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

[Red]

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

Imagine being the captain who relied on his 5th bowlers to bowl the last 6 overs (unless it was iceman era Steve Waugh)

 

[Red]

Think a simple way to resolve it might be to ask yourself - "If I had $1000 riding on the team winning, would I rather have Symonds in at #7+5th bowler or Klusener/Watson/Flintoff?"

If I had 1000 on my ATG team winning, I'd stack it with gun fielders, tbh.

A.Gilchrist
V.Richards
R.Ponting
V.Kohli
A.Flintoff
AB.DeVilliers
A.Symonds
Wasim Akram
J.Garner
M.Muralitharan
G.McGrath

 

[harsh.ag]

If I had 1000 on my ATG team winning, I'd stack it with gun fielders, tbh.

A.Gilchrist
V.Richards
R.Ponting
V.Kohli
A.Flintoff
AB.DeVilliers
A.Symonds
Wasim Akram
J.Garner
M.Muralitharan
G.McGrath

Ha, like that you completely cheated your way out the tradeoff

 

[AndrewB]

FWIW here's the average* number of balls faced/bowled, runs scored/conceded, etc for each batting/bowling position in ODIs. (Of course the 5th bowler used isn't necessarily the 5th best bowler in the team).

*average over the 8387 innings started in ODIs, according to Statsguru.

Batting
     Balls    Runs   Out    Avge    SR           Inns
 #1  43.81   31.99  0.956  33.45  73.01 (4.38)   8387
 #2  42.29   31.16  0.951  32.74  73.66 (4.42)   8387
 #3  43.33   31.71  0.912  34.78  73.18 (4.39)   8312
 #4  39.83   29.94  0.847  35.33  75.15 (4.51)   8132
 #5  32.21   24.85  0.786  31.62  77.14 (4.63)   7816
 #6  24.60   19.32  0.707  27.31  78.55 (4.71)   7346
 #7  17.26   13.58  0.620  21.89  78.69 (4.72)   6757
 #8  11.79    9.16  0.527  17.36  77.65 (4.66)   6042
 #9   7.60    5.58  0.416  13.40  73.33 (4.40)   5187
#10   4.77    3.14  0.304  10.30  65.78 (3.95)   4286
#11   2.31    1.19  0.159   7.49  51.68 (3.10)   3359
-----------------------------------------------------
    269.81  201.61  7.186  28.05  74.72 (4.48)  74011

Bowling
     Balls    Runs   Wkts   Avge   SR    Econ    Inns
 #1  50.39   37.90  1.328  28.52  37.9   4.51    8387
 #2  48.93   38.83  1.255  30.93  38.9   4.76    8384
 #3  47.47   37.57  1.170  32.11  40.5   4.74    8342
 #4  46.99   35.96  1.056  33.98  44.4   4.59    8296
 #5  43.97   34.09  0.967  35.19  45.3   4.65    8143
 #6  24.16   20.33  0.558  36.42  43.2   5.05    6576
 #7   5.10    4.62  0.122  37.99  41.9   5.43    1961
 #8+  0.44    0.44  0.011  38.87  38.5   6.04     281
-----------------------------------------------------
    267.44  209.75  6.472  32.41  41.3   4.70   50370

 

[ImpatientLime]

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

i won't have slander on mark ealham's name. he was a gun limited overs bowler.

 

[Bolo.]

If I had 1000 on my ATG team winning, I'd stack it with gun fielders, tbh.

A.Gilchrist
V.Richards
R.Ponting
V.Kohli
A.Flintoff
AB.DeVilliers
A.Symonds
Wasim Akram
J.Garner
M.Muralitharan
G.McGrath

There are many things that are strange with that lineup. I like the idea of Viv opening, especially if you mean in the modern era. He would be like Rohit on steroids.

Completely unproven, sure. But to a lessor degree than Viv actually mastering number 3 or 4 in the modern era? Opening is an easier job these days, an his style is utterly suited to being a modern opener.

I like that left field call.

Batting possitions low down are a bit of a mess. AB and Symonds that low down are wasted. But I dont want to distract from the Viv opening question.

 

[harsh.ag]

There are many things that are strange with that lineup.

It stems from a disposition towards Symonds which results in dropping Tendulkar on the basis of fielding while still having Flintoff who was no better at fielding than Tendulkar.

 

[ImpatientLime]

nah flintoff was a better fielder than tendulkar quite comfortably.

very safe hands and an absolute rocket launcher of a right arm.

