The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[smash84]

and you crack at me for not knowing old-timey cricketers

edit: thought you were trundler

You think all brown people look the same

 

[TheJediBrah]

You think all brown people look the same

I still think Trundler is a 45 year old white guy tbh

 

[bagapath]

Polly is an ATG. but he is not Imran.

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/29514785/was-shaun-pollock-good-imran-khan

this article asks the question and quite clearly says No while trying to say Yes

 

[honestbharani]

Well, to be fair, I read the intent of that piece as saying "Pollock is only slightly less good compared to Imran" and I think they make a fair fist of it.

 

[trundler]

Pollock wasn't Imran wasn't Miller.

Pollock vs Dev, anyone?

 

[ankitj]

Pollock wasn't Imran wasn't Miller.

Pollock vs Dev, anyone?

Pollock comfortably better.

 

[Bolo.]

Pollock vs Dev or Imran is a non starter, because you are really just debatting degree, not who is better. Pollock vs a better bowler who cant bat or Miller would be more interesting. Sobers and Kallis too, if they were a bit worse.

 

[Flem274*]

pollock's most obvious comparisons are hadlee, streak and holder.

 

[Bolo.]

Hadlee clearly ahead, Holder is too soon to compare, and Streak has no business being mentioned with the others.

 

[trundler]

I'd still take McGrath over Pollock. Pollock vs Garner perhaps?

 

[ankitj]

Pollock was a much better bowler than he gets credit for.

 

[h_hurricane]

Pollock has a sub 24 bowling average against all countries except Australia. Even against Aus, he had looked awesome in his first tour there. 16 wickets @ 21.93.

Arguably the most under-rated cricketer of all time.

He is comfortably better than Botham as well, but then first N tests where 1<=N<=50.......

 

[ankitj]

At some point when Pollock had picked 300+ wickets he had the best average of any bowler with 200+ wickets. Tailed off a bit towards the end.

 

[ImpatientLime]

not sure how pollock can be considered comfortably better than botham when he has 12 fewer test centuries

 

[h_hurricane]

The point is, if Pollock is comfortably ahead of Kapil Dev, he is comfortably ahead of Ian Botham as well.

Depending on how much you value 100s and 5 wicket hauls, It can be either Botham > Dev > Pollock or Pollock > Botham > Dev. It cannot be Botham > Pollock > Dev.

 

[TheJediBrah]

The point is, if Pollock is comfortably ahead of Kapil Dev, he is comfortably ahead of Ian Botham as well.

Depending on how much you value 100s and 5 wicket hauls, It can be either Botham > Dev > Pollock or Pollock > Botham > Dev. It cannot be Botham > Pollock > Dev.

what are you the > police

 

[h_hurricane]

what are you the > police

It isn't a hard enough logic to understand. Try again.

 

[TheJediBrah]

It isn't a hard enough logic to understand. Try again.

joke m8

 

[harsh.ag]

The point is, if Pollock is comfortably ahead of Kapil Dev, he is comfortably ahead of Ian Botham as well.

Depending on how much you value 100s and 5 wicket hauls, It can be either Botham > Dev > Pollock or Pollock > Botham > Dev. It cannot be Botham > Pollock > Dev.

You can have Botham > Pollock > Dev with other criteria though, such as more likely to win you the game.

 

[bagapath]

Botham
Pollock
Kapil

Is the correct ranking of their bowling anyways, IMO