Why Do ATG XI's Have More Pacers Than Specialist Spin Bowlers?

[The Sean]

Australian bowling averages at home against RSA, specialist bowlers, 2000-2016:

Hazlewood 22
Johnson 26
MacGill 29
Starc 29
Warne 30
McGrath 31
Siddle 32
Hilfenhaus 36
Bird 37
Pattinson 38
Gillespie 40
Bracken 42
Lee 43
Lyon 46
Hauritz 51
Bollinger 66
Mennie 85
Hastings 153
Krejza 204

Bowling on those pitches against a good batting lineup well-suited to pace and bounce was seriously hard. Australia had an even better batting lineup at the time than RSA, plus they were at home, so averaging low-mid 30s during that period was not really anything to be particularly ashamed about.

The idea that players like Pollock and Anderson just "couldn't bowl in Australia" due to their meh figures there across this period is nonsense - if they'd got to bowl in Australia against West Indies, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, Pakistan etc instead of an ATG batting lineup at home every time, what do you reckon their records would look like then?

I had completely forgotten that Joe Mennie played Test cricket for Australia. Sorry Joe.

 

[TheJediBrah]

You would save a lot of time posting if you spent a little reading what you are replying to.

How are you still trying to backtrack lol

You're wrong, you made a bad point, get over it

 

[Bolo.]

How are you still trying to backtrack lol

You're wrong, you made a bad point, get over it

Burgey made an obvious troll post about pollock not being picked based on his numbers. I specifically use his exact language for a bit of a tongue in cheek retort. Then I remind you again the next post what it is about before having some discussion about Watson.

Having missed the tone of the conversation, and the language being used 3 times, you claim I'm backtracking when I point it out for the 4th time.

Read the posts you bag of spanners.

 

[subshakerz]

**** I hate when you want to say something and then find the thread has moved on 10+ pages.

Anyway... In an ATG team I like the idea of lower order batting as tie breaker. Yes, I'd probably go Hadlee over McGrath, but it's not so clear cut. McGrath achieved a large part of his numbers in the roads era. The gap between Hadlee and him in bowling is not as small as it looks. But I could easily take Hadlee as well. But Imran doesn't get a look in. His numbers are built on two different players. He was immense as a bowler, or as a lower order bat, but not together. Hadlee did his thing across his career. Plus Hadlee won't have cameras watching him work the ball as an issue to worry about.

Not this again. It has been thoroughly debunked.

 

[Burgey]

Australian bowling averages at home against RSA, specialist bowlers, 2000-2016:

Hazlewood 22
Johnson 26
MacGill 29
Starc 29
Warne 30
McGrath 31
Siddle 32
Hilfenhaus 36
Bird 37
Pattinson 38
Gillespie 40
Bracken 42
Lee 43
Lyon 46
Hauritz 51
Bollinger 66
Mennie 85
Hastings 153
Krejza 204

Bowling on those pitches against a good batting lineup well-suited to pace and bounce was seriously hard. Australia had an even better batting lineup at the time than RSA, plus they were at home, so averaging low-mid 30s during that period was not really anything to be particularly ashamed about.

The idea that players like Pollock and Anderson just "couldn't bowl in Australia" due to their meh figures there across this period is nonsense - if they'd got to bowl in Australia against West Indies, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, Pakistan etc instead of an ATG batting lineup at home every time, what do you reckon their records would look like then?

Anderson couldn't bowl in Australia though, even when Aus was fielding moderate sides. He barely created a chance here after 2011. He was embarrassing. In fact, he was even worse in England vs Australia. Woeful. Decks like Headingley 2023 weren't his kryptonite, playing against Australia was. Averaged 34 here and 36 overall vs Aus. A staggering 39 at home vs Aus!!! 39!!! Meant to be an ATG? ATG joke itbt.

T H I R T Y S I X / T H I R T Y N I N E
H
I
R
T
Y
S
I
X
/
T
H
I
R
T
Y
N
I
N
E

Embarrassing.

 

[subshakerz]

Anderson couldn't bowl in Australia though, even when Aus was fielding moderate sides. He barely created a chance here after 2011. He was embarrassing. In fact, he was even worse in England vs Australia. Woeful. Decks like Headingley 2023 weren't his kryptonite, playing against Australia was. Averaged 34 here and 36 overall vs Aus. A staggering 39 at home vs Aus!!! 39!!! Meant to be an ATG? ATG joke itbt.

