kingkallis
International Coach
Can't wait to go online and read it...
-
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.
Draft League Round 1 Voting Thread
- Thread starter Jager
- Start date
Jager
International Debutant
Watson, I disagree on your point about captains - a team's tactical ability is of paramount importance when it comes to winning matches. Imagine if Clive Lloyd had Darren Sammy's cricketing brain. There would be no WI legacy! The same goes for bodyline, Jardine's genius was what allowed Larwood and co to humble Bradman (by his enormous standards, anyway), and even if the tactics were dubious, no one can doubt the innovation and cunning from the great man.
Another great example is Mike Brearley leading England to the Ashes in '81. Give a genius captain a lethal weapon and it can transform a side.
Another great example is Mike Brearley leading England to the Ashes in '81. Give a genius captain a lethal weapon and it can transform a side.
Red
The normal awards that everyone else has
It's often said that Australia choose the best XI players available, then the best captain from that XI, while England will choose a specialist captain at times. Probably mostly related to the selection of Brearley. It was said he had "a degree in people". I don't think England do it any more.
While Brearley's test average of 22 is not acceptable as a test batsman, it could be argued he was almost solely responsible for Botham's dominance as an AR in the early 80s.
* It's worth noting Brearley had a massive FC career. He played 455 FC games and had a FC average in the high 30s (and a high score of 312*). So the guy could obviously bat a bit.
While Brearley's test average of 22 is not acceptable as a test batsman, it could be argued he was almost solely responsible for Botham's dominance as an AR in the early 80s.
* It's worth noting Brearley had a massive FC career. He played 455 FC games and had a FC average in the high 30s (and a high score of 312*). So the guy could obviously bat a bit.
watson
Banned
Of course a captain is of paramount importance when it comes to winning matches. But we are not comparing Jardine to Darren Sammy. When we choose an ATG team we are comparing Jardine to someone like Clive Lloyd or Lindsay Hassett. And so, would Jardine get any more out of Lindwall, Lillee, and Trueman than Lloyd would? I doubt it. If Jardine was better in utilising those 3 bowlers then it would be by a very small amount. It's not as if Jardine or Lloyd has to wander up to Dennis Lillee and say, "Look, can you please try a bit harder!" By definition, ATG players are very well motivated, don't lack confidence, know exactly what to do on the cricket field, and are highly skilled in their trade. An ATG team does not have to carry the likes of Phil Tufnel..
Yet, there is a gulf of difference in the respective batting skills between Jardine and Lloyd. The fact remains, the highest score that Jardine obtained against a decent attack was 98 runs. And the two bowlers that he had the most trouble with, and dismissed him the most, were Ironmonger and Wall. Now, Wall was a reasonably good bowler, but we could be almost be certain that if Jardine had problems with the pace of Wall then he wouldn't last too long against Lindwall, Lillee, and Trueman. Let alone Hall, Steyn and Adcock.
Now, it is a possibility that Jardine could score a century. But probability demands that it is far more likely that Jardine would be out within 1-10 overs when facing an ATG attack. And because the difference between Jardine and other great captains in not that great, this sort of mediocre batting is unwarranted and merely exposes the No.3 batsman more often than necessary.
But yes, in the context of the 1932 Ashes series, Jardine was the right man, in the right place, at the right time.
Last edited:
watson
Banned
I'm no expert kyear. And it really doesn't matter how may stat's and charts you look at, selecting a team, or voting for a team, is still roughly 50% 'intuition'.
The individual stat's for Donald, Snow and Croft are excellent, but to be impressed by that combination and then vote for it, is still a matter of emotion.
I picture Snow bowling his leg-cutter or away swinger, then picture Donald bowling his off-cutter to the ribs of the batsman, and then Croft bowling wide of the crease to angle the ball in from a metre outside the off-stump and intuitively conclude that those 3 elements combined 'must be' hellish for the batsman. But there's no scientific way of proving that unless you magic all 3 of them to the present, at the bowling peak.
Along similar lines - our memories often cloud our judgement. When I think of Bob Willis I tend to remember him getting pulverised by Greenidge and Richards. During some of their innings I genuinely felt sorry for him. For other people his 6-43 at Headingly in 1981 might be their dominant memory, and thus think more favourably. The point being, the way we view objective stat's is often clouded by subjective thought. Willis was a brilliant bowler obectively, but my memories mean that I just can't select him for my ATG team. We are all a mixture of the rational and irrational.
