The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[capt_Luffy]

You reckon the top team bats better? An ATG bat fails most innings. Having all three ARs combined fail in an innings to a similar extent is going to be very rare. The difference in averages is like going from a top averaging ATG to Bradman.

There definitely are going to be diminishing reurns from playing Miller. I don't think I'd play him as a result. Debatable. But I'm just trying to construct a team that is stronger in both departments.

I think you are underselling his bowling or overselling the others. Between form, fitness, and conditions, he is frequently going to be a better option than at least one of the other 4 guys. Probably a better option than Warne alone half the time.

If it's an all-rounderish team, then surely Kallis comes in mine for Miller, and Hammond for Richards/Tendulkar.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Kallis doesn't have a great home record against teams with good pace attacks.

Only team Kallis doesn't have a good record at home against is Australia; and his Australian average is still around Smith's home average vs Top 8 nations.

 

[Bolo.]

If it's an all-rounderish team, then surely Kallis comes in mine for Miller, and Hammond for Richards/Tendulkar.

It's not meant to be an AR team specifically (or even the strongest team). It's just one I rate higher on both batting and bowling compared to the team Kyear selected.

Fielding too if you drop Sachin.

 

[capt_Luffy]

It's not meant to be an AR team specifically (or even the strongest team). It's just one I rate higher on both batting and bowling compared to the team Kyear selected.

Fielding too if you drop Sachin.

Yeah, I get it now. But why Barry Richards ahead of Hutton and Gavaskar though?

 

[Bolo.]

Yeah, I get it now. But why Barry Richards ahead of Hutton and Gavaskar though?

Kyear's pick, not mine. I'd take Hutton, but I don't want to be debating on multiple fronts at once.

 

[Coronis]

1970s Team of the Decade
1) Sunil Gavaskar
2) Barry Richards
3) Greg Chappell
4) Graeme Pollock
5) Clive Lloyd (c)
6) Tony Greig
7) Alan Knott+
8) Mike Procter
8) Andy Roberts
9) Dennis Lillee
10) Derek Underwood

1980s Team of the Decade
1) Gordon Greenidge
2) Desmond Haynes
3) Viv Richards
4) Javed Miandad
5) Allan Border
6) Imran Khan (c)
7) Jeff Dujon+
8) Richard Hadlee
9) Malcolm Marshall
10) Iqbal Qasim
11) Joel Garner

1990s Team of the Decade
1) Graham Gooch
2) Saeed Anwar
3) Brian Lara
4) Sachin Tendulkar
5) Steve Waugh (c)
6) Aravinda De Silva
7) Andy Flower+
8) Wasim Akram
9) Shane Warne
10) Curtly Ambrose
11) Allan Donald

2000s Team of the Decade
1) Graeme Smith
2) Matthew Hayden
3) Ricky Ponting (c)
4) Rahul Dravid
5) Jacques Kallis
6) Michael Hussey
7) Adam Gilchrist+
8) Shaun Pollock
9) Shoaib Akthar
10) Muttiah Muralitharan
11) Glenn McGrath

Yeah no, Richards, Procter and and Pollock played 4 matches in the 70’s. Including them is ridiculous. Sobers belongs more in a 70’s test XI than any of them lol.

Barry Richards could have done very well in 70s and the same goes with Mike Procter.

Could. I could’ve been an international cricketer too.

But trundler, would you really rather have Boycott (the auld Chanderpaul)?

Yes, easily.

Boycott in the 70’s 44 matches 77 innings 3806 @ 55.97 12 tons

70’s XI would probs be:

Gavaskar
Boycott
Kallicharran
Chappell
Viswanath/Lloyd
Greig*
Knott+
Roberts
Lillee
Willis
Underwood

(assuming Richards is in the 80’s XI)

 

[AndrewB]

There's a case for picking Botham in the 70s ahead of Willis; in the matches where they both played, Botham took 112@19 to Willis's 79@22; he also had a great record bowling first change (67@18) so would be more used to coming on after Lillee and Roberts; and obviously he hugely strengthens the tail.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I really hate the idea of Andy Flower keeping to an ATG-level attack, but he deserves a spot as a batsman. I would rather play a proper keeper like an Ian Healy (or Boucher even though he missed most of the 90s), move Flower up to 6 and get rid of de Silva. Don't think Aravinda was quite good enough to be in this company anyway tbh

 

[Victor Ian]

Here is a challenge for you team makers.