T H I R T Y S I X / T H I R T Y N I N E
H
I
R
T
Y
S
I
X
/
T
H
I
R
T
Y
N
I
N
E

Embarrassing.

What about the 2010 tour?

 

[Burgey]

What about the 2010 tour?

This is like saying Ponting played decently in India in 2008 when he made 3 x 50s or whatever it was and therefore was ok there overall. He wasn't. Anderson was bad here, and worse vs Aus at home.

 

[Victor Ian]

That's bull**** tbh. He was a decent lower order bat and ATG bowler from 80-88

All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

**** me. If I can have 80s bowling Imran, batting like that, he's a shoe in over Hadlee. ***** a wanker anyway.

Who's the culprit that sucked me into the two Imran's myth?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Burgey made an obvious troll post about pollock not being picked based on his numbers. I specifically use his exact language for a bit of a tongue in cheek retort. Then I remind you again the next post what it is about before having some discussion about Watson.

Having missed the tone of the conversation, and the language being used 3 times, you claim I'm backtracking when I point it out for the 4th time.

Read the posts you bag of spanners.

- make bad argument
- get corrected
- try to argue back, keep being wrong
- keep getting corrected
- make a dozen posts trying to backtrack/explain/argue original bad point

. . . "I was joking the whole time didn't you get it"

lol bro. Just take the correction next time.

Or after being corrected the first time, if it was really just a "tongue in cheek retort" you would have literally just said "oh yeah I know Watson wasn't really making the team I was just exaggerating as a joke" instead of keeping on putting forth a dozen equally bad arguments as to why your initial post was actually true

 

[subshakerz]

This is like saying Ponting played decently in India in 2008 when he made 3 x 50s or whatever it was and therefore was ok there overall. He wasn't. Anderson was bad here, and worse vs Aus at home.

Yeah but it's misleading to call him an outright failure in Australia. Most pace bowlers would give an arm and leg to have one series-winning performance in their career in Australia.

Given Anderson's bowling style, it is the most that can be expected. He was only outright bad in 2006 and 2013. 2017 and 2021 he was ok, just not very penetrative but not bad.

I agree in England he has been bad vs Australia for some reason.

 

[Bolo.]

- make bad argument
- get corrected
- try to argue back, keep being wrong
- keep getting corrected
- make a dozen posts trying to backtrack/explain/argue original bad point

. . . "I was joking the whole time didn't you get it"

lol bro. Just take the correction next time.

Or after being corrected the first time, if it was really just a "tongue in cheek retort" you would have literally just said "oh yeah I know Watson wasn't really making the team I was just exaggerating as a joke" instead of keeping on putting forth a dozen equally bad arguments as to why your initial post was actually true

How do you still think you have any idea you have you know what you are talking about?

You have missed what what was said in 3 posts.
You have missed the tone conveyed by 2 (3 after my last one).
You have ignored 2 requests to just read the thread (3 after this one I assume).

Read the thread.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah but it's misleading to call him an outright failure in Australia. Most pace bowlers would give an arm and leg to have one series-winning performance in their career in Australia.

Given Anderson's bowling style, it is the most that can be expected. He was only outright bad in 2006 and 2013. 2017 and 2021 he was ok, just not very penetrative but not bad.

I agree in England he has been bad vs Australia for some reason.

Dud

 

[TheJediBrah]

How do you still think you have any idea you have you know what you are talking about?

You have missed what what was said in 3 posts.
You have missed the tone conveyed by 2 (3 after my last one).
You have ignored 2 requests to just read the thread (3 after this one I assume).

Read the thread.

Your first mistake was making an error in the first place
Your second was doubling and tripling down on it
Your third was thinking I would let it go if you obfuscated enough! I can do all this day m8

For real no disrespect, I love talking about this stuff and you are never going to come close to my level of knowledge about this era of Australian cricket. But I've had fun so I for one am not going to resort to name calling

Let's just agree that Shane Watson was never good enough to make that side, and didn't make the full strength side (literally never played more than 1 game in a row even qith injuries lol) and call it a day. You can pretend you were joking the whole time it's fine I don't mind

 

[ankitj]

That's bull**** tbh. He was a decent lower order bat and ATG bowler from 80-88

All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

This is cheating level of brilliance. Such crazy numbers by opposition and by host country. Why did he ruin his legacy by joining politics?

