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

[kyear2]

Again, I am just simplying asking you the slip cordon they will get instead. Answer that first and then I will decide.

But don't you think that even asking the question, shows how much you guys have been underrating the impact and importance of a slip cordon?

With that top order and Gilchrist, it just wouldn't have been needed. Warne level was more than good enough.

 

[capt_Luffy]

But don't you think that even asking the question, shows how much you guys have been underrating the impact and importance of a slip cordon?

With that top order and Gilchrist, it just wouldn't have been needed. Warne level was more than good enough.

No, I don't think so. If the slip cordon replacing them is competent, I don't think a Jadeja like batsman in the lower order will be an issue they will shred tears on.

 

[subshakerz]

But don't you think that even asking the question, shows how much you guys have been underrating the impact and importance of a slip cordon?

With that top order and Gilchrist, it just wouldn't have been needed. Warne level was more than good enough.

All of us recognize that having a good slip cordon is important.

What we don't buy is that ELITE slip fielding is a secondary skill.

It is tertiary.

 

[kyear2]

Un no. They are so beyond other teams that they don't need extra lower order batting. They could also have a crap slip cordon and still win easily.

But who cares? This is entirely your own scenario that nobody is interested in arguing except you


No. Depends entirely on the strength of the bowling they are facing.


Again, depending on who they face. If it's a crap team, they have full license to spill every second catch and the bowling team still wins. You don't seem to accept this for lower order batting.

Not remotely the case. But believe what you will.

And that's your concession.

If one is critically important and one not even remotely so, it's not even a discussion. This one veet much is.

And we can keep going. Is SA giving up Steyn for Imran if it means giving up Kallis's and Smith' s catching. The catching was way more important to their success.

And to take it to your extreme, in an ATG scenario, which would a SA ATG team give up if they had to chose. Pollock's lower order batting or the catching of Kallis and Smith. In a heart beat it would be Pollock's batting.

The funny and crazy thing is, and I noted this in the tour thread when India was playing England. Sunny was saying that how great it was to have two young batsmen who were also great catchers in the slips, and he went through the names. And noted how crucial and underrated a skill it was and how it had hurt the team is the past.

But somehow it's the most crazy concept to accept here.

 

[subshakerz]

Let us clarify @kyear2 and his shtick.

He has an irrational irritation for Imran and can't stand his name in an ATG XI.

He argued that including him is weakening the bowling.

Given that most don't find that argument compelling, he tried a different track, which is to discredit all lower order batting altogether to make Imran the bat less attractive.

He does this by hyping up slip catching as a secondary skill more worthy than lower order runs, in fact even coming up with obscure equations of slip catches for runs, and suggests that a lower order bat in a great team has no role in success, whereas without elite slip catchers they don't deserve to be called a great team.

It's all desperate tactics.

 

[kyear2]

No, I don't think so. If the slip cordon replacing them is competent, I don't think a Jadeja like batsman in the lower order will be an issue they will shred tears on.

That's not remotely the question and you know it.

I don't even know what question you're answering, and don't know how Jadeja even came into the conversation.

The question and promise is simple.

Your premise is that lower order batting is crucial and important, and catching is leagues behind in value.

Would Australia, with the team as constituted, have taken on an Imran, Jadeja, Pollock level lower order performer if it meant they would lose the quality of slip cordon that they had.

Since you've asked, let's say Pakistan's cordon from the 90's. Do you think a plurality of Australian's on the forum, for that team, would take that trade. Give up Waugh, Ponting, Taylor, Hayden, which ever names you prefer, for batting depth.

 

[kyear2]

All of us recognize that having a good slip cordon is important.

What we don't buy is that ELITE slip fielding is a secondary skill.

It is tertiary.

So it's simple then, they would easily take the lower order batting since it was more important.
This isn't hard.

 

[capt_Luffy]

That's not remotely the question and you know it.

I don't even know what question you're answering, and don't know how Jadeja even came into the conversation.

The question and promise is simple.

Your premise is that lower order batting is crucial and important, and catching is leagues behind in value.

Would Australia, with the team as constituted, have taken on an Imran, Jadeja, Pollock level lower order performer if it meant they would lose the quality of slip cordon that they had.

