The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[subshakerz]

Because Gilchrist handled Warne more than admirably for his entire career, it's literally how he built his legacy. If it were Murali or O'Reilly, Knott for sure.

@capt_Luffy @CricketFan90s does this seem like a genuine reason for you or just a face-saving one that he pulled from somewhere to preserve his side?

 

[trundler]

This is worse than the tennis discussion holy ****

 

[capt_Luffy]

@capt_Luffy @CricketFan90s does this seem like a genuine reason for you or just a face-saving one that he pulled from somewhere to preserve his side?

I already said would had taken Healy then. Gilchrist was good with Warne, Healy was spectacular and atleast a couple tiers above.

 

[subshakerz]

I already said would had taken Healy then. Gilchrist was good with Warne, Healy was spectacular and atleast a couple tiers above.

Yup. Healy and Knott are ATG as far as keeping skills are concerned, Gilly was great but not that level.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yup. Healy and Knott are ATG as far as keeping skills are concerned, Gilly was great but not that level.

In all honesty, for keeping skills only I would take Godfrey Evans or Bert Oldfield (the latter has an insanely good stumping record). If batting is into to be taken into account, I think these two are even better glovesmen.

 

[subshakerz]

In all honesty, for keeping skills only I would take Godfrey Evans or Bert Oldfield (the latter has an insanely good stumping record). If batting is into to be taken into account, I think these two are even better glovesmen.

Well I don't run on the logic of Kyear so I have no issue with picking Gilly. But it runs completely against what he has been arguing for us.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Well I don't run on the logic of Kyear so I have no issue with picking Gilly. But it runs completely against what he has been arguing for us.

Quite exactly. I would take Andy Flower over both Evans and Oldfield without much of a second thought, even probably Healy; but I am not the one asking for explanation on taking Imran over Steyn.

 

[Qlder]

Imran admitted to using a bottle cap once in a country game, and he gave that as an exceptional example of 'unfair' tampering of a ball. He never said he was doing that regularly in test matches, despite what some may think.

Have a read of a 10 year old CW Thread on Imran ball tampering

Did Imran Khan use to do intense ball tempering frequently?

is this true? i couldn't believe this at first. but his own admission that he had tampered with the condition of the ball during a county match with a bottle top once prompts me to believe so. “I have occasionally scratched the ball and lifted the seam. Only once did I use an object.Indeed, the...

www.cricketweb.net

 

[kyear2]

You are wrong.

Imran Khan is not "8th" best bowler.

He is more like 5th best bowler.

Literally just did a poll and he finished 8th. The 3rd straight poll where he finished 8th.

If we're talking just pacers, he's consistently ranked 6th since Steyn has retired.

I just posted results of 3 polls where he loses out to Ambrose and especially Steyn and none were remotely close.

It's not my opinion that's the outlier.

 

[kyear2]

I am just interested to hear @kyear2 reasoning to justify it, since:

- He claims specialist skills trump secondary ones. Well Knott is clear a better keeper than Gilly.

- He claims slip fielding is vitally important. Well, what about the keeper itself? That would be even more important. Gilly would occasionally drop the odd one, not so Knott.

- He claims that batting at no.8 isn't going to save your team if your regular bats fail. Well, this is literally one batting position from Gilly, so why are Gilly's runs so important then?

I answered this already, and the premise is disingenuous but in a good mood from F1 quali, so why not.

Gilchrist kept to Warne, and McGrath mind you, his entire career and built his legacy on that. He was excellent to Warne, the bowler who he will be keeping to in this scenario. What is the justification of not selecting him.

As I said earlier, if it's O'Reilly or Murali, and I've said this multiple times, it's Knott.

Finally, the wicketkeeper position for the past 50 years plus has been an all rounder position. My argument to @capt_Luffy was that his scaling of 70 / 30 in favor of the batting is way off and and should be 60 / 40 in favor of the keepers imho.

