The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[GoodAreasShane]

Yes. Just add flour, salt, a little red wine and dont forget a dollop of tomato sauce for sweetness and that extra tang

Quite possibly the greatest post in the history of CricketWeb

 

[AndrewB]

Bradman got 9 tons in 11 tests at the MCG

And 4 in 4 at Headingley, including both his triples. (But never reached 50 at Old Trafford).

 

[a massive zebra]

And 4 in 4 at Headingley, including both his triples.

And a matchwinning undefeated 173 in which he put together a stand of 301 in only 217 minutes with Arthur Morris, thereby chasing down a target of over 400 on the last day. Bradman averaged 192 in Tests at Headingley.

 

[ataraxia]

And a matchwinning undefeated 173 in which he put together a stand of 301 in only 217 minutes with Arthur Morris, thereby chasing down a target of over 400 on the last day. Bradman averaged 192 in Tests at Headingley.

Ladies and gentlemen, I think we've found a better Ben Stokes.

 

[marc71178]

Of the 158 innings he fielded in, he bowled 5 + overs in 109 of them. He averaged over 6 overs per innings. That number as an average is skewed because we regularly bowled teams out and occasionally played someone like Hopes or Harvey as 5th bowler or we selected 3 quicks plus 2 spinners. Or it suited Clarke's/Lehmann's bowling.

FWIW, here's a list of the matches he didn't bowl in:

ODI 1485: Aust bowled SL out in 37 overs (not required)
ODI 1563: Aust did not bowl (wash out)
ODI 1565: McG, Warne, Lee, Lee bowled out NZ in 30 overs (not required to bowl)
ODI 1677: Lee, Fleming, Harvey, Warne bowl out WI in 35 overs (not required to bowl)
ODI 1938: Clarke bowls 7 overs
ODI 1940 and 41: Aust play 2 spinners (and three quicks)
ODI 1970: Aust bowl out Namibia in 14 overs
ODI 1990: Lehmann bowls 6 overs and Harvey in the team
ODI 1991 : Aust bowl SL out in 38 overs
ODI 2016: Hauritz and Hogg play along with 3 quicks
ODI 2019: Harvey is selected as 5th bowler
ODI 2053: Aust bowl NZ out in 33 overs
ODI 2159: Washed out
ODI 2172: Aust bowl USA out in 24 overs
ODI 2209 : Lehmann bowls 7
ODI 2232: Hopes is selected as 5th bowler
ODI 2256: Eng only face 6 overs before wash out
ODI 2284: ICC World XI bowled out in 27 overs
ODI 2366: Cullen and Hogg selected along with 3 quicks
ODI 2367: Ditto
ODI 2473: Clarke and White share 10 overs
ODI 2577: NZ bowled out in 25 overs
ODI 2580: Watson selected as 5th bowler
ODI 2621: Washed out
ODI 2623: Clarke bowls 9 overs
ODI 2625 - end of Symonds career (approx 12 matched where Symonds doesn't bowl): Hopes selected as 5th bowler and Symonds used as a batsman only.

You're the one that's pulling something.

ok

 

[GoodAreasShane]

marc sticking his head in the sand and continuing to believe anything vaguely Australian is shite despite being completely and utterly wrong once again

I'm shook. NEVER seen that before

 

[marc71178]

well damn

pwned

Not really when the majority of the reasons he didn’t bowl as a 5th bowler are because he wasn’t selected as a 5th bowler, it doesn’t really do a lot for the claim that he was a legitimate 5th bowler to the extent needed to carry his less than mediocre batting when coming in as a number 7 (where it is claimed he should be in an ATG team).

 

[h_hurricane]

A top 6 of Tendulkar, Gilchrist, Richards,Kohli, Devilliers and Bevan gives you 55 overs before dismissal. Nothing much changes if Gilchrist and Bevan are replaced by Sharma and Dhoni.

One could add a buffer of as much as 10 overs to account for batting collapses, superior opposition bowling in an ATG team makeup etc, even then your numbers 7,8 and 9 are not needed to bat more than 5 overs in most cases.

What it means is that your 5th bowler's bowling is more important than his batting at no.7. I would go with Dev/Klusener/Flintoff instead of Symonds at 7 followed by Akram and Warne which gives me enough explosiveness at the end.

I am all for batting Symonds at no.5 or 6 if he was better than Devilliers or Dhoni but that is clearly not the case. It is all about maximizing the output of every single player in the team. Symonds could be the best 12th man though.

 

[honestbharani]

Symonds is not good enough as a batsman to displace any ATG top 6, not good enough as a bowler to displace any other ATG side all-rounder or bowler. And honestly, for 12th man, I would go with Jonty.

