The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[stephen]

Clarke and Hussey are ATVG while Kallis and ABDV are ATG.

Yes, but is Alvero Peterson (SA's 5th top run scorer in that time period) in Damien Martyn's class?

Australia's top 7 run scorers during the period in question:

Ponting 3766 runs @63
Hayden 3612 runs @48
Langer 2823 runs @47
Gilchrist 2319 runs @41
Martyn 2114 runs @46
Hussey 1934 runs @81
Clarke 1821 runs @47

SA's top 7 run scorers during the period in question:

Amla 3369 runs @66
De Villiers 3121 @66
Kallis 2810 @58
Smith 2769 @49
Petersen 1825 @39
du Plessis 782 @60
Boucher 647 @29

So just looking at their averages from the time period in question, the Australians averaged a total of 373, the South Africans averaged 367. So not a huge difference one way or the other. The main difference comes from the number of tests that Australia played in the period, with the top 7 SA bats playing a combined 195 tests vs the Australians who played a total of 238 tests.

 

[Gob]

Nah, Kallis sure but ABdV isn't any better than Clarke and Hussey

Kallis>>Clarke/DeVilliers>Hussey for mine

 

[TheJediBrah]

Kallis>>Clarke/DeVilliers>Hussey for mine

Kallis>Hussey>Clarke>deVilliers

AbdV is overrated in Tests based on his white-ball abilities. He wasn't as good as Clarke or Hussey, and his average of 50 really flatters him. He feasted on minnows, including averaging 84 in 13 Tests v WI. He averaged just 40 in 20+ tests against England and less than 40 against India.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Kallis>Hussey>Clarke>deVilliers

AbdV is overrated in Tests based on his white-ball abilities. He wasn't as good as Clarke or Hussey, and his average of 50 really flatters him. He feasted on minnows, including averaging 84 in 13 Tests v WI. He averaged just 40 in 20+ tests against England and less than 40 against India.

I'd take de Villiers over Clarke and Hussey in Tests for sure. Picking averages vs individual countries is rarely a useful tool and doesn't even hurt de Villiers in this comparison if you actually do it for the others as well. His average of 40 vs India as his biggest black mark isn't the stuff of nightmares and is higher than Hussey's vs SA and (much) higher than Clarke's vs Pakistan. His record against England is better than Clarke's is. He averaged >50 vs Australia over a large number of Tests and I don't think you'd hold them as minnows. If anything I'd say his career average is unflattering to him given the number of Tests he played as either opener or wicketkeeper which are both factors which make Test batting harder. Not as good a Test bat as he was in ODIs, sure, but he was still a true gun in Tests.

 

[Gob]

Look I'm all for stats and numbers and science but it should be used more wisely and with bit more context which goes beyond the face value of player x averages more than player y against team A hence he is better
And TJB I'd definitely put Clarke a notch above Hussey. Clarke was the mandatory ATG batsman Aust produce in each generation since Bradman (Harvey, Chappell, Border, Waugh, Ponting and Smith) but fell short on achievements compared to those guys due to his ****ed back. I haven't seen many unstoppable batsmen than god mod Clarke although it lasted briefly.
Hussey while a very accomplished player certainly did not possess the same genius

 

[OverratedSanity]

Hussey being disgustingly overrated by Tjb. Clarke and AB both levels above him as batsmen.

 

[Jayro]

Rohan kanhai, Rohit Sharma, Ricky Ponting, Rahul Dravid, Ross Taylor, Rishabh Pant, Ravindra Jadeja, R Ashwin, Richard Hadlee, Richie Benaud, Ray Lindwall...... I choose two sub's as Richie Richardson and R. Bob Willis..... This will be my alphabetical eleven starting with the initial "R" ..... Decent bowling attack with few loops in the top order batting covered by the depth in it right to the number eleven.... Any more suggestions are welcome.

Please rate my eleven?

 

[ataraxia]

Please rate my eleven?

RG Pollock, RN Harvey, RB Simpson major ommisions. There's probably a better keeper than Pant and I'd replace Ashwin with Willis because 3 spinners is unneeded.

 

[Red]

Hussey being disgustingly overrated by Tjb. Clarke and AB both levels above him as batsmen.

I dont get this. Cant see how there are many "levels" above Hussey in history (the obv one aside). Hussey was elite

 

[Red]

RB Simpson
RC Fredericks
R Dravid
RG Pollock
RT Ponting
RN Harvey
RR Pant
R Benaud
Rj Hadlee
RR Lindwall
RGD Willis

R Kanhai
R Sharma
R Ashwin

Technically Ross isn't Ross Taylor's first name. Can't find any other keepers with the R name.

Pretty serious #batdeep, especially if you played Ashwin over Willis for two spinners.

 

[ataraxia]

Can't find any other keepers with the R name

In that case I'm (almost) tempted to make Dravid keep.

Rod Marsh exists though. Also Romesh Kaluwitharana. And Rashid Latif. And Ray Jennings. (I'm apparently rather good at this.)

 

[TheJediBrah]

Hussey being disgustingly overrated by Tjb. Clarke and AB both levels above him as batsmen.

Haha disgusting isn't it calm down m8. Hussey defo better than both

 

[Gob]

Haha disgusting isn't it calm down m8. Hussey defo better than both

Why?

 

[TheJediBrah]

I'd take de Villiers over Clarke and Hussey in Tests for sure. Picking averages vs individual countries is rarely a useful tool and doesn't even hurt de Villiers in this comparison if you actually do it for the others as well. His average of 40 vs India as his biggest black mark isn't the stuff of nightmares and is higher than Hussey's vs SA and (much) higher than Clarke's vs Pakistan. His record against England is better than Clarke's is. He averaged >50 vs Australia over a large number of Tests and I don't think you'd hold them as minnows. If anything I'd say his career average is unflattering to him given the number of Tests he played as either opener or wicketkeeper which are both factors which make Test batting harder. Not as good a Test bat as he was in ODIs, sure, but he was still a true gun in Tests.

