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

[TheJediBrah]

Massive overstatement there...

Yeah, with those numbers you should pick eleven Rhodes because you'd save 220-330 runs a game

I don't think so tbh. Again reading comprehension is important. I said they can save that many a game. Not that they will every game. And your 11 Jontys can't all field in key positions. Unless your at cover or point you're not going to get close to saving 20-30 runs in a game.

 

[Daemon]

I don't think so tbh. Again reading comprehension is important. I said they can save that many a game. Not that they will every game. And your 11 Jontys can't all field in key positions. Unless your at cover or point you're not going to get close to saving 20-30 runs in a game.

It was tongue in cheek. I knew you’d say that though which is why I made that next post.

Nobody saves 20-30 runs a game with any sort of regularity. Maybe Symonds at cover point in a 3rd XI club game would be saving those runs regularly because he’s that much better than the average 3rd XI club cricketer. But he’s not at that level compared to the average international cricketer (especially these days).

And if it’s not regular then it’s not worth mentioning. Might as well say player X ‘can’ smash a 120 ball 200.

 

[ankitj]

Alternative to having Symonds at point is not keeping point position empty surely.

 

[honestbharani]

Wasn't Symonds more at cover than point?

 

[Red]

Wasn't Symonds more at cover than point?

In ODI, yeh. Ponting almost always went to point and Symonds to cover/mid on/mid off. They'd basically move Symonds anywhere in the inner ring that the batsman was likely to target and/or the bowler wanted them to hit to.

 

[TheJediBrah]

It was tongue in cheek. I knew you’d say that though which is why I made that next post.

Nobody saves 20-30 runs a game with any sort of regularity. Maybe Symonds at cover point in a 3rd XI club game would be saving those runs regularly because he’s that much better than the average 3rd XI club cricketer. But he’s not at that level compared to the average international cricketer (especially these days).

And if it’s not regular then it’s not worth mentioning. Might as well say player X ‘can’ smash a 120 ball 200.

Hoenstly I think you're simply wrong. Having watched a lot of Symonds fielding growing up he was pretty special. Along with guys like Jonty and Ponting saving 20 runs over the course of 50 overs with moderate regularity is absolutely plausible.

Regardless, the saving runs is still a minor part of the advantage of a gun fielder. I experienced this myself just yesterday with this one **** that took an insane diving catch at point, and then later in the innings in equally crazy diving save that resulted in a mix-up and run out. Those alone could have easily saved 50+ runs more often than not.

Alternative to having Symonds at point is not keeping point position empty surely.

The comparison is the difference between Symonds/gun fielder compared to an average fielder. Not comparing to no fielder. If that was the case he'd be saving 100+ runs lol

 

[Daemon]

Hoenstly I think you're simply wrong. Having watched a lot of Symonds fielding growing up he was pretty special. Along with guys like Jonty and Ponting saving 20 runs over the course of 50 overs with moderate regularity is absolutely plausible.

Regardless, the saving runs is still a minor part of the advantage of a gun fielder. I experienced this myself just yesterday with this one **** that took an insane diving catch at point, and then later in the innings in equally crazy diving save that resulted in a mix-up and run out. Those alone could have easily saved 50+ runs more often than not.



The comparison is the difference between Symonds/gun fielder compared to an average fielder. Not comparing to no fielder. If that was the case he'd be saving 100+ runs lol

I'm surprised you think this tbh. Anyone who's played a moderate level of cricket would not agree with you.

 

[Bolo.]

I could buy the idea of a great fielding side saving 20 runs compared to a very poor one, but not compared to a very good one.

An ATG side has Viv and AB to cover critical positions. The difference between them and the best combo of fielders is very small.

After that, fielders have less role to play. A great 3rd man will typically not save you a run in a game compared to a good one.

 

[honestbharani]

Jonty has always been unparalleled as a fielder for me. I would put Gibbs, Ponting and Symonds in the next tier of that generation and even amongst them, Ponting is the most versatile.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Runs saved across the entire WC 19 (roughly 10 games each)

Guptill 53
Jadeja 41
Maxwell 41

Cotterell was pretty close as well

 

[TheJediBrah]

I'm surprised you think this tbh. Anyone who's played a moderate level of cricket would not agree with you.

false. I doubt you'd find anyone who had played a decent level of cricket who hasn't had plenety of experience where otustanding fielding has genuinely decided the result of a game, before even trying to put a value on it.

honestly I think where a lot of this is going off track is that we got into it using Symonds as the catalyst. It's muddied the waters and a lot of posters on here have huge (both concious and unconcious) bias regarding him personally and his country of origin in general, which has not allowed people to open their minds on the subject. Instead everyone is just arguing what would suit their agenda. Also I'm not just having a crack at one side there's probably bias at play the other direction as well.

