Is Ravichandran Ashwin an ATG test bowler?

[kyear2]

I thought you are open to rating Holding above Garner. And why not Steve Waugh and Border?

Re Holding and Garner, it is really close, but I gave the explanation as to why I chose Garner.

Border definitely closer than Waugh, and for multiple reasons, but neither quite makes the cut, Border for me also was borderline. But if you're thinking that hard about it, then again it's probably a no.

But yes, there's a reason that neither are there but not restarting that discussion, but Border was right there.

 

[subshakerz]

Re Holding and Garner, it is really close, but I gave the explanation as to why I chose Garner.

Border definitely closer than Waugh, and for multiple reasons, but neither quite makes the cut, Border for me also was borderline. But if you're thinking that hard about it, then again it's probably a no.

But yes, there's a reason that neither are there but not restarting that discussion, but Border was right there.

Sanga over Border then? Interesting.

Trueman can't be justified though.

 

[subshakerz]

As expected this thread has devolved into people arguing because they have different criteria for ATG, a term with no universal meaning.

Which is how it should have started. Always best to define terms.

 

[Migara]

Easier way to look at is whether the player walks in to the majority of ATG sides.

The top tier batters and bowlers are self explanatory.

But you would find players like Sangakkara and Kallis would walk in to any ATG XI in past or present given their secondary skill. Sangakkara is as good a keeper bat as Gilchrist of not better. Only plus point Gilchrist has is that he is more aggressive and can play in lower order, because he typically players shorter innings.

 

[kyear2]

As expected this thread has devolved into people arguing because they have different criteria for ATG, a term with no universal meaning.

But that's the natural conclusion of the premise of the thread.

For me an ATG is the absolute elite dominating your era, a champion home and away and someone who when I compile my shortlist is legitimately a contender for a 1st or second ATG team. That's my 3 criteria. But everyone's would differ.

For those talking about arbitrary it reminds me of the Pluto argument. When Eris was discovered, it was either include all or create a criterion and eliminate some. 3 criteria, must be a sphere, must orbit the sun and must clear it's orbit. The last one may seem arbitrary but at some point you have to create something to thin the heard and create a distinction. Sorry to vary off topic.

 

[kyear2]

Which is how it should have started. Always best to define terms.

This

 

[kyear2]

Sanga over Border then? Interesting.

Trueman can't be justified though.

Sanga also (mostly) makes my second team as a wicketkeeper so that is what solidifies him over Border for me.

 

[Migara]

Sanga also (mostly) makes my second team as a wicketkeeper so that is what solidifies him over Border for me.

There is so much hypocrisy over Sanga.

When Sanga is assessed as batsman, his average with keeping also considered.
When Sanga the batsman keeper considered only his average while keeping is considered.

Sanga as as batsman keeper is not an option, him as a pure batsman is only second to Bradman.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I rate players primarily by their primary skills. You have to be an ATG there before even moving to the secondary one. Why I rate Hadlee over Imran, better bowler by enough that the secondary skills can't overcome it. Miller wasn't good enough in primary or secondary in my opinion to get into the conversation. But I know that differs from the consensus.
Trueman is really borderline, but was the hardest omission, and could probably make it in ahead of Garner. But the down was that he was totally useless outside of England. But he was great and right on the cusp.

Greame Smith is in contention for me and at most a few others, but hardly by the consensus and try not to debate too far. He would have also been quite the controversial selection and taken away from the discourse. For an actual team though, his play style, LH advantage, captaincy and slip fielding makes him highly valuable as a cricketer. And that's before the home pitches and the fact that he's probably the 2nd best 'modern" opener and probably the best of this century.

Don't believe there are lower tiers ATG, you are or you aren't, for me he's borderline and probably deserves a shout. But that wouldn't be a popular decision and if it's an argument (as that would be) he's in the same boat as the others mentioned. He's almost like the reverse Ashwin though.

I think it's your list, most (including me) are free to disagree, but if a player is in contention for your ATG team, for whatever reason, they should be an ATG. As for Miller, I think he is a Top 30 pacer and his batting was good enough to play purely as a batsman almost his whole career. His overall value is too high imo to not be an ATG. And as for Trueman, you don't really need to remove Garner, you could just place them together.

 

[capt_Luffy]

The problem is that you need at least some foundational knowledge of cricket history to understand who has the ATG reputations to base this analysis. Otherwise arguing with them is very difficult.

They are looking at the Economist or the New York Times to see how is an ATG today.

Then I believe you definitely consider Victor Trumper to be better than the likes of Ricky Ponting??

 

[subshakerz]

Then I believe you definitely consider Victor Trumper to be better than the likes of Ricky Ponting??

No. It's not just reputation but record as well to be an ATG.

I think it's your list, most (including me) are free to disagree, but if a player is in contention for your ATG team, for whatever reason, they should be an ATG. As for Miller, I think he is a Top 30 pacer and his batting was good enough to play purely as a batsman almost his whole career. His overall value is too high imo to not be an ATG. And as for Trueman, you don't really need to remove Garner, you could just place them together.

