The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[Coronis]

Inspired by a much earlier post in this thread, my XI for today.

Hobbs
Bradman*
Hammond
Smith
Tendulkar
Sobers
Gilchrist+
Akram
Marshall
Warne
McGrath

 

[mr_mister]

Using 50 Tests as a minimum criteria, Marshall has the best bowling average while Steyn has the best bowling SR.

50 tests is a pretty hefty criteria. Makes poor old Sydney Barnes look like a flash in the pan who had a meme career

 

[Logan]

50 Tests is a decent criteria IMO.


How good was Sydney Barnes?

Overall Wickets : 189
Matches : 27
Average : 16
SR : 40

Against Australia
Matches : 20
Wickets : 106
Average : 21
SR : 54


Against South Africa
Matches : 7
Wickets : 83
Average : 9.85
SR : 25


Greatest Bowler of all Time?

Great Bowler who feasted on a Minnow Team?

 

[trundler]

21 average is pretty good though. The 1900s were nowhere near as bowling friendly as the preceding decades and the Australian teams Barnes played against were remarkably strong.

 

[Logan]

Just did a little digging

Barnes played in the Ashes between 1901-1912.

The mean batting average for the 1910s was 24 and mean bowling average was 23. For a comparison, it was 34 and 32 respectively last decade.

Some of the players who played around the same time as Barnes and their records against Australia.

Sydney Barnes
Average : 21
SR : 54

Colin Blythe(Spinner)
Average : 21
SR : 50

Ted Arnold(Medium Pace)
Average : 27
SR : 54

Bill Lockwood(A decade earlier)
Average : 20
SR : 45



Not saying Sydney Barnes isn’t great. But his stats are inflated due to his performances against South Africa who were minnows back then.

 

[Red]

He's not the Bradman of bowling like some people think he is

There's like 5 pacemen with an argument for best ever

Malcolm Marshall isn’t the equivalent of Don Bradman. He is the equivalent of Sachin Tendulkar. Marshall performed against everyone and everywhere. Arguably the greatest bowler of all time.

I didn't say he was the "Bradman of bowling", anywhere.

I find it difficult to clearly rate any one bowler as a clear number one. Not to say Marshall isn’t up there, but saying any XI without him is wrong comes across as quite rude.

It comes across as "rude" to express an opinion that Marshall is the greatest quick of all time by saying he should be the first quick selected in a team?

Ok

 

[Slifer]

I respectfully disagree, not sure how you can make an ATG XI and leave out arguably 2 of the 3 best fast bowlers of all time so that you can bat deep. Their primary job is to bowl out the opposition for as low as possible, for that you get as close to the very best attack that you can.
As of now mine consists of

Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
Steyn

Umm but you only replaced Imran with Steyn? But we can all agree to disagree. Afaic, there is absolutely a coat of varnish between the top 7 or so pacers: MM, McGrath, Hadlee, Ambrose, Imran, Steyn, Donald. Obviously, as has been said before, Imran is infinitely better than Steyn as a batsman , and he was an outstanding captain. Oh and imran also did well against the best team of his time (WI). Therefore imran Khan will be apart of my bowling attack any day of the week.

 

[Coronis]

It comes across as "rude" to express an opinion that Marshall is the greatest quick of all time by saying he should be the first quick selected in a team?

Ok

No, it comes across as rude to say “your team is wrong because it doesn’t include Marshall”

 

[mr_mister]

I didn't say he was the "Bradman of bowling", anywhere.



It comes across as "rude" to express an opinion that Marshall is the greatest quick of all time by saying he should be the first quick selected in a team?

Ok

It's not a huge deal, but saying somebody's ATG XI is 'wrong' for not having a player in it is probably only justified if it's Gilchrist or Bradman being omitted

Whatever

 

[akilana]

Umm but you only replaced Imran with Steyn? But we can all agree to disagree. Afaic, there is absolutely a coat of varnish between the top 7 or so pacers: MM, McGrath, Hadlee, Ambrose, Imran, Steyn, Donald. Obviously, as has been said before, Imran is infinitely better than Steyn as a batsman , and he was an outstanding captain. Oh and imran also did well against the best team of his time (WI). Therefore imran Khan will be apart of my bowling attack any day of the week.

Agree. Imran should take McGrath’s place.

 

[Chrish]

Who is the most unhittable bowler you guys have ever watched?

From whom I have seen, it is Curtly Ambrose.

From what I have heard or read, it is Bapu Nadkarni.

Mcgrath.

Despite being a trundler, haven't seen a bowler who was so immune to thrashing.

 

[ataraxia]

It's not a huge deal, but saying somebody's ATG XI is 'wrong' for not having a player in it is probably only justified if it's Gilchrist or Bradman being omitted

Whatever

Sobers as well.

 

[Logan]

Jacques Kallis was just as good as Gary Sobers. He played almost twice the number of matches in a more competitive era and ended up with similar figures.

Andy Flower played around 55 Tests as a wicket Keeper. And he averaged 55 compared to Gilchrist’s 47. Andy Flower was the only great batsman in a struggling team while Gilchrist had the luxury of playing in the greatest team of all time.

Don Bradman is the only sure pick in any ATG XI. He is the only cricketer who was truly light years ahead of anyone else. The GOAT

 

[ataraxia]

Jacques Kallis was just as good as Gary Sobers. He played almost twice the number of matches in a more competitive era and ended up with similar figures.

Andy Flower played around 55 Tests as a wicket Keeper. And he averaged 55 compared to Gilchrist’s 47. Andy Flower was the only great batsman in a struggling team while Gilchrist had the luxury of playing in the greatest team of all time.

Don Bradman is the only sure pick in any ATG XI. He is the only cricketer who was truly light years ahead of anyone else. The GOAT

Kallis played in a much easier era than Sobers to bat in. Anyhow, both should be included. Flower would generally bat early in the innings, after quick wickets fell. At 7 is out of place for him or any of the batsman included otherwise. Gilchrist was suited to 7 and was a much better keeper.

 

[Chrish]

So many people who have seen these players in action have claimed Garry to be the GOAT all rounder that it’s difficult to ignore.

Bradman and Sobers should be two automatic choice for any sensible all time XI.

Smith might end up as the 3rd name but that remains to be seen.

 

[ataraxia]

But some people aren't sensible, of course: https://www.sportskeeda.com/cricket/unbeatable-all-time-test-world-xi

 

[Logan]

It is ridiculous to say Kallis played in a much easier era. Kallis played 166 Tests and 328 ODIs in a span of 18 years. That’s more than twice the amount of international cricket that Sobers played in around 20 years.

Their batting averages are similar. Their bowling averages are similar.

It is understandable if one says Sobers was slightly better than Kallis. But if someone say Sobers is an automatic pick like Bradman, they are wrong.

 

[Logan]

Andy Flower has a better average than Gilchrist(55 vs 47)

Andy Flower scored a fifty every 4.3 innings while Gilchrist scored one every 5.6 innings.

Andy Flower scored a century every 8.33 innings while Gilchrist scored one every 8 innings.

Andy Flower was the only one great batsman in a weak team. Gilchrist didn’t have half the pressure since Australia could have won since they had Hayden, Ponting, Warne, McGrath etc

 

[Victor Ian]

Between 1995-2009, Australia team held the number one ranking for 155 weeks out of a possible 163 weeks (95%)

Between 1981-1995, West Indies team held the number one ranking for 163 weeks out of a possible 174 weeks (93%)

The two greatest Test teams ever

How is this indian team faring in the chase? They have been at the top for quite a few years now.

 

[ataraxia]

Sobers is an automatic pick as a batsman alone IMO.