atg aussie test team

[Pykie]

If we are to assume Bradman is at 3 - then IMO - we have the following competing for 2 spots

Chappell, Ponting, Smith, Waugh, Border, Ponsford

I'd have Gilly at 6 and Miller at 7.

Ponsford played the majority of his cricketer as an opener. He's in the Simpson, Hayden, Warner, Langer, Lawry, Morris pool for the opening position imo.

 

[Pykie]

You can add Smith to Bradman, Warne, McGrath and Gilchrist as the indisputable locks of the side at the moment imo.

Smith - He has the highest average in test cricket at #4 and averages 17% more than the next best in the position, in other immortals like Weekes, Pollock, Barrington and Greg Chappell. Sorry, statistically it's impossible to argue anyone above him, especially when taking into account his overseas record. He has 7,000+ runs at 74.02 at #4 ffs. I'd argue he's a lock before Warne atm.…..


I think the legitimate middle order pool is.

G.Chappell, Ponting, S.Waugh, Border would be the considerations for #5.

My two other considerations would be:

I.Chappell - Made 5,000+ runs @ 50 at #3 for Australia. More than Border or Neil Harvey in the position. as an example.
Michael Clarke is the other - Made 8,000+ runs @ 60 at #5. He shades Hussey statistically in the position.

You probably only pick 1 of those 6 batsman, as with players like Gilchrist and potentially Miller and Davidson in the side, you don't need 6 batsman.

 

[Pippen94]

And yet Pat Cummins averages 21 with the ball with a SR in the 30's on those same pitches. Bumrah in his one tour, Steyn also.

So how do you weight that?

Standard reasoning would be that they should be rated well ahead of the WI quicks who have similar records on far less batter friendly pitches....

All three of those guys are great.
Don't think many would argue Aussie wickets haven't become batter friendly - MCG was at risk of losing test due to poor rated pitch

 

[Pippen94]

I didn't realise WSC counted towards anyone's test careers.....

Look at some of the super tests, it was basically what would have been the South African bowling attack + Khan and Underwood and the other lineups it was just the WI bowling attack.

It's really not different to someone like Warner taking apart Steyn, Morkel, Philander, McLaren in SAF in 14'.

He averaged 91 in that series....

Any player of that ability can have an outstanding 3 or 4 games.

Just Windies attack of Holding, Garner, Croft, Roberts with no limit on bouncers on dodgy surfaces.

If you don't think world xi attack on card is one of best I don't know what to tell you

 

[caveman72]

Chappell scored nearly 1500 runs at 56 during WSC which would have had him beating Boycott for most runs ever when he retired if those games were included. I also think it's becoming increasingly difficult to compare modern batsmen to their predecessors. T20 has changed the dynamic of Test cricket as well, the game is far, far more professional than when Chappell played and changes in bat technology startling. I don't think that detracts from what Smith has done, it just makes comparison more difficult.

Have to agree on Bat technology would be interesting to see how batsmen from this era would got with bats from the past. Considering you rarely saw an edge or miss hit fly off for a 4 or 6. On the other hand at times they would still be looking for the ball if the likes of Lance Cairns or Viv Richards got hold of one with a modern Bat.

 

[PhatBoy]

More likely gives indication that era favours batsmen

I can’t stand watching him, I don’t particularly like him, and I detest the team he plays for.

As a test batsman there is not a single argument I could find to exclude smith from an all time great australian team.

He has scored runs everywhere, against every opponent. He has nothing left to prove, irrespective of generations.

Players like Warner, Hayden, even Steve Waugh given some of the pissant English sides he absolutely belted, you can find holes in their records.

There are none in Smith’s.

 

[PhatBoy]

Have to agree on Bat technology would be interesting to see how batsmen from this era would got with bats from the past. Considering you rarely saw an edge or miss hit fly off for a 4 or 6. On the other hand at times they would still be looking for the ball if the likes of Lance Cairns or Viv Richards got hold of one with a modern Bat.

This doesn’t make up the difference in run scoring but it is also worth remembering a huge percentage more mishits carry to fields men now. It isn’t a huge mitigating factor but it is one nonetheless.

Also re modern bats, I don’t think Richards or Cairns would be hitting the ball any further. Balls that are middled don’t go further than they did 30 years ago. The middles are still roughly the same. It’s the edges that go further.

Remember 118 years ago Gilbert Jessop put a ball into the gasometer next to The Oval.

