kyear2
International Coach
Seriously, what's with the reactions, lolShocking
-
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.
The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread
- Thread starter Red
- Start date
kyear2
International Coach
The ridiculous way that everyone tries to cite a singular example of lbw decisions to counter what was the absolute worst decade of home umpiring in modern cricket history is disingenuous.
kyear2
International Coach
How?
Australia was considerably more bowler friendly than Pakistan in that era, wasn't it?
capt_Luffy
International Coach
So it's disingenuous to say other countries also had shitty umpires??
kyear2
International Coach
Wow that's indepth, that's for that insight into your mind.
Care to reference which was wrong, because pretty sure all of what I said is objectively true.
capt_Luffy
International Coach
Like really how?? Playing at home is definitely an advantage over someone alien to the conditions. I really don't think I need to break it down to you.
capt_Luffy
International Coach
For starters, he wasn't the best batsman of the early 70s, let alone objectively.
That 300 was quite good, but that attack looks way better on paper that reality. It was pretty debut Lillee (averaged 36 that season), retired McKenzie and 41 year old Lock; and the square boundary was 40m long.
A batsman who never played in SC being termed as all conditional is certainly interesting..... Also don't think he ever proved himself in anything but the flattest Test pitches and Shield pitches in Australia. In England, a number of batsmen have similar records, some even scored faster and he was criticised for throwing his wicket as well.
Taking Richards over Hobbs is the farthest thing from objective really.
kyear2
International Coach
It's this Trump equivalency argument that's disingenuous.
It's the same with the ball tampering argument.
Pakistan's umpires were the absolute worst, NZ had a series that's comparable, but wasn't endemic and systematic like theirs. Australia had their issues, but it wasn't where there was a marked difference in performance between home and away for players.
Just take a look at Javed's home performances and how often he received LBWs against him
The first was in 1985, vs SL.
capt_Luffy
International Coach
Pakistan was the worst, don't get me wrong. But Australia, WI, NZ etc were hardly significantly better either. The home umpiring Era had some pretty bad things everywhere. It is disingenuous to hold only Pakistan accountable and not the other countries.
kyear2
International Coach
By all reports, articles, peer and pundit ratings and pretty unanimously Barry Richards was the best batsman in the world till 1976, and even then it wasn't clear cut, but Viv had the edge.
There were multiple other innings where he took prime Lillee, Procter, Thompson to task also had massive performances vs Snow. Lillee at that point was still at his very quickest.
The toughest conditions to bat in the 70's vs were in England and SA, and regardless of the conditions in Australia he was easily the leading run scorer. And if it were that easy to score a triple in a day, how others did it, especially vs that attack?
Yes the spinners in India were impressive, but also please tell me the ATG batsmen struggled agast them.
I have never said that I rate Barry over Hobbs, I also don't rate pre WWI players, this isn't new, and the same way I wouldn't place Barnes in a first team... The only reason I rate Hobbs is because of how much better he was than his peers and how exceptional overall. But he's the exception.
capt_Luffy
International Coach
In England. Graeme Pollock was better over that period.
kyear2
International Coach
Besides that one series and Fred overall, NZ wasn't that notorious. The WI had one bad match that's harped on, yes the Aus umps let Lillee do as he pleased but hey. India wasn't great either, but no where near as bad.
None of those guys had the gap in home and away performances that the Pakistani's had.
Yes they were significantly better. Look back at some of the quotes from the Indian players during that '82 tour.
My WI XI is very similar: Gayle out, Haynes in. Garner out, Roberts in [but there is no bad choice here].
kyear2
International Coach
So I've got questions on how I select my XI.
There are 7 players who were selected for both the Cricinfo and Wisden XI's that also mesh with the CW XI.
They start the list.
01. Hobbs
02.
03. Bradman
04. Richards
05. Tendulkar
06. Sobers
07.
08.
09. Marshall
10. Warne
11.
The philosophy isn't only based on numbers, but also who meshes as a team and would perform well and compliment each other. I also prefer players you played and competed vs modern competition and rules or whom I would have at least seen some evidence of their play. Grace for instance is a non starter, as is Barnes. Hobbs though is a challenge because of how great he was and for how long. His peak though when he was that attacking batsman, was obviously before the first war and yeah... I don't go back that far.
No, not everyone would agree but part of it is to see how they batted, their technique, quality of opposition etc.
In any event for me Adam Gilchrist has to be next on the sheet. Besides Sobers, and as far as all rounders go, he's as evenly balanced as it comes. He was excellent to Warne and the best no. 7 in cricket.
Glenn McGrath is for me the 2nd best bowler ever and has to be Marshall's opening partner. He was the key to one of the two greatest teams in history and his style also perfectly complements Marshall's.
