West Indies ATG Team- Open Voting

[Bahnz]

Greenidge and Haynes

 

[BoyBrumby]

Frank Worrell opened 6 times in 80-odd test knocks, ftr. Walcott was more of a keeper.

Greenidge and Haynes, for me. Has that ring.

 

[cnerd123]

Greenidge
Haynes
Why break up a great pair?

 

[Prince EWS]

Frank Worrell opened 6 times in 80-odd test knocks, ftr. Walcott was more of a keeper.

Yeah I voted for both, but Worrell was a middle order batsman who opened a few times for team balance reasons and Walcott was a wicket keeper/batsman who gave up the gloves to prevent injury. Not really the same.

 

[The Sean]

Greenidge and Hunte for me.

 

[fredfertang]

Gomes- Orthodox?

In comparison to Chanders I'd say so, but not viewed in islation, naturally

 

[kyear2]

Hunte was a better batsman than Haynes, so we are choosing the (slightly) inferior batsman because he actually played with Greenidge?

 

[kyear2]

Vote Update:

Greeenidge: 19
Haynes: 7
Fredricks: 1
Hunte: 5
Worrell: 6

 

[AndyZaltzHair]

Thought Fredericks would get more votes. He could tear a quality fast attack in a session.

 

[watson]

Yes, the voting for our ATG WI team has been a bit strange.

The fact that Frank Worrell has 6 votes is an admission that omitting Lance Gibbs was a tactical howler. Obviously Gary Sobers is not good enough to carry the spin bowling duties on his own after all. Hence we apply a patch to the patch-up the existing imbalance in team. And dare I say create yet another weakness by not selecting a specialist in a key batting position.

 

[Eds]

Yes, the voting for our ATG WI team has been a bit strange.

The fact that Frank Worrell has 6 votes is an admission that omitting Lance Gibbs was a tactical howler. Obviously Gary Sobers is not good enough to carry the spin bowling duties on his own after all. Hence we apply a patch to the patch-up the existing imbalance in team. And dare I say create yet another weakness by not selecting a specialist in a key batting position.

What a ridiculous point.

It wasn't a howler, because Worrell and Sobers are more than good enough to handle the spin duties between them and Worrell's a better batsman than Haynes or Hunte anyway. Factor in his captaincy and it's a no-brainer for me.

Granted, I wouldn't have selected a pace quartet if I knew Worrell wouldn't be selected, though.

 

[Cabinet96]

Greenidge & Worrell

 

[AndyZaltzHair]

Hence we apply a patch to the patch-up the existing imbalance in team. And dare I say create yet another weakness by not selecting a specialist in a key batting position.

I have to agree with this particular point. It's like we are covering one player for another and thus creating a chain of weak link in the process. There is a reason for specialist position in certain aspects of the game.

is Walcott a better keeper than Dujon? No. So why is Walcott selected? because he's a better bat. but is there a need for a better bat at no 7 esp after such a strong top/ middle order, I don't think so and besides Dujon was more than capable batsman.

why is Worrell opening? because he played there 4 matches and was successful. well Hunte played 44 matches opening and was successful on multiple occassions against the same Trueman and Statham and adding to that he was successful against Davidson, Benaud, Fazal etc all on opening the innings. Opening is a specialist position I believe and in my mind, no matter how good a middle order batsman is than the opening batsman, if he doesn't get a slot in his order, he doesn't fit in unless there isn't a viable option left. If it happens then why don't we just select the top 6 batsmen of the country and put them in order other than selecting categorically like opening, top order/ middle order, saves the time too. I believe addition of Worrell also got a boost as there isn't a specialist spinner in the team (though Sobers will be forced to bowl spin here) but all in all I am not too sure how much value will Worrell's spin give as this team will face another ATG team. So once again we are giving up on another specialist position.

having said all this, I've no doubt Walcott and Worrell would both adjust beautifully at whatever role they are presented here, but we are depriving the other ATGs who were more successful at these particular positions/roles.

 

[kyear2]

Again under estimating Walcotts keeping. Keeping to Ramadin and Valentive is considerably more difficult than to the pace quartet and he managed just fine. Healy was also a better gloveman than Gilly, does that mean that Healy or Tallon should have made Australia's team before Gilly?

 

[watson]

Again under estimating Walcotts keeping. Keeping to Ramadin and Valentive is considerably more difficult than to the pace quartet and he managed just fine. Healy was also a better gloveman than Gilly, does that mean that Healy or Tallon should have made Australia's team before Gilly?

Gilchrist kept wicket to some of Australia's best ever bowlers for more than 90 Test matches without blemish. So he easily holds his own against Healy or Tallon.

However, Walcott's international keeping record simply pails into insignificance when compared to any of those great Australian wicket-keepers. Or Dujon for that matter. You cannot hide, avoid, or sweep under the carpet that salient fact.

 

[Days of Grace]

Can we have a re-vote on Gibbs/Garner?

That was the mistake that caused all the problems.

Also, Worrell was like Sobers in that his best suite was his left arm medium pace.

So, if Worrell is selected, we would basically have two part time left arm spinners as the spin attack.

I'll say it again, Sobers bowling is much more valauble as the fourth seamer, then as the only spin option.

 

[NUFAN]

Freeboard and Hunte - freeboard is Gr.eenidge thanks predictive text.

 

[cnerd123]

Hunte was a better batsman than Haynes, so we are choosing the (slightly) inferior batsman because he actually played with Greenidge?

I always value chemistry between opening batsmen. I think it helps them both lift their games.
Good communication improves running between the wickets, helps when they discuss the bowling attack, and creates that understanding between them, so they know when to attack and when to defend, or can sense when they need to shield their partner from a certain bowler.
Plus it always helps when the two batsmen in the middle know each other well, they can talk each other through difficult phases of a match.

 

[Satyanash89]

Greenidge and Hunte

Tempted to go for Fredricks coz i love him, but Hunte was a better batsman for me

Can we have a re-vote on Gibbs/Garner?

That was the mistake that caused all the problems.

Also, Worrell was like Sobers in that his best suite was his left arm medium pace.

So, if Worrell is selected, we would basically have two part time left arm spinners as the spin attack.

I'll say it again, Sobers bowling is much more valauble as the fourth seamer, then as the only spin option.

I dunno why people want Gibbs in the side so much. He would be an asset to the side in SC conditions, yes, but Garner did superbly in the few chances he got in the SC. Garner is a world-class bowler on any kind of pitch anywhere in the world. Gibbs is a match-winner on helpful pitches, but even then probably isnt >>> Garner like some people are making it sound. On pitches not conducive to spin bowling, gibbs wouldnt be of much use as a strike option. Garner should clearly be the choice

 

[Days of Grace]

Not only on pitches conductive to spin bowling, but on roads you want to mix it up a bit and rotate the fast bowlers around Gibbs.

I'd only want four fast bowlers on a pitch that will stay bowler friendly for five days, and that's a rare thing.