-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread
- Thread starter Red
- Start date
trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
There have been batsmen that have gone from 60 to 35 in successive halves of their careers. Harvey and Morris spring to mind. But even a high 30s/low 40s average is serviceable. Botham went from Miller to Chris Harris. The most puzzling thing is that both of those periods went on for quite a while.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'd say a steady fast bowler so Anderson. Barnes can slow down and be the leggie. Don't think Flintoff cuts it as a frontline bowler but the 3 all rounders do make up for the runs somewhat.
Howe_zat
Audio File
It’s hard to add anyone without making one of Flintoff or Stokes look superfluous. Adding a bowler means Stokes is the 5th best seamer in a 6-man attack and should probably make way for a batsman that has twice as many hundreds. Adding a batsman means Flintoff at eight or nine and you have two guys in an all time attack who took their wickets in the 30s.
Perhaps if you started with Stokes-Grieg-Botham and then added another bowler it’d look a bit more like everyone has a role.
Perhaps if you started with Stokes-Grieg-Botham and then added another bowler it’d look a bit more like everyone has a role.
Last edited:
morgieb
Request Your Custom Title Now!
It's a little bit more complex than that....
The first period he was basically Keith Miller with a larger bowling workload; probably the best all-rounder of all time.
The second period had two parts:
1982/83 to 1986/87 - he averaged 31 with the bat and 35 with the ball. Not great figures by any means, but for an all-rounder you'd take it and you could easily make a career on those figures. Bowling wise it was a big decline, but frankly the decline there had already started post the 81 Ashes.
1987 onwards he averaged 22 with the bat and 54 with the ball. That is flat out terrible, but he only played 13 Tests in that period.
So while the gap is extreme, it's for a different reason to what people might otherwise think.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
It is better than Mohammad Sami for sure but quite possibly worse than Ramprakash. An average of 26 with the bat and 38 with the ball is arguably worse than an average of 26 with the bat and not picking up a ball.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
Didn't realize that.. Beefy was better then.
wpdavid
Hall of Fame Member
I'm guessing that was around 1979? If so, lots of others would have lost points due to playing WSC instead of test cricket.
Same reason that England were retrospectively ranked number 1 in the world at one point in 1979, iirc.
Last edited:
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
July 1982 against India.
wpdavid
Hall of Fame Member
It looks like he had a really good run of matches in consecutive series against India
https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...s=1;template=results;type=allround;view=match
I remembered the double hundred, but not how consistent he'd been in both series.
But not many of us thought he was the 3rd best bat in the world, even so.
harsh.ag
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Think so. Only Smith, Kohli, Williamson, Babar better for sure
bagapath
International Captain
This is bang on
For a few years... He was the best since Bradman... on par with Sobers.
Then he was bad and no one realised it for a while. Waiting for the magic to come back. Didn't happen.
Then he became terrible, after the 86-87 Ahes... after his last century and last five fer.. . And faded away...
Red
The normal awards that everyone else has
Hutton
Hobbs
Barrington
May
Compton
Stokes/Botham
Knott +
Barnes
Snow/Bedser/Anderson
Trueman
Laker
Positions up for dispute, imo, are the bolded ones. Could make an argument for Swann, Verity or Rhodes as the spinner, but I'd take Laker.
There's pros and cons for Botham or Stokes. Stokes is going to end up the more consistent cricketer over a long period of time, injury permitting.
Hobbs
Barrington
May
Compton
Stokes/Botham
Knott +
Barnes
Snow/Bedser/Anderson
Trueman
Laker
Positions up for dispute, imo, are the bolded ones. Could make an argument for Swann, Verity or Rhodes as the spinner, but I'd take Laker.
There's pros and cons for Botham or Stokes. Stokes is going to end up the more consistent cricketer over a long period of time, injury permitting.
trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Did you just.. leave out Walter Hammond? *gasp*
Also, Hammond at 3 and Barrington at 5 makes way more sense given where each usually batted
Red
The normal awards that everyone else has
Yeh, accidentally. Actually, Stokes and Botham are both dropped now.
Hutton
Hobbs
Barrington
May
Hammond
Compton
Knott +
Barnes
Snow/Bedser/Anderson
Trueman
Laker