Would Stuart Broad make the world's strongest XI?

[smash84]

it is difficult to argue with bots Legendary Protea

 

[four_or_six]

Except it's not that simple. Otherwise we'd be picking Ian Bell, and, well

edit: hi gimh

If Ajmal is actually in the world xi team, which he is for most people, picking Bell is the way to go as he doesn't have to face him and therefore we can discount having ever seen his series against Pakistan.

 

[LegendaryProtea]

Well, a couple of things.

Firstly, picking a World XI isn't just about picking based on performance in the last two years, one year or six months. The idea is to pick a team you think would work best as a unit against a team of similar quality - essentially, pretending the Test world is a domestic competition and pick your team from it to take on the next level up of cricket. As such, you don't have to be so rigid - it's not a "team of the 2010-2012 period"; it's a team selected to play now.

Obviously more recent performances will be more relevant, but that doesn't mean you should completely write off anything that happened before your random line in the sand - you should take everything into account at various degrees. To use an example, anyone picking Ian Bell (who I rate more than a lot here) over Sangakkara just before England's tour of the UAE was absolutely kidding themselves, and based on the two-year average metric there would've been plenty. What transpired afterwards of course showed exactly what a huge mistake that would have been, and there was plenty of evidence from beyond the magical two year point that indicated it, too.

Beyond that, you can look at what you value for different roles in the team and the batting lineup, and of course how you think certain players would go if they had to play a level up. There are players at Test level who would more than likely be the Ramprakashes, Dippenaars and Phil Hugheses of the next level above and while it's bloody hard to make guesses at who those will be, that's part of the fun.

More specifically on the Clarke/de Villiers point.. we're looking at someone to bat five or six here, which means their primary role will be performing when the top order doesn't. Ramming home an advantage has its place too but it certainly has less value than rescuing a side from a near-guaranteed losing total. On this front, Clarke has de Villers covered quite considerably IMO and his innings against your own mob is a perfect example. When you have a side like South Africa with a crackerjack batting lineup on paper but, even despite a lack of any evidence of decline in their big names, randomly collapses in a big heap on a semi-regular basis, it suggests everyone is scoring all their runs at the same time. This of course speaks poorly of what the batsmen at five and six are doing when the top order fails. On some level it can be an unfortunate coincidence when everyone fails at once but once it becomes a recurring trend then you have to really have a look at the rescuing qualities of your insurance batsmen down the order, and ask exactly how much they're contributing by turning 350 scores into 550 and doing little else. Neither of these blokes are going to average 80 at the next level up so whether it's 80 or 60 they've been averaging isn't really the point; it's how likely they'd be to transfer that to a higher playing field and how useful their contributions would be to the balance of the side.

I agree. When picking my XI, I select it based on all sorts of things. I was just using the "last two years" period because this was the one given by one of the previous posters and this was period in which the whole Clarke vs de Villiers debate sprung up. If you wish to extend beyond that and look at other factors, I'm more than happy to. I'd still say AB is comfortably ahead of Clarke.

On the rescuing point, aside from that one innings from Clarke, he hasn't exactly done that a lot of times. Neither has AB, mind you, but don't make it out as if Clarke has him "comfortably covered". If you want an example of AB batting us out of trouble, I'd say look at the second Test in the New Zealand tour. We were rocking at 88/6 and in danger of giving them a reasonable lead from which they could try and apply pressure on us. AB comes out and plays a calm and composed 80, which gives us a fairly sizable lead from where we go on and win the match. I also remember a recent innings against AUS where him and Ashwell Prince batted South Africa out of a dangerous position. I can't see how you can say Clarke is far ahead of AB in this regard.

Also, I'd argue AB's ramming home an advantage skills are far superior to Clarke's. Clarke isn't a particularly fast scorer (which is why he isn't much of a T20 player) and doesn't have the sort of gears that AB does. When AB decides to, he can score at up to a SR of 200 and completely decimate an attack.

In my opinion, over the last five years or so, AB has shown himself to be a complete batsman for all situations. I don't mean to disparage Clarke, I actually think he is a very fine batsman and I love watching him bat when is in form. I just don't think he is ahead of de Villiers.

