The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[Silver Line]

Just played 10 more tests

then go ahead and eliminate bradman from conversations of great batsmen like tendulkar and lara lol

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

then go ahead and eliminate bradman from conversations of great batsmen like tendulkar and lara lol

Dude, Wasim played 104 tests, Steyn 93. There isn’t an issue of longevity or anything here.

 

[kyear2]

the difference between these bowlers in the top 10 is way too low to argue. At the end of the day these top 10-15 whatever bowlers will do better in different conditions than eachother but overall they were all an equal luxury to have in an attack. Batting is where the differences are high as not every one of these top 10 bowlers had the capability to provide with the bat on top of their world class spells.

I greatly disagree

For me there's the slightest of gaps between Marshall and McGrath, then another gap between these two and the rest of the top 5. The quite a bit larger one to the next group.

The next group (top 15), in roughly chronological order.
Lindwall, Trueman, Davidson, Imran, Lillee, Holding, Garner, Akram, Waqar, Donald all lacked something, that extra quality, consistency, magic, all round greatness of the first group. None of them seriously contend for the title of greatest ever and have questions or holes in their game / repertoire / record...

If they aren't in contention for the best why should they be in the first team? Batting deep till 9 or 10 should be sufficient IMHO.

 

[trundler]

Both were average in Aus. The mid 2000s SC tracks were some of the most batting friendly wickets ever. Akram is better Steyn in Eng(wickets in Eng were flatter then than in 90s), but both have mediocre record there. Strum’s average indicates he is worse than Akram there, but again he bowled on much flatter tracks, and has some great spells there. So much closer in Aus also. In Ind, Wasim’s record is not good, Steyns is just next to Marshall and Mcgrath

Akram is one of the best touring bowlers in Australia. He was far, far from average. He had no bad tours there and averaged 24 against very strong lineups. He has a 10fer and 3fers in Australia. In any case he was much better than Steyn and post 2008 Steyn didn't face better lineups. Before diabetes, Akram averaged 19 in Australia! His overall record until 1997 is 23 away (better than Steyn) and 21 at home (better than Steyn on much, much tougher decks). Sure, I'll give you that Steyn was better in India but it's completely laughable to suggest both of them were average in Australia. Akram is next to Hadlee and Ambrose in Australia.

Just played 10 more tests

And how many more years? Akram played a lot more ODIs. Again this isn't his fault. The gap between Akram and Steyn is minuscule.

 

[Socerer 01]

diabetes the great scourge of atg pacers

 

[trundler]

Dude, Wasim played 104 tests, Steyn 93. There isn’t an issue of longevity or anything here.

Akram had a longer career in terms of years and played 20-30 ODIs each year. Not his fault he didn't play the same volume of tests but the added longevity hurts his numbers significantly. No reason why he isn't among the top pacers.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Akram is one of the best touring bowlers in Australia. He was far, far from average. He had no bad tours there and averaged 24 against very strong lineups. He has a 10fer and 3fers in Australia. In any case he was much better than Steyn and post 2008 Steyn didn't face better lineups. Before diabetes, Akram averaged 19 in Australia! His overall record until 1997 is 23 away (better than Steyn) and 21 at home (better than Steyn on much, much tougher decks). Sure, I'll give you that Steyn was better in India but it's completely laughable to suggest both of them were average in Australia. Akram is next to Hadlee and Ambrose in Australia.

And how many more years? Akram played a lot more ODIs. Again this isn't his fault. The gap between Akram and Steyn is minuscule.

I’m sorry. I meant to say both were average in Eng.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Akram had a longer career in terms of years and played 20-30 ODIs each year. Not his fault he didn't play the same volume of tests but the added longevity hurts his numbers significantly. No reason why he isn't among the top pacers.

Across formats, I would without a doubt put Akram leagues ahead. Even if you account for longevity, Steyn is clearly better for me, taking into consideration home/away performance, the eras in which they played, Steyn’s superior SR, WPM.

 

[kyear2]

And akram being able to sustain his fitness to play 5 more years, is not his fault. Steyn if he continued 5 more years would not have been able to parallel Akram anymore. And Akram played with diabetes too lol. Trust me dude in everyones general consensus without looking at stats and stuff, Akram comes off as the most rated bowler

He really doesn't though. Akram's reputation isn't borne out in his numbers as they are other bowlers in that top tier.

We also can't say what would have happened if one or the other played more or less, we just have what actually happened to work with.

And while playing with diabetes is beyond admirable, it can't factor into the conversation.

Then the are the other intangibles that detracts from his over all status as well. As I said, for me Akram is closer to borderline top 10 than my top five, and definitely not as good as Steyn.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

And obviously Akram is an ATG test pacer, just not in top 5 like Steyn. ODIs, he’s the greatest ever bowler IMO, and second greatest overall player after Sir Viv.

 

[OverratedSanity]

And while playing with diabetes is beyond admirable, it can't factor into the conversation.

Why?

 

[bagapath]

My shortlist of 33 players to select three XIs would be...