Finally Len Hutton was the first great modern and travelling opener. He played in what was one of the 3 toughest batting eras, especially for opening batsmen. He faced the best of his era and travelled everywhere.
So that leaves us with
01. Hutton
02.
03. Bradman
04. Richards
05. Tendulkar
06. Sobers
07. Gilchrist
08.
09. Marshall
10. Warne
11. McGrath
That leaves the two disputed spots, and the explanations, (apologies) gets longer.
But in short I want an old ball reverse specialist and an opening batsman capable of accelerating the scoring as required. If either can bat a bit and replace Warne at 1st, it's a bonus.
The bowling spot is between Hadlee, Steyn, Imran and Wasim. If we're ranking them as bowlers, that it.
Hadlee was adept at bowling with the old ball, but as it's a team where I try to cover every base and gain every possible advantage, he is lacking the ability to reverse swing the older ball.
Steyn like Hadlee was better with the new ball, and though he was adept at reverse swing and bowling with the old ball, and could be looked at as possibly the 2nd best old ball bowler... He did have a tendency to be a little more expensive than the others in contention and when attacked often seemed to lack a plan B. Also, for an AT XI there should be more than one player from the SC, especially a bowler.
It then comes down between Wasim and Imran, and there a couple factors.
8 players made Wisden and Cricinfo's all time teams, Wasim was one of them. Even Martin Crowe who would have faced them both, included Wasim in his all time squad over Imran.
Wasim was capable of conventional and reverse swing in both directions, that lends flexibility to all possible conditions, and with a viable, well brilliant cordon, he would get better results here.
And as I said a few posts back, he was the greatest ever old ball bowler. Reverse swing or not, he was capable of movement and variety with the old ball. With Sobers, Warne and himself I want them to bowl during the dog overs, keeping the openers fresh, while keeping it tight, and for the latter two, being a consistent and considerable threat. I think Wasim Akram does that better than anyone else. He was also a better batsman than his average indicated and was part of a number of crucial partnerships for Pakistan.
For the opener spot opposite Hutton, similarly with Marshall and McGrath, I want two openers who compliments each other. Hutton to be the anchor, and someone who can do that, but also capable of destroying an opening pace attack in all conditions.
The candidates for the spot would be Richards and Gavaskar. Hobbs obviously is probably the 2nd greatest batsman ever, but discussed that already, and Greenidge and Smith could be contenders, but don't think either is quite good enough for this discussion.
I want an attacking batsman, someone that has demonstrated that that they can take apart an attack. We've never seen an opening bat that can take on a quality attack like him, period.
Following on, I want that person to be able to still score in quick and swinging conditions. Barry took on the best in England, South Africa and Australia and still got massive scores vs the very best. In bowling conditions in WSC, Barry along with Viv were the best batsmen on display. Barry was also at his best vs visiting test teams, averaging 70 in those contests, including prime Thompson. Thompson & Lillee rating him as the best opener they had seen.
His peer rating, during the 70's when they both played, Barry was the higher rated batsman, ranking as the best batsman in the world into the 2nd half of the decade, with a long list including Pollock, Procter, Bird etc who proclaim him as the best batsman they'd seen.
Interns of ability, Barry Richards post war comps are Tendulkar, Richards, Lara , Sobers and Smith. That was the level of batsman he was. In addition he was also a first rate slip who prioritized the importance of that facet of the game.
So that leaves me with a team of
All Time World XI
Sir Leonard Hutton
Barry Richards ^
Sir Donald Bradman ©
Sir I.V.A Richards ^
Sachin Tendulkar
Sir Garfield Sobers ^⁵
Adam Gilchrist (wk)
Wasim Akram ³
Malcolm Marshall ¹
Shane Warne ⁴
Glenn McGrath ²
In addition to having the best and greatest batsmen and bowlers of all time, it covers all the secondary facets. It has the best ever 5th bowler, a strong tail that bats till no. 10 and a brilliant cordon. It has bowlers and batsmen who mostly performed in any and all conditions and are match winners.
There are anchors and attackers, pace, swing, seam and reverse swing, wrist and finger spin, and they can test your will and technique, body and wicket.
There are 7 players who were selected for both the Cricinfo and Wisden XI's that also mesh with the CW XI.
They start the list.
01. Hobbs
02.
03. Bradman
04. Richards
05. Tendulkar
06. Sobers
07.
08.
09. Marshall
10. Warne
11.
The philosophy isn't only based on numbers, but also who meshes as a team and would perform well and compliment each other. I also prefer players you played and competed vs modern competition and rules or whom I would have at least seen some evidence of their play. Grace for instance is a non starter, as is Barnes. Hobbs though is a challenge because of how great he was and for how long. His peak though when he was that attacking batsman, was obviously before the first war and yeah... I don't go back that far.
