**Official** Pakistan v New Zealand in the UAE 2014

[Flem274*]

Oddly, everyone in that top 5 averages between 44 and 46. Even if you assume that Crowe would have averaged close to 50 had he not been thrown in at the deep end as a youngster, there seems to be a ceiling on how good our best batsmen ever get.

Nah, we just haven't had one average more over a longer period yet.

It's not as though the water has a "youwillonlyaverageupto46lolshamedick" molecule in it.

 

[weldone]

Wouldn't pick Bond for an ATXI considering he's likely to break down at any point.

Against ATG batting lineups, your replacement will hardly be any better than an absent Bond.

He'll at least form a formidable opening bowling partnership with Hadlee till he breaks down.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

Never see an ATG team picked on that philosophy before. Most people are comfortable with picking old school players. Your omission of Sutcliffe for Jones for example would make some of us who have read the Kiwi Cricketing folklore as bed time stories cringe.

It's based on the idea that the current All Blacks team would annihilate the ABs from, say, 1987, because the modern players are far more professional and better trained.

Cricket isn't a strength based sport so this may not be as relevant.

But the question remains, as with all ATG teams (cricket and rugby), whether to pick players based on comparisons with their contemporaries or with modern players who have better coaching, nutrition, analysis etc.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

Nah, we just haven't had one average more over a longer period yet.

It's not as though the water has a "youwillonlyaverageupto46lolshamedick" molecule in it.

Agree, it's just an odd statistic, that's all. Even an ATG Zimbabwe team would manage one player who averaged 50.

 

[Flem274*]

In 2020 we'll be posting something like

Turner, Sutcliffe, Williamson, Crowe, Taylor, Reid/Cairns/McCullum, McCullum/Watling, Hadlee, Taylor/Cowie/Bond/Boult/Vettori, Southee, Milne

Hendrix will have Latham in there for Sutcliffe and I'm not sure what will be happening at #6 but Williamson and Southee will definitely be there barring catastrophe (which with NZ is likely).

Anyone feeling braver?

 

[Hurricane]

It's based on the idea that the current All Blacks team would annihilate the ABs from, say, 1987, because the modern players are far more professional and better trained.

Cricket isn't a strength based sport so this may not be as relevant.

But the question remains, as with all ATG teams (cricket and rugby), whether to pick players based on comparisons with their contemporaries or with modern players who have better coaching, nutrition, analysis etc.

Yeah it is an age old question on this message board and we have had countless debates about Sachin vs Bradman. So there is no real generally agreed upon answer just different schools of thought.

I was watching some highlights of the 1975 world cup (perhaps you saw this as well it was on sky sport) on the one hand the average player back then looked weaker than the average player today based purely on technique - the star players looked mint and would be stars today.
Footage of Lillee in particular looked just incredible. Kallicharan looked phenomenal. Even Dale Hadlee looked quite useful and had a very fluent action.
One thing that has come up is that the better players since the 1960s are often seen as being capable of playing today - compared to say players in the early 1900s. And definitely the 1800s. By memory the 1950s aren't looked fondly upon if I remember some of Fred's reports.

TLDR: it may be a bit unfair to go back to only the 1980s.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

I was watching some highlights of the 1975 world cup (perhaps you saw this as well it was on sky sport) on the one hand the average player back then looked weaker than the average player today based purely on technique - the star players looked mint and would be stars today.

Didn't see those highlights, but it's interesting what you say about how the average player looked in comparison to the stars. Off to YouTube now for a look.

 

[cnerd123]

Hmm. When I pick ATG XIs/Squads, I work on the following assumptions:

1) The players would be plucked from the past in their absolute prime - for some players this is obvious; for others like Imran Khan or Sachin Tendulkar it is less so, as they evolved and changed so much as players over the course of their careers
2) The XI/Squad would train together for a few months before playing whatever hypothetical match/series/tournament they are being selected for. This helps builds team chemistry (so you don't necessarily need to pick Sutcliffe just because you pick Hobbs, for example) and helps to get everyone's fielding and fitness up to a certain minimal level, as well as getting the old-timers caught up on current day rules and regulations.
3) The latest rules/equipment/technology/nutrition/coaching/knowledge will be available to all the players. Apart from statistics ofcourse. So basically in preparation for whatever match they are going to play, they can view video footage of their opponents and study it, and vice versa.


This way you do have to consider a players' fitness, fielding and personality, but they aren't selection-breaking factors. Certain very old-era players do get disadvantaged (Grace, Barnes) because cricket was such a different game in their time, but talent will shine through in the end and so you can pick a squad without worrying about minor details.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

I guess that approach is the complementary one to my own, which makes the assumption that the players step out of a time machine straight onto the field.

Something I find interesting looking at that old footage is the diversity of bowling actions that exist in cricket. Watching Dennis Lillee or Malcolm Marshall you know these guys are going to be effective before you even see where they pitch the ball. But some other styles look very different to what one sees nowadays.

 

[BeeGee]

So, how 'bout dem Pakistanis?

What happened to the Pakistan fans?

 

[hendrix]

Really good interview with Javed Miandad on pakpassion.

 

[GGG]

Really good interview with Javed Miandad on pakpassion.

"I feel that Pakistan are lucky to have escaped with a drawn series against New Zealand. One has to remember that Australia, despite their reputation, were not as strong a team as New Zealand", he answered the other thread.

 

[smash84]

So, how 'bout dem Pakistanis?

What happened to the Pakistan fans?

We exist and drop in from time to time just to say hi

 

[wellAlbidarned]

So, how 'bout dem Pakistanis?

What happened to the Pakistan fans?

The smart ones have better things to do than post on CW, the stupid ones all flock to PakPassion.

 

[BeeGee]

We exist and drop in from time to time just to say hi

What's your team for the T20s and ODIs, Smali?

 

[smash84]

I find the squad very annoying. don't want Gul back in the side but apparently he is coming back. Other than that dropping of fawad alam is really frustrating.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I find the squad very annoying. don't want Gul back in the side but apparently he is coming back. Other than that dropping of fawad alam is really frustrating.

Gul is good at t20s though, right?

 

[OverratedSanity]

Really good interview with Javed Miandad on pakpassion.

Yeah good stuff... they do seem to get some really good interviews from time to time... just a shame about the community, otherwise it'd be a great forum.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Gul is good at t20s though, right?

Yeah a few years back.

I have always liked Gul because he is an honest hard working guy and was the only quick not involved in the fixing, but he's not a good bowler and hasn't been so for a while. His best is purely as a third bowler in the team and not a frontline bowler. This is why he did well when Asif and Amir were in the team. But he flopped once asked to lead the attack. His biggest problem is that he doesn't use his brain. For example, he will keep on bowling bouncers even when they go for runs, despite having a good Yorker.

 

[Bahnz]

Yeah a few years back.

I have always liked Gul because he is an honest hard working guy and was the only quick not involved in the fixing, but he's not a good bowler and hasn't been so for a while. His best is purely as a third bowler in the team and not a frontline bowler. This is why he did well when Asif and Amir were in the team. But he flopped once asked to lead the attack. His biggest problem is that he doesn't use his brain. For example, he will keep on bowling bouncers even when they go for runs, despite having a good Yorker.

Sounds like he belongs in the New Zealand team circa 3 years ago.