 

[The Battlers Prince]

Symonds has a great claim to be better than Jonty as a fielder. It’s his fielding that gets him above most options as a team player. Gives you options batting and bowling and to some of us we consider him the best fielder ever.
Having said that, he’s not a lock for me in any ATG XI, but I’d consider him

 

[stephen]

It's pretty incredible how much Symonds' home record hurts his image. His home average of 29 hurts his overall average immensely. It hides the fact that he averaged 43 away and 66 in neutral matches.

And his 6 year peak was even more remarkable with the bat - he averaged 45 overall but 52 away and 80 in neutral venues.

In fact of all countries that Symonds played 10+ ODIs in, Australia was his worst country. He was an away track bully and was seriously good.

To put his overseas accomplishments into perspective, his overseas+neutral average is the eighth best in history behind Kohli, de Villiers, Babar, Root, Bevan, Williamson and Clarke. The only one of these players who had an earlier career than Symonds was Bevan.

It's safe to say that if Symonds played for any other side he'd have been far more revered than he was playing for Australia.

Why wasn't he as good in Australia as overseas? He faced 23 balls per innings in Australia vs 31 balls per innings in neutral and away games. He also was dismissed more frequently in Australia, with only 7 not outs in 83 matches vs 26 in overseas+neutral matches. His strike rate was also marginally higher at home than away.

I would suggest that Symonds more often arrived at the crease later and tried to hit out sooner at the end of an innings at home than overseas. I would also guess that he was caught less on the boundary overseas than at home due to smaller boundaries. But both of these are guesses. It's quite perplexing when someone is better literally everywhere else in the world than at home.

 

[stephen]

Symonds is not good enough as a batsman to displace any ATG top 6, not good enough as a bowler to displace any other ATG side all-rounder or bowler. And honestly, for 12th man, I would go with Jonty.

One could make a case for Symonds at 6 instead of Dhoni/Bevan in an AT side. So long as the matches aren't being played in Australia.

 

[harsh.ag]

#SmallGroundBully

 

[honestbharani]

One could make a case for Symonds at 6 instead of Dhoni/Bevan in an AT side. So long as the matches aren't being played in Australia.

If you have to use disclaimers, you are already stating clearly the person does not belong in an ATG discussion. And Symonds does not.

 

[Coronis]

If you have to use disclaimers, you are already stating clearly the person does not belong in an ATG discussion. And Symonds does not.

I really don’t care about this particular argument at all, but don’t we often make ATG sides dependent on conditions? (usually inside/outside the subcontinent)

 

[ataraxia]

I really don’t care about this particular argument at all, but don’t we often make ATG sides dependent on conditions? (usually inside/outside the subcontinent)

Nah just a 12th man most of the time (from my experience at least).

 

[Red]

Not really when the majority of the reasons he didn’t bowl as a 5th bowler are because he wasn’t selected as a 5th bowler, it doesn’t really do a lot for the claim that he was a legitimate 5th bowler to the extent needed to carry his less than mediocre batting when coming in as a number 7 (where it is claimed he should be in an ATG team).

Just admit he was regularly selected as a fifth bowler. He clearly was, it's not that hard to admit, surely.

 

[Red]

A top 6 of Tendulkar, Gilchrist, Richards,Kohli, Devilliers and Bevan gives you 55 overs before dismissal. Nothing much changes if Gilchrist and Bevan are replaced by Sharma and Dhoni.

One could add a buffer of as much as 10 overs to account for batting collapses, superior opposition bowling in an ATG team makeup etc, even then your numbers 7,8 and 9 are not needed to bat more than 5 overs in most cases.

What it means is that your 5th bowler's bowling is more important than his batting at no.7. I would go with Dev/Klusener/Flintoff instead of Symonds at 7 followed by Akram and Warne which gives me enough explosiveness at the end.

I am all for batting Symonds at no.5 or 6 if he was better than Devilliers or Dhoni but that is clearly not the case. It is all about maximizing the output of every single player in the team. Symonds could be the best 12th man though.

IF you prioritise fielding in ODIs (which I do) and IF you include Glichrist > Dhoni (which I usually do), then Symonds at 6 makes a lot of sense. Legitimately the best ground fielder I've seen, a devastating batter, and a handy bowler.

FWIW my ATG ODI XI is usually:

Tendulkar
Gilchrist +
Richards
Kohli
DeVilliers
Symonds
Kapil/Pollock/Cairns
Wasim
Garner
Murali
McGrath

 

[stephen]

Yep. There are very few genuinely great lower middle order batsmen. Most either strike really well but are inconsistent (Kapil, Afridi) or don't strike as well but are more consistent (Bevan, Dhoni). Symonds was both consistent and struck well, especially away from home.

 

[stephen]

On a different topic, how do people rate Clarke as an ODI batsman? I was genuinely surprised to find that his away from home average is literally top 7 of all time. He captained a world cup win and was a genuinely good fielder. But he's not often talked about as being an ATG. Why is that so?