 

[Bolo.]

Your first mistake was making an error in the first place
Your second was doubling and tripling down on it
Your third was thinking I would let it go if you obfuscated enough! I can do all this day m8

For real no disrespect, I love talking about this stuff and you are never going to come close to my level of knowledge about this era of Australian cricket. But I've had fun so I for one am not going to resort to name calling

Let's just agree that Shane Watson was never good enough to make that side, and didn't make the full strength side (literally never played more than 1 game in a row even qith injuries lol) and call it a day. You can pretend you were joking the whole time it's fine I don't mind

Read the thread. The points you have been trying to raise are tangential, and have only come up because you weren't paying attention to what Burgey and I actually wrote at the start.

I'm not even sure there would be a difference of opinion if you weren't arguing against something I didn't claim.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Read the thread. The points you have been trying to raise are tangential, and have only come up because you weren't paying attention to what Burgey and I actually wrote at the start.

I'm not even sure there would be a difference of opinion if you weren't arguing against something I didn't claim.

Nah bro. It wasn't your first post, you kept arguing and made multiple erroneous assertions.

If it was a misunderstanding as you're claiming you would have literally just said "i was joking" or "i didn't mean it that way" on your second response rather than arguing back digging a deeper hole. Also it would also make your whole line of arguing irrelevant to the discussion about Pollock making the team anyway. So it's either wrong, irrelevant or both.

Not letting you out of it that easily!

 

[_00_deathscar]

**** I hate when you want to say something and then find the thread has moved on 10+ pages.

Anyway... In an ATG team I like the idea of lower order batting as tie breaker. Yes, I'd probably go Hadlee over McGrath, but it's not so clear cut. McGrath achieved a large part of his numbers in the roads era. The gap between Hadlee and him in bowling is not as small as it looks. But I could easily take Hadlee as well. But Imran doesn't get a look in. His numbers are built on two different players. He was immense as a bowler, or as a lower order bat, but not together. Hadlee did his thing across his career. Plus Hadlee won't have cameras watching him work the ball as an issue to worry about.

If batting factors in to a choice of bowlers, how much does fielding factor in to choosing batsmen? Kallis' slip fielding must be considered when picking batsmen. But how about Ponting? Sure, the end of his career has bumped him below Lara and Tendulkar, but his fielding everywhere is worth so much more than those few runs per innings in batting. In an ATG encounter you don't want to give great batsmen easy singles. You need them staying put so your bowlers can work their plans.

This post is so contrasting it’s quite hilarious.

McGrath/Hadlee/Imran are far closer as bowlers, so the primary skill they must be considered for, than Kallis is to Lara/Sachin if it’s a “only select one” criteria.

 

[trundler]

**** me. If I can have 80s bowling Imran, batting like that, he's a shoe in over Hadlee. ****s a wanker anyway.

Who's the culprit that sucked me into the two Imran's myth?

It's just blatantly false. The man is one of 3 players to score a century and take a 10 wicket haul in the same test.

The culprit may be a certain gentleman who has devoted his last 10 years to peddling this myth despite being thoroughly rebuked and debunked several times.

 

[Victor Ian]

This post is so contrasting it’s quite hilarious.

McGrath/Hadlee/Imran are far closer as bowlers, so the primary skill they must be considered for, than Kallis is to Lara/Sachin if it’s a “only select one” criteria.

No, not really, when you are just basing it on stats. You can try and say Kallis is not in the league of Tendulkar and Lara all you like, but the Shrek put up numbers that are not so easy to brush aside. He may not be ***y (neither was Shrek) but he did the job well enough to outgun them in the years he played. Tendulkar and Lara can't even get near an average of 503 in Zimbabwe.

Why would you pick Tendulkar or Lara over Kallis. He has done everything they have done in a comparable way and had the harder home conditions of the trio.

 

[Victor Ian]

It's just blatantly false. The man is one of 3 players to score a century and take a 10 wicket haul in the same test.

The culprit may be a certain gentleman who has devoted his last 10 years to peddling this myth despite being thoroughly rebuked and debunked several times.

Who is that? I need to severely dislike him.