And yes slip fielding is important and I've built a brilliant cordon without sacrificing the batting. Hammond would make it perfect, but like for the lower order batting situation, the drop off isn't worth it.

 

[kyear2]

As has been commented on, he didn't really know how to bowl reverse. And even assuming he learned, he may not be that good at it. See McGrath- as good a bowler as Hadlee, who knew how to bowl reverse, but was tiers below the best at it.

Height of release point, pace, natural length, and how you generate swing (such as flicking the wrist). All this stuff makes a difference, and I wouldn't assume Hadlee would have been that good at bowling it.

All fair points, my only counter would be that Hadlee swung it conventionally more than McGrath ever did, hence, well who knows.

One of these questions to which there is no answer.

 

[kyear2]

Let’s say it’s a long tour so we have an 18 man squad. I’m gonna go with:

Hutton
Hobbs
Bradman
Tendulkar
V.Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist
Wasim
Warne
Marshall
McGrath

Gavaskar
Lara
Kallis
Knott
Murali
Hadlee
Ambrose

Really close to mine.

Sir John Hobbs
Barry Richards^
Sir Donald Bradman *
Sir I.V.A. Richards^
Sachin Tendulkar
Sir Garfield Sobers^ (5)
Adam Gilchrist +
Malcolm Marshall (1)
Shane Warne (2)
Dale Steyn (3)
Glenn McGrath (2)

Sir Leonard Hutton
Sir Richard Hadlee
Brian Lara
Muttiah Muralitharan

Imran Khan
Jacques Kallis
Allan Knott

18 man squad, Hammond the unlucky one to miss out. The extra bowling over Lara may have been useful, but

 

[kyear2]

What? You think Knott couldn't handle Warne better than Gilly? Don't buy this logic at all.

Where did you read that? Wtf

Grasping now.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I answered this already, and the premise is disingenuous but in a good mood from F1 quali, so why not.

Gilchrist kept to Warne, and McGrath mind you, his entire career and built his legacy on that. He was excellent to Warne, the bowler who he will be keeping to in this scenario. What is the justification of not selecting him.

As I said earlier, if it's O'Reilly or Murali, and I've said this multiple times, it's Knott.

Finally, the wicketkeeper position for the past 50 years plus has been an all rounder position. My argument to @capt_Luffy was that his scaling of 70 / 30 in favor of the batting is way off and and should be 60 / 40 in favor of the keepers imho.

And yes slip fielding is important and I've built a brilliant cordon without sacrificing the batting. Hammond would make it perfect, but like for the lower order batting situation, the drop off isn't worth it.

Gilchrist built his legacy on his attacking batting down the order, not being an outstanding keep. He was very good, far from outstanding. Healy was preferred by Warne over him for very valid reasons and so was even Darren Berry. If taking specialist is the criteria, doesn't makes much sense to take him really.

Gilchrist wasn't exceptional with Warne. That's a bad argument. If he could keep to Warne, then can to Murali and O'Reilly and without a shadow of doubt from me Knott would keep Warne better than him.

And the no. 8 batsmen, your teams 4th bowler, knowing to hold a bat has been a thing for the last 100, if not 150 years of Test cricket.

 

[capt_Luffy]

All fair points, my only counter would be that Hadlee swung it conventionally more than McGrath ever did, hence, well who knows.

One of these questions to which there is no answer.

And should not be around really. We shouldn't rate players on assumptions of them mastering new skills.

 

[kyear2]

Then take Ian Healy. Warne had a much better partnership with him and he never had much praise for Gilchrist. Instead he said he would had preferred Darren Berry to play for Australia.
Also, it wasn't. It only becamea a true allrounder position once Gilchrist stepped in. Before that it was the best keeper plays for years. And on that logic, I don't think any team exists who wouldn't like thier No 8 to be an allrounder.

You guys are hilarious.

Ames was among the first chosen with batting in mind, but guess he was after Gilly. Engineer was also a quality bat.

