Which current players are/will be ATGs?

[TheJediBrah]

My point is this restrictive list of ATGs is arbitrary and too small.

That's just, like, your opinion man

 

[Burgey]

How do you reconcile the statistical improbability that India and the Windies have played nearly the same amount of tests, India has a better W/L record but you ascribe six ATGs to the Windies and two to India.

Do you not see the deep limitations with your minimalist definition

Maybe because the West Indies of those players' era(s) won a lot away from home, which is something very few Indian sides have done until recently? I've got more than two all timers from India, but I can understand why they'd have less than the WI which has historically dominated for longer periods of time.

 

[TheJediBrah]

How do you reconcile the statistical improbability that India and the Windies have played nearly the same amount of tests, India has a better W/L record but you ascribe six ATGs to the Windies and two to India.

Do you not see the deep limitations with your minimalist definition

Pretty easy to reconcile with a bit of logic tbh

 

[kyear2]

Most of the ATGs he articulated were out of the period of WI greatness. His analysis was so bad it excluded people who contributed to the great period like Lloyd, Holding and Garner

All 3 were great players, Lloyd for sure wasn't an ATG and while Holding was absolute quality and Garner was special they are both borderline, if I'm pushing the list, they both make it.

ATGs are the crown jewels of the players of the past and present, the pantheon.

There are really good players, special players, greats and the all time greats who was great within their eras, home and away, would stand out in any era and wouldn't look out of place in an AT XI short list.

Even when I go through a batsman and bowlers list, after the top 20 I start to question some of the names. Same with the bowlers.

At most I'm looking at 20 bowlers, 25 batsmen and about 5 all rounders / all round cricketers.

Actually let's give it a go

Bradman / Tendulkar / Sobers / Hobbs // Richards / Smith / Lara / Hutton

Chappell / Gavaskar / Hammond / Ponting / Kallis / Headley / Border / Sutcliffe

Sangakkara / Pollock / Waugh / Weekes / Barrington / Miandad / Dravid / Younis / Root

Bowlers

Marshall / McGrath / Hadlee // Muralitharan / Warne / Steyn / Ambrose / Imran

Lillee / Donald / O'Reilly / Wasim / Trueman / Garner

Lindwall / Holding / Waqar / Davidson / Pollock / Cummins

Gilchrist / Smith // Miller / Botham / Benaud / Worrell / Kapil

Guys in contention that missed out Taylor / Lloyd / Simpson / Williamson / Kohli / Walcott / Inzamam / Harvey / Knott / Jayawardene / Hayden / Jadeja / Verity / Ashwin / Walsh / Anderson / Kumble / Gibbs

And of course

Richards & Procter.

Who gets in with an astrix?

Perosnally don't think Kapil is an ATG, and Botham barely, Miller . Cummins and Root and white a few others are very borderline and were added in to make up the 50, hence my original point.

I want to put in Ashwin, but it can't be as a spinner, he's basically the Clyde Walcott of spinners, however cricketer was way closer, in any event the end of year proceedings could well push him in.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Who gets in with an astrix?

Not a bad idea to take a low-dose aspirin for an older bloke but I still would recommend you get advice from a health professional

 

[Silver Silva]

We let's all be thankful that you weren't an English selector.........dropping Jimmy Anderson ffs!! The rest of your post was bogus but this......this is just bat **** insane nonsense.

You think Fred Trueman, Bob Willis or any other great English seamer would have got a pass for averaging 80 in an Ashes series twice?

 

[James]

Being the best in class of their time. There honestly is no real subjective way to say with any degree of confidence A is better than B except looking at their dominance within their eras.

Shouldn't there be a difference between ATG for your country and ATG in cricketing history?
I.e. in my opinion, Hadlee is both , but Kane is currently a NZ ATG but not yet a World ATG due to his record against the best teams of his generation. That likely applies to a lot of players.
The number of ATG cricketers I would suggest is quite a small list of players who were top of the pile in all conditions/countries for many years.

 

[kyear2]

Not a bad idea to take a low-dose aspirin for an older bloke but I still would recommend you get advice from a health professional

In my defence there is a question mark.

I agree they can't be ranked, and I'm not going to say it's tragic because of the circumstances of their absence. Barry doesn't even make my cut off for country sample size.

But if I may play devils advocate for a moment.

Barry made the Cricinfo 2nd all time.team, and when they named their legends of cricket, everyone was saying he can't be rated yet he was no. 24. Everyone who saw him said he was the best ever, Mark Nicholas among others has him in their first team with Sunny. He was a rare technically correct opening batsman who could also score quickly.

Procter, has there been a first class bowler with his numbers who didn't replicate them in tests to some degree? At least in his era or after? He was fast, durable and superb who could almost bat as well as Imran and catch like Garry.

Plus they both make the South African team for most without quibble.

Again, no, can't be rated, and they weren't, but oh what could have been.
And honestly if they both had played full careers, would immediately solve my 2nd opener, 3rd pacer and 3rd slip issues for my AT XI.

