The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[watson]

The point is that a bowling all rounder who is an ATG fast bowler adds pretty much as much to the side as does another ATG fast bowler and then brings batting to the table. I don't see what Akram, Lillee, Donald, Waqar or McGrath bring to the table that Imran doesn't while being one of the most outstanding leaders in cricket as well as being a very dependable bat. Imran's bowling is pretty much as good as any pure fast bowler so having him in doesn't hurt at all.

In the case of my ATG team I wanted variety, and I feel that the styles of Marshall and Imran too similar. That is, they are both 'chest-on' bowlers. Lillee on-the-other-hand is the best attacking 'corridor bowler' that I can think of ('caught Marsh bowled Lillee' was a common occurance on the scorecard for good reason). McGrath and Hadlee were just as relentless , but they lacked Lillee's showmanship and aggression that fires up the rest of the side and gets the crowd going.

I could have gone with Imran as my first change bowler but after some consideration decided that I wanted a medium paced bowler who bowls 'the lot' instead. There are some very good batsman who prefer the ball 'coming onto the bat', and who don't like facing a bowler who moves the ball around at will. So I want a bowler in my team who can capitalise on conditions that are favourable to swing, spin, or both. Add Warne and Sobers, and the attack features a bowler for every type of pitch, condition, or batsman.

 

[Coronis]

Imo he is not as far ahead of other bowling allrounders as some would have you believe. Especially when you take a closer look at his batting.

 

[smash84]

In the case of my ATG team I wanted variety, and I feel that the styles of Marshall and Imran too similar. That is, they are both 'chest-on' bowlers. Lillee on-the-other-hand is the best attacking 'corridor bowler' that I can think of ('caught Marsh bowled Lillee' was a common occurance on the scorecard for good reason). McGrath and Hadlee were just as relentless , but they lacked Lillee's showmanship and aggression that fires up the rest of the side and gets the crowd going.

I could have gone with Imran as my first change bowler but after some consideration decided that I wanted a medium paced bowler who bowls 'the lot' instead. There are some very good batsman who prefer the ball 'coming onto the bat', and who don't like facing a bowler who moves the ball around at will. So I want a bowler in my team who can capitalise on conditions that are favourable to swing, spin, or both. Add Warne and Sobers, and the attack features a bowler for every type of pitch, condition, or batsman.

What? How is Imran a "chest-on" bowler? I think you completely missed SJS's thread on fast bowlers

And they are both not very similar bowlers either. Imran was exceptional at reverse swing whereas Marshall was better at conventional swing. And what does it really matter if the wickets are coming from the corridor or from demolishing their stumps? Maybe Lillee's showmanship and aggression got the Aussie crowd going but if you want to bring that element in then Imran was easily the bigger star (in terms of number of people following him) due to his glamor. And as I said earlier that throughout the 1980s Imran was striking quicker and cheaper than Lillee (who retired in 84 though) or Marshall or Hadlee.

 

[smash84]

Imo he is not as far ahead of other bowling allrounders as some would have you believe. Especially when you take a closer look at his batting.

And Lillee isn't even ahead of a lot of fast bowlers as some would have you believe.

 

[Coronis]

And Lillee isn't even ahead of a lot of fast bowlers as some would have you believe.

Yes, I believe Lillee is overrated as a bowler, and Imran's batting is overrated. Probably why neither of them make my First XI.

 

[watson]

I don't think that any of the top 10 bowlers are ahead of eachother by any meaningful distance. That being the case, we can really choose who we like from the top 10 and not stuff-up. It boils down to the type of team that the selector wants to create.

In this particular study the author gives points out of a 100 to 15 ATG bowlers. At the end of the statistical number crunching Imran scores 81.00/100 and Lillee scores 80.76/100 - a difference of less than 1%;

Blogs: The fearsome fifteen: a look at the great bowlers | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo

In other words, it is just about a win-win situation whether you choose Imran or Lillee to partner to Marshall with the new ball.

 

[Coronis]

I don't think that any of the top 10 bowlers are ahead of eachother by any meaningful distance. That being the case, we can really choose who we like from the top 10 and not stuff-up. It boils down to the type of team that the selector wants to create.

In this particular study the author gives points out of a 100 to 15 ATG bowlers. At the end of the statistical number crunching Imran scores 81.00/100 and Lillee scores 80.76/100 - a difference of less than 1%;

Blogs: The fearsome fifteen: a look at the great bowlers | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo

In other words, it is just about a win-win situation whether you choose Imran or Lillee to partner to Marshall with the new ball.

Would be interesting to see how other great bowlers compare using this method. e.g Barnes, Grimmett, O'Reilly, Laker, Steyn when he's retired.

 

[smash84]

I don't think that any of the top 10 bowlers are ahead of eachother by any meaningful distance. That being the case, we can really choose who we like from the top 10 and not stuff-up. It boils down to the type of team that the selector wants to create.

In this particular study the author gives points out of a 100 to 15 ATG bowlers. At the end of the statistical number crunching Imran scores 81.00/100 and Lillee scores 80.76/100 - a difference of less than 1%;

Blogs: The fearsome fifteen: a look at the great bowlers | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo

In other words, it is just about a win-win situation whether you choose Imran or Lillee to partner to Marshall with the new ball.

