The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[Slifer]

for the frank worrell trophy the Aussie xi will play against...

gordon greenidge
conrad hunte
viv richards
brian lara
george headley
gary sobers *
jeff dujon +
malcolm marshall
michael holding
curtley ambrose
lance gibss

All pace for wi xi therefore garner for gibbs please

 

[Howe_zat]

JB XI

1. Joe Burns
2. Jack Brown
3. Jermaine Blackwood
4. Jos Buttler
5. Jonny Bairstow
6. Jim Burke
7. Jack Blackham
8. John Bracewell
9. Johan Botha
10. Jake Ball
11. Jasprit Bumrah

 

[Red]

England XI

Hutton
Hobbs
Hammond
Barrington
Compton
Botham
Ames +
SF Barnes
Laker
Anderson
Trueman

(Could take Knott as keeper and be equally as happy but with Botham at 6, Ames steadies the ship a bit)

Aus XI

Trumper
Simpson
Bradman
GChappell
Miller
Harvey
Gilchrist +
Warne
OReilly
Lillee
McGrath

(Hurts to leave out Border, Lindwall, Ponting and Davidson)

 

[Flem274*]

i haven't updated my aus xi in forever sooooo

simpson
bradman
ponting
smith
border
waugh
gilchrist
davidson
warne
lillee
mcgrath

best aus xi i've seen

hayden
warner
ponting
smith
waugh
clarke
gilchrist
warne
gillespie
harris
mcgrath

johnson had a great peak and cummins should hopefully get in a bit later, but for now i'd take gillespie's career over both. i feel like johnson can only really make peak elevens otherwise we'd always pick these teams based on guys at their absolute best and ignore the worst.

 

[Flem274*]

englands best is basically eleven dudes ive never seen live so a best england ive seen is

cook
strauss
vaughan
kp
root
prior
flintoff
swann
broad
sidebottom
anderson

 

[Flem274*]

since there's an incoming series between us and sl, a best of both teams during my viewing time

nz

richardson
mccullum
williamson
taylor
fleming (c)
watling (wk)
cairns
vettori
wagner
bond
boult

jayasuriya
dilshan
sangakkara
mahela jayawardene (c)
samaraweera
mathews
prasaana jayawardene (wk)
vaas
herath
malinga
murali

 

[Red]

Aus XI

Trumper
Simpson
Bradman
GChappell
Miller
Harvey
Gilchrist +
Warne
OReilly
Lillee
McGrath

(Hurts to leave out Border, Lindwall, Ponting and Davidson)

Letting Ponting open the innings is a pretty cool idea, seeing as I'm not that keen on picking earlier era players, and think that anyone from earlier than Hobbs needs to be viewed differently to post Hobbs.


Ponting
Simpson
Bradman
GChappell
Miller
Harvey
Gilchrist +
Warne
OReilly
Lillee
McGrath

 

[Logan]

My Best WI eleven:

Greenidge

Haynes

Richards

Lara

Walcott

Sobers

Dujon

Ambrose

Marshall

Garner

Holding



The bowling attack is something else. Marshall averages 20.95, Garner averages 20.98 and Ambrose averages 20.99. Holding is arguably the fastest batsman ever

 

[h_hurricane]

Holding was an undisputed ATG, but isn't he a tad over-rated here ? Makes most WI teams ahead of Garner even though it is pretty clear that the latter was the more consistent bowler and had a superior record by a decent margin. They played together as well.

 

[stephen]

Holding was an undisputed ATG, but isn't he a tad over-rated here ? Makes most WI teams ahead of Garner even though it is pretty clear that the latter was the more consistent bowler and had a superior record by a decent margin. They played together as well.

The general feeling is that Garner was similar in style to Ambrose who was probably fractionally better, whereas Holding was different from those two and therefore offers a point of difference in the bowling attack. Besides, who wouldn't want to watch that ***y run up all day long.

 

[Bolo]

The general feeling is that Garner was similar in style to Ambrose who was probably fractionally better, whereas Holding was different from those two and therefore offers a point of difference in the bowling attack. Besides, who wouldn't want to watch that ***y run up all day long.

