Would you play Keith Miller in your Australia ATG XI?

[capt_Luffy]

@Coronis argues that Walcott may not qualify as a true keeper bat since he only kept early career before his batting blossomed.

Still averaged 40 odd though. Ofcourse you can't expect him to average 56 while keeping

 

[subshakerz]

Still averaged 40 odd though. Ofcourse you can't expect him to average 56 while keeping

Yeah also batting at no.7 may change his flow.

 

[kyear2]

He was double a world class bat when Hammond, Hobbs and Hutton were around. Hell, his retirement is close enough to Sobers debut that we can make a comparison there too!


It's weird to accept, as yes he could get a peach first ball and get a duck, but the reality is he tonned up every 2 matches for 2 decades. He really was that good

During that era between the great wars, at least before the WI bowlers became a threat, there were two test standard attacks. One had a top 3 ATG spinner and a great spinner and the other had the other had an assortment of good pacers who were totally ineffective on the flat Australia pitches, and on the dry English ones.

Hammond and Bradman, as much as they existed in parallel, didn't face the same test level attacks, because they had the only 2, and one was superior to the other. O'Reilly and Grimmett were so much more effective on those pitches than pacers were. Then when the WI developed a few pacers, Hammond went to the Caribbean while Hammond faces them again, at home. Hammond literally averaged 75 in Australia before the war.

Hobbs was almost as dominant as Bradman in the pre war era, which was a far more difficult batting era. And he was head and shoulders above everyone else. By the time he reached Bradman's era to which you're making the comparison, he was in his 40's and still averaging well over 50.

Hutton was I believe 23 when the war started and already had broken the world test record. He broke the world record, vs O'Reilly at 22. The conditions he faced after the war was the exact opposite of what Bradman faced. Bradman batted in the flattest if conditions during the flattest era of test cricket. Hutton after the war and while carrying an injury, played in one of the toughest. The pitches were spiced up in the 50's to at the time, unprecedented levels, and even before then he was confronted with Lindwall, Miller out the gate. He also travelled so much more than Bradman did. As close as he was to the time Bradman played, they didn't play the same game and in no human way, was Bradman twice the batsman Sir Leonard Hutton was.

Sobers debuted right after as well, but again, the pictures in the 50's (WI apart) and he faced Lindwall, Miller, Benaud, Davidson, Lillee, Trueman, Snow, Underwood, the quartet, Fazal etc etc. Not to add the insane travel and workloads he took on.

There's so much ignored context when the "Bradman was worth two batsmen" conversation comes up.

He was better, but he was not nearly twice as good as Hammond, Hutton or Sobers. Hutton opened for a England in the 50's, on those pitches.

 

[kyear2]

Marshall, Ambrose and Holding on pace friendly wickets are just slightly more deadly than Lillee, McGrath and Cummins/Lindwall/Davo.

Gilchrist is outmatched by Walcott as keeperbat.

So you have Bradman advantage vs relative strength of all the rest of the WI bats.

People are going to be pissed, but...

Maco is the GOAT. Ambrose form '88 - '94 was as good as if not better than McGrath, and better than any version of Lillee. Holding was every bit the equal of Lillee in the 70's. Gibbs played too long and wrecked his numbers a bit but he wasn't a liability.

And I'm not saying either is better, but the notion that any team is dominating this one is dominating this attack isn't grounded in reality.

If Australia as is recommended by many bats Miller at 6, the WI batsmen is at least on par. And while all of the WI batsmen were tested by great and ATG bowlers, and tough eras the same can't be said for Ponting, Bradman, Miller or Hayden. Even Gilchrist, who had some clutch performances, but primarily batted in the same era as Haydos and Punter and someone escapes the same criticisms. Border at 6 is a major plus, at least imho.

Yes it would be a contest, even SA would be a handful for both.

 

[subshakerz]

People are going to be pissed, but...

