No. He was a fantastic player of pace, and a really good player of the moving ball. The fact that he is less proven as a quasi opener means little when we are theorising anyway.
-
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 Hill
- Start date
trundler
Well-known member
WI probably still has the better bowlers. Let's say Marshall and McGrath cancel out, so do Garner and Lillee. Davidson and Holding can go either way but Davidson > Holding, just imo. Cummins still only has a 3 year career so it's no contest with Ambrose. Miller an advantage though.
Australia have a wayyyyy better top 3 but the West Indian 4-7 is stronger. Hmm.
Australia have a wayyyyy better top 3 but the West Indian 4-7 is stronger. Hmm.
h_hurricane
Well-known member
WI has so far played 500 tests. How about an ATG WI XI against an Australian team from its first 500 tests i.e until 1990 ?
So,
Greenidge
Haynes
Richards
Lara
Headley
Sobers
Walcott
Marshall
Ambrose
Garner
Holding
vs
Trumper
Simpson
Bradman
Chappell
Border
Miller
Healy
Davidson
Lindwall
Lillee
O'Reilly
Would be a great contest..
So,
Greenidge
Haynes
Richards
Lara
Headley
Sobers
Walcott
Marshall
Ambrose
Garner
Holding
vs
Trumper
Simpson
Bradman
Chappell
Border
Miller
Healy
Davidson
Lindwall
Lillee
O'Reilly
Would be a great contest..
Teja.
Global Moderator
Probably not the right thread but am surprised by how decent Vaas was as a batsman on top of his 350 wickets @ 29.
He has 3000+ runs @ 24.3. I was wondering if there's some serious minnow bashing involved considering his 100 against B'desh but he actually averages 20 or more against every side apart from India against whom he averages 17. Also averages 22 away and 27 at home.
355 wickets @ 29 and 3100 runs @ 24 is very strong ATVG stuff. Underrated cricketer.
He has 3000+ runs @ 24.3. I was wondering if there's some serious minnow bashing involved considering his 100 against B'desh but he actually averages 20 or more against every side apart from India against whom he averages 17. Also averages 22 away and 27 at home.
355 wickets @ 29 and 3100 runs @ 24 is very strong ATVG stuff. Underrated cricketer.
Last edited:
stephen
Well-known member
Smith
Chappell
Border
Gilchrist+
Vs
Lara
Headley
Sobers
Dujon+
I think is petty close. Smith and Sobers batting is pretty close. I'm not sure the gap between Headley+Lara and Chappell+Border makes up for how much better Gilchrist was than Dujon.
stephen
Well-known member
If we're going Bradmanless then Ponting IMO cancels out Viv.
trundler
Well-known member
Yeah that works. Chappell talent wise wouldn't be much behind Lara or Headley. Headley Vs Border is hard because of vastly different roles and career lengths.
I say talent wise because Lara had the greater career. Chappell picked his tours and retired earlier but as a batsman he must've been right up there.
I say talent wise because Lara had the greater career. Chappell picked his tours and retired earlier but as a batsman he must've been right up there.
Last edited:
Line and Length
Well-known member
I'm sorry, but a little contradictory. You say Marshall = McGrath and Garner = Lillee and Davidson and Holding can go either way.
If you rate these as the top 3 from each country, how can you say "Australia have a wayyyyy better top 3" ?
With Ambrose, Roberts, Walsh and Bishop rounding out the West Indian 4 - 7, I'd say they are well in front overall.
TheJediBrah
Well-known member
He's talking about the top 3 batsman
stephen
Well-known member
Bradman is just imba and really should be excluded from any atg discussions because he's so obviously ahead of everyone else. Excluding him, my Australian XI is:
Simpson
Hayden
Ponting
Smith
Chappell
Border (c)
Gilchrist+
Davidson
Warne
Lillee
McGrath
Cummins could push his way ahead of Davidson by the end of his career if he keeps following his current trajectory. Waugh, Harvey and half a dozen openers are all unlucky to miss out. In fact, a second XI looks like this:
Trumper
Ponsford
Harvey
Clarke
Waugh (c)
Walters
Healy+
Miller
Lindwall
Cummins
O'Reilly
Obviously Grimmett is unlucky and depending on the playing conditions Miller and O'Reilly could be promoted in place of Chappell and Davidson, in which case Grimmett would come in as cover for O'Reilly and McDermott would step up as cover for Miller.
The West Indies I think would look like this:
Greenidge
Haynes
Richards (c)
Lara
Headley
Sobers
Dujon +
Marshall
Holding
Garner
Ambrose
The second XI:
Hunte
Fredericks
Weekes
Walcott
Worrall (c)
Lloyd
D Murray+
Roberts
Bishop
Gibbs
Walsh
Now if the pitch demands a spinner Gibbs could go up and replace Holding but there would be less condition- dependent selection in these sides than in the Australian ones.
The top sides are evenly matched. Even the second XIs are very close, though Australia having the better spinner and stronger tail would probably give them a slight edge.
Simpson
Hayden
Ponting
Smith
Chappell
Border (c)
Gilchrist+
Davidson
Warne
Lillee
McGrath
Cummins could push his way ahead of Davidson by the end of his career if he keeps following his current trajectory. Waugh, Harvey and half a dozen openers are all unlucky to miss out. In fact, a second XI looks like this:
Trumper
Ponsford
Harvey
Clarke
Waugh (c)
Walters
Healy+
Miller
Lindwall
Cummins
O'Reilly
Obviously Grimmett is unlucky and depending on the playing conditions Miller and O'Reilly could be promoted in place of Chappell and Davidson, in which case Grimmett would come in as cover for O'Reilly and McDermott would step up as cover for Miller.
The West Indies I think would look like this:
Greenidge
Haynes
Richards (c)
Lara
Headley
Sobers
Dujon +
Marshall
Holding
Garner
Ambrose
The second XI:
Hunte
Fredericks
Weekes
Walcott
Worrall (c)
Lloyd
D Murray+
Roberts
Bishop
Gibbs
Walsh
Now if the pitch demands a spinner Gibbs could go up and replace Holding but there would be less condition- dependent selection in these sides than in the Australian ones.
The top sides are evenly matched. Even the second XIs are very close, though Australia having the better spinner and stronger tail would probably give them a slight edge.
Yep, always thought of him as Pollock-lite. Some poor numbers away from home though, odd since you'd expect SL to be a much harder place to bowl in compared to say, England where he averages 77.
morgieb
Well-known member
For someone who the casual fan would think of as a beacon of consistency Vaas was hilariously inconsistent. Wonderful bowler at his best but prone to some absolute stinkers out of nowhere. In 2000/01 he had a horror series in South Africa, then dominated a home series against England. Stunk it up in the ATC but then was a key factor in upsetting Australia in 1999.
bagapath
Well-known member
Love Walters. But really,the second XI should be...
Trumper
Ponsford
Hill
Harvey
Clarke
Waugh (c)
Miller
Healy+
Lindwall
Cummins
O'Reilly