You're not entirely wrong but you also missed my point. I'm not picking random teams thay he had a low average against, like clarke v Pakistan, if you look at AB's career he consistently averaged significantly higher against the weaker teams. Averaging 50 v Aus is the exception.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Why?

Played more important innings under pressure, in more difficult situations, batting with the tail a lot etc. Compare his test 100s to Clarke's and you'll find more of Hussey's were at times when the side was in serious trouble, and more of Clarke's were feasting when the getting was good.

 

[Tom Flint]

Amla was in absolute beast mode at that time but if still back McGrath to get him more often than not, if only because McGrath getting top order batsmen was as inevitable as the sun rising.

Thing is, Hayden and Ponting were in sublime form for much of that time period and man for man the rest of Australia's batting was miles ahead of South Africa's at the time, even if we say that Hayden=Smith and Amla=Ponting. The pace bowling is a bit closer and it depends on who is the Australian attack. If we say that McGrath=Steyn, Clark was probably fractionally better than Philander in unhelpful conditions. Both Lee and Morkel were rubbish. MacGill was leagues ahead of any South African spinner of the time.

Kallis is the best batsman on either side.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

You're not entirely wrong but you also missed my point. I'm not picking random teams thay he had a low average against, like clarke v Pakistan, if you look at AB's career he consistently averaged significantly higher against the weaker teams. Averaging 50 v Aus is the exception.

Most players average more against weaker teams though, to be fair - that's exactly what you'd expect. And I don't think of de Villiers as particularly being a minnow basher anyway.

He succeeded vs high quality pace and spin attacks (think vs peak Mitch Johnson in 2014 or the current Aussie attack in 2018, or numerous knocks away in Asia against the likes of Ashwin, Jadeja and suspicious action Ajmal). He has plenty of memorable performances against strong attacks. If I knew the opponent was going to be fielding an ATG bowling attack, de Villiers is absolutely a player I'd want in my lineup against them, ahead of most of his similarly-averaging peers from this century.

From a stats POV, as well as the aforementioned excellent record against Australia, his combined away record in India/Pakistan/Sri Lanka is fantastic for a SENA batsman (averaging almost 20 higher than Clarke in the same countries). You picked his average against India as an indication that he only performed against weaker attacks. However his away record against India is very good and it's his home record that's poor. I think you'd agree India had a very strong home attack and a relatively weak one overseas during those years, and he did well against the strong attack. He averaged 66 overall against Pakistan. Really 'did worse against strong teams' boils down to 'was pretty average against England', since he did only average 42 against them. But that's not really all that bad and he succeeded against better teams than England anyway.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Most players average more against weaker teams though, to be fair - that's exactly what you'd expect. And I don't think of de Villiers as particularly being a minnow basher anyway.

He succeeded vs high quality pace and spin attacks (think vs peak Mitch Johnson in 2014 or the current Aussie attack in 2018, or numerous knocks away in Asia against the likes of Ashwin, Jadeja and suspicious action Ajmal). He has plenty of memorable performances against strong attacks. If I knew the opponent was going to be fielding an ATG bowling attack, de Villiers is absolutely a player I'd want in my lineup against them, ahead of most of his similarly-averaging peers from this century.

From a stats POV, as well as the aforementioned excellent record against Australia, his combined away record in India/Pakistan/Sri Lanka is fantastic for a SENA batsman (averaging almost 20 higher than Clarke in the same countries). You picked his average against India as an indication that he only performed against weaker attacks. However his away record against India is very good and it's his home record that's poor. I think you'd agree India had a very strong home attack and a relatively weak one overseas during those years, and he did well against the strong attack. He averaged 66 overall against Pakistan. Really 'did worse against strong teams' boils down to 'was pretty average against England', since he did only average 42 against them. But that's not really all that bad and he succeeded against better teams than England anyway.

Getting a bit ridiculous now. Unless you're Tendulkar no one is playing enough games against each team home and away to be able to conclude a significant analysis in this manner. However he consistently averaged significantly more against the weaker teams, which is a stat that does hold statistical significance.

You touch on the point that he had the ability to do anything though. He could be as good as anyone against the highest quality bowling which on the surface I understand might seem to contradict my point but it's a sign of his relative inconsistency. He had the ability to be great against the best bowling attacks but over the course of his career under-performed (relatively speaking) against them as a whole.

 

[Red]

In that case I'm (almost) tempted to make Dravid keep.

Rod Marsh exists though. Also Romesh Kaluwitharana. And Rashid Latif. And Ray Jennings. (I'm apparently rather good at this.)

Yeh, Rod Marsh

 

[stephen]

Kallis is the best batsman on either side.

That was not generally the opinion held during his playing days, with most placing him at a level behind the big 3. He was more consistent than Ponting though, particularly once Ponting's eye went.

If I wanted a batsman to win me a game I'd pick Ponting. If I wanted one to draw me a game I'd pick Kallis.

Kallis was a better all round cricketer though. Second best batting all rounder in history and for much of his career would have been picked as a specialist in either discipline (though he'd have had to bowl more of he was picked specifically as a change bowler).

As I posted earlier, South Africa probably had five batsmen who were as good as Australia's best five batsmen during the time periods in question. But Australia pull away when you look at the entire top 7. There isn't much difference between the two in the time periods in question though.

I would like to note that Australia beat South Africa during their period of dominance while South Africa didn't manage it during Australia's time of dominance.