Maco is the GOAT. Ambrose form '88 - '94 was as good as if not better than McGrath, and better than any version of Lillee. Holding was every bit the equal of Lillee in the 70's. Gibbs played too long and wrecked his numbers a bit but he wasn't a liability.

And I'm not saying either is better, but the notion that any team is dominating this one is dominating this attack isn't grounded in reality.

If Australia as is recommended by many bats Miller at 6, the WI batsmen is at least on par. And while all of the WI batsmen were tested by great and ATG bowlers, and tough eras the same can't be said for Ponting, Bradman, Miller or Hayden. Even Gilchrist, who had some clutch performances, but primarily batted in the same era as Haydos and Punter and someone escapes the same criticisms. Border at 6 is a major plus, at least imho.

Yes it would be a contest, even SA would be a handful for both.

The kicker to me is having a super aggressive dominator like Sobers come at no.6, basically the best bat in either side after Bradman, facing tired bowlers and a soft ball.

Imagine if Lara is in the mood, the two are going to grind out massive partnerships.

 

[stephen]

How the **** is NZ even close to India??

Now that India have Bumrah you might be right. An attack led by Kapil has a glaring weakness, especially in NZ. Hadlee and Bond are light years ahead as an opening partnership. But yes, it's been a few years since I looked in detail at the two sides but last time I did the Indian pace stocks were awful and a glaring weakness.

 

[stephen]

Against the WI, Waugh and Border at 5 and 6, who made their name against the best WI bowling attacks is a huge combination. And if you want to drop Waugh and place G Chapell there, you're also picking a guy who played against those great WI attacks and succeeded.

Gilchrist will be facing a soft, old ball and is going to cash in (the same argument made for Sobers).

Outside Bradman, there is little between the batting between the WI and the Aus AT sides. The advantage Sobers gives at 6 is made up for by the Gilchrist advantage at 7. Australia's second opener is better than the WI second opener even if Greenidge is better than any Australian opener. Smith and Lara are peers. It really is the case of splitting hairs.

 

[kyear2]

Lol. Viv was a great, but arguing he outclasses Smith against top quality pace is ludicrous.

Any arguable pace advantage that the WI have over Australia (and it's arguable) is at most marginal. Warne completely outclasses any spin option that the WI have.

The WI all time side would be fighting the England all time side for a spot in the final against Australia. South Africa would round out the top 4. Pakistan, New Zealand and India would make 5-7, probably in that order.

Steve Smith isn't in the same league vs pace as Viv Richards.

Yes, Warne outclasses any spinner the WI has, he like Murali, also struggled, like really struggled, vs every good player of spin he faced. He's not nearly the factor he's being made out to be.

Now for the reason I'm responding. "Fighting with England"? South Africa is easily a better team than England and would be giving Australia much more trouble than England would us. What bowlers do they have to trouble the WI? Trueman? Of every match in played in England and even then... And that's it.

Australia and the WI easily in the final, SA giving either trouble to get there.

None of the other teams have complete squads to compete. Pakistan comes closest overall, but the batting isn't up to the others. Bowling is enough to give everyone trouble though.

But England, lacks the bowlers, and besides Hutton, who has faced and conquered a bowling attack close to that of the Windies?

India better than NZ though, they would be more competitive at home. NZ better on the road though.

 

[kyear2]

India atg xi is better then nz atg xi.more atg bats much more dynamic wk and much much better spinners. 5 th spot would be fight between ind vs pak

Think Pakistan's bowling edge is too much for India tbh.

 

[kyear2]

@Coronis argues that Walcott may not qualify as a true keeper bat since he only kept early career before his batting blossomed.

Coronis is welcome to his opinion, but Walcott made the WI team as a keeper and stopped after a back injury. He made the shortlist for the Cricinfo exercise and fell just short of making the team there.

He was a world class keeper to spin and was masterful to Ramadhin and Valentine. @JBMAC rates him above many modern keepers.

 

[ma1978]

Think Pakistan's bowling edge is too much for India tbh.

nah India’s batting is better than Pakistani’s by a much wider margin than the bowling difference esp w Bumrah but also the spinners.