What is the best team of the 80's to have ONLY played in the 80s? Anyone?...Anyone?

 

[AndrewB]

Going back a bit:

1940s Team:
Arthur Morris
Bruce Mitchell
Bill Edrich
Denis Compton
Everton Weekes
Keith Miller
Colin McCool
Don Tallon+
Ray Lindwall
Jack Cowie
Bill Johnston

1950s Team:
Len Hutton
Hanif Mohammad
Peter May
Neil Harvey
Clyde Walcott
John Waite+
Richie Benaud
Alan Davidson
Fazal Mahmood
Alec Bedser
Jim Laker

1960s Team:
Bob Simpson
Trevor Goddard
Ken Barrington
Graeme Pollock
Ted Dexter
Doug Walters
Gary Sobers
Farokh Engineer+
Peter Pollock
Fred Trueman
Erapalli Prasanna

I'm assuming Bradman is in the 1930s team so ineligible for the 1940s.
Both Davidson and Trueman could get into the 50s and 60s teams, so I went with one in each.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Rohan Kanhai for the 1960s team

 

[capt_Luffy]

Here is a challenge for you team makers.

What is the best team of the 80's to have ONLY played in the 80s? Anyone?...Anyone?

I will try:

1. Qasim Umar
2. Chris Tavare
3. Roy Dias
4. Greg Ritchie
5. Duleep Mendis
6. Sandip Patil
7. Taslim Arif (wk)
8. Somachandra de Silva
9. Tony Gray
10. Geoff Lawson
11. Winston Davies

 

[Coronis]

There's a case for picking Botham in the 70s ahead of Willis; in the matches where they both played, Botham took 112@19 to Willis's 79@22; he also had a great record bowling first change (67@18) so would be more used to coming on after Lillee and Roberts; and obviously he hugely strengthens the tail.

I mean yes he was obviously better in the 70’s but if we start doing that we should be having Viv and Miandad in the 70’s too rather than the 80’s. I think some weight has to be given to the amount of tests played in each decade, especially if a player can only be chosen for one decade.

 

[Victor Ian]

I will try:

1. Qasim Umar
2. Chris Tavare
3. Roy Dias
4. Greg Ritchie
5. Duleep Mendis
6. Sandip Patil
7. Taslim Arif (wk)
8. Somachandra de Silva
9. Tony Gray
10. Geoff Lawson
11. Winston Davies

Great. Particularly that Greg Ritchie was the catalyst for the question.

 

[kyear2]

You reckon the top team bats better? An ATG bat fails most innings. Having all three ARs combined fail in an innings to a similar extent is going to be very rare. The difference in averages is like going from a top averaging ATG to Bradman.

There definitely are going to be diminishing returns from playing Miller. I don't think I'd play him as a result. Debatable. But I'm just trying to construct a team that is stronger in both departments.

I think you are underselling his bowling or overselling the others. Between form, fitness, and conditions, he is frequently going to be a better option than at least one of the other 4 guys. Probably a better option than Warne alone half the time.

So you're saying that you would rather have Imran, Hadlee and Miller over Sachin in a team, and the three all rounders would have a higher combined chance of success than one ATG batsman?

In a post a little higher up in this thread I was explaining that while I would start a series with Marshall, Warne, Steyn and McGrath if the batting showed itself to be a weakness, and the tail a liability, then Hadlee can come in for McGrath.
As a bowler he's literally right behind and a better bat. But as I was typing that the notion of trying to fix your entire batting by upgrading the no. 8 position seemed laughable, it's akin to trying to fix the titanic with a tarp. It's still going to sink and you're still going to lose, you have bigger problems.