Since you've asked, let's say Pakistan's cordon from the 90's. Do you think a plurality of Australian's on the forum, for that team, would take that trade. Give up Waugh, Ponting, Taylor, Hayden, which ever names you prefer, for batting depth.

As you are giving Australia literally one of the worst slip cordons of all time; I will say had their last 4 batsmen were all Chandrashekhar level batsmen, they would take Imran's lower order batting over the cordon.

 

[subshakerz]

Your premise is that lower order batting is crucial and important, and catching is leagues behind in value.

Strawman.

Would Australia, with the team as constituted, have taken on an Imran, Jadeja, Pollock level lower order performer if it meant they would lose the quality of slip cordon that they had.

False dilemma.

Since you've asked, let's say Pakistan's cordon from the 90's. Do you think a plurality of Australian's on the forum, for that team, would take that trade. Give up Waugh, Ponting, Taylor, Hayden, which ever names you prefer, for batting depth.

Red herring.

 

[subshakerz]

As you are giving Australia literally one of the worst slip cordons of all time; I will say had their last 4 batsmen were all Chandrashekhar level batsmen, they would take Imran's lower order batting over the cordon.

Yeah but what if their entire slip cordon had their thumbs chopped off. Would you take that over Imran's runs?

 

[kyear2]

Let us clarify @kyear2 and his shtick.

He has an irrational irritation for Imran and can't stand his name in an ATG XI.

He argued that including him is weakening the bowling.

Given that most don't find that argument compelling, he tried a different track, which is to discredit all lower order batting altogether to make Imran the bat less attractive.

He does this by hyping up slip catching as a secondary skill more worthy than lower order runs, in fact even coming up with obscure equations of slip catches for runs, and suggests that a lower order bat in a great team has no role in success, whereas without elite slip catchers they don't deserve to be called a great team.

It's all desperate tactics.

I see you're back to the royal we.

And dude, despite what has been a tightly competitive category, your worst post yet.

The excise for not responding to my "thesis" is because it too long.

Then you couldn't respond to a very simple and more importantly short question, so you try to shift the argument to say that it's a red herring.

Your issue is that you can never even admit that someone has a better point so you move the goal posts and make accusations.

Now we're back to I hate Imran. I'm also not trying to discredit lower order batting, I'm saying it not as important to me as it is for you. And that could be a good faith argument even here on the forum, but you consistently try to poison the well by making it personal.

Re people not finding the argument compelling, that wasn't my goal, and btw the last poll we did, only 35% of those polled included Imran in what would be the best attack. And as Coronis recently corrected you, Imran doesn't easily make most members ATG teams and it's generally a split for the 3rd spot between him, Steyn and Hadlee.

The last sentence is bordering on incoherent. I asked a simple question which you couldn't answer. Period.
I didn't say a lower order bat has no role in success, I've said historically speaking, it not a role that has moved the needle, and it hasn't. I also didn't say that a team can't be great without a great cordon, I said none of the great ones lacked them. And that clearly they were critical to their success.

Everything that I said was try and that entire last sentence was at best disingenuous.

You've lost the argument and throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks.

I'm also not saying that slip fielding is way more important than lower order batting, but it's at the very least in equal footing and depending on the team in question, it can be more impactful. That's not make belief, again, look at the two best teams ever, and even the referenced SA that was also arguably a top 5 team ever. Of you're relying heavily on your lower order you have bigger issues and not that strong a team (we can argue that fact too if you like).

This has nothing to do with Imran and started over an argument about Keith Miller. But the problem is, as I've repeatedly said, you argue based purely on personalities (exact reason for you Kallis, Steyn, Lara and Ambrose campaigns), and as a result you can't possibly concede that slip fielding is important or can even be seen as secondary.

I've conceded arguments to you before, you find it incapable to do the same.

 

[kyear2]

As you are giving Australia literally one of the worst slip cordons of all time; I will say had their last 4 batsmen were all Chandrashekhar level batsmen, they would take Imran's lower order batting over the cordon.

So what you're saying is that it was good enough as is?

All that I'm saying as well, there's and the WI own. It wasn't crucial.

And no, not in my opinion, you're trying to take wickets and win matches.

 

[subshakerz]

Now we're back to I hate Imran. I'm also not trying to discredit lower order batting, I'm saying it not as important to me as it is for you. And that could be a good faith argument even here on the forum, but you consistently try to poison the well by making it personal.