 

[Spark]

If Ajmal is actually in the world xi team, which he is for most people, picking Bell is the way to go as he doesn't have to face him and therefore we can discount having ever seen his series against Pakistan.

I'm not one of those who thinks Bell's problem was simply facing Ajmal. He's not the first batsman to not pick a doosra.

EDIT: Whilst ABdV and Prince did bat South Africa out of a dangerous position, they then put South Africa back in a dangerous position by gifting their wickets at a terrible time with truly dismal dismissals, precipitating one of the most inexplicable collapses I have ever seen in Test cricket. So that's not the best example.

 

[four_or_six]

I'm not one of those who thinks Bell's problem was simply facing Ajmal. He's not the first batsman to not pick a doosra.

He's one of the most spectacularly bad at it that I've seen.

I reckon Bell/Clarke/AB are all pretty similar in terms of quality, picking any one of them is just personal taste.

 

[Spark]

There is nothing about not knowing which way the ball will turn which tells you to play limp defensive strokes from the crease with minimal footwork, which was what Bell did. Obviously not picking the doosra was what led to that, but it's symptomatic of a larger issue I have with Bell's batting (which I've ranted on CW about at length already)

 

[smash84]

I'm not one of those who thinks Bell's problem was simply facing Ajmal. He's not the first batsman to not pick a doosra.

.

Of course, you are a pollyannaist after all

 

[Spark]

...

 

[four_or_six]

There is nothing about not knowing which way the ball will turn which tells you to play limp defensive strokes from the crease with minimal footwork, which was what Bell did. Obviously not picking the doosra was what led to that, but it's symptomatic of a larger issue I have with Bell's batting (which I've ranted on CW about at length already)

Well the proof of it all is going to be how Bell plays in India this winter, will be itstl. I'm a big fan, I reckon he's underrated... his main problem IMO is that he doesn't play confidently enough when he's in the middle of a poor run.

On the AB/Clarke(/Bell) thing, AB is just such a stunning fielder, I think you could say that puts him ahead.

 

[Spark]

If you pick Clarke then he's captain, on the other hand. Good slipper nowadays too (to his left, anyway )

ABdV is a nonsensically good fielder though, yeah, that counts in his favour. They all are in their positions though (Bell is probably the best short leg fielder I've seen)

 

[GIMH]

When did my Stuart Broad thread become about Michael Clarke? FFS

 

[Prince EWS]

He's one of the most spectacularly bad at it that I've seen.

I reckon Bell/Clarke/AB are all pretty similar in terms of quality, picking any one of them is just personal taste.

Well my "personal taste" definitely leans towards Bell; I like him infinitely more than the other two, and I still wouldn't dream of picking him in a World XI at the moment. Not in a month of Sundays.

 

[Spark]

When did my Stuart Broad thread become about Michael Clarke? FFS

I thought we answered that question in the first reply

 

[Prince EWS]

When did my Stuart Broad thread become about Michael Clarke? FFS

Well if you start a thread about Broad you invite Spark to post, and when Spark posts the conversation invariably becomes about Clarke. You should've known.

 

[four_or_six]

If you pick Clarke then he's captain, on the other hand. Good slipper nowadays too (to his left, anyway )

ABdV is a nonsensically good fielder though, yeah, that counts in his favour. They all are in their positions though (Bell is probably the best short leg fielder I've seen)

Oh god, if I have to have Clarke as captain then I wouldn't want to watch my own team. Everyone would be salivating every time he moved a fielder about how he's a genius the like of which we've never seen since Shane Warne.

I think I'll have AB.

 

[four_or_six]

When did my Stuart Broad thread become about Michael Clarke? FFS

Everyone's decided Broad is a given, so have moved onto the more contentious issue of whether there are actually any Australians good enough to get in.

 

[Spark]

Well if you start a thread about Broad you invite Spark to post, and when Spark posts the conversation invariably becomes about Clarke. You should've known.

that's not true

it's been closer to the other way round lately

 

[LegendaryProtea]

Since we've gone a bit off-topic, may I enquire who the girl in PEWS avatar is?

 

[Prince EWS]

Since we've gone a bit off-topic, may I enquire who the girl in PEWS avatar is?

Alison Brie

 

[flibbertyjibber]

(Bell is probably the best short leg fielder I've seen)

I'd still go for Boon, Bell runs him close though.