The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[trundler]

Nice team trundler.


Australian team playing in Australia:

Bill Lawry
Matthew Hayden
Don Bradman
Steve Smith
Michael Clarke
Doug Walters
Adam Gilchrist
Ray Lindwall
Shane Warne
Dennis Lillee
Glenn McGrath

Australian team playing in England:

Mark Taylor
Arthur Morris
Don Bradman
Bill Ponsford
Allan Border
Steve Waugh
Adam Gilchrist
Shane Warne
Dennis Lillee
Terry Alderman
Glenn McGrath

Australian team playing in India:

Matthew Hayden
Kim Hughes
Dean Jones
Damian Martyn
Neil Harvey
Allan Border
Ian Healy
Richie Benaud
Alan Davidson
Jason Gillespie
Ashely Mallett

Australian team playing in South Africa:

Dave Warner
Jack Fingleton
Ricky Ponting
Neil Harvey
Stan McCabe
Steve Waugh
Adam Gilchrist
Pat Cummins
Mitchell Johnson
Stuart Clark
Clarrie Grimmett

Benaud was an absolute menace in India, and Warne an utter failure! Remarkable.

 

[trundler]

Australia Spin XI
Victor Trumper (his feats on sticky dogs mean he would be able to do well against spin imo)
Matthew Hayden
Don Bradman
Damien Martyn
Neil Harvey
Doug Walters
Ian Healy (Warne always whined how he was a better 'keeper!)
Ritchie Benaud
Shane Warne
Bill O Reilly
Clarie Grimmet

 

[Red]

Nice XI

Hugh Trumble and Bill Jonhston worth including for a bit of bowling variety imo, rather than four leggies.

Michael Clarke a decent shout out for the batting also. Could include TOTAB also, great player of spin and a handy spin option himself.

Bradman aside, I wonder who our best ever player of spin was in Australia? My vote is Neil Harvey.

 

[Red]

An Australian team where everyone bowls spin (and has 20+ test wickets):


Bob Simpson (legspin)
Charlie McCartney (LA orthodox)
Ian Chappell (legbreak)
Mark Waugh (offspin)
Allan Border (LA orthodox)
Michael Clarke (LA orthodox)
Tim Zoehrer (legspin) +
Hugh Trumble (off spin)
Richie Benaud (legspin)
Shane Warne (legspin)
Bill Johnston (LA chinamen)


* Zoehrer (keeper) never took a test wicket but was a decent legspinner when not keeping, and managed to take 38 FC wickets with his bowling

 

[trundler]

TOTAB definitely should be there but I'm not sure for whom. I just went with 4 leggies for no reason. Ashley Mallet reckons Harvey is one of the best 5 he's ever seen, along with Barry, Viv, Sobers and Sachin. Pretty high quality company!

 

[trundler]

What would a pace XI be like? Cant decide on the openers. Middle order would be Bradman (did fairly well in Bodyline), Greg Chappell, Ricky Ponting, Keith Miller, Adam Gilchrist, Alan Davidson, Ray Lindwall, Denniss Lillee and McGrath. Maybe Border for Miller?

 

[Starfighter]

Australian XI where everyone bowls pace, at least 30 wickets except for keeper:

Watson (RFM)
Kelleway (RFM)
Walters (RM) / G Chappell (RM)
McCabe (RMF)
S Waugh * (RMF)
Miller (RF)
Wade + (RM) (only 4 first class wickets but everyone a cracker)
Davidson (LFM)
Lindwall (RF)
McGrath (RFM)
Johnston (LFM)

No. three and second opener presented the only real difficulties. Went for Bill Johnston because we needed another lefty for variety.

 

[Starfighter]

Bill Johnston (LA chinamen)

I know Johnston bowled orthodox at times but I've never seen it mentioned he bowled chinaman?

 

[Engle]

No place for WW Armstrong and Monty Noble ?

 

[Gowza]

Jack Gregory?

 

[trundler]

Ponting bowled a useful medium pace occasionally and got Lara out once. Plus, great player of pace himself.

 

[jimmy101]

Isn't RMF faster than RFM?

I always get them confused.

 

[Starfighter]

Isn't RMF faster than RFM?

I always get them confused.

