The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[kyear2]

Just a comparative look at other 11's released:

Geoff Armstrong
Grace, Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Pollock, Sobers, Gilchrist, Imran, Marshall, Warne, Barnes

Cricinfo
Hutton, Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards, Sobers, Gilchrist, Marshall, Akram, Warne, Lillee

Geoffrey Boycott
Hobbs, Hutton, Bradman, Headley, Richards, Sobers, Knott, Marshall, Warne, Lillee, Barnes

Bleacher
Hobbs, Sutcliffe, Bradman, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Miller, Imran, Warne, Marshall, Barnes

Benaud
Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, Richards, Tendulkar, Sobers, Imran, Gilchrist, Warne, Lillee, Barnes

CricketWeb
Hobbs, Hutton, Bradman, Richards, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Imran, Marshall, Warne, Mcgrath

Christopher Martin-Jenkins
Grace, Hobbs, Bradman, Richards, Hammond, Sobers, Gilchrist, Marshall, Warne, Barnes, Mcgrath

 

[kyear2]

Bradman: 7
Sobers: 7
Hobbs: 7
Warne:7

Marshall: 6
Gilchrist:6

Tendulkar: 5
Richards: 5
Barnes: 5

Imran: 4

Hutton: 3
Lillee: 3

 

[The Sean]

Interesting to see how consistent most of those teams are: Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Marshall and Warne all virtual locks, with Richards, Imran and Barnes not far behind. The final spot - the second opener - has a clear leader in Hutton. Giving a combined team of:

Hobbs
Hutton
Bradman
Tendulkar
Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist
Imran
Marshall
Warne
Barnes

Lillee 12th Man

 

[kyear2]

Interesting to see how consistent most of those teams are: Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Marshall and Warne all virtual locks, with Richards, Imran and Barnes not far behind. The final spot - the second opener - has a clear leader in Hutton. Giving a combined team of:

Hobbs
Hutton
Bradman
Tendulkar
Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist
Imran
Marshall
Warne
Barnes

Lillee 12th Man

Pretty much, the batting (except for the second opener) is much easier to choose compared to the last two bowling selections.

 

[kyear2]

All-time World XI: Gideon Haigh on all-time XIs | All-time XIs | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

Nice article

Has Haigh ever released his xi

 

[Cabinet96]

He was on the jury for Cricinfo's one, so he obviously has made one. Never come across it though.

 

[watson]

All-time World XI: Gideon Haigh on all-time XIs | All-time XIs | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

Nice article

Has Haigh ever released his xi

I like Haigh's concluding paragraph;

So why perform an exercise that seems meretricious, intellectually flawed and is almost bound to mislead? Two reasons. First, it cajoles us into contemplating the past, for which the modern game, which wants our money rather than our love, gives us little encouragement. Second, in superficially obscuring differences, it forces us to acknowledge them: we have to pretend that the world of cricket has not changed because we know it has. Oh, one other reason: because it's fun, and ultimately, although it is so easy to forget in this grim present, that is what we're here for.

 

[L Trumper]

Pretty much, the batting (except for the second opener) is much easier to choose compared to the last two bowling selections.

I don't think even second opener is up for debate.

Hobbs - Hutton - Don - Sachin - Viv - Sobers can be considered the batting line up for best XI. And we can probably add Gilly, Marshall, Warne to that list. So probably 9 places filled.

Remaining are generally a fight between Lillee, Imran, Barnes and probably Akram(I personally prefer Davidson if we are to go for left arm variation, having said that with sobers there no need for another left arm) or Murali.

Also the great thing about that batting line up is, if we look at chronologically there are pretty much the best batsman of their era.

Hobbs 1908-30
Don 29-38, 46-48
Hutton 38, 46-55
Sobers 55-73
Viv 74-91
Sachin 89-2013*

Its as if a baton passed from one generation to other. And they all pretty much perfectly fit into the 6 slots. I am not sure whether any future batsman can break into that line up. Would be very interesting to see.

 

[Coronis]

I don't think even second opener is up for debate.

Hobbs - Hutton - Don - Sachin - Viv - Sobers can be considered the batting line up for best XI. And we can probably add Gilly, Marshall, Warne to that list. So probably 9 places filled.

Remaining are generally a fight between Lillee, Imran, Barnes and probably Akram(I personally prefer Davidson if we are to go for left arm variation, having said that with sobers there no need for another left arm) or Murali.