 

[Pykie]

Just Windies attack of Holding, Garner, Croft, Roberts with no limit on bouncers on dodgy surfaces.

If you don't think world xi attack on card is one of best I don't know what to tell you

Oh course it is.

But is it any different to any other Aus vs WI series of that era? No.

There were far better performances of that era than Chappell averaging 55 in WSC against that WI attack.

It's not even Chappell's best series against them. He averaged 117 in 11 innings (all-be-it a weaker WI bowling lineup) in 75/76'.

Border's home series in 81/82' then away in 83'/84' was far greater than Chappell's WSC record.

 

[The Passenger]

You can add Smith to Bradman, Warne, McGrath and Gilchrist as the indisputable locks of the side at the moment imo.

Miller a lock as well ?

 

[eth-dog]

Let's be honest, there are only 4 locks in the Aussie all time side.

Bradman's record is unrivalled in the game
Warne is only rivalled by Murali
McGrath has more wickets than any seamer not named James Anderson
Gilchrist revolutionised the keeping position with his batting whilst being more than tidy with the gloves as well.

I can see an argument for any of Miller, Waugh, Border, Chappell, Smith and Ponting to take up any of the spots between 4 and 6
Davidson, Miller, Lillee, McKenzie, McDermott and Thomson for the two other fast bowling spots
Simpson/Lawry, Ponsford/Woodfull and Langer/Hayden all options for opening too as great opening partnerships

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Let's be honest, there are only 4 locks in the Aussie all time side.

Bradman's record is unrivalled in the game
Warne is only rivalled by Murali
McGrath has more wickets than any seamer not named James Anderson
Gilchrist revolutionised the keeping position with his batting whilst being more than tidy with the gloves as well.

I can see an argument for any of Miller, Waugh, Border, Chappell, Smith and Ponting to take up any of the spots between 4 and 6
Davidson, Miller, Lillee, McKenzie, McDermott and Thomson for the two other fast bowling spots
Simpson/Lawry, Ponsford/Woodfull and Langer/Hayden all options for opening too as great opening partnerships

Keith Miller is an absolute lock. Best AR the country has ever had and no one has got close.

 

[PhatBoy]

Keith Miller is an absolute lock. Best AR the country has ever had and no one has got close.

Still depends on whether you want to pick one or not. Considering Lindwall is a Test centurion and Warne was basically the next best thing, and the wicketkeeper is the best batsman in gloveman history, it's not essential. Notwithstanding his claims, obviously, which are impeccable.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Still depends on whether you want to pick one or not. Considering Lindwall is a Test centurion and Warne was basically the next best thing, and the wicketkeeper is the best batsman in gloveman history, it's not essential. Notwithstanding his claims, obviously, which are impeccable.

I’d have Miller comfortably at 6. He’s a lock at 6. Gilchrist at 7, Warne at 8 or 9.

 

[PhatBoy]

I’d have Miller comfortably at 6. He’s a lock at 6. Gilchrist at 7, Warne at 8 or 9.

I'd probably pick him too but it would be a nice luxury to have an Allan Border at 6 for example

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I'd probably pick him too but it would be a nice luxury to have an Allan Border at 6 for example

Don’t think Border would make it albeit not against it

 

[PhatBoy]

Don’t think Border would make it albeit not against it

Pound for pound I think there's an argument you could theoretically make - not necessarily win - that he was the best Australian batsman between Bradman and Smith

 

[eth-dog]

Keith Miller is an absolute lock. Best AR the country has ever had and no one has got close.

I'd be happy enough with Steve Waugh and Allan Border as part timers.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I'd be happy enough with Steve Waugh and Allan Border as part timers.

I wouldn’t Miller is a lot better

 

[eth-dog]

I wouldn’t Miller is a lot better

As a bowler, sure, but I'd rather two blokes that have over 10,000 runs at over 50 in the top 6 when you have Warne and a combination of Davidson, Lillee, McGrath, Thomson and even Miller as a number 8 as the attack. A 5th bowler isn't really necessary apart from someone who can chop out, which Border and Waugh have both shown themselves to be capable of doing

 

[LukeParkerno1]

As a bowler, sure, but I'd rather two blokes that have over 10,000 runs at over 50 in the top 6 when you have Warne and a combination of Davidson, Lillee, McGrath, Thomson and even Miller as a number 8 as the attack. A 5th bowler isn't really necessary apart from someone who can chop out, which Border and Waugh have both shown themselves to be capable of doing