Dude, we have all been following your trajectory in your arguments and your views on Imran have been notorious for years. No need to play dumb. It's all transparent.

You could have easily have just compared slip catching directly to runs of all kinds. Instead you made it about lower order runs specifically, a comparison nobody asked for or felt necessary, essentially to make it a reason to knock down bowling ARs, particularly Imran.

Re people not finding the argument compelling, that wasn't my goal, and btw the last poll we did, only 35% of those polled included Imran in what would be the best attack. And as Coronis recently corrected you, Imran doesn't easily make most members ATG teams and it's generally a split for the 3rd spot between him, Steyn and Hadlee.

Disingenuous. Generally, even if they prefer Steyn or others over Imran, there isn't this suggestion that Imran there is seriously weakening the attack. That is your input.

I'm also not saying that slip fielding is way more important than lower order batting, but it's at the very least in equal footing and depending on the team in question, it can be more impactful.

This isn't your actual argument. Your actual argument (which you are trying to hide or slip in surreptitiously) is elite fielding is a secondary discipline for players on par with runs from bowling ARs. At least be honest about what you intend. It's not the same as comparing an entire slip cordon to one players' input.

 

[kyear2]

Strawman.


False dilemma.


Red herring.

Yeah, point proven.

I've repeated what you've said in every post and it's strawman.

Literally posed a question based on your premise and it's a false dilemma

And posed a question to Australian's with regards to which would they take, great no. 8 batting average or an elite slip cordon to take the chances McWarne presented and you call it a red herring.

 

[capt_Luffy]

So what you're saying is that it was good enough as is?

All that I'm saying as well, there's and the WI own. It wasn't crucial.

And no, not in my opinion, you're trying to take wickets and win matches.

Dude, you're creating what if scenarios and on giving an answer responding it was good as it was?? To answer your question, if McGrath batted like Imran and Ponting and Waugh turned into MoYo; Australia would simply use Hayden and Warne at slips and would gain sufficiently overall.

It is crucial for the current India team; not as good as the Australian and WI ones, but still pretty good. It was also crucial for the Invincible Australian team.

If you're just trying to take wickets then why are you losing **** for Miller over Border in Australia ATG XI?? If you think you can win without scoring runs, that's surely a strange school of thought.....

 

[kyear2]

Dude, we have all been following your trajectory in your arguments and your views on Imran have been notorious for years. No need to play dumb. It's all transparent.

You could have easily have just compared slip catching directly to runs of all kinds. Instead you made it about lower order runs specifically, a comparison nobody asked for or felt necessary, essentially to make it a reason to knock down bowling ARs, particularly Imran.


Disingenuous. Generally, even if they prefer Steyn or others over Imran, there isn't this suggestion that Imran there is seriously weakening the attack. That is your input.


This isn't your actual argument. Your actual argument (which you are trying to hide or slip in surreptitiously) is elite fielding is a secondary discipline for players on par with runs from bowling ARs. At least be honest about what you intend. It's not the same as comparing an entire slip cordon to one players' input.

There's one cricketer I dislike for personal reasons based on behaviour, it's not Imran. There's many I disliked for how they performed against us, Ponting leading the bunch, but that was also respect, well except for Nel, I thought he was a dick.

I don't follow, nor literally know anything about Pakistani politics. It your tortured me I couldn't tell you the name of his or any party.

That's literally what we were discussing, are u serious. I'll remind you, @capt_Luffy said that Miller was the better option at 6 at then he would buff the lower order batting. Which I must say again, to me is lunacy. Then pfk chimed in, and you were there all along. The reason I used Imran in the last scenario was because he was the best lower order batsman ever, hence why I compared him to the one of the best cordons ever. It was best vs best.
Yes Imran's batting average is soft, but if I saw his numbers the way you did, he's an automatic for the first team. I don't hate him, I genuinely don't think you chose your bowling attack based on batting, your no 6 based primarily on bowling, your wicket keeper 70% based on batting. This isn't about you. Forgot if I, if you followed your own ideology there's no justification to include Sachin over Hammond in an AT XI.

And yes, slip catching is on par with lower order batting and 5th bowlers as secondary skills, all contribute to the team being well rounded.

