South Africa ATG - Open Voting

[harsh.ag]

I have just one gripe with my selection. Barry Richards will not like the batting style of Graeme Smith in the least May even say a word or two (although that seems unreasonable). Barnes.... One of the great continuing mysteries. Seems like Herb Taylor may have had problems with consistency.

 

[kyear2]

After a long series (Where said Marshall was Man of the Series) and Holding was frequently hurt and Walsh was making his debut and on a prepared spinners wicket.

2nd Test: West Indies v Australia at Kingston, Mar 13-16, 1999 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

In this game Australia played two spinners and still gave up over 400 runs, one of occurances mean nothing.

3rd Test: West Indies v Australia at Bridgetown, Mar 26-30, 1999 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

And in this game the same two spinners gave up 300 twice, including a last day victory, while the fast bolwers took all of the wickets for the other team, again doesn't prove anything.

 

[watson]

God ****ing damnit it's going to be Smith isn't it

I make it, but someone should double-check;

Richards = 23
Smith = 15
Mitchell = 11
Kirsten = 4
Barlow = 2

 

[harsh.ag]

I make it, but someone should double-check;

Richards = 23
Smith = 15
Mitchell = 11
Kirsten = 4
Barlow = 2

How does Kirsten get 4? Might be better to appoint him coach of the side

 

[harsh.ag]

After a long series (Where said Marshall was Man of the Series) and Holding was frequently hurt and Walsh was making his debut and on a prepared spinners wicket.

2nd Test: West Indies v Australia at Kingston, Mar 13-16, 1999 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

In this game Australia played two spinners and still gave up over 400 runs, one of occurances mean nothing.

3rd Test: West Indies v Australia at Bridgetown, Mar 26-30, 1999 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

And in this game the same two spinners gave up 300 twice, including a last day victory, while the fast bolwers took all of the wickets for the other team, again doesn't prove anything.

Very good post. Just what I wanted to say, but thought it should be obvious anyway (and I was way too lazy)

 

[watson]

After a long series (Where said Marshall was Man of the Series) and Holding was frequently hurt and Walsh was making his debut and on a prepared spinners wicket.

2nd Test: West Indies v Australia at Kingston, Mar 13-16, 1999 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

In this game Australia played two spinners and still gave up over 400 runs, one of occurances mean nothing.

3rd Test: West Indies v Australia at Bridgetown, Mar 26-30, 1999 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

And in this game the same two spinners gave up 300 twice, including a last day victory, while the fast bolwers took all of the wickets for the other team, again doesn't prove anything.

How many more Test matches won by spin bowlers would you like me to post? I just liked the example I posted more than a miriad of others that I could have chosen

- mainly because a relative non-entity made one of the greatest batsman of all time look clueless.

(Sorry I digressed)

 

[NUFAN]

Bruce Mitchell and Graeme Smith produced the best Test performances over the course of SA's history so they get my vote.

 

[kyear2]

likewise, two of the greatest teams ever were based on quicks, W.I's and the Invincibles.

But we digress.

 

[Jager]

likewise, two of the greatest teams ever were based on quicks, W.I's and the Invincibles.

But we digress.

But not four quicks at once

 

[The Sean]

Tough one, this. Eddie Barlow and Trevor Goddard formed a formidable partnership in the '60s, and while Barlow was the better pure bat, Goddard was a superb all round cricketer. I'm picking neither though.

Bruce Mitchell was a wonderful servant of South African cricket, and for many years the country's all time leading runscorer. Graeme Smith, the modern champion, is an absolute beast of a player and would bring great leadership the side. I'm picking neither.

Who am I picking? First up it's Barry Richards. Yes, I usually try to base all time Test XIs on performances in Test cricket, but there are simply too many good judges who played with and against him and saw him close at hand who testify to his greatness for me to leave him out. I'm not one for blindly believing the hype, but when such praise as Richards gets is damn-near universal, it's hard to ignore.

My other pick is Herbie Taylor. Because he defied Barney when Barney was at his greatest, because I don't think he'll get picked for the middle order against Pollock, Kallis and Nourse, and because he didn't even get a mention in the OP.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

I can't see how any captain could get the most out of four frontline quicks with current over-rate regulations.

Not a tactical decision to me so much as avoiding any reliance on part-time spin.

Otherwise, I look forward to the simmed result of Graeme Smith bowling to Sobers.

 

[Garson007]

Speaking of how the selection works and the all-rounders... I'm not sure picking two opening bowlers and two other bowlers is the correct methodology. Where does Pollock fit? If Donald and Procter is selected as opening bowlers, then where does it leave Steyn? I'd rather just pick three fasts in one go and a spinner to round it up.

I'm also not very sure about the #6 position. I actually feel Pollock will be in with a shout.

 

[Satyanash89]

Richards.... its just impossible to imagine leaving him out when youve read and heard so much about him in that same admiring and awestruck tone. Overwhelms the admittedly superb competition

Smith... ugliest opener ever by far but hes been brilliant for a while now and deserves a bit of recognition. He's shown his awesomeness in handling pressure situations in difficult conditions and hes provided tons of memorable moments too

 

[Prince EWS]

Bruce Mitchell
Graeme Smith

Changing to Mitchell and Richards because I want Mitchell in the team and I'm a **** like that.

 

[Cabinet96]

Barry Richards and Bruce Mitchell. Smith very unlucky.

 

[Rasimione]

looks like the hate for smith is clouding peoples judgement.

 

[Cabinet96]

Love Smith FTR.

 

[Red]

Why is Smith hated?

 

[Prince EWS]

Love Smith FTR.

Yeah **** posting from Rasimione. Smith is awesome, I don't hate him at all and actually picked him originally, but Mitchell was an ATG as well.

 

[Teja.]

Mitchell had absolutely amazing longevity. His career was about twice the length of Smith's career as it stands right now. Unlike the likes of Faulkner, Headley etc., it wasn't two decades with a unwise comeback/sharp decline/retirement-recall either. He played every test through those years and the last quarter of his career was actually the peak of his career fetching him 1072 runs in 10 matches @ 60.55.

You can literally count on your fingertips the amount of batsmen in cricket history who have played for two decades consistently and were world-class pretty much throughout their careers.

Even arguendo Smith's runs are of the same quality/slightly higher quality as Mitchell's, surely that puts Mitchell over the line, comfortably?

Ftr, I think averaging 48 for over two decades in South Africa for an opener was a seriously astonishing task and I don't think it's even particularly close.