No, 'fast medium' is faster than 'medium fast'. I remember once reading a debate on here about that. 'Medium-fast' is a relatively recent invention, you barely see it at all before the sixties (maybe?) and it's not all that common even afterwards. I remember once reading a Wisden article about how they wouldn't start using medium-fast as they feel it's not necessary, a sentiment I generally agree with.

I just read WG Grace's book on cricket (I might talk about that more at a later date) and back then you only had fast, medium or slow. Also no-one bothered distinguishing roundarm and overarm, so Spofforth bowled "roundarm with a high action". Then at some point fast-medium forced its way into the act, generally referring to guys of your Tate-Bedser-Barnes sort of pace to somewhat faster, only after WWII did it really adopt its current meaning. I think a good number of guys who were fast-medium before the war would be medium-fast today, or fast-medium rather than fast.

 

[Red]

I know Johnston bowled orthodox at times but I've never seen it mentioned he bowled chinaman?

My mistake

No place for WW Armstrong and Monty Noble ?

Should be in there, absolutely.

Jack Gregory?

Yeh, should be in that pace XI for sure.

 

[trundler]

I think the most important factor that should be considered when picking an all-time XI is picking the best players (and the best balance) who performed in adverse circumstances and not the ones with the best stats i.e players who 'rose to the occasion' or relished a great challenge should be rated more highly in this case than say more consistent but less dominant on the big state type of players. That makes Hobbs and Hutton a certainty. Bradman played the greatest innings of all time, that 270. Viv gets in based on his WC final century (an ODI, yes but it should count because of all the pressure). The #4 spot becomes more and more contentious then. Sachin has all the aggregates and a fine technique but thinking of the toughness of the level we're talking about, the difference between him and Lara, Greg Chappell and others becomes less eminent, especially considering they were superior fielders. The idea of having Vic Trumper in the middle order seems attracting too. So my question is this, should Sachin be a certainty at 4 in your opinion like the preceding 3 are? Why or why not?

 

[Coronis]

I think the most important factor that should be considered when picking an all-time XI is picking the best players (and the best balance) who performed in adverse circumstances and not the ones with the best stats i.e players who 'rose to the occasion' or relished a great challenge should be rated more highly in this case than say more consistent but less dominant on the big state type of players. That makes Hobbs and Hutton a certainty. Bradman played the greatest innings of all time, that 270. Viv gets in based on his WC final century (an ODI, yes but it should count because of all the pressure). The #4 spot becomes more and more contentious then. Sachin has all the aggregates and a fine technique but thinking of the toughness of the level we're talking about, the difference between him and Lara, Greg Chappell and others becomes less eminent, especially considering they were superior fielders. The idea of having Vic Trumper in the middle order seems attracting too. So my question is this, should Sachin be a certainty at 4 in your opinion like the preceding 3 are? Why or why not?

First, ODI performances have nothing to do with Test XI's, its a completely different game. Honestly, I don't think anyone should be (or is) a lock/certainty in an ATG XI, besides Bradman. Outside of Bradman, you can make excellent arguments to include a multitude of different players for the other 10 positions. e.g Lara > Tendulkar because of innings such as Bridgetown 99, Knott > Gilchrist because he was a better keeper, though a lesser batsman, Steyn > other pacers because he played in a more batting friendly era etc. etc.

 

[trundler]

Hmm, fair enough. My point was more about players who were at their best against the best like Miller, Richards etc.

 

[Coronis]

Hmm, fair enough. My point was more about players who were at their best against the best like Miller, Richards etc.

Well ya know, Sachin averaged 55 over 39 matches against Australia throughout his career, so possibly not the best player to make that argument against.

 

[trundler]

Fair enough

 

[Red]

I would prefer to pick Lara based on cricket as a spectator sport, but you can't argue with the fact that Sachin is the most adaptable batsman in the history of the game.

His average against any opponent OR in any conditions never dipped below 40.

He averaged 55 against McGrath/Warne all thru their prime, and managed 53 against them IN Australia. Also averaged 60+ against Murali wherever they played.

He was technically perfect against pace/spin and in whatever conditions. IMO he should be #4 in any test ATG team that is taking all conditions adaptability and technical perfection into account.