Why do we even think Ambrose was better than Garner? So similar in style. So similar in stats, but garner took wickets a fair bit faster, despite being handicapped by spending a fair chunk of his career as a change bowler.

 

[stephen]

Why do we even think Ambrose was better than Garner? So similar in style. So similar in stats, but garner took wickets a fair bit faster, despite being handicapped by spending a fair chunk of his career as a change bowler.

How young are you? Did you watch Ambrose much? Garner was great but Ambrose was next level. Garner was never the best bowler in the side either, whereas Ambrose was almost constantly the best bowler in his side.

 

[stephen]

My dad watched a lot of the Windies of the 70s/80s era and told me his favourite bowler was Garner but that Ambrose was almost certainly the best of the lot.

 

[Prince EWS]

Why do we even think Ambrose was better than Garner? So similar in style. So similar in stats, but garner took wickets a fair bit faster, despite being handicapped by spending a fair chunk of his career as a change bowler.

I wasn't alive/old-enough to follow Test cricket during their careers but my standardised averages project has Ambrose slightly better on quality and a fair bit longer on longevity:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rmR0F6hmKyJEiX9AdbRJyxqnl8WU_sZvK5SbDe109OA/edit#gid=0

Garner played for about 8 years and Ambrose 11, so even if you don't accept my idea that a gun player for 11 years is worth more than a gun player for 8 years, Ambrose probably had a Garner-sized career in the middle of his somewhere he did better (and by more than a bee's dick as it seems) than Garner. He'd effectively be Garner + extra bits if so.

More interesting questions can be asked of Garner v Holding but I think it's more our inner cricket selector brains coming out and trying to pick as varied attack as possible without substantially sacrificing on quality. Holding was different to Amrbrose/Garner by a margin greater than he was worse than Garner.

 

[h_hurricane]

Considering that Ambrose kept the WI team competent through the 90s(with good support from Walsh and to a lesser extent Bishop), he is fractionally ahead of Garner for me. Not by much though.Curtly was the best bowler of the 90s.

Garner is a beast though. The only bowler in history with decent sample size averaging sub 21 in both tests and LOIs. Also, possibly the only bowler since 1970s with a good sample size averaging sub 20 away from home.

 

[vcs]

What stands out to me about Ambrose's career is his dominance in Australia - the best players of pace, especially at home. Visiting ATG quicks of his generation and later have typically struggled to match their usual numbers in Australia (Waqar, Donald, Pollock, Steyn etc.) but Ambrose was even better. The Australian batting lineups that he took apart were also probably, on average, better than the ones that the '80s greats like Hadlee, Imran and Marshall bowled to.

 

[h_hurricane]

What stands out to me about Ambrose's career is his dominance in Australia - the best players of pace, especially at home. Visiting ATG quicks of his generation and later have typically struggled to match their usual numbers in Australia (Waqar, Donald, Pollock, Steyn etc.) but Ambrose was even better. The Australian batting lineups that he took apart were also probably, on average, better than the ones that the '80s greats like Hadlee, Imran and Marshall bowled to.

That 7/1 was a great childhood memory. Won the ODI series too in the same season in telling fashion. As Richie Richardson described at the end of that tour, Ambrose was quite simply the best quick in that period.

 

[trundler]

Holding comes across as.a bowler who was more of a strike option and took more daddy hauls whereas Garner doesn't have a lot of 5fers and no 10fer. Plus, Holding debuted before the West Indies were a particularly strong team. Garner also suffers from being less memorable.

 

[vcs]

That 7/1 was a great childhood memory. Won the ODI series too in the same season in telling fashion. As Richie Richardson described at the end of that tour, Ambrose was quite simply the best quick in that period.

Yeah, I remember reading about it in the newspaper and couldn't even process how it was possible.

Think WI had won the previous Test by 1 run to level the series.

 

[h_hurricane]

Yeah, I remember reading about it in the newspaper and couldn't even process how it was possible.

Think WI had won the previous Test by 1 run to level the series.

That was one series which should be celebrated as among the best ever. Probably under-rated from that perspective.