The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[ataraxia]

B.Woodfull
S.Barnes
I.Chappell
M.Waugh
M.Hussey
D.Walters
D.Tallon
J.Gregory
J.Gillespie
J.Thompson
A.Mailey

Yea Aus have great depth. The only selection I seriously disagree with here is Mailey (Trumble, Lyon, and MacGill are easily superior to him). Clem Hill should've been in my 3rd XI.

 

[Red]

I’d happily take any of those spinners, but I’m not sure why any of them are “easily superior” to Mailey.

 

[ataraxia]

I’d happily take any of those spinners, but I’m not sure why any of them are “easily superior” to Mailey.

I rather misremembered Mailey's averages as worse than they actually were. Anyhow you'd probably want a more defensive spinner in that side considering the offensive nature of the rest of the bowling attack, and Mailey is often quite expensive.

 

[jimmy101]

Those threads NUFAN ran a couple of years ago were great. Would be fun reading through those again.

 

[ataraxia]

Those threads NUFAN ran a couple of years ago were great. Would be fun reading through those again.

Haha, I just checked what side Mailey was it about 20 minutes ago. He's in Aus H.

 

[jimmy101]

Yikes. At a guess the seven spinners before him must have been Warne, O'Reilly, Grimmett, MacGill, Benaud... er, Noble? Iverson, maybe?

 

[ataraxia]

Warne, O'Reilly, Grimmett, MacGill, Benaud

Those five plus Lyon, Ironmonger, and Trumble (Aus A = second XI so 8 not 7).

Noble is second spinner in Aus C. Iverson is in Aus M.

 

[kyear2]

England.

Sir Leonard Hutton
Sir Jack Hobbs
Sir Walter Hammond
Denis Compton
Ken Barrington
Sir Ian Botham
Alan Knott
Fred Trueman
Jim Laker
James Anderson
Syd Barnes

South Africa

Barry Richards
Graeme Smith
Jacques Kallis
Graeme Pollock
A.B. deVillieres
Aubrey Faulkner
Jock Cameron
Mike Procter
Dale Steyn
Hugh Tayfield
Allan Donald

West Indies

Sir Gordon Greenidge
Sir Conrad Hunte
George Headley
Sir I.V.A Richards
Brian Lara
Sir Garfield Sobers
Jeffrey Dujon
Malcolm Marshall
Michael Holding / Lance Gibbs
Curtly Ambrose
Joel Garner

Australia

Matthew Hayden
Bobby Simpson
Sir Donald Bradman
Steve Smith
Greg Chappell
Ricky Pointing
Adam Gilchrist
Alan Davidson
Shane Warne
Dennis Lillee
Glenn Mcgrath

So as I had said, in my mind, England just seems to be a tier below the other 3 and like India, the bowling isn't quite up to par (of the others).

But it is real difference if you are choosing teams to actually play against each other or just as an acknowledgement of greatness. For example, the openers of an AT XI it's almost always Hobbs and Hutton. But if I were selecting to play vs the Martians etc, would definitely use Richards or Gavaskar to partner Hutton.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

B.Woodfull
S.Barnes
I.Chappell
M.Waugh
M.Hussey
D.Walters
D.Tallon
J.Gregory
J.Gillespie
J.Thompson
A.Mailey

Put Charlie Macartney in for one of Chappell, Waugh, or Hussey. Gives you a useful 2nd spinner too in case Mailey gets tonked.

 

[ataraxia]

But it is real difference if you are choosing teams to actually play against each other or just as an acknowledgement of greatness. For example, the openers of an AT XI it's almost always Hobbs and Hutton. But if I were selecting to play vs the Martians etc, would definitely use Richards or Gavaskar to partner Hutton.