If you would just take a step back, you would see this isn't against one person, he's the poster boy, because he was the best batsman of the group, literally ever. If he was the bowler Hadlee was, this wouldn't be an argument.

This isn't personal, I promise you.

 

[subshakerz]

Forgot if I, if you followed your own ideology there's no justification to include Sachin over Hammond in an AT XI.

You do realize YOU were the one to convince me that in an ATG scenario, a fifth bowling option is not that necessary, hence go with the best bats?

 

[kyear2]

Dude, you're creating what if scenarios and on giving an answer responding it was good as it was?? To answer your question, if McGrath batted like Imran and Ponting and Waugh turned into MoYo; Australia would simply use Hayden and Warne at slips and would gain sufficiently overall.

It is crucial for the current India team; not as good as the Australian and WI ones, but still pretty good. It was also crucial for the Invincible Australian team.

If you're just trying to take wickets then why are you losing **** for Miller over Border in Australia ATG XI?? If you think you can win without scoring runs, that's surely a strange school of thought.....

You've deliberately missed the point and not answered the question, which is fine. Hayden was brilliant, Warne just serviceable when he moved to first, would have been abysmal at 2nd.

That aside, I'm not talking about moving other great players into the scenario and you're smart enough to know this.

It was simple enough, forget the names, would Australia have given up a superb cordon to add further batting depth at the no. 8 position .

I don't think they would have, you don't either judging my the mental gymnastics going around.

Yes, it is crucial for the current Indian team because the middle order is, let's be nice and say inconsistent. That's not the hall mark of a great team, certainly not an ATG one.

That invincibles team had a long ass tail, and Lindwall, the best of the lot, who still batted below Tallon, was very much in the Marshall category of batsmen. Definitely, according to what has been said here before, not an all rounder or anywhere close, I believe was the quote.

I never said you can win without scoring runs, it's about quality, not quantity.

Miller wasn't a great test batsman, he was barely a good one. A no. 5 test batman averaging in the high 30's is technically a failure. You can't make up that quality by stuffing the tail, which then prohibits you from chosing your best attack. And this for a bowler who will hardly get the ball, and definitely not the new ball which is where he did his best work.

Let your batsmen bat and bowlers bowl. He's not Border and he's not Imran, you get the worse of both worlds.

But good luck getting him to bowl 5 overs with the old ball before the front end guys takes the new one.

Botham plays for England because of the lack of options, Australia literally has more than any other team. He weakens the team, like by a lot.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

You've deliberately missed the point and not answered the question, which is fine. Hayden was brilliant, Warne just serviceable when he moved to first, would have been abysmal at 2nd.

That aside, I'm not talking about moving other great players into the scenario and you're smart enough to know this.

It was simple enough, forget the names, would Australia have given up a superb cordon to add further batting depth at the no. 8 position .

I don't think they would have, you don't either judging my the mental gymnastics going around.

Yes, it is crucial for the current Indian team because the middle order is, let's be nice and say inconsistent. That's not the hall mark of a great team, certainly not an ATG one.

That invincibles team had a long ass tail, and Lindwall, the best of the lot, who still batted below Tallon, was very much in the Marshall category of batsmen. Definitely, according to what has been said here before, not an all rounder or anywhere close, I believe was the quote.

I never said you can win without scoring runs, it's about quality, not quantity.

Miller wasn't a great test batsman, he was barely a good one. A no. 5 test batman averaging in the high 30's is technically a failure. You can't make up that quality by stuffing the tail, which then prohibits you from chosing your best attack. And this for a bowler who will hardly get the ball, and definitely not the new ball which is where he did his best work.

Let your batsmen bat and bowlers bowl. He's not Border and he's not Imran, you get the worse of both worlds.

But good luck getting him to bowl 5 overs with the old ball before the front end guys takes the new one.

Botham plays for England because of the lack of options, Australia literally has more than any other team. He weakens the team, like by a lot.

Name a better 5th bowler

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Sorry, typo in the initial response.

Pakistan's from the 90's.

Really doesn't matter though, I'm not giving up Waugh and Ponting for lower order batting, not worth it.

We're talking about two of the very best ever who took multiple half chances to win Australia matches.

Wonder what would have been Warne's Avg without them.. Its already above 25.