The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[TheJediBrah]

If Kallis could have scored like 15% faster and had the same average he'd be very hard to compete with

 

[Jayro]

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.)

I was also thinking of these but wanted to fortify the batting further since didn't feel the eleven has comparative big averages in top seven

 

[Bolo.]

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.

What kind of a take is this?

He averaged sub 40 against Bangers, NZ and India. He averaged 60+ against WI SL and Pak. The second group are better bowlers. Along with SL and Pak, the best 2 attacks he played against were England and Aus, who he averaged in the 40s and 50s against. You would be hard pressed to find a worse example of what you are saying than him... everyone fills their boots against weaker attacks, and other than grouting WI, he is pretty much the opposite of what you are saying.

He was dissappointingly inconsistent relative to his talent, but that reflects more on his talent. He was inconsistent against top attacks in the hardest country to bat in... no great surprises there, poor is the record you would expect. And outstanding against top bowling attacks away, regardless of conditions.

The only way I can make sense of what you are saying is if only looking at his time as an opener, when he was very poor against quality attacks. But that was a small portion of his career. He was outstanding against quality attacks in his career as a whole, and even better as a middle order bat, which is what this discussion is assessing him as.

 

[_00_deathscar]

if you look at AB's career he consistently averaged significantly higher against the weaker teams.

You wot m8?

 

[TheJediBrah]

What kind of a take is this?

He averaged sub 40 against Bangers, NZ and India. He averaged 60+ against WI SL and Pak. The second group are better bowlers. Along with SL and Pak, the best 2 attacks he played against were England and Aus, who he averaged in the 40s and 50s against. You would be hard pressed to find a worse example of what you are saying than him... everyone fills their boots against weaker attacks, and other than grouting WI, he is pretty much the opposite of what you are saying.

He was dissappointingly inconsistent relative to his talent, but that reflects more on his talent. He was inconsistent against top attacks in the hardest country to bat in... no great surprises there, poor is the record you would expect. And outstanding against top bowling attacks away, regardless of conditions.

The only way I can make sense of what you are saying is if only looking at his time as an opener, when he was very poor against quality attacks. But that was a small portion of his career. He was outstanding against quality attacks in his career as a whole, and even better as a middle order bat, which is what this discussion is assessing him as.

sorry but nah. For mine Aus, England and India were the strongest opponents, and the only one of those 3 he hit at more than 40 against was Aus, and NZ (who he averaged less than 40 against) had probably the next strongest attack.

His bullying of West Indies was massive too. He barely played against Bangers but in 13 Tests against WI he managed to average 84, that's a huge weighting.

You say he averaged 60+ against SL who "are better bowlers" but he only averaged 42 against SL in SL. Outside Asia the SL bowlers were nowhere near as good and that's where that higher average comes from.

Your analysis is full of errors. Now I don't want to get to the point where we're judging players purely on selected averages from tiny samples against specific countries but when taken as a whole it is quite clear that he feasted on the weaker sides to a greater extent than many other players of his ilk. Again, the bullying of the WI alone adds huge weight.

 

[OverratedSanity]

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

He was very good. 5th tier in terms of great batsmen at best.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Also keep in mind that I've already decided that ABdV is overrated as a Test batsman and went looking for reasons to support that

Still think the overall picture (selective averages) tentatively supports that idea though

 

[trundler]

Mark Nicholas put him as next in line after Lara/Tendulkar/Ponting, ahead of guys like Dravid and YK in a cricinfo piece once, which based on output I don't agree with. But De Villiers was damn versatile and the epitome of clutch and also had the toughest home conditions in the world. He toes the line between VG and G like Clarke but Hussey was an HTB compared to those guys.

 

[Starfighter]

sorry but nah. For mine Aus, England and India were the strongest opponents, and the only one of those 3 he hit at more than 40 against was Aus, and NZ (who he averaged less than 40 against) had probably the next strongest attack.

His bullying of West Indies was massive too. He barely played against Bangers but in 13 Tests against WI he managed to average 84, that's a huge weighting.

You say he averaged 60+ against SL who "are better bowlers" but he only averaged 42 against SL in SL. Outside Asia the SL bowlers were nowhere near as good and that's where that higher average comes from.

Your analysis is full of errors. Now I don't want to get to the point where we're judging players purely on selected averages from tiny samples against specific countries but when taken as a whole it is quite clear that he feasted on the weaker sides to a greater extent than many other players of his ilk. Again, the bullying of the WI alone adds huge weight.

Putting the West Indies, Sri Lanka and Pakistan as 'strong' and India as 'weak' in bowling really is a bad take full stop.

There's a little secret about WI's bowling since Walsh retired - it's been ****. In fact only Zimbabwe and Bangladesh were worse through de Villiers' career. A couple of good years recently - and still very inconsistent at that - doesn't change this, nor does any misty-eyed romanticism for the eighties. Pakistan were also pretty weak as well - as a matter of fact in averages they come between NZ and SL. And guess what? India were better than any of them.

Of course there is variation through that period, but it's a laughable bit of 'analysis'.

 

[Red]

He was very good. 5th tier in terms of great batsmen at best.

Yeh but I’m asking why?

 

[CricAddict]

How do you differentiate between ATVG and ATG?

ATG is elite status of batsmen who have held their spot in the top 4-5 batsmen in their era. ATVG are people like Hussey and Laxman who have been very good but still not the top tier of their era.

I agree Clarke is touch and go. If not for the back injury, he would definitely have been ATG.

 

[CricAddict]

Yeh but I’m asking why?