So wouldn't you want to choose a bowler who is as good as Lillee and brings significantly more value to the team with his batting and leadership?

 

[watson]

So wouldn't you want to choose a bowler who is as good as Lillee and brings significantly more value to the team with his batting and leadership?

I am more interested in getting the new ball combination right. With Hobbs at 1, Bradman at 3 and Sobers at 6 the batting is hardly a problem even if facing the best attack in the world. Also, Marshall was pretty handy with the bat and capable of propping up his end while other batsman like Sobers score the runs.

 

[smash84]

I more interested in getting the new ball combination right. With Hobbs at 1, Bradman at 3 and Sobers at 6 the batting is hardly a problem even if facing the best attack in the world. Also, Marshall was pretty handy with the bat and capable of propping up his end while other batsman like Sobers score the runs.

What makes you think Imran can't bowl with the new ball? He opened the bowling pretty much all his career.

 

[watson]

What makes you think Imran can't bowl with the new ball? He opened the bowling pretty much all his career.

Well of course Imran can bowl with the new ball because he is an excellent new ball bowler. But I just so happen to prefer Lillee and Marshall, that's all.

 

[The Battlers Prince]

the rating for Viv who played 74-91 above the like of Sunil or Border for the same times and similar averages, when Sunil and Border made runs when their teams needed them. Ugly runs but full of heart.

 

[smash84]

Well of course Imran can bowl with the new ball because he is an excellent new ball bowler. But I just so happen to prefer Lillee and Marshall, that's all.

ok....you could have said this much earler?

 

[kyear2]

Imran is close to Marshall as a fast bowler, but it would be a brave person who would suggest that he was Marshall's equal or better. I do find this a bid odd because Imran's raw bowling stats are superior in some respects. But there you go.

Imran can't be compared to Warne or Sobers because their skills were completely different. However, we can say that Imran's main opposition to the No.8 spot in the ATG XI team are Richard Hadlee and Mike Procter. And this would be after a convincing case has been made for the mandatory inclusion of a bowling-allrounder in the bottom 4, rather than another pure bowler like Lillee, McGrath, Donald, Akram, Waqar, or Barnes.

That is an interesting point, I normally have my teams very structured with a bowling all rounder, batting all rounder and at least three good slip fielders in each 11, but with the batting that the team possesses and the fact that Marshall and Warne were quite good with the bat as well not that important to have a bowling allrounder, but rather a superior bolwer like Ambrose or Trueman or even Lillee would be preferred.

Yes, I believe Lillee is overrated as a bowler, and Imran's batting is overrated. Probably why neither of them make my First XI.

Fully agree with that, Lillee is overrated if one listens to the like of Benaud and others who clearly places him as the best and by some distance which to me he clearly isn't and it's not close. Imran's case is much clearer and a bit amazing that some like to combine his bolwing from the start of his career and his batting from his later days. Can't have it both ways. It's just that the talent of the bowling All Rounders is more shallow than any other positions, even more that Openers and Spinners, so Imran wins out over Hadlee (who is severly over rated as a batsman and bolwer, but thats just my opnion.) Miller (weakens your batting if placed in the top 6 and bowling if part of a four man attack as a primary bowler) and Procter who just didn't play enough, to push it futher Botham would fall into a similar catergory as Miller and his peak was just so short.

So Imran it is, because as Smali says, if you have a bowler as good as Lillee, but can bat a bit, then no reason not to select him, though Ambrose and Trueman are for me superior bolwers.

 

[Coronis]

Have heard much on the fielding of Hobbs/Bradman/Hammond/Sobers/Procter, and seen a lot of Gilchrist/Warne/McGrath. Was curious, does anybody know anything about Sutcliffe, Pollock and Marshall's fielding?

 

[kyear2]

Know Marshall was very good in the outfield and in the circle, know nothing of Pollock or Sutcliffe.

 

[Red]

Fully agree with that, Lillee is overrated if one listens to the like of Benaud and others who clearly places him as the best and by some distance which to me he clearly isn't and it's not close..

There is a reason why some people rate Lillee number one. They saw him bowl and what he could do. They saw his aggression and his will to win and dominate. They saw the fact that when most other bowlers needed a rest, he wanted more and more overs.

 

[The Battlers Prince]

So Imran it is, because as Smali says, if you have a bowler as good as Lillee, but can bat a bit, then no reason not to select him, though Ambrose and Trueman are for me superior bolwers.

i'd say Lindwall falls into that category too then

 

[Coronis]

i'd say Lindwall falls into that category too then

Davidson too.

 

[watson]

Imran scored his first Test century against the West Indies in 1980 (The bowlers were Clarke, Croft, Marshall, and Garner). And he scored his last Test Century against Australia in 1990 (The bowlers were Hughes, Rackeman, Campbell, and Taylor).

The point being that for a full decade Imran was a competent batsman and excellent No.7 or No.8. His average did peak between 1987-1990, but this does not mean that he didn't average well between 1980-86, or that he wasn't a bowling-allrounder of the highest order during that time;

HowSTAT! Player Analysis by Year

However, I am struggling to find a Test where Imran emulated Ian Botham and impacted a match with BOTH bat and ball (maybe someone else can find a good example!). In that respect Imran is a deficient allrounder in a way that other great allrounders are not.