Last edited:
Valer
First Class Debutant
As I mentioned here I voted for teams entirely base upon my metric* -- I generally (and did in this case) find that the stats and my choices match up anyway.
*With a fudge factor for current players.
Jager
International Debutant
Agreed on the subjective part watson, maybe why no Aussies are voting for me 
In all seriousness though, DRJ was a very good batsman - 48.00 is an excellent average - and even if he doesn't go big all the time, I have Harvey, Tendulkar, Nourse, Walters and Prior following him up. Most of those batsmen became famous for their gritty, aggressive strokeplay and digging their teams out of trouble, not to mention that all of them will capitalise on a solid foundation and a shineless ball
In all seriousness though, DRJ was a very good batsman - 48.00 is an excellent average - and even if he doesn't go big all the time, I have Harvey, Tendulkar, Nourse, Walters and Prior following him up. Most of those batsmen became famous for their gritty, aggressive strokeplay and digging their teams out of trouble, not to mention that all of them will capitalise on a solid foundation and a shineless ball
watson
Banned
Jardine may be a mental hurdle because of the Bodyline Series. It's hard to say.
For my own part, I'm speculating what the mental hurdles are for my team? Obvioulsy 3 votes means that it is percieved as being neither exciting nor strong relative to the other teams. In hindsight I should have not picked Roberts when I did, but rather chose a bigname batsman who can bowl a bit. Or just be happy with Simpson's bowling abilities.
But the learning bit is half-the-fun.
Last edited:
watson
Banned
Yes, I tend to weight post-WWI players more heavily. I think that up until that point the skill of cricket was still evolving.
It is a good assumption that Johnny Briggs (for example) would bowl well on modern pitches against modern batsman, but it is still an assumption none-the-less. And hence a gamble. If Mushtaq can score a century against Roberts, Croft and Garner in the WIs, (and then take 8 wickets in the same match, including Viv Richards), and someone has those players in their team then I have hard evidence that he would go OK. But this not the case concerning players who were from an era when cricket was at its genesis.
However, if the Draft Rules stipulated that all Test matches were to be played on 1890s wickets, rather than modern wickets, then Johnny Briggs would have more in his favour. But I've always assumed that our ATG teams would be playing on 2012 wickets, and in different countries. So I try and pick a team that would obviously be just as successful in Delhi as it would Perth.
Perhaps future Drafts should stipulate the playing conditions. For example, 11 matches (plus a final) at Delhi, Perth, Lords, Port of Spain, Capetown, and Columbo etc - circa 2012.
Last edited:
watson
Banned
Actually, what would be interesting is a hybrid competition.
Each team plays a Test Match against all other teams, with a win equaling 5 points.
Each team then plays a ODI against all other teams, with a win equaling 1 point.
If 2 or more teams are tied for points after the 22 matches then there will be a 20-20 tie-breaker, or 20-20 tie-breakers as the case may be. Kind of like a penalty shoot-out in soccer.
Each team plays a Test Match against all other teams, with a win equaling 5 points.
Each team then plays a ODI against all other teams, with a win equaling 1 point.
If 2 or more teams are tied for points after the 22 matches then there will be a 20-20 tie-breaker, or 20-20 tie-breakers as the case may be. Kind of like a penalty shoot-out in soccer.
Jager
International Debutant
The test match sim was the original idea of the ATG XI's game - hopefully someone decides they are willing to sim it, would be so interesting!
watson
Banned
Yes, it would be very interesting. I'd run the sim if I knew how, and test everyones hypothesis that Eds is strongest team by a significant margin.
kingkallis
International Coach
Simming is not easy and we have not played it quite sometime now. It would be great if someone can manage it...
kyear2
International Coach
Slightly off topic, but I have had an idea for a while where we get a couple of members from each test nation to select their best possible All Time test team from their country with the intention of simming it afterwards. Would be less players to input into the sim as would only be 8 teams. Some thing that I think will be fun for all involved. Also don't see any of the teams being identicle to the cricinfo effort.