No, not everyone would agree but part of it is to see how they batted, their technique, quality of opposition etc.
In any event for me Adam Gilchrist has to be next on the sheet. Besides Sobers, and as far as all rounders go, he's as evenly balanced as it comes. He was excellent to Warne and the best no. 7 in cricket.
Glenn McGrath is for me the 2nd best bowler ever and has to be Marshall's opening partner. He was the key to one of the two greatest teams in history and his style also perfectly complements Marshall's.
Finally Len Hutton was the first great modern and travelling opener. He played in what was one of the 3 toughest batting eras, especially for opening batsmen. He faced the best of his era and travelled everywhere.
So that leaves us with
01. Hutton
02.
03. Bradman
04. Richards
05. Tendulkar
06. Sobers
07. Gilchrist
08.
09. Marshall
10. Warne
11. McGrath
That leaves the two disputed spots, and the explanations, (apologies) gets longer.
But in short I want an old ball reverse specialist and an opening batsman capable of accelerating the scoring as required. If either can bat a bit and replace Warne at 1st, it's a bonus.
The bowling spot is between Hadlee, Steyn, Imran and Wasim. If we're ranking them as bowlers, that it.
Hadlee was adept at bowling with the old ball, but as it's a team where I try to cover every base and gain every possible advantage, he is lacking the ability to reverse swing the older ball.
Steyn like Hadlee was better with the new ball, and though he was adept at reverse swing and bowling with the old ball, and could be looked at as possibly the 2nd best old ball bowler... He did have a tendency to be a little more expensive than the others in contention and when attacked often seemed to lack a plan B. Also, for an AT XI there should be more than one player from the SC, especially a bowler.
It then comes down between Wasim and Imran, and there a couple factors.
8 players made Wisden and Cricinfo's all time teams, Wasim was one of them. Even Martin Crowe who would have faced them both, included Wasim in his all time squad over Imran.
Wasim was capable of conventional and reverse swing in both directions, that lends flexibility to all possible conditions, and with a viable, well brilliant cordon, he would get better results here.
And as I said a few posts back, he was the greatest ever old ball bowler. Reverse swing or not, he was capable of movement and variety with the old ball. With Sobers, Warne and himself I want them to bowl during the dog overs, keeping the openers fresh, while keeping it tight, and for the latter two, being a consistent and considerable threat. I think Wasim Akram does that better than anyone else. He was also a better batsman than his average indicated and was part of a number of crucial partnerships for Pakistan.
For the opener spot opposite Hutton, similarly with Marshall and McGrath, I want two openers who compliments each other. Hutton to be the anchor, and someone who can do that, but also capable of destroying an opening pace attack in all conditions.
The candidates for the spot would be Richards and Gavaskar. Hobbs obviously is probably the 2nd greatest batsman ever, but discussed that already, and Greenidge and Smith could be contenders, but don't think either is quite good enough for this discussion.
I want an attacking batsman, someone that has demonstrated that that they can take apart an attack. We've never seen an opening bat that can take on a quality attack like him, period.
Following on, I want that person to be able to still score in quick and swinging conditions. Barry took on the best in England, South Africa and Australia and still got massive scores vs the very best. In bowling conditions in WSC, Barry along with Viv were the best batsmen on display. Barry was also at his best vs visiting test teams, averaging 70 in those contests, including prime Thompson. Thompson & Lillee rating him as the best opener they had seen.
His peer rating, during the 70's when they both played, Barry was the higher rated batsman, ranking as the best batsman in the world into the 2nd half of the decade, with a long list including Pollock, Procter, Bird etc who proclaim him as the best batsman they'd seen.
Interns of ability, Barry Richards post war comps are Tendulkar, Richards, Lara , Sobers and Smith. That was the level of batsman he was. In addition he was also a first rate slip who prioritized the importance of that facet of the game.
So that leaves me with a team of
All Time World XI
Sir Leonard Hutton
Barry Richards ^
Sir Donald Bradman ©
Sir I.V.A Richards ^
Sachin Tendulkar
Sir Garfield Sobers ^⁵
Adam Gilchrist (wk)
Wasim Akram ³
Malcolm Marshall ¹
Shane Warne ⁴
Glenn McGrath ²
In addition to having the best and greatest batsmen and bowlers of all time, it covers all the secondary facets. It has the best ever 5th bowler, a strong tail that bats till no. 10 and a brilliant cordon. It has bowlers and batsmen who mostly performed in any and all conditions and are match winners.
There are anchors and attackers, pace, swing, seam and reverse swing, wrist and finger spin, and they can test your will and technique, body and wicket.
Any reason why Robert’s over garner and Haynes over Gayle. I choose Gayle because he can score quick runs at the start of the innings and can be a good part time spinner to join sobers as the team doesn’t have a specialist spinner.