If we could have had this discussion about the value of fielding and potentially trying to put a value on it without bringing up the toxic Australia v India/Asia schtick that has been polluted the forum so much recently I'm sure we could have had a much more sensible and open-minded discussion.

It's unfortunate, but ftr Daemon I'm not referring to you with the comments re. bias, I know you're generally not that way inclined

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Is Cameron Cuffy's economy rate still the lowest in the format of ODI?

 

[stephen]

Fielding is more valuable in some circumstances than others. On postage stamps it's far less valuable than it is on the MCG (for example) because in the case of the latter fielders have more scope to cut down runs and get outfield catches.

 

[h_hurricane]

Symonds could be placed at any position in a cricket field but there is no guarantee that batsmen would hit the ball towards him regularly. 2 of the best modern day fielders, Guptill and Jadeja save 7-10 runs on an average per match as Daemon has posted in one of the posts.Let us not pretend that Symonds was some 5 levels above them as a fielder.

Again, I would go for Symonds over probably any fielder in history (a few of them would give close competition) if all other factors are same. But all other factors are not the same.

 

[Spark]

I could buy the idea of a great fielding side saving 20 runs compared to a very poor one, but not compared to a very good one.

An ATG side has Viv and AB to cover critical positions. The difference between them and the best combo of fielders is very small.

After that, fielders have less role to play. A great 3rd man will typically not save you a run in a game compared to a good one.

You've cherry picked one of literally the only two positions that are typically employed where a gun fielder - although what exactly that constitutes varies by position - wouldn't make that much difference.

The "20 runs a game" thing is obviously highly exaggerated but even if we talk on average about 2-3 runs a game for a great fielder vs a good one - basically a boundary saved that wouldn't have been otherwise - that's a pretty significant difference across an entire cricket team when you consider how tight the margins are at this sort of level. How often in ODI games do we judge a side batting first to have made 15-20 runs too many/too few to be truly competitive?

Any minor but enduring advantage could easily be decisive in a crunch match, not least because it measurably raises the chance that you'll get something significant breaking your way, like a great catch or run out.

 

[Red]

I could buy the idea of a great fielding side saving 20 runs compared to a very poor one, but not compared to a very good one.

An ATG side has Viv and AB to cover critical positions. The difference between them and the best combo of fielders is very small.

After that, fielders have less role to play. A great 3rd man will typically not save you a run in a game compared to a good one.

Having 4 or 5 outstanding inner ring fielders in an ODI team makes a MASSIVE difference. We're not talking third man, we're talking cover, point, mid wicket and square/mid on/mid off (depending who's on strike and who's bowling). Making batsmen second guess singles is a HUGE deal.

Australia in their pomp had Ponting, Symonds and Clarke (often forgotten how good young Clarke was) - all outstanding inner ring fielders, and Hogg who was very good, as well as Lee and McGrath who were solid on the boundary.

But the point is, the three or four guys in the inner ring made a massive difference. Second guessing and not rotating the strike matters a lot in 50 overs.

 

[Red]

Jonty has always been unparalleled as a fielder for me. I would put Gibbs, Ponting and Symonds in the next tier of that generation and even amongst them, Ponting is the most versatile.

Jonty was outstanding at anticipating and cutting off, still think Ponting and Symonds were as good at those skills, but were better at throwing down the stumps.

 

[vcs]

Jonty's athleticism and ability to throw off balance was unparalleled IMO.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Jonty wasn't any better than Symonds or Ponting as a complete fielder, more known for his fielding though, possibly because he wasn't as good at the other facets of the game, relatively speaking.

 

[vcs]

He gets extra points for revolutionizing the discipline and doing things that were unthought of at the time.

Even if you don't care for that, I saw him produce pieces of brilliance with more regularity than I've seen from any fielder since then. Could be just my biased nostalgic mind though.