Openers
Sir Jack Hobbs
Sir Len Hutton
Sunil Gavaskar
Herbert Sutcliffe
Sir Gordon Greenidge
Victor Trumper

#3
Sir Don Bradman
Sir Viv Richards
Brian Lara

#4
Sachin Tendulkar
Greg Chappell
Jacques Kallis

#5
Allan Border
Walter Hammond
Steve Smith

Allrounders
Sir Gary Sobers
Imran Khan
Keith Miller

Bowling Allrounders
Richard Hadlee
Lord Ian Botham
Wasim Akram

Wicketkeepers
Adam Gilchrist
Alan Knott
Les Ames

Spin Bowlers
Shane Warne
Bill O'Reilley
Mutthiah Muralitharan

Fast Bowlers
Malcolm Marshall
Dennis Lillee
Glenn McGrath
Curtley Ambrose
Dale Steyn
Fred Truman

 

[kyear2]

Why?

Everton Weekes destroyed his leg prior to the Australia Tour and was never the same again, but still has the reputation of a minnow basher that couldn't get it done vs the better teams.

Len Hutton had a catastrophic arm injury during the war that left one arm significantly shorter than the next, it isn't factored in by most when talking about his career.

Ian Bishop was headed on a career trajectory possibly higher than Ambrose before his back injury, but no one speaks of him in that group.

So while it would have taken its toll, it's difficult to say how much it would have impacted his career.

Again, it's admirable how he managed to continue his career during and after.

 

[trundler]

Everton Weekes destroyed his leg prior to the Australia Tour and was never the same again, but still has the reputation of a minnow basher that couldn't get it done vs the better teams.

Len Hutton had a catastrophic arm injury during the war that left one arm significantly shorter than the next, it isn't factored in by most when talking about his career.

Ian Bishop was headed on a career trajectory possibly higher than Ambrose before his back injury, but no one speaks of him in that group.

So while it would have taken its toll, it's difficult to say how much it would have impacted his career.

Again, it's admirable how he managed to continue his career during and after.

He already had a full ATG career prior to that though. The problem is that people would rate him higher because he had better averages if he had simply retired when he got diagnosed with diabetes. Bishop and other what-ifs don't compare. Any sensible person should account for Hutton's war injury when rating him too.

Akram had a stellar record against the strongest teams of his time, picked up 5fers very frequently (almost as many as Steyn in fewer matches) and had 5 10 wicket hauls already by that point. His penetrativeness declined in his latter years but it is to his credit that he was still a decent bowler with some creditable performances. I don't think he should be marked down for having an exceptionally longer career and playing with a handicap.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Steyn is for sure better than Akram for me too. But I really don't agree with the reasons given by most posters for Akram's supposed inferiority to Mcgrath /ambrose /Steyn often. Not accounting for his unusually long career and late career diabetes affecting his averages doesn't make a whole lot of sense when he'd had a full ATG level career already. His numbers pre diabetes compare extremely favourably with the very top tier of pacers both in terms of averages and longevity/volume.

Steyn's ability to wreck lineups and take wickets in clumps more frequently is what puts him above Wasim imo. Generally bowled to superior batting lineups too.

 

[trundler]

Steyn is for sure better than Akram for me too. But I really don't agree with the reasons given by most posters for Akram's supposed inferiority to Mcgrath /ambrose /Steyn often. Not accounting for his unusually long career and late career diabetes affecting his averages doesn't make a whole lot of sense when he'd had a full ATG level career already. His numbers pre diabetes compare extremely favourably with the very top tier of pacers both in terms of averages and longevity/volume.

Steyn's ability to wreck lineups and take wickets in clumps more frequently is what puts him above Wasim imo. Generally bowled to superior batting lineups too.

I agree with this. Also I think CW overcorrects and tends to underrate guys that are overrated elsewhere. This is true of Viv and Lillee too. De Silva beat Jayawardena in a poll here some time ago and I found that to be another example of this phenomena.

 

[kyear2]

I agree with this. Also I think CW overcorrects and tends to underrate guys that are overrated elsewhere. This is true of Viv and Lillee too. De Silva beat Jayawardena in a poll here some time ago and I found that to be another example of this phenomena.

I do believe this is true, but him being in my top 10 and ahead of Lillee is more indicative of where he should be rather than an over correction.

 

[Coronis]

Ok guys you finally got me. I actually don’t rate Viv cos I didn’t like Benaud putting him ahead of Lara/Chappell etc. in his DVD which helped me get more introduced to cricket on a wider historical level.

 

[Red]

But Akram for me is closer to borderline top 10 than he is to my top 5 and definitely not as good as Steyn, but know many would disagree.

I think it’s worth considering a bowling attack if selecting an XI. Even if you don’t think Wasim is outright top 3, his ability to do things with an older ball that others can’t in a real match scenario would be really vital. With him also being a left handed and good enough bat, he’s a must pick for me.

McGrath, Marshall and Wasim, with Warne, is my choice always. Covers all bases, and Wasim, Marshall and Warne were all handy lower order batters who usually batted #8 for their test teams

 

[Coronis]

It all depends of course, on how much you think his different skillset adds, and whether or not it makes up for any perceived difference in quality.

This also is a factor in batting lineups to a lesser degree (especially openers).

Say for example Hobbs didn’t exist and Smith was close to the others of the big 4 but still just behind. I’d likely take Smith with one of them if the gap wasn’t so big since the other 3 were slower defensive batsmen and Smith is a faster attacking batsman.