Which players would be locks in every OTHER country’s ATG XI?

[kyear2]

Ignoring runouts and 5th bowlers, if these guys are striking at 60 against an ATG lineup, you need 50 overs a match on average per bowler to bowl a team out twice. Even Warne didn't bowl that much.

These overs are not going to be evenly distributed across innings and matches. You are asking them for obnoxious bowling loads in a number of innings. You give extra bowlers a go, or your bowlers start to seriously underperform and/or break down.

This is where a Sobers, Kallis, Hammond, Simpson, Greig comes into play.

 

[Bolo.]

This is where a Sobers, Kallis, Hammond, Simpson, Greig comes into play.

Or a Miller

 

[kyear2]

Or a Miller

He averaged 36, and that too was soft.

 

[subshakerz]

Ignoring runouts and 5th bowlers, if these guys are striking at 60 against an ATG lineup, you need 50 overs a match on average per bowler to bowl a team out twice. Even Warne didn't bowl that much.

They will be striking at well under 60. These are going to be mostly low scoring games we have established and there is no let up on the bats, constant pressure

In the cases when you need 5th or 6th bowlers, then Chappell or Simpson are more than enough.

 

[subshakerz]

I've hardly ever witnessed a match when only 4 bowlers were used, genuinely can't recall. Need that cover, but doesn't have to be bowling more than hopefully 10 overs? Needed even. More if one of the guys are off, especially the spinner. Need that competent cover who wouldn't release pressure or get thrashed around the park.

And yes, the extra batting of a legit batsman is required.

Many ATG WI and Aus games had four bowlers only used.

You are making a better case for Miller than Kallis actually if you are suggesting 10 overs on average to be bowled by a 5th bowler. I don't see a 5th bowler in an ATG on average getting nearly as much, maybe a few overs at most and being absent in most games.

Either the 5th bowler if important as you stated, in which case Miller should be selected as Aus already have plenty of batting strength.

Or the 5th bowler is not that important, in which case it doesn't matter as much if it's Kallis or Chappell or Simpson frankly and you should just pick the best bats.

 

[kyear2]

Many ATG WI and Aus games had four bowlers only used.

You are making a better case for Miller than Kallis actually if you are suggesting 10 overs on average to be bowled by a 5th bowler. I don't see a 5th bowler in an ATG on average getting nearly as much, maybe a few overs at most and being absent in most games.

Either the 5th bowler if important as you stated, in which case Miller should be selected as Aus already have plenty of batting strength.

Or the 5th bowler is not that important, in which case it doesn't matter as much if it's Kallis or Chappell or Simpson frankly and you should just pick the best bats.

But the 5th bowler role is what Sobers and Kallis are there for, and was as good as it as anyone ever.

That's literally their role

 

[Bolo.]

They will be striking at well under 60. These are going to be mostly low scoring games we have established and there is no let up on the bats, constant pressure

In the cases when you need 5th or 6th bowlers, then Chappell or Simpson are more than enough.

They will be striking at well above their career SRs due to batting quality. 60ish seems a reasonable approximation. Whatever the exact number, there will be plenty of times when you really want 15 or 20 overs from them. Imagine what something like a WI middle order will do to part-timers in that many overs when the alternative is scoring off the front liners.

 

[subshakerz]

They will be striking at well above their career SRs due to batting quality. 60ish seems a reasonable approximation. Whatever the exact number, there will be plenty of times when you really want 15 or 20 overs from them. Imagine what something like a WI middle order will do to part-timers in that many overs when the alternative is scoring off the front liners.

That's where we fundamentally disagree. You think the bowlers suffer more due to batting quality whereas I think the batters suffer more due to bowling quality. And it is quite easy to see why. Imagine Viv seeing off Lillee and McGrath with difficulty only to face sustained pressure from Warne and Cummins. Nobody is going to last long on average whereas every bowler can rotate with others of the same quality.

Even ATG batting lineups are going to struggle to regularly score 250 against ATG quartets unless it's a flat pitch in which case it will likely be a draw anyways. Fifth bowlers aren't really in play much except for a 2-3 overs here or there except if the wicket is flat.

