The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[bagapath]

G. Chappell being ranked above everyone else bar Bradman and Sobers is perfectly fine by me.

Now, if you replace "G. Chappell" in that sentence with Viv Richards, Gavaskar, Tendulkar, Lara, Hammond, Hutton or Hobbs it would still hold good.

In the top 10 batsmen list, from no.3 to no. 10 the names are interchangeable .

 

[bagapath]

A Dream ODI XI that no one really dreams of...

Hashim Amla
Saurav Ganguly
Zaheer Abbas
Virat Kohli
Clive Llloyd (C)
AB de Villiers (WK)
Kapil Dev
Brad Hogg
Michael Holding
Nathan Bracken
Dennis Lillee

 

[kyear2]

G. Chappell being ranked above everyone else bar Bradman and Sobers is perfectly fine by me.

Now, if you replace "G. Chappell" in that sentence with Viv Richards, Gavaskar, Tendulkar, Lara, Hammond, Hutton or Hobbs it would still hold good.

In the top 10 batsmen list, from no.3 to no. 10 the names are interchangeable .

Agree to a point. I personally rate Richard second only to Bradman and just ahead of Sobers, but Chappell is definitely in the discussion for one of the best ever. The top 10 for me, in order of appearance.

Hobbs, Bradman, Headley, Hutton, Sobers, Chappell, Richards, Richards, Tendulkar, Lara.

Gavaskar just misses out.

 

[cnerd123]

A Dream ODI XI that no one really dreams of...

Hashim Amla
Saurav Ganguly
Zaheer Abbas
Virat Kohli
Clive Llloyd (C)
AB de Villiers (WK)
Kapil Dev
Brad Hogg
Michael Holding
Nathan Bracken
Dennis Lillee

Hogg and Bracken, now there is an underrated duo. The Warne and McGrath for when the real Warne and McGrath weren't around.

 

[bagapath]

Agree to a point. I personally rate Richard second only to Bradman and just ahead of Sobers, but Chappell is definitely in the discussion for one of the best ever. The top 10 for me, in order of appearance.

Hobbs, Bradman, Headley, Hutton, Sobers, Chappell, Richards, Richards, Tendulkar, Lara.

Gavaskar just misses out.

Why have you written down Viv's name twice?

Headley belongs there, yes. But don't bring in 4 test wonders, certainly not ahead of Gavaskar who played 125 tests over 16 years and despite such a long career in the highest form of the game remained the very best opener of his times.

 

[kyear2]

Your argument and logic is sound and tour perspective well known, it's just that everyone who has seen Barry bat rates him among the very best. Lillee rates him with Sobers and Viv. That's hard to ignore.

 

[longranger]

Why have you written down Viv's name twice?

Headley belongs there, yes. But don't bring in 4 test wonders, certainly not ahead of Gavaskar who played 125 tests over 16 years and despite such a long career in the highest form of the game remained the very best opener of his times.

I would agree with this. I don't know why people rate Barry Richards as one of the best ever, the fact is that he played only 4 test matches. Yes, he had the talent and skill which everyone saw in first-class cricket, but international cricket is a step up for a reason. Who is to say that his form may not have dipped after 15-20 tests? It's very dangerous to extrapolate an athlete's achievements on a linear scale. If that was the case, Tiger Woods would have crossed Jack Nicklaus ages ago.

I may sound ignorant, but did Barry Richards play against the West Indian quicks in the Caribbean? Or against Indian spinners in sub-continental tracks? He definitely could have struggled.

I maintain that his skill levels should be rated as one of the best ever and he should also be the best 'what if' candidate, but his name certainly doesn't belong with players who played Test matches for over a decade.

 

[watson]

I would agree with this. I don't know why people rate Barry Richards as one of the best ever, the fact is that he played only 4 test matches. Yes, he had the talent and skill which everyone saw in first-class cricket, but international cricket is a step up for a reason. Who is to say that his form may not have dipped after 15-20 tests? It's very dangerous to extrapolate an athlete's achievements on a linear scale. If that was the case, Tiger Woods would have crossed Jack Nicklaus ages ago.

I may sound ignorant, but did Barry Richards play against the West Indian quicks in the Caribbean? Or against Indian spinners in sub-continental tracks? He definitely could have struggled.

I maintain that his skill levels should be rated as one of the best ever and he should also be the best 'what if' candidate, but his name certainly doesn't belong with players who played Test matches for over a decade.