Also the great thing about that batting line up is, if we look at chronologically there are pretty much the best batsman of their era.

Hobbs 1908-30
Don 29-38, 46-48
Hutton 38, 46-55
Sobers 55-73
Viv 74-91
Sachin 89-2013*

Its as if a baton passed from one generation to other. And they all pretty much perfectly fit into the 6 slots. I am not sure whether any future batsman can break into that line up. Would be very interesting to see.

Tendulkar has not been the best batsman for 24 years. Also, I don't see how 3/7 makes Hutton a surefire selection but maybe thats just me..

An old XI, but still, it was Bradman's (2001)
Richards, Morris, Bradman, Tendulkar, Sobers, Tallon, Lindwall, Lillee, Bedser, O'Reilly, Grimmett.

 

[Red]

I don't think even second opener is up for debate.

Hobbs - Hutton - Don - Sachin - Viv - Sobers can be considered the batting line up for best XI. And we can probably add Gilly, Marshall, Warne to that list. So probably 9 places filled.

Remaining are generally a fight between Lillee, Imran, Barnes and probably Akram(I personally prefer Davidson if we are to go for left arm variation, having said that with sobers there no need for another left arm) or Murali.

Also the great thing about that batting line up is, if we look at chronologically there are pretty much the best batsman of their era.

Hobbs 1908-30
Don 29-38, 46-48
Hutton 38, 46-55
Sobers 55-73
Viv 74-91
Sachin 89-2013*

Its as if a baton passed from one generation to other. And they all pretty much perfectly fit into the 6 slots. I am not sure whether any future batsman can break into that line up. Would be very interesting to see.

I think there are plenty of other great middle order players that should be considered. I don't think it's as clear cut as you make out. G.Chappell, Hammond, G.Pollock, Kallis and Lara are all very legit contenders for either Viv or Tendulkar's spots imo.

 

[centurymaker]

I think there are plenty of other great middle order players that should be considered. I don't think it's as clear cut as you make out. G.Chappell, Hammond, G.Pollock, Kallis and Lara are all very legit contenders for either Viv or Tendulkar's spots imo.

Hobbs
Hutton/Gavaskar
Bradman
Tendulkar/Kallis
Viv/Chappell
Sobers
Gilly
Imran/Lillee
Warne
Marshall
McGrath

This is what an All time XI should look like IMO. It covers all eras. Includes players from most top sides. Has 1 great fast bowler from each of WI, Pak and Aus. (and all three are unique in their way of bowling). Has batsmen/batting-allrounders from different eras in the middle order (4,5,6) and has enough players from the modern era and 70/80s

 

[centurymaker]

Tendulkar has not been the best batsman for 24 years. Also, I don't see how 3/7 makes Hutton a surefire selection but maybe thats just me..

An old XI, but still, it was Bradman's (2001)
Richards, Morris, Bradman, Tendulkar, Sobers, Tallon, Lindwall, Lillee, Bedser, O'Reilly, Grimmett.

so wasn't viv richards? the point he is making is that all those batsmen were the stand-out batsmen from their respective eras.

Imo only chappell and kallis are the strong condenders to replace viv and tendulkar, respectively, in the side.

Only very biased line-ups would have Lara, Hammond, or Pollock.

-Pollock didn't play enough.
-If you pick Hammond, you are devaluing the cricket that has been played in the last 40 years, which probably makes up at least 75 % of all cricket, by picking another batsman from the old days.
-Finally, there's no place for lara when there's guys like Bradman, viv richards, sobers and gilly. I'd much rather have a technically proficient batsman/batting-allrounder like Tendulkar or Kallis. Plus, I think tendulkar passed him as a batsman long time back and kallis as a batting AR is now ahead too

 

[centurymaker]

For one of the fast bowling spots, it's hard to pick anyone over McGrath from the last 20 odd years. His longevity is second to none.

and for the other, it has be Marshall. He was the stand out bowler of his era.

and then there's no better contender for the 3rd quick bowling spot than imran khan.
When you have McGrath, you don't need Hadlee.

if not imran, then lillee.

 

[watson]

Aubrey Faulkner was highly ranked by Jack Hobbs as a leg-spinner, and was known for his accuracy. He also made some very good runs for South Africa.