I believe that they are multiple issues with having and believing Imran, Hadlee, Marshall would be an ideal threesome.

All 3 played in the same era, the same era that Subs just spent the better half of an entire threat tearing apart as being weak compared to other eras. My attack purposefully takes the best bowlers from 3 different eras.

As a batsman, Miller scored almost half of his hundreds in one series vs the WI, where quite Frankly, Worrell (see what I did there) was the opening pacer, and that's not even mentioning the pitches.
Imran's batting numbers were notoriously, and proven to be soft in another recent thread. And while I can come up with 4 match saving knocks (a couple early innings scores and I think 2 fourth innings no's) off the top of my head, it's not exactly something you would count on for every match and I can also think of 3 for Maco. He was also literally the 3rd best pacer of his era (who we just voted 8th all time), with a record heavily skewed towards home games.
Hadlee, who some have consistently argued wasn't a proper all rounder btw, is the one I legitimately don't have much of an argument against, besides variety of era, McGrath's extra bounce, accuracy and seam, which varies from and compliments the swing of the other 3. He's definitely top tier and adds the extra bat at no expense (besides the stylistic differences stated above).

Bowling wise Miller is hardly going to get a bowl and while he was at his best during his career using the new ball, he wouldn't be getting a sniff of it here. To say diminished returns is an understatement and definely not worth the sacrifice of a Tendulkar.

In the past two head to head polls between Steyn and Imran, Steyn received percentages of 83% and 78% and when Ambrose was added in a three-way, Imran's votes dropped to literally Subz and Silva.

So no, the top option is literally better for batting and for bowling. Hadlee is the complicating factor and depending on preferences could easily slip into the first team and be net improvement.

 

[CricketFan90s]

I really hate the idea of Andy Flower keeping to an ATG-level attack, but he deserves a spot as a batsman. I would rather play a proper keeper like an Ian Healy (or Boucher even though he missed most of the 90s), move Flower up to 6 and get rid of de Silva. Don't think Aravinda was quite good enough to be in this company anyway tbh

PA de Silva (SL)

1990-1999

62

104

9

4448

267

46.82

8530+

52.00

14

18

6

547+

33

A Flower (ZIM)

1992-1999

39

70

12

2580

156

44.48

6337

40.71

6

16

4

263

7

A Flower (ZIM)

2000-2002

24

42

7

2214

232*

63.25

4299

51.50

6

11

1

280

13

Where to include him 90s or 2000s ?

Andy Flower batting started improving from 1998 and 1999 and suddenly we don't know what happened to him 2000 and 2001 he became almost like Bradman for 2 years. May be his Girlfriend was too good on bed.

Year 2000	9	16	3	1045	232*	80.38	2143	48.76	3	5	0	124	10
Year 2001	9	14	4	899	199*	89.90	1601	56.15	3	4	0	119	2

 

[CricketFan90s]

1970s Team of the Decade
1) Sunil Gavaskar
2) Geoffrey Boycott
3) Alvin Kallicharran
4) Greg Chappell
5) Clive Lloyd (c)
6) Tony Greig
7) Alan Knott+
8) Ian Botham
9) Andy Roberts
10) Dennis Lillee
11) Derek Underwood

1980s Team of the Decade
1) Gordon Greenidge
2) Desmond Haynes
3) Viv Richards
4) Javed Miandad
5) Allan Border
6) Imran Khan (c)
7) Jeff Dujon+
8) Richard Hadlee
9) Malcolm Marshall
10) Iqbal Qasim
11) Joel Garner

1990s Team of the Decade
1) Graham Gooch
2) Saeed Anwar
3) Brian Lara
4) Sachin Tendulkar
5) Steve Waugh (c)
6) Aravinda De Silva
7) Ian Healy+
8) Wasim Akram
9) Shane Warne
10) Curtly Ambrose
11) Allan Donald

2000s Team of the Decade
1) Graeme Smith
2) Matthew Hayden
3) Ricky Ponting (c)
4) Rahul Dravid
5) Jacques Kallis
6) Michael Hussey
7) Adam Gilchrist+
8) Shaun Pollock
9) Shoaib Akthar
10) Muttiah Muralitharan
11) Glenn McGrath

any more changes ?