We could say that about most batsman - for example, how would Victor Trumper go against the 'West Indian quicks in the Caribbean? Or against Indian spinners on sub-continental tracks?'.

In fact we know more how good Richards was compared to Victor Trumper because of his years in WSC.


Edit: 5 Super Tests, 554 runs at 79.14. However, most of his innings were against Australia rather than the West Indies which is a shame.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/485906.html

 

[Red]

Barry Richards was ****ing good. This is true.

 

[watson]

Just for interest sake, here are two 'Tests' between a South African Invitation XI and the International Wanderers in 1976.

Against Lillee, Walker, Shepherd, Gilmour, and Mallett in the first 'Test', Richards made 52 and 0, and Pollock made 124 and 6. Incidently, Lillee took 7 for 27 in the second innings, so he must have been fired-up.

The Home of CricketArchive

And against Lillee, Hurst, Shepherd, Gilmour, and Underwood in the second 'Test', Richards made 33 and 80, and Pollock made 10 and 63.

The Home of CricketArchive

 

[the big bambino]

Eddie Barlow was 36 then and still competitive. Special player him

 

[weldone]

...
I maintain that his skill levels should be rated as one of the best ever and he should also be the best 'what if' candidate, but his name certainly doesn't belong with players who played Test matches for over a decade.

...players like Michael Atherton and Navjot Sidhu?

 

[longranger]

...players like Michael Atherton and Navjot Sidhu?

No I meant I players like Viv Richards, Tendulkar and Lara - as was posted earlier

 

[weldone]

Ya fair enough then

 

[Pratters]

I would agree with this. I don't know why people rate Barry Richards as one of the best ever, the fact is that he played only 4 test matches. Yes, he had the talent and skill which everyone saw in first-class cricket, but international cricket is a step up for a reason. Who is to say that his form may not have dipped after 15-20 tests? It's very dangerous to extrapolate an athlete's achievements on a linear scale. If that was the case, Tiger Woods would have crossed Jack Nicklaus ages ago.

I may sound ignorant, but did Barry Richards play against the West Indian quicks in the Caribbean? Or against Indian spinners in sub-continental tracks? He definitely could have struggled.

I maintain that his skill levels should be rated as one of the best ever and he should also be the best 'what if' candidate, but his name certainly doesn't belong with players who played Test matches for over a decade.

Richards was superb in County cricket where you had two great quicks in almost all teams at the time apart from the super tests. It was not like he didn't play any cricket at all. People rate him because they saw him bat very well against quality fast bowling.

 

[harsh.ag]

As I have said earlier, why Barry is a little special is because he is perhaps the only opener who gives you the best of Virender Sehwag and Len Hutton together - free scoring with good technique. Don't think Hobbs would qualify for this, given we don't know much about the free scoring side of his game.

Trumper perhaps the other one.

 

[harsh.ag]

The ICC have a "Your Greatest Cricket World Cup XI" thing going on right now. Andy Bichel and Matthew Hayden have also submitted their XIs there in a "Legends" section.

Greatest Xi | Cricket World Cup 2015 - ICC Cricket | Official Website

They want people to pick two all rounders in the minimum, and that means two of Kapil Dev, Sanath Jayasuriya, Lance Klusener, Imran Khan, and Yuvraj Singh will have to be picked, while Wasim Akram is a pure bowler, and Andrew Symonds a pure batsman.

Michael Bevan and Michael Hussey and Shaun Pollock are unavailable, and you can't pick both Gilchrist and Dhoni

My XI

 

[OverratedSanity]

Limiting the number of all rounders in such sides has never made sense to me.

 

[cnerd123]

Sachin
Jayasuriya
Ponting
Viv
Symonds/Flintoff
Bevan
MSD (+) (*)
Klusener
Dev
Wasim
Murali

would be a fun side to watch.

You just know that even with all those bowlers, MSD will still toss the ball to Ponting to bowl the 44th over.

 

[watson]

Great montage harsh, but Joel Garner's stats are superior to every other bowler in all of ODI history (in relative terms of course).

ER = 3.09
Overall ER for Garner's period = 4.00
Difference = 0.91

Average = 18.84
Overall Average for Garner's period = 29.60
Difference = 10.76


Compared to Wasim for example;

ER = 3.89
Overall ER for Wasim's period = 4.45
Difference = 0.56

Average = 23.52
Overall Average for Wasim's period = 32.37
Difference = 8.85

If Viv Richards is the first batsman picked then Joel Garner has to be the first bowler picked.