Each to their own. My view is you are nuts not having Miller at 6. Absolute lock in my side. There’s 6 locks- Bradman, Miller, Gilchrist, Warne, McGrath, Lilliee

 

[eth-dog]

Each to their own. My view is you are nuts not having Miller at 6. Absolute lock in my side. There’s 6 locks- Bradman, Miller, Gilchrist, Warne, McGrath, Lilliee

Let's compare their batting records:

Miller: 55 tests, 87 innings, 2958 runs at 36.97, 7 centuries and 13 fifties, 8% tons per innings, 15% fifties per innings
Border: 156 matches, 265 innings, 11174 runs at 50.56, 27 centyrues and 63 fifties, 10% tons per innings, 24% fifteis per innings
Waugh: 168 matches, 260 innings, 10927 runs at 51.06, 32 centuries and 50 fifties, 12% tons per innings, 19% fifties per innings

The difference is significant. Of course, so is their bowling, but we're debating a top 6 position here. The primary reason needs to be batting

 

[Pippen94]

Let's compare their batting records:

Miller: 55 tests, 87 innings, 2958 runs at 36.97, 7 centuries and 13 fifties, 8% tons per innings, 15% fifties per innings
Border: 156 matches, 265 innings, 11174 runs at 50.56, 27 centyrues and 63 fifties, 10% tons per innings, 24% fifteis per innings
Waugh: 168 matches, 260 innings, 10927 runs at 51.06, 32 centuries and 50 fifties, 12% tons per innings, 19% fifties per innings

The difference is significant. Of course, so is their bowling, but we're debating a top 6 position here. The primary reason needs to be batting

No - whether it's batsman or all rounder comes down to preference. With all time top 5 & Gilchrist to follow - side won't be short of batting

 

[Pippen94]

Oh course it is.

But is it any different to any other Aus vs WI series of that era? No.

There were far better performances of that era than Chappell averaging 55 in WSC against that WI attack.

It's not even Chappell's best series against them. He averaged 117 in 11 innings (all-be-it a weaker WI bowling lineup) in 75/76'.

Border's home series in 81/82' then away in 83'/84' was far greater than Chappell's WSC record.

There's been nothing like those champion windies attacks in the late 1970s, 80's & even through to 90's. Fearsome combination of four paceman constantly at batsmen - slowest over rates coz no spin just pace.
Border was all time toughest & battled through it. Chappell was strokeplayer who could dominant bowling

 

[eth-dog]

No - whether it's batsman or all rounder comes down to preference. With all time top 5 & Gilchrist to follow - side won't be short of batting

When we're talking a top 6 position the primary reason should be batting if you have an attack like Australia does. Miller was undoubtedly a great all rounder but it isn't as if he's Kallis or Sobers

 

[Pykie]

There's been nothing like those champion windies attacks in the late 1970s, 80's & even through to 90's. Fearsome combination of four paceman constantly at batsmen - slowest over rates coz no spin just pace.
Border was all time toughest & battled through it. Chappell was strokeplayer who could dominant bowling

Sorry mate.

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

The Windies didn't have some all conquering pace attack for 30 consecutive years.

Their attack in the mid 70's still had Sobers, Clive Lloyd, Lance Gibbs in it until the late 70's when Andy Roberts, Michael Holding, Marshall, Croft came on the scene. They got absolutely thumped in Australia in 75/76' which was one of their last battering's for about a decade.

They still lost away to India, New Zealand and drew in Australia, New Zealand (again), India and Pakistan at the absolute height of their power.

Then they transitioned to Ambrose, Bishop and Walsh in the late 80's. A great bowling attack, but hardly head and shoulders above some of the modern Australia, South African and even English attacks in the last 30 years. South Africa and Australia have probably had multiple attacks to rival it since and I say that as the #1 ticket holder to the Curtley Ambrose fan club. He's probably my favourite quick of all time.


The Windies attack of the mid 80's IS probably the greatest ever. It had depth as well. But people hold them on some mythical pedastal at times.

Plenty of batsman still took them apart.

Just as happened to the great South African sides recently and the great Australian side of the 90's/00's.

I don't think they would be any more intimidating than facing Dale Steyn and Morne Morkel on a Wanderers pitch in their absolute pomp.

Or facing Mitchell Johnson on that same pitch during his purple patch.