One of the earliest exponents of the googly, he differed from other bowlers of that type because of his ability to send down quite a fast ball, almost a yorker, and when at his best, with faultless length, skill in turning the ball either way and a puzzling variation of flight he proved too much for some of the world's greatest batsmen.

Wisden - George Aubrey Faulkner

So is there a case for playing Faulkner in an ATG XI? If he does play then he and Murali would make a pretty formidable spin bowling combo, while at the same time allowing enough room at the bottom of the order for 3 top notch fast bowlers. All pitch conditions would be catered for.

01. Jack Hobbs
02. Len Hutton
03. Don Bradman
04. Sachin Tendulkar
05. Gary Sobers
06. Aubrey Faulkner
07. Adam Gilchrist
08. Malcolm Marshall
09. Dennis Lillee
10. Glenn McGrath
11. Muttiah Muralitharan

Obviously Benaud is not good enough to bat in the top 6, and Mushtaq Mohammed is an excellent batsman but not quite good enough with the ball.

 

[Howe_zat]

He's a better bowler than Sobers but while the latter is going to be there anyway, it seems more efficient not to waste his skills and bowl him, and play a more accomplished batsman in Faulkner's place.

 

[Jager]

If you only play five specialist batsmen but the majority of your bowlers are talented with the bat, does it make up for it?

 

[kyear2]

I don't think even second opener is up for debate.

Hobbs - Hutton - Don - Sachin - Viv - Sobers can be considered the batting line up for best XI. And we can probably add Gilly, Marshall, Warne to that list. So probably 9 places filled.

Remaining are generally a fight between Lillee, Imran, Barnes and probably Akram(I personally prefer Davidson if we are to go for left arm variation, having said that with sobers there no need for another left arm) or Murali.

Also the great thing about that batting line up is, if we look at chronologically there are pretty much the best batsman of their era.

Hobbs 1908-30
Don 29-38, 46-48
Hutton 38, 46-55
Sobers 55-73
Viv 74-91
Sachin 89-2013*

Its as if a baton passed from one generation to other. And they all pretty much perfectly fit into the 6 slots. I am not sure whether any future batsman can break into that line up. Would be very interesting to see.

Pretty much agree, though Gavaskar does push Hutton pretty hard. Lara is just a hair behind Tendulkar (but he is behind), Chappell looses out to Richards and Headley and Hammond were just unfortunate to play in the same era as the Don.
I do belive though that if Barry Richards and Mike Procter had played more they would have been certain slections for their positions of #2 and 8 respectively. The last two spots are the difficult ones though I belive that Mcgrath takes one. Hadlee is not in the same class as Mcgrath as he basically played all his cricket in Aus, N.Z and England and his S.C stats and boosted by playing a very weak Sri Lankan infant minnow side.

Bradman, Sobers, Hobbs, Warne and Richards are the Wisden cricketers of the Century, Tendulkar's numbers are beyond reproach, Marshall is the greatest fast bowler to play the game, who succeeded everywere and againts everyone and who dispite a changing and aging W.I team was the greatest match winner who never lost a test series and only four matches as an opening bowler (his prime). Mcgrath's case is similar to Tendulkars and he was also a match winner. Hutton played againts the greatest attacks bridged by a war and a horendous injury and broke Bradman's record with the great man at cover when he was 21 facing Tiger O'Reilly. Gilly changed the game while batting like Viv and keeping to the magician like a genius.
Mcgrath is the most contentious of those listed above, but with time I belive that we will appreciate more what he has accomplished. Until then he will fight with Barnes and Lillee for his place.

 

[kyear2]

If you only play five specialist batsmen but the majority of your bowlers are talented with the bat, does it make up for it?

No.

 

[Jager]

No.

That's a matter of opinion. Can you please top making statements like they're fact?

 

[L Trumper]

Tendulkar has not been the best batsman for 24 years. Also, I don't see how 3/7 makes Hutton a surefire selection but maybe thats just me..

An old XI, but still, it was Bradman's (2001)
Richards, Morris, Bradman, Tendulkar, Sobers, Tallon, Lindwall, Lillee, Bedser, O'Reilly, Grimmett.

That's not the point I am making.
As far as 3/7 for hutton, the reason for that is people considering WG Grace for that spot. I am selecting XI since 1900 only, not before that.