 

[kyear2]

Shouldn't there be a difference between ATG for your country and ATG in cricketing history?
I.e. in my opinion, Hadlee is both , but Kane is currently a NZ ATG but not yet a World ATG due to his record against the best teams of his generation. That likely applies to a lot of players.
The number of ATG cricketers I would suggest is quite a small list of players who were top of the pile in all conditions/countries for many years.

Agree with this fully.

 

[Coronis]

In my defence there is a question mark.

I agree they can't be ranked, and I'm not going to say it's tragic because of the circumstances of their absence. Barry doesn't even make my cut off for country sample size.

But if I may play devils advocate for a moment.

Barry made the Cricinfo 2nd all time.team, and when they named their legends of cricket, everyone was saying he can't be rated yet he was no. 24. Everyone who saw him said he was the best ever, Mark Nicholas among others has him in their first team with Sunny. He was a rare technically correct opening batsman who could also score quickly.

Procter, has there been a first class bowler with his numbers who didn't replicate them in tests to some degree? At least in his era or after? He was fast, durable and superb who could almost bat as well as Imran and catch like Garry.

Plus they both make the South African team for most without quibble.

Again, no, can't be rated, and they weren't, but oh what could have been.
And honestly if they both had played full careers, would immediately solve my 2nd opener, 3rd pacer and 3rd slip issues for my AT XI.

Nah he was definitely a better bat than Imran - at FC and county level at least.

Will be hard to find someone with his exact numbers, but I’ll check. But yes, very hard to find anyone with those sort of numbers and that volume, does show how class he truly was.

Procter for reference (65-88/89) 1417 @ 19.53

Norman Gifford (60-88) 2068 @ 23.56 vs (64-85) 33 @ 31.09

Also shoutout to probs the biggest bowling disappointment from FC to tests since then..

Emburey (73-97) 1608 @ 26.09 vs (78-95) 147 @ 38.40

For comparison also to Procter.. CW’s top test pace bowlers in FC

Marshall 1651 @ 19.10
McGrath 835 @ 20.85
Hadlee 1490 @ 18.11
Steyn 618 @ 23.57
Ambrose 941 @ 20.24
Imran 1287 @ 22.32

Yes sad that we were deprived of their careers, but they can’t seriously be considered ATGs in a test context.

 

[ma1978]

Maybe because the West Indies of those players' era(s) won a lot away from home, which is something very few Indian sides have done until recently? I've got more than two all timers from India, but I can understand why they'd have less than the WI which has historically dominated for longer periods of time.

I can see this argument totally; it’s just when you cut the list that fine, you are making arbitrary exclusions

 

[TheJediBrah]

I can see this argument totally; it’s just when you cut the list that fine, you are making arbitrary exclusions

why would you assume that, at all

 

[honestbharani]

Shouldn't there be a difference between ATG for your country and ATG in cricketing history?
I.e. in my opinion, Hadlee is both , but Kane is currently a NZ ATG but not yet a World ATG due to his record against the best teams of his generation. That likely applies to a lot of players.
The number of ATG cricketers I would suggest is quite a small list of players who were top of the pile in all conditions/countries for many years.

I understand what you are saying but to me, both are ATGs.

 

[ma1978]

I understand what you are saying but to me, both are ATGs.

The problem is someone is going to jump up and down and say Graeme Pollock is an ATG and Kane Williamson is not, and there’s no basis for that sort of statement. So all these “ATGs are the best of the best of the best” list reflect arbitrary biases, esp because cricket has no catch all player evaluation metric

 

[honestbharani]

To me, if you are the best in your class in your era, you are an ATG easily.

 

[James]

I understand what you are saying but to me, both are ATGs.

What's your criteria for ATG out of interest considering Kane averages 36, 36, 37 against Australia, India, England? Would a World ATG not have to have a more complete record? i.e. like those players @kyear2 listed.

 

[honestbharani]

What's your criteria for ATG out of interest considering Kane averages 36, 36, 37 against Australia, India, England? Would a World ATG not have to have a more complete record? i.e. like those players @kyear2 listed.

As I said, being the best in class. To me, Kane is a clear 4th in the Fab 4 but the Fab 4 are all ATGs for me. They are all a clear level above the next best bats of the generation. That is good enough to be an ATG IMO.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Probably better to wait till Kanes career is done but it would be pretty weird if he ended up with the second highest average of his era, 11k runs and 40 test hundreds and wasn’t rated as an ATG

 

[honestbharani]

Probably better to wait till Kanes career is done but it would be pretty weird if he ended up with the second highest average of his era, 11k runs and 40 test hundreds and wasn’t rated as an ATG

As I said before, to me, he is the Sanga to Smith's Lara, Root's Sachin, and Kohli's Ponting. Make of that what you will.

 

[kyear2]

As I said before, to me, he is the Sanga to Smith's Lara, Root's Sachin, and Kohli's Ponting. Make of that what you will.

Like the comps