He mostly played during his peak. Still, he was not among the top ten batsmen during his time. Hence, the 5th tier. Just take 2-3 ppl in each era to each tier apart from exceptionally strong eras. You then place Hussey in the 5th.

 

[TheJediBrah]

He mostly played during his peak

Missed a fair chunk of his peak too. Debut 3 or 4 years earlier and maybe he'd have retired a year or 2 earlier and be higher regarded, who knows.

This may not count for much but as someone who watched Hussey's whole career live and lived through the context of every one of his great Test innings I will always rate him higher than Clarke. For me he's second only to Ponting when it comes to Aus batsmen post-Waugh (and pre Smith obv)

 

[sunilz]

Missed a fair chunk of his peak too. Debut 3 or 4 years earlier and maybe he'd have retired a year or 2 earlier and be higher regarded, who knows.

This may not count for much but as someone who watched Hussey's whole career live and lived through the context of every one of his great Test innings I will always rate him higher than Clarke. For me he's second only to Ponting when it comes to Aus batsmen post-Waugh (and pre Smith obv)

No way.
Overseas batting average of Aus batsman this century

 

[Gob]

more of Clarke's were feasting when the getting was good.

Mate that is blatantly untrue

151 Bangalore
98 Brisbane vs NZ
131 Sydney vs SA
136 Lords
103* Birmingham
93 Leeds
168 Wellington
118 SSC
151 Cape town
329* Sydney vs India
259* Brisbane vs SA
230 Adelaide vs SA
130 Chennai
161* Capetown
128 vs Adelaide vs India

I watched every single one of these innings live and they were all absolute batting masterclasses for one reason or another. IIRC when Clarke scored double centuries for fun in 2012 what most people don't remember was that Aust were consistently 3 down for **** all

Hussey was amazingly consistent for the first three years but after that he was always close to the chopping block (rightly or wrongly). Like I said Hussey is a fine player and Aust would kill to have him now but I honestly Clarke at his peak had a sense of genius only true greats had. I mean who else can slap Steyn, Phillander and Morkel all around Cape town like a bunch of club bowlers on a pitch yielded less runs in the next two combined to what Clarke scored in a single innings.

 

[TheJediBrah]

IIRC when Clarke scored double centuries for fun in 2012 what most people don't remember was that Aust were consistently 3 down for **** all

Not going to go through every innings and there were some absolute gems in there, the 161* definitely stands out.

These ones you mention in 2012 I watched every ball of as well and yes they were masterclasses, and I've never seen a batsman in as control as Clarke was in those 2 consecutive double centuries however, they were roads despite Aus being 3-50 odd in each innings and neither lead to a result, and Aus ended up losing the series despite dominating those first 2 games. I know it's probably not fair to judge based on match results but I'd have rated that series a lot more if he'd have performed in Perth when a win was really needed.

No way.
Overseas batting average of Aus batsman this century

It's not all about overseas, and Clarke's lower than Hussey on that list anyway so kind of supports my point

 

[Gob]

Not going to go through every innings and there were some absolute gems in there, the 161* definitely stands out.

These ones you mention in 2012 I watched every ball of as well and yes they were masterclasses, and I've never seen a batsman in as control as Clarke was in those 2 consecutive double centuries however, they were roads despite Aus being 3-50 odd in each innings and neither lead to a result, and Aus ended up losing the series despite dominating those first 2 games. I know it's probably not fair to judge based on match results but I'd have rated that series a lot more if he'd have performed in Perth when a win was really needed.

Had Clarke failed to score those runs when his team was 3 for 40, Aust could have lost 3 zip and he got an absolute snorter from Steyn at Perth first dig. Ftr Aust were winning in Brisbane had not been for the bad weather. Any way let's not get dragged away from the fact that the point was Clarke played many clutch knocks certainly much more than Hussey

It's not all about overseas, and Clarke's lower than Hussey on that list anyway so kind of supports my point

Again you have to look deeper in to the stats
Clarke

Hussey


Clarke's away record looks much better all round for me. Other than Bangers and UAE sample size games, only England and WI drag his average below 40. I don't know what to make of WI but anyone who watched the ashes 09 knows Clarke can bat in England

 

[TheJediBrah]

Surprised how good Hussey's stats in Asia are, for some reason I always thought that was a weakness of his.

 

[Bolo.]

Putting the West Indies, Sri Lanka and Pakistan as 'strong' and India as 'weak' in bowling really is a bad take full stop.

There's a little secret about WI's bowling since Walsh retired - it's been ****. In fact only Zimbabwe and Bangladesh were worse through de Villiers' career. A couple of good years recently - and still very inconsistent at that - doesn't change this, nor does any misty-eyed romanticism for the eighties. Pakistan were also pretty weak as well - as a matter of fact in averages they come between NZ and SL. And guess what? India were better than any of them.

Of course there is variation through that period, but it's a laughable bit of 'analysis'.

You are misunderstanding. WI were dire, and I was in no way claiming otherwise, just listing the countries he notably overperfomed and underperformed against for the point of comparison.

India and SL belong in a similar category for most of his career. Poor away and great at home. By the end of ABs career India had managed to turn into simply great, but as AB was great against them at the time, it certainly doesnt help TJBs point, which is what I am responding to.

Pak were not particularly special, but most teams werent. Better touring bowlers than India and SL (in particular) but weaker at home.

The two groups are comparable in the context of the conversation, even if you disagree with which goes where. As the vast majority of players overperform heavily against the weak teams and vice versa, he still comes out looking really good in this regard.

 

[TheJediBrah]

India and SL belong in a similar category for most of his career. Poor away and great at home.

Yet you used his average against SL as a point when he was only really good against them when playing in SA, where they were generally terrible. That one supports my view.