We just had this conversation re keepers. My only disagreement with you was that the weighting should be different, but it is most definitely an all rounder position.

And I also said no way in hell am I taking Flower over someone like Knott. Also further added that's why guys like Gilly and Sobers are as highly rated because it requires zero to minimal sacrifices to slot them in. He was a cheat code for Australia while brilliantly handling Warne.

 

[kyear2]

This doesn't change the fact that for ARs you have consistently emphasized specialists skills as essential and with no compromise for the sake of secondary skills.

When it comes to his specialisation, arguably no keeper is better than Knott, plus he is a capable bat.

After all that claptrap about slip fielding being essential for ATG sides, when it comes to the keeper itself you are going to punt it for their batting skills. Doesn't make any sense.

You are full of **** at this point. You take every single discussion we have here and twist it to suit your singular agenda.

I have a brilliant keeper and a brilliant cordon. Show me where in Gilly's prime where he struggled with Warne, or Lee or McGrath for that matter.

The wicketkeeper skill is by it's nature and has been for decades, an all rounder position, I've never questioned that. Where I draw the line is where the keeping isn't up to standard, Flower isn't an option, neither would Dhoni be for me, I don't even use deVilliers for SA, preferring Cameron.

Also, if someone decided that they wanted to use Knott, no issues. Same way Imran, no issues, it's not my preference but he isn't at the level of say Miller for me, that's not justifiable imo.

All I said is show me how Imran was better than Steyn and it's degenerated into this Cluster****. Gilchrist is all but a unanimous choice for everyone, doesn't in the least impact how I feel about my slip fielding or how I would select my bowlers. Stop conflating unrelated issues.

 

[kyear2]

@capt_Luffy @CricketFan90s does this seem like a genuine reason for you or just a face-saving one that he pulled from somewhere to preserve his side?

Been saying that for years, you're just trolling now.

 

[kyear2]

Gilchrist built his legacy on his attacking batting down the order, not being an outstanding keep. He was very good, far from outstanding. Healy was preferred by Warne over him for very valid reasons and so was even Darren Berry. If taking specialist is the criteria, doesn't makes much sense to take him really.

Gilchrist wasn't exceptional with Warne. That's a bad argument. If he could keep to Warne, then can to Murali and O'Reilly and without a shadow of doubt from me Knott would keep Warne better than him.

And the no. 8 batsmen, your teams 4th bowler, knowing to hold a bat has been a thing for the last 100, if not 150 years of Test cricket.

Yes, yes they should, never disagreed with that, and I have that covered with Marshall and Warne. That's 8 and 9, and both have records of saving or winning matches for their team with the bat, and for the best two teams in history at that. Sounds quite good enough to me.

I don't need the best ever batsman that kept wicket, that's Flower or deVilliers. I don't need the absolute best slip fielders, that's Hammond and Simpson (though both are close), and don't need the absolute best lower order batsmen who bowl (Imran and Pollock, though, and I can't stress this enough, Imran is in the ****ing squad while the others referenced aren't). Balance, and despite what you think, consistency.

Guys like Sobers and Hadlee thread the needle of being good enough to brilliant at the secondary while being ATG top tier in the primary. Gilchrist hits that 50 / 50 split in literally an all-rounder spot, and that's why it's not even a question or a debate for a position that hasn't been selected purely on keeping skills in decades.

But keep up the bad faith arguments, again this started out as me simply saying show me where Imran was better than Steyn and a better bowling for for the team.

Red just posted a while 18 man squad and didn't have Imran in it, but you will focus on me, lol. . He's not the no discussion lock that some on the forum believe him to be.

 

[Red]

Kyear is perfectly fine picking Gilchrist as keeper over Knott or whoever while also maintaining slip fielding is important because Gilchrist was a perfectly fine keeper.

Keeping to Warne and MacGill is a more difficult keeping job than anyone’s had since OReilly and Grimmett were going.