 

[TheJediBrah]

May be his Girlfriend was too good on bed.

I hate when that happens

 

[Bolo.]

So you're saying that you would rather have Imran, Hadlee and Miller over Sachin in a team, and the three all rounders would have a higher combined chance of success than one ATG batsman?

In a post a little higher up in this thread I was explaining that while I would start a series with Marshall, Warne, Steyn and McGrath if the batting showed itself to be a weakness, and the tail a liability, then Hadlee can come in for McGrath.
As a bowler he's literally right behind and a better bat. But as I was typing that the notion of trying to fix your entire batting by upgrading the no. 8 position seemed laughable, it's akin to trying to fix the titanic with a tarp. It's still going to sink and you're still going to lose, you have bigger problems.

I believe that they are multiple issues with having and believing Imran, Hadlee, Marshall would be an ideal threesome.

All 3 played in the same era, the same era that Subs just spent the better half of an entire threat tearing apart as being weak compared to other eras. My attack purposefully takes the best bowlers from 3 different eras.

As a batsman, Miller scored almost half of his hundreds in one series vs the WI, where quite Frankly, Worrell (see what I did there) was the opening pacer, and that's not even mentioning the pitches.
Imran's batting numbers were notoriously, and proven to be soft in another recent thread. And while I can come up with 4 match saving knocks (a couple early innings scores and I think 2 fourth innings no's) off the top of my head, it's not exactly something you would count on for every match and I can also think of 3 for Maco. He was also literally the 3rd best pacer of his era (who we just voted 8th all time), with a record heavily skewed towards home games.
Hadlee, who some have consistently argued wasn't a proper all rounder btw, is the one I legitimately don't have much of an argument against, besides variety of era, McGrath's extra bounce, accuracy and seam, which varies from and compliments the swing of the other 3. He's definitely top tier and adds the extra bat at no expense (besides the stylistic differences stated above).

Bowling wise Miller is hardly going to get a bowl and while he was at his best during his career using the new ball, he wouldn't be getting a sniff of it here. To say diminished returns is an understatement and definely not worth the sacrifice of a Tendulkar.

In the past two head to head polls between Steyn and Imran, Steyn received percentages of 83% and 78% and when Ambrose was added in a three-way, Imran's votes dropped to literally Subz and Silva.

So no, the top option is literally better for batting and for bowling. Hadlee is the complicating factor and depending on preferences could easily slip into the first team and be net improvement.

These guys are not great bats. You can obviously poke holes in their records individually. But there are 3 of them. Any one bat fails more often than not. Viv scored a 50 roughly every 3rd Innings. 3 bats (cumulatively) will not fail this often, even if they are on average weak bats. If they collectively fail by scoring half their career averages, that's over 50 runs an innings.

Miller is going to be underutilized as the 5th best bowler. I'm not arguing he is the best pick. But he is going to get a bowl. He will often better a better option at stages than Warne (depends on conditions and opposition). The other quicks are all sometimes getting tired/injured/just not on song. He isn't a Sobers who is mostly just bowling to get through overs in this team. He averages the same as the rest of the attack, even if his average flatters him in relation to them.

Ya, most people think Steyn is a better bowler than Imran. Steyn to Imran + Miller is not the same comparison.

 

[Qlder]

I will try:

1. Qasim Umar
2. Chris Tavare
3. Roy Dias
4. Greg Ritchie
5. Duleep Mendis
6. Sandip Patil
7. Taslim Arif (wk)
8. Somachandra de Silva
9. Tony Gray
10. Geoff Lawson
11. Winston Davies

What about Chris Broad (1984-89, ave 39.54) Tim Robinson (1984-89, ave 36.38) and for keeper Wayne Phillips (1983-86, ave 32.28)