Curtly Ambrose vs Wasim Akram

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

@Johan aren't you a Barnes' lover yourself? You place him in top 4/5 iirc.

Yes but He has well and truly a good argument to be The Goat. Won’t say placing him a top 5/6 is really doing anything outside of the box thing tbh.

For @Johan, SJS posts may convince you. He was Before my time here but he has some quality posts on Barnes.

 

[sayon basak]

If a team has only one spinner, Barnes could easily be a replacement imo. Could Spin and Swing it both ways, could be fast Medium too, leaves room for other slots that the team might lag.

 

[DrWolverine]

1. Sir Jack Hobbs
2. Sir Len Hutton
3. Sir Donald Bradman
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. Sir Viv Richards
6. Sir Garfield Sobers
7. Adam Gilchrist
8. Sir Richard Hadlee
9. Malcolm Marshall
10. Shane Warne
11. Glenn McGrath

can be convinced to replace Warne with Barnes

Great team. My team is almost similar.


Richards was at his best at number 3.
At 3 : 59 inn. 3508 runs @ 61 with 12 centuries. 2 ducks
At 5 : 61 inn. 2720 runs @ 47 with 6 centuries. 6 ducks

 

[sayon basak]

Great team. My team is almost similar.


Richards was at his best at number 3.
At 3 : 59 inn. 3508 runs @ 61 with 12 centuries. 2 ducks
At 5 : 61 inn. 2720 runs @ 47 with 6 centuries. 6 ducks

This is actually the reason why I am thinking about a new no. 5 for my team

Help me figure out who the No. 5 in my AT XI should be (Richards vs Others)

My AT XI:- Jack Hobbs WG Grace Don Bradman Sachin Tendulkar Viv Richards Garfield Sobers Adam Gilchrist Imran Khan Malcolm Marshall Glenn McGrath Muttiah Muralitharan The position I'm doubtful about id number 5. Should Viv play at number 5? He averaged 60+ at number 3, but that position is...

www.cricketweb.net

 

[Johan]

Viv would work at 5 as long as he is motivated

 

[DrWolverine]

Batsmen who scored 3000 runs and average 50+ :
ABD
Clarke
Thorpe
Chanderpaul
Waugh
Flower
Yusuf
Border
Misbah

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

It's still over 4, unlike Wasim.

Akram was averaging 4.5 wickets per test in the same period.

Akram played 17 years, Ambrose only 12.. still Akram WPI is better than Ambrose's.

Ambrose numbers are very low for an ATG

 

[sayon basak]

Akram was averaging 4.5 wickets per test in the same period.

Akram played 17 years, Ambrose only 12.. still Akram WPI is better than Ambrose's.

Ambrose numbers are very low for an ATG

Pre injury Ambrose had a WPM of 4.54.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Pre injury Ambrose had a WPM of 4.54.

Yes,
During that period Akram was averaging 5.1 wickets per match though.

 

[Coronis]

This is actually the reason why I am thinking about a new no. 5 for my team

Help me figure out who the No. 5 in my AT XI should be (Richards vs Others)

My AT XI:- Jack Hobbs WG Grace Don Bradman Sachin Tendulkar Viv Richards Garfield Sobers Adam Gilchrist Imran Khan Malcolm Marshall Glenn McGrath Muttiah Muralitharan The position I'm doubtful about id number 5. Should Viv play at number 5? He averaged 60+ at number 3, but that position is...

www.cricketweb.net

Put Bradman there, he averages 142

But general wisdom here at least is that 3-5 at least (sometimes 6) are interchangeable. You usually start by putting your best batsmen at their preferred positions and working from there.

If I was picking players specifically on actual batting position.. (ie 3 has to be the best 3 and so on - purely on averages - they also need to be decently high up on the most runs in that position)

1. Jack Hobbs (58.14)
2. Herbert Sutcliffe (63.26)
3. Don Bradman (103.63)
4. Jaques Kallis (61.86)
5. AB de Villiers (62.11)
6. Chanderpaul (64.82)
7. Gilchrist+ (46.44)

Without going blindy on averages I’d be picking

Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Bradman
Tendulkar
Border/Waugh
Sobers
Gilchrist

 

[kyear2]

Bradman, Sobers are pretty much locked, along with Gilchrist.

As you'd have to go for two openers, Hobbs is locked for that too imo. Not sure if Sachin and Imran is locked (would like to think so, but they are not ig, Specially Imran). You must pick one of Marshall/McGrath/Hadlee, but guess that doesn't qualify as to be locked. One of Muralitharan and Warne should be picked, but they aren't auto choice either.

So I think Don, Sobers and Gilchrist probably?

Bradman, Sobers and Marshall are locks imo. Gilchrist is close, but an argument can be made for the better keeper in Knott as Wisden actually did.

Bradman and Sobers are in leagues of their own and with 3 pacers being picked, are there 3 who gets in over Marshall? He's at absolute worst a top 3 bowler and a good enough bat not to be a liability and brings a skill set that no one else does.

My first three names on the team sheet and not exactly in that order.

 

[kyear2]

1. Sir Jack Hobbs
2. Sir Len Hutton
3. Sir Donald Bradman
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. Sir Viv Richards
6. Sir Garfield Sobers
7. Adam Gilchrist
8. Sir Richard Hadlee
9. Malcolm Marshall
10. Shane Warne
11. Glenn McGrath

can be convinced to replace Warne with Barnes

My exact point with Barnes, don't even know if he was pace or spin.

 

[kyear2]

The only places I'd change are Hadlee with Imran and Warne with Muralitharan (and Hutton with Grace, tho I'd probably go with Hutton if I had to exclude Grace)
I'm ok with Warne (and more than ok with Barnes and really hope you go with Barnes).
But Hadlee and McGrath are similar kind of Bowlers, Really think you'd need some reverse swing from Imran, plus his batting was significantly better.

Just to play devil's advocate. Hadlee was also clearly the better bowler, especially away from home. And he managed to do this without reverse.

Don't think at this level there's a big difference between the batting either. High 20's vs high teens?

 

[The_CricketUmpire]

Akram was averaging 4.5 wickets per test in the same period.

Akram played 17 years, Ambrose only 12.. still Akram WPI is better than Ambrose's.

Ambrose numbers are very low for an ATG

Well let's be honest with ourselves....all of us....both Akram and Ambrose are All Time Great bowlers.

 

[sayon basak]

Well let's be honest with ourselves....all of us....both Akram and Ambrose are All Time Great bowlers.

I mean, nobody is arguing against that.