If it was based on raw quality like playing against the Martians I'd probably choose an XI like this:

G Smith*
Sehwag
Sangakkara
S Smith
Tendulkar
Kallis
Gilchrist +
Warne
Cummins
Steyn
McGrath

 

[Fuller Pilch]

If it was based on raw quality like playing against the Martians I'd probably choose an XI like this:

G Smith*
Sehwag
Sangakkara
S Smith
Tendulkar
Kallis
Gilchrist +
Warne
Cummins
Steyn
McGrath

I know Cummins is a good bowler, but ahead of Marshall and Hadlee?????!!!!????

 

[kyear2]

If it was based on raw quality like playing against the Martians I'd probably choose an XI like this:

G Smith*
Sehwag
Sangakkara
S Smith
Tendulkar
Kallis
Gilchrist +
Warne
Cummins
Steyn
McGrath

Mine would likey be

Hutton
Richards
Bradman
Smith
Sobers
Kallis
Gilchrist
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
Steyn

 

[ataraxia]

I know Cummins is a good bowler, but ahead of Marshall and Hadlee?????!!!!

My real AT side has Marshall and Hadlee, but Cummins is arguably a better quality bowler when not adjusting for eras. On reflection I could have Ambrose in there.

Adjusting for eras is absolutely necessary in producing AT XIs IMO.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Hutton
Hobbs
Bradman
Lara
Smith
Sobers
Gilchrist
Hadlee
Marshall
Ambrose
Murali

 

[ataraxia]

Mine would likey be

Hutton
Richards
Bradman
Smith
Sobers
Kallis
Gilchrist
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
Steyn

I guess this side is reasonable but a lot of the greatness of Hutton comes from his performance on wet pitches (which wouldn't be produced against the Martians).

When adjusting for eras, IMO you also adjust for performances on pitches that we don't have today, like the horrible-for-batting pitches of the 19th century, matting pitches, and wet pitches.

Actually, a Martian home pitch would be pretty dusty...

 

[ataraxia]

If it was based on raw quality like playing against the Martians I'd probably choose an XI like this:

G Smith*
Sehwag
Sangakkara
S Smith
Tendulkar
Kallis
Gilchrist +
Warne
Cummins
Steyn
McGrath

For a comparison, my actual AT XI is about this:

Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Bradman
Tendulkar
Grace*
Sobers
Gilchrist +
Imran
Hadlee
Marshall
-whoever I feel like picking as spinner between Warne, O'Reilly, Grimmett, and Murali-

 

[kyear2]

My real AT side has Marshall and Hadlee, but Cummins is arguably a better quality bowler when not adjusting for eras. On reflection I could have Ambrose in there.

Adjusting for eras is absolutely necessary in producing AT XIs IMO.

Have u ever seen Marshall bowl? Between speed, skill and tools there is no need for era adjustment. Just my opinion though.

 

[ataraxia]

Have u ever seen Marshall bowl? Between speed, skill and tools there is no need for era adjustment. Just my opinion though.

Admittedly I haven't, but the quality of batsmen have gone up quite a lot since Marshall was around. (It's important to take that into account as well as the perceived quality of the bowlers over time.)

 

[kyear2]

I guess this side is reasonable but a lot of the greatness of Hutton comes from his performance on wet pitches (which wouldn't be produced against the Martians).

When adjusting for eras, IMO you also adjust for performances on pitches that we don't have today, like the horrible-for-batting pitches of the 19th century, matting pitches, and wet pitches.

Actually, a Martian home pitch would be pretty dusty...

Not only wet pitches though. His mental strength, especially with beating Bradman's records with him mere feet away and against O'Reilly. Surviving his war injury to then face the fire of Lindwall and Miller and the webs of Randin and Valentine. He was a master who faced considerably better bowling than even Bradman did.

 

[kyear2]

Admittedly I haven't, but the quality of batsmen have gone up quite a lot since Marshall was around. (It's important to take that into account as well as the perceived quality of the bowlers over time.)

Gavaskar and co in India (when the pitches were even flatter than they are now), Miandad, Border, Gower. He faced his share of quality bats in that era.