 

[harsh.ag]

nah flintoff was a better fielder than tendulkar quite comfortably.

very safe hands and an absolute rocket launcher of a right arm.

Sachin's hands were safe as well.

But, nah, what's the difference when you need to keep Symonds in.

 

[smash84]

nah flintoff was a better fielder than tendulkar quite comfortably.

.

What? I can understand that he may be a better fielder than tendulkar but definitely not the "comfortably" part. Although i think it is definitely arguable that flintoff was a better fielder. Tendulkar was an extremely versatile fielder. Good at almost any position. I don't recall flintoff being that versatile.

Tendulkar was a very safe fielder. A dropped catch or misfields were very rare with him, very rare.

Edit: Harsh beat me to it.

 

[Daemon]

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?

Flintoff is an asset at all stages of the innings but especially at the death. Symonds was used to quickly get through some middle overs when the captain knew the batsmen wouldn’t go after him.

Just concede this point man, you’re wrong.

 

[AndrewB]

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.

The flip side of this argument is that on average Symonds batted for 34 balls and scored 32, while Flintoff batted for 32 balls and scored 28. And batting at 7, they'd face fewer balls than that, so the difference between them as #7 batsmen is about 2 or 3 runs per innings.

 

[stephen]

Flintoff is an asset at all stages of the innings but especially at the death. Symonds was used to quickly get through some middle overs when the captain knew the batsmen wouldn’t go after him.

Just concede this point man, you’re wrong.

Flintoff would never be used at the death if McGrath, Garner and Akram are in the same side. He would be used exactly as Symonds was - to get through the middle overs cheaply.

There is a reason sides stack batting down to 7 or 8. A fifth bowler has less impact than a batsman in that position. Versatility is key in LO cricket.

And I'm not even necessarily arguing fort Symonds here. I'm arguing that picking a bowler at number 7 is less useful than picking a better batsman.

 

[harsh.ag]

(a) Flintoff would never be used at the death if McGrath, Garner and Akram are in the same side. He would be used exactly as Symonds was - to get through the middle overs cheaply.

There is a reason sides stack batting down to 7 or 8. A fifth bowler has less impact than a batsman in that position. Versatility is key in LO cricket.

And I'm not even necessarily arguing fort Symonds here. (b) I'm arguing that picking a bowler at number 7 is less useful than picking a better batsman.

Why don't you not extend (a) to #7 batsman won't be needed as much with the bat with a top 6 of Tendulkar, Viv, Kohli, ABdV etc while a 5th bowler almost always has to bowl a decent chunk of overs?

Look for someone who can change the match both with the bat and the ball at #7. Someone like Flintoff is a far better candidate for that than someone like Symonds. (b) doesn't really apply. It would apply in a Kapil vs Symonds debate.

 

[Flem274*]

in the 90s and early 00s you could get away with fake bowlers in the middle overs.

that's changed ever since the 2015 wc. it's bowl properly or die. it's no coincidence batting allrounders who can keep their economy rates in check are hard to come by now, making balanced allrounders and batting allrounders with high economy rates but golden arms valuable assets.

 

[jimmy101]

i won't have slander on mark ealham's name. he was a gun limited overs bowler.

And a quality Test/FC bowler to boot. I never really got the "Ealham sucks" meme. Always looked on song when I saw him play & gets a lot of plaudits from the players of his time. I don't understand why so many people think he's crap.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Anyone in favor of Glen McGrath and Curtly Ambrose opening the bowling and bowling out their quota of overs in the first 20?

 

[h_hurricane]

If I had 1000 on my ATG team winning, I'd stack it with gun fielders, tbh.

A.Gilchrist
V.Richards
R.Ponting
V.Kohli
A.Flintoff
AB.DeVilliers
A.Symonds
Wasim Akram
J.Garner
M.Muralitharan
G.McGrath

There is no way on god's green earth that Akram and Mcgrath should be anywhere near an ATG fielding team. Replace them with Umesh Yadav and Shane Lee and you do have a point.

 

[Spark]

There is no way on god's green earth that Akram and Mcgrath should be anywhere near an ATG fielding team. Replace them with Umesh Yadav and Shane Lee and you do have a point.

Where did he say he was picking an ATG fielding team, as opposed to an ATG team with lots of gun fielders?

 

[h_hurricane]

Where did he say he was picking an ATG fielding team, as opposed to an ATG team with lots of gun fielders?

The premise of the argument is that it is a gun fielders list, not just okayish ones.