 

[subshakerz]

But the 5th bowler role is what Sobers and Kallis are there for, and was as good as it as anyone ever.

That's literally their role

You didn't address the point. How important is the 5th bowler role in an ATG scenario? Very important (Miller then) or not that important (Simpson then)?

 

[Bolo.]

That's where we fundamentally disagree. You think the bowlers suffer more due to batting quality whereas I think the batters suffer more due to bowling quality. And it is quite easy to see why. Imagine Viv seeing off Lillee and McGrath with difficulty only to face sustained pressure from Warne and Cummins. Nobody is going to last long on average whereas every bowler can rotate with others of the same quality.

Even ATG batting lineups are going to struggle to regularly score 250 against ATG quartets unless it's a flat pitch in which case it will likely be a draw anyways.

Everyone suffers against better quality. That's clear. I'm not debating if bowlers or bats get hit worse, but the numbers will be somewhere between them. ATG bats get out faster than they did in the real world. ATG bowlers strike slower.

 

[kyear2]

You didn't address the point. How important is the 5th bowler role in an ATG scenario? Very important (Miller then) or not that important (Simpson then)?

You do know there's an in-between. And Simpson was pretty handy.

 

[kyear2]

Everyone suffers against better quality. That's clear. I'm not debating if bowlers or bats get hit worse, but the numbers will be somewhere between them. ATG bats get out faster than they did in the real world. ATG bowlers strike slower.

I agree, none of them does quite as well as they normally would. Edge to bowlers definely in my mind, but they too are dealing with ATGs one after the next. Which is why Miller would be such a sore thumb in the lineup.

 

[subshakerz]

Everyone suffers against better quality. That's clear. I'm not debating if bowlers or bats get hit worse, but the numbers will be somewhere between them. ATG bats get out faster than they did in the real world. ATG bowlers strike slower.

That is a contradiction. Also, you are forgetting that none of the ATG bowlers had an entire bowling lineup of ATGs to back them up in their careers.

It is stacked much more in the bowlers favor in terms of the challenge to each side.

 

[Socerer 01]

They will be striking at well under 60. These are going to be mostly low scoring games we have established and there is no let up on the bats, constant pressure

In the cases when you need 5th or 6th bowlers, then Chappell or Simpson are more than enough.

unless i missed the biggest miracle on cricketweb where everyone agreed on the same thing, when did this happen

 

[capt_Luffy]

No. This is specific to ATG scenarios. Four ATG level bowlers removes the need for a good 5th bowling option.


Yes. In an ATG situation, you are dealing with 90 percent low scoring scenarios that removes the normal need for rest and rotation bowlers.


Sounds good on paper, but individually each batsman in a lineup will be facing a rotation of 4 ATGs. Imagine seeing off McGrath and Lillee only to be faced with Warne and Cummins. The odds of any bat performing to their normal standards is far lower, whereas any bowler can be immediately replaced by an ATG alternative if they have an off spell.

Not that simple. Having 3 proper pacers will eventually wear them down, and Miller was almost as good as Lindwall Or Davidson in short bursts.

 

[subshakerz]

You do know there's an in-between. And Simpson was pretty handy.

If Simpson was handy then why is selecting Kallis important?

You seem to be contradicting your own position earlier to dismiss Miller that a fifth bowler isn't really a big deal and Simpson, et al is more than sufficient.

Now suddenly you switch just to shoehorn Kallis?

 

[subshakerz]

Not that simple. Having 3 proper pacers will eventually wear them down, and Miller was almost as good as Lindwall Or Davidson in short bursts.

Sure thats fine. We are just disagreeing here about how important a fifth bowler would be.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Sure thats fine. We are just disagreeing here about how important a fifth bowler would be.

Had Sobers not existed, I personally would had taken Sanga and gone with a bowling lineup of Imran, Hadlee, Marshall, Warne and Murali/McGrath/Barnes

 

[subshakerz]

Had Sobers not existed, I personally would had taken Sanga and gone with a bowling lineup of Imran, Hadlee, Marshall, Warne and Murali/McGrath/Barnes

That's overkill.

 

[capt_Luffy]

That's overkill.

What I would really had preferred....