 

[kyear2]

The kicker to me is having a super aggressive dominator like Sobers come at no.6, basically the best bat in either side after Bradman, facing tired bowlers and a soft ball.

Imagine if Lara is in the mood, the two are going to grind out massive partnerships.

And without the burden of bowling 40 overs a match.

Just as much a mismatch at 6 as is being discussed on the other side.

 

[kyear2]

nah India’s batting is better than Pakistani’s by a much wider margin than the bowling difference esp w Bumrah but also the spinners.

In a series between the two and both pitches are taking spin, yeah India may have an advantage. But Imran, Wasim and Waqar are a handful for any team.

 

[kyear2]

Against the WI, Waugh and Border at 5 and 6, who made their name against the best WI bowling attacks is a huge combination. And if you want to drop Waugh and place G Chapell there, you're also picking a guy who played against those great WI attacks and succeeded.

Gilchrist will be facing a soft, old ball and is going to cash in (the same argument made for Sobers).

Outside Bradman, there is little between the batting between the WI and the Aus AT sides. The advantage Sobers gives at 6 is made up for by the Gilchrist advantage at 7. Australia's second opener is better than the WI second opener even if Greenidge is better than any Australian opener. Smith and Lara are peers. It really is the case of splitting hairs.

I agree with you that it would be a close contest, and that Chappell and Border at 5 and 6 are musts.

Think we're underselling one player in particular a tad.

I, and you obviously disagree, believe that peak Viv was as good as any batsman who ever lived and a Vivian Richards selected from Anywhere from '76 to '80 is a trump card for the Windies.

 

[Red]

Marshall, Ambrose and Holding on pace friendly wickets are just slightly more deadly than Lillee, McGrath and Cummins/Lindwall/Davo.

why?

 

[subshakerz]

why?

Their relative standing as pacers and Ambrose and Holding especially have awesome records in Aus.

 

[subshakerz]

nah India’s batting is better than Pakistani’s by a much wider margin than the bowling difference esp w Bumrah but also the spinners.

Bowling matters more in tests but Ind in Ind have an advantage, Pak everywhere else. Plus Pak batting is likely the best against spin of any side outside India.

 

[subshakerz]

Against the WI, Waugh and Border at 5 and 6, who made their name against the best WI bowling attacks is a huge combination. And if you want to drop Waugh and place G Chapell there, you're also picking a guy who played against those great WI attacks and succeeded.

Gilchrist will be facing a soft, old ball and is going to cash in (the same argument made for Sobers).

Outside Bradman, there is little between the batting between the WI and the Aus AT sides. The advantage Sobers gives at 6 is made up for by the Gilchrist advantage at 7. Australia's second opener is better than the WI second opener even if Greenidge is better than any Australian opener. Smith and Lara are peers. It really is the case of splitting hairs.

Yeah if Aus don't have Miller at 6 and have Chappell and Border instead, I give them the batting edge, tho I don't think you can compare Sobers and Gilly.

 

[Coronis]

Coronis is welcome to his opinion, but Walcott made the WI team as a keeper and stopped after a back injury. He made the shortlist for the Cricinfo exercise and fell just short of making the team there.

He was a world class keeper to spin and was masterful to Ramadhin and Valentine. @JBMAC rates him above many modern keepers.

ftr, I never said anything regarding his keeping. I mentioned he was not in Gilchrist’s league as a keeper-batsman, which is quite obvious.

He’s basically Sanga 50 years previously.

 

[kyear2]

ftr, I never said anything regarding his keeping. I mentioned he was not in Gilchrist’s league as a keeper-batsman, which is quite obvious.

He’s basically Sanga 50 years previously.

He averaged 40 as a keeper and that was before his batting peak.

He wasn't as good, but he wasn't too far off.

They both played on some dire home tracks though, while Walcott away had some challenging ones.

Think they are pretty close.