• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Would you play Keith Miller in your Australia ATG XI?

S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Patience and Accuracy+Gut said:
That’s not the only thing tho. You have McGrath, and 2 of Lindwall, Davo or Lillee to bowl fast. They are definitely close enough to West Indies quicks and then you have spinner who is just in different level. Australia has a clear enough edge in bowling. Batting too is slightly stronger with Bradman and Gilchrist.

The biggest lagging point for Australia is probably openers and West Indies can’t take any advantage of that too.
Click to expand...
Marshall, Ambrose and Holding on pace friendly wickets are just slightly more deadly than Lillee, McGrath and Cummins/Lindwall/Davo.

Gilchrist is outmatched by Walcott as keeperbat.

So you have Bradman advantage vs relative strength of all the rest of the WI bats.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
Marshall, Ambrose and Holding on pace friendly wickets are just slightly more deadly than Lillee, McGrath and Cummins/Lindwall/Davo.

Gilchrist is outmatched by Walcott as keeperbat.

So you have Bradman advantage vs relative strength of all the rest of the WI bats.
Click to expand...
And the Australian spinners who are class apart.....
 
the big bambino

the big bambino

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
Marshall, Ambrose and Holding on pace friendly wickets are just slightly more deadly than Lillee, McGrath and Cummins/Lindwall/Davo.

Gilchrist is outmatched by Walcott as keeperbat.

So you have Bradman advantage vs relative strength of all the rest of the WI bats.
Click to expand...
This is ridiculous. The so called difference is probably imaginary and unlike the advantage Bradman brings a team.
 
mr_mister

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
subshakerz said:
I think he was more exceptional than his contemporaries at cashing in on the medium attacks and stretching his innings. Don't know how much it translates against a WI top tier attack.
Click to expand...
His rate of 100s proves it was more than just cashing in and stretching innings against mid attacks. He barely went more than a few games without a ton his whole career(including FC) Even in body line he still snagged a ton
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
mr_mister said:
His rate of 100s proves it was more than just cashing in and stretching innings against mid attacks. He barely went more than a few games without a ton his whole career(including FC) Even in body line he still snagged a ton
Click to expand...
I'm not saying he isnt going to end up scoring well beyond the worldclass mean. But I don't think it will be to the degree he did it in his career in a more modern setup.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
sayon basak said:
Warne and O'Reilly were two very different kinds of Bowlers. Excluding one of them because they both were spinners and overlooking the variation it adds to the attack is a no for me.
Click to expand...
Well I am assuming it's your average Aussie captain and I doubt he will opt for no third seamer. Unless Miller is a fifth bowler which again I doubt an Aussie captain would go for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top