• 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.

Imran v Hadlee v Miller

kyear2

kyear2

Well-known member
stephen said:
Miller - player who will improve any side in history the most
Hadlee - the best choice for an ATXI
Imran - the player with the most impactful career (and the best post- retirement job)
Click to expand...
Think I agree with this assessment, especially the first two. Miller would bat at 5 or 6, open the bowling and brilliantly man the critical 2nd slip position .

Hadlee is now an automatic for me in my ATG XI (along with Sobers and Kallis ftr) and he holds down the no. 8 position .
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Well-known member
trundler said:
Who else is proud of TJB for discovering pre-90s cricketers
Click to expand...

I won't say proud but I am pleasantly surprised he has realized people are free to think what they want to think, tbh. :p


FWIW, I stand by my rating of these players as expressed in my first post on this thread.
 
Pothas

Pothas

Well-known member
honestbharani said:
Sobers
Miller
Gilchrist
Imran

will be one sweet 5-8 for any ATG side.
Click to expand...
Just too many all rounders for me, am never one for 6 bowlers. Would rather just have a batsman over Miller.

Imran and Hadlee would be a legitimate option at 8 and 9.
 
TheJediBrah

TheJediBrah

Well-known member
Pothas said:
Just too many all rounders for me, am never one for 6 bowlers. Would rather just have a batsman over Miller.

Imran and Hadlee would be a legitimate option at 8 and 9.
Click to expand...
Inclined to agree with this. You don't need 5 ATG bowlers + Sobers.
 
ankitj

ankitj

Well-known member
kyear2 said:
Think I agree with this assessment, especially the first two. Miller would bat at 5 or 6, open the bowling and brilliantly man the critical 2nd slip position .

Hadlee is now an automatic for me in my ATG XI (along with Sobers and Kallis ftr) and he holds down the no. 8 position .
Click to expand...
I recall for a long time you didn't rate Hadlee as high as rest of the forum does. Always omitted him from top tier pacers list. I'm happy that has changed.
 
stephen

stephen

Well-known member
As I said earlier, Hadlee is the most likely of the three to make an AT XI. Miller, like Botham, was a true all rounder and while he was an ATG bowler, he was a batsman who was passable for the era but not exceptional. Imran is a different story all together. Started out as a bowler, middle of his career he was an all rounder and ended up as (mostly) a batsman.

Miller, Engineer, Imran are my top 3 best looking cricketers. I was thinking of trying to create an XI of Adonises. But the only other cricketers who come to mind are Brett Lee and Pat Cummins. I can't think of too many attractive batsmen or spinners.
 
stephen

stephen

Well-known member
I guess Alistair Cook and Faf du Plessis would be up there as well.

Cook
.
du Plessis
.
.
Miller
Engineer+
Imran
Lee
Cummins
.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Well-known member
ankitj said:
I recall for a long time you didn't rate Hadlee as high as rest of the forum does. Always omitted him from top tier pacers list. I'm happy that has changed.
Click to expand...
Many of my views have evolved. Two of them directly involving Hadlee.
I have Hadlee as one of my truly elite top tier bowlers. Ftr
Marshall, Steyn, McGrath, Hadlee, Ambrose, Muralitharan, Warne, (Trueman?)
And if you are arguably at most one or two positions behind McGrath while being somewhat similar in style and a much better bat, it really is a no brainier for him to be a automatic selection.

The other one being that I down played the importance of bowling all rounders and rated them behind batting all rounders and possibly also batsmen who were special in the codon.
This view stemming from looking at the greatest teams and noting that none of them had great bowling or for that matter batting all rounders. They just went for the superior bats and 4 best bowlers. But the great WI and Aussie teams don't come along every day and not indicative of every day cricket. And while I wouldn't drop a clearly superior bowler for one who can bat a bit, among two competitive teams I do see the value of a decent tail and how partnerships down the order can change a match. So most things being equal or McGrath v Hadlee, I would go Sir Richard.

But basically where I still differ from most here is that I believe all three all round aspects of the game are equal and just as valuable to a team. I've seen teams loose because of tail collapse, crucial drops in the cordon and I've seen teams win because of rear guard actions, taking half chances at slip and by wickets by the batting all-rounder . But it's about balance, batting shouldn't factor in to the decision for all of the bowlers, no. 8 for sure and would help if no. 9 was handy with the bat. While having at least one batsman who can bowl a few over when needed is always a plus. And finally, even if Sobers never bowled an over in tests, and I had one spot for a batsman I would choose him over Sachin because of his ability in the cordon along with them being rated in the same tier as batsmen.

So my personal ATG XI

Hutton
Hobbs
Bradman
Smith / Tendulkar / Richards
Sobers
Kallis
Gilchrist / Knott
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne / Muralitharan
Steyn

For the record playing Sobers as a batsman with Kallis being 1st 5th bowling option and they would share the load to minimize potential wear.


Sorry for the unnecessarily long response.
 
stephen

stephen

Well-known member
The West Indies had Marshall, who had a batting average around 20 which qualifies him as a bowling all rounder IMO. Similarly, Australia had Warne and Lee and later Gillespie who all could hold a bat. The key to bowling all rounders is that having one or two bowlers average around 20 with the bat is enough to have a decent tail. The tail really is mostly there to ensure the batsmen get the most opportunity to maximise their scores anyway.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Well-known member
Pothas said:
No need for Sobers and Kallis is there?
Click to expand...
Responded to this a bit above.

But why not. Sobers is arguably best after Bradman, and while Kallis is a bit below it isn't an ocean and he was ranked down a bit because of his batting bubble more than lack of skill.

He also allows me to bat Sobers higher and both bring different bowling styles and angles to the table if required. Additionally they are both superb top tier slip fielders and with these bowlers and against equal opposition I want to take every possible chance back there.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Well-known member
stephen said:
The West Indies had Marshall, who had a batting average around 20 which qualifies him as a bowling all rounder IMO. Similarly, Australia had Warne and Lee and later Gillespie who all could hold a bat. The key to bowling all rounders is that having one or two bowlers average around 20 with the bat is enough to have a decent tail. The tail really is mostly there to ensure the batsmen get the most opportunity to maximise their scores anyway.
Click to expand...
Fully agree, but since most don't even rate Hadlee as an all rounder (just look earlier in the thread) they definitely don't rate Marshall or Warne as such. But they fully filled that role brilliantly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top