I don't really get is why Kapil's name doesn't get brought up very much. He was a consummate ODI bowler & could hit the ball out of the park. Yes, his batting average isn't remarkable, but do batting averages really matter for the lower-order in ODIs? If you pick the three of Kapil, Imran & Wasim that's some immense batting depth.

 

[h_hurricane]

Whilst it might not be ideal & doesn't look strong on paper, a healthy stock of bowling options can be a plus. There's a chance that one of them might have a really good day, or at the very least effect a catch on the boundary or a stumping opportunity.

One thing I don't really get is why Kapil's name doesn't get brought up very much. He was a consummate ODI bowler & could hit the ball out of the park. Yes, his batting average isn't remarkable, but do batting averages really matter for the lower-order in ODIs? If you pick the three of Kapil, Imran & Wasim that's some immense batting depth.

I think Viv would be a decent 6th bowling option, and Sachin would be 7th if it gets to that point. That would be the last resort if one of the main bowlers get injured or having a rare off day.

And yes, Kapil could hit a 30 of 15-20 balls as consistently as any no.7 batsman ever. I would have him in my team personally.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Kapil is the Sholay of all Indian cricketers.

Gavaskar is the Jugnoo.

 

[jimmy101]

Ok

 

[stephen]

Viv averaged 5 overs per match, Sachin averaged 3 overs per match. That's your fifth bowler right there (as there will be some times where they don't need to bowl). Throw in Symonds and you have enough options to fill in the overs. I mean people are advocating for Jayasuriya but his average is worse than Viv's and he only bowled an average 6 overs per match as well (just as much as Viv). Heck, even Watson who was as genuine an all rounder as you'll find only bowled 6 overs per match on average.

If you have a side 3 down and need to get 10 out of some part timers, you can get through those part timers earlier so the other team needs to take risks against them earlier, which could result in them going 4 or 5 down early on.

But if they're zero down after 20 overs of McGrath/Garner/Akram you're probably rooted anyway and the extra batting firepower in the second innings will probably be worth more. The fifth bowler going for 0/80 instead of 0/60 isn't going to help you that much. A better batsman might.

What is being discussed here is having a genuine bowler at 7, giving the side 5 front line bowlers. But I just don't see the 5th bowler as ever being the difference in an ODI. At least not enough to have a front line quick. Occasionally, if conditions are right a second front line spinner could be worthwhile but there's a reason that even in T20 cricket sides most often opt for four full time bowlers and two or three (batting) all rounders.

Let's take Flintoff as an example. He bowled an average of 7 overs per match and took his wickets at a strike rate of 33. He averaged 24 with the ball. He took barely more than one wicket per match. His mean bowling figures were 1.2/29 (7). Compare that to Symonds, who played in a slightly earlier era but not by enough to adjust for. His mean was 0.7/25 (5). If he bowled 7 overs (same as Flintoff) he would average 0.9/35(7).

Is Flintoff's extra 0.3 wickets and six less runs conceded going to make a difference? Especially given that those stats will be hurt even further by the fact that he won't get the new ball and will be likely be bowling more often to set batsmen?

I honestly don't think the 5th bowler has as much impact on a game as the number 7 batsman. The number 7 batsman won't bat every innings, and won't bat for long a lot of the time, but there will be times when the number 7 can change the course of a match. Far more often than the 5th bowler will.

 

[jimmy101]

Viv averaged 5 overs per match, Sachin averaged 3 overs per match. That's your fifth bowler right there

What?

Throw in Symonds and you have enough options to fill in the overs. I mean people are advocating for Jayasuriya but his average is worse than Viv's and he only bowled an average 6 overs per match as well (just as much as Viv).

You just said Viv bowled an average of 5 overs per match.

If you have a side 3 down and need to get 10 out of some part timers, you can get through those part timers earlier so the other team needs to take risks against them earlier, which could result in them going 4 or 5 down early on.

As stated earlier, this just lets the batting side off the hook in 99% of situations.

But if they're zero down after 20 overs of McGrath/Garner/Akram you're probably rooted anyway and the extra batting firepower in the second innings will probably be worth more. The fifth bowler going for 0/80 instead of 0/60 isn't going to help you that much. A better batsman might.

There's literally nothing that would suggest this is the case imo.

Let's take Flintoff as an example. He bowled an average of 7 overs per match and took his wickets at a strike rate of 33. He averaged 24 with the ball. He took barely more than one wicket per match. His mean bowling figures were 1.2/29 (7). Compare that to Symonds, who played in a slightly earlier era but not by enough to adjust for. His mean was 0.7/25 (5). If he bowled 7 overs (same as Flintoff) he would average 0.9/35(7).

All this does is just confirm that Flintoff is the infinitely better option.

Is Flintoff's extra 0.3 wickets and six less runs conceded going to make a difference? Especially given that those stats will be hurt even further by the fact that he won't get the new ball and will be likely be bowling more often to set batsmen?

Hell yes. Taking wickets is vital to keeping the run rate down.

I honestly don't think the 5th bowler has as much impact on a game as the number 7 batsman. The number 7 batsman won't bat every innings, and won't bat for long a lot of the time, but there will be times when the number 7 can change the course of a match. Far more often than the 5th bowler will.

Of course the fifth bowler is more important. You're basically talking about a player which is responsible for sending down 20% of all deliveries in the innings. It's a pivotal role. No matter which way you slice it, you're going to need 10 overs out of your fifth bowlers in almost every one-day match. Whereas a big knock from a No. 7 batsman is not going be required nearly as often.

 

[ImpatientLime]

this is so weird

i mean wasim ONLY takes an average of 1.41/33 in an average of 8.51 overs a game. are his extra 0.7 wickets really worth how weak your batting line up is with him at 8 compared to symonds?

 

[h_hurricane]

I am getting heavily influenced by Stephen's astute observations and contemplating picking the below bottom order to cover all bases including batting until no. 11.

7.Andrew Symonds
8. Shahid Afridi
9. Robin Singh
10. Thisara Perera
11. Ronnie Irani

Symonds would open the bowling with his curving seamers and would cause havoc in the opposition ranks with whatever little on offer in the pitch. He would be ably supported by Irani, his crafty partner. Singh and Perera following up will ensure that there is no let down on the pressure. Afridi would eat up the lower order like a hungry lion devours an unsuspecting prey. On rank turners, Symonds would nonchalantly switch to a spinner's role mesmerizing the opposition with all his unique skills. Well and truly the Sobers of ODIs. Viv would have a hard time to take the ball off his hands and would need to engage in a one-on-one barbed wire steel cage contest with Symonds to get an over or two.

On those rare off days, when nothing else works, this team would end up only conceding 550/2 which they would be chasing with ease considering the immense batting depth.

 

[honestbharani]

Cannot believe you did not pick Mark Ealham man, come on............

 

[Red]

You absolutely need a 5th bowler with these 2 in the team. If you are relying on a bloke who averaged 35 with the ball, and further down the pit, another bloke who averaged a ****ing 44 with the ball, you are not going to escape disastrous consequences 80-90% of the time. They are going to get butchered.

Bowling averages for fifth bowlers in ODIs are pretty inconsequential.