Yeah Miller and Trueman got to be there.

 

[kyear2]

There is so much hypocrisy over Sanga.

When Sanga is assessed as batsman, his average with keeping also considered.
When Sanga the batsman keeper considered only his average while keeping is considered.

Sanga as as batsman keeper is not an option, him as a pure batsman is only second to Bradman.

I mentioned nothing from your first paragraph.

Definely disagree with the last part of the second one.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

@capt_Luffy had a good idea, so let's tier the ATGs

Bradman / Sobers / Marshall / Tendulkar / Hobbs / McGrath/ Hadlee

In no order and by country

Warne / Gilchrist / Smith / Hutton / Hammond / Gavaskar / Imran / Kallis / Steyn / Muralitharan / Richards / Lara / Ambrose

Final / borderline

O'Reilly / Lillee / Ponting / Chappell / Sutcliffe / Knott / Wasim / Donald / G. Pollock / Sangakkara / Headley / Garner

Of the top of my head, sure I'm missing someone(s)

After that are the truly great and great players. No disrespect but they are challenging for a spot in an ATG team. Well Smith for me, but that's probably my issue.

Nearly agree with all of this.

 

[subshakerz]

For me an ATG is the absolute elite dominating your era, a champion home and away and someone who when I compile my shortlist is legitimately a contender for a 1st or second ATG team. That's my 3 criteria. But everyone's would differ.

Great criteria, agreed but would at per rep as best of their time too.

 

[kyear2]

I think it's your list, most (including me) are free to disagree, but if a player is in contention for your ATG team, for whatever reason, they should be an ATG. As for Miller, I think he is a Top 30 pacer and his batting was good enough to play purely as a batsman almost his whole career. His overall value is too high imo to not be an ATG. And as for Trueman, you don't really need to remove Garner, you could just place them together.

Ummm, I'm working on talking myself in the Smith one, but again, as with Ash, if it spurs a 30 page discussion, by consensus can he be a definitive or clear cut ATG? But for mine, he is closer to being one than the subject of the thread.

Miller averaged the same as Carol Hooper as a batsman, so that's below par for a test batsman. His wpm and as such bowling impact puts him well below ATG standard as a bowler. He was test quality but not enough quantity . With Miller I would agree to disagree.

 

[Victor Ian]

Easier way to look at is whether the player walks in to the majority of ATG sides.

The top tier batters and bowlers are self explanatory.

But you would find players like Sangakkara and Kallis would walk in to any ATG XI in past or present given their secondary skill. Sangakkara is as good a keeper bat as Gilchrist of not better. Only plus point Gilchrist has is that he is more aggressive and can play in lower order, because he typically players shorter innings.

Sanga flicks hand water in people's faces. Automatic exclusion

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Yeah so I disagree with borderline.

Lillee, Headley, Wasim, Knott, O Reilly, Pollock, Chappell aren't borderline at all. They are confirmed ATGs based on rep and not including them is just flying in the face of cricket consensus.

Sutcliffe, Ponting, Border, Donald to me squeak in as they had not quite as super high rep in their times but enough to justify.

Sanga, Waugh, Garner, Holding, Laker, Grimmett are the borderline ones. In fact, I rather dont count them.



The problem is that you need at least some foundational knowledge of cricket history to understand who has the ATG reputations to base this analysis. Otherwise arguing with them is very difficult.

They are looking at the Economist or the New York Times to see how is an ATG today.

If I remember correctly, you said Ashwin and Lillee are similar in the respect of forcing their case through sheer output of wickets rather than a complete record. So if Lillie is a confirmed ATG, can't Ashwin be a borderline ATG by that logic?

 

[subshakerz]

My list of confirmed ATGs:

ATG pacers: Barnes, Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Imran, Steyn, Ambrose, Lillee, Trueman, Wasim, Donald, Lindwall

ATG bats: Bradman, Tendulkar, Sobers, Viv, Hobbs, Smith, Lara, Hammond, Gavaskar, Hutton, Headley, Pollock, Sutcliffe, Chappell, Ponting, Border

ATG spin: Warne, Murali, O'Reilly

ATG wks: Gilly, Knott

ATG ARs: Kallis, Miller

 

[capt_Luffy]

No. It's not just reputation but record as well to be an ATG.

And Trumper has plenty good record as well. While batting in middle-order he averaged close to 50, in an extreme era and his opening average was also around that of the likes Shrewsbury, the leading opener of his time.

 

[Victor Ian]

Is there a problem with bowlers vs batsman end of careers. My perception is that a great bowler gets dropped far quicker than a batsman. So batsman have a harder time maintaing their aura. Is this wrong? I'm just trying to think of great bowlers who got to spend a few years being **** and none spring to mind as readily as a plethora of batsman.