Poll 7: Playing selector: Last selection for AT Subcontinental XI

[Lillian Thomson]

It is not cut n' dried that 4 fast bowlers do any better than 3.

IMO it is important to have a balanced attack.

4 high quality fast bowlers do far better than 3 plus an inadequate spinner chosen for the sake of variation.

That analysis is probably a spoof. If it isn't it should be.

 

[watson]

4 high quality fast bowlers do far better than 3 plus an inadequate spinner chosen for the sake of variation.

That analysis is probably a spoof. If it isn't it should be.

Fair enough, but in this current selection we are not talking about an 'inadequate spinner'. We are selecting top class ones.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Fair enough, but in this current selection we are not talking about an 'inadequate spinner'. We are selecting top class ones.

So what? My post was solely in response to your line "Even if we consider the West Indies attack of the 1980s there is no precedent to say that 4 fast bowlers do any better than 3 fast bowlers. The 4th is simply a waste."

 

[watson]

So what? My post was solely in response to your line "Even if we consider the West Indies attack of the 1980s there is no precedent to say that 4 fast bowlers do any better than 3 fast bowlers. The 4th is simply a waste."

And the fact remains - there is no evidence that 4 quality fast bowlers is any better at taking 20 wickets than 3 quality fast bowlers. At the very least it is a preconceived supposition that is no more valid than its alternate.

 

[The Battlers Prince]

I think four fast bowlers bowling the same kind of delivery is not exceptionally better than three and a classy spinner or two. But I went for KD because of his solid action that could produce accurate swing at decent pace to keep the pressure on and pick up wickets. I wouldn't be completely against Mankad or someone else but we only got to choose one.

 

[Howe_zat]

Playing no spinner isn't tactically wrong - it's just dire. Test cricket is the only sport in the world where a bloke can stand about scratching his backside for three and a half days before suddenly he wins you the game. Embrace it

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I think four fast bowlers bowling the same kind of delivery is not exceptionally better than three and a classy spinner or two. But I went for KD because of his solid action that could produce accurate swing at decent pace to keep the pressure on and pick up wickets. I wouldn't be completely against Mankad or someone else but we only got to choose one.

The West Indies of the 80's didn't have a classy spinner or two. They had Padmore and Jumadeen until Roger Harper came along and he was not a great bowler. That's why they picked their four best bowlers irrespective of balance. It's just common sense.

 

[The Battlers Prince]

Playing no spinner isn't tactically wrong - it's just dire. Test cricket is the only sport in the world where a bloke can stand about scratching his backside for three and a half days before suddenly he wins you the game. Embrace it

Is that to me? Because I'm definitely going for a spinner in this side just not two frontline spinners

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Playing no spinner isn't tactically wrong - it's just dire. Test cricket is the only sport in the world where a bloke can stand about scratching his backside for three and a half days before suddenly he wins you the game. Embrace it

Or Moeen Ali can come on inside the first hour of every innings, bowl more overs than anyone else and concede four an over. Everyone's a winner.

 

[The Battlers Prince]

The West Indies of the 80's didn't have a classy spinner or two. They had Padmore and Jumadeen until Roger Harper came along and he was not a great bowler. That's why they picked their four best bowlers irrespective of balance. It's just common sense.

Absolutely, I definitely agree with that, but if you have a class spinner then you choose at least one of them or make do with part timers and your four best quicks

 

[smash84]

yeah, i find it silly that you need to have a spinner in the side on every surface regardless of the quality of the pacers available.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Absolutely, I definitely agree with that, but if you have a class spinner then you choose at least one of them or make do with part timers and your four best quicks

The original point was specifically about the West Indies of the 80's. If Clive Lloyd had had Warne or Murali available he would have picked them just as he did Lance Gibbs up to his retirement.
Anyway enough of this. I'm going to vote for Chandra and go to bed.

 

[Coronis]

Went for Shakib, though honestly I don't mind if its him or Kapil, I'm just a Shakib fanboi.

 

[bagapath]

First of all we get a poll with Imran in a cunning disguise, now we get one with Bedi in it twice. I smell a rat.

Sue me, I dare you.
Srinivasan

 

[ankitj]

Mankad in his test career has scored a double hundred and has also taken a 10 wicket haul. There are very, very few cricketers who have achieved this double over their careers. So Mankad it has to be.

 

[ankitj]

the day he said "no one can be mahatma gandhi" when questioned about his involvement in a sports management firm while serving as a selector, I lost respect for him. he doesn't need to take gandhi's name to justify his stance. i hate him as much as i hate my ugly neighbour married to a beautiful woman way beyond his league.

I think he meant Sonia Gandhi.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Sorry but no Anil Kumble in the poll options is an absolute joke

 

[bagapath]

Sorry but no Anil Kumble in the poll options is an absolute joke

you can vote for him anyways

(actually the second bedi option in the poll was meant to be kumble; don't know why i screwed up)

 

[CaptainGrumpy]

Mankad in his test career has scored a double hundred and has also taken a 10 wicket haul. There are very, very few cricketers who have achieved this double over their careers. So Mankad it has to be.

IMO, I am not sure about the definitive conclusion, even if a 5th bowler is so demanded. That same logic would make Allan Border a certainty for the Austalian ATG sides, which he is not.

Mushtaq Mohammad has a 9 wicket haul and a double century, with far better overall averages than Mankad with the ball and the bat, and the role here is for 5th bowler batting at 6 (or 7 if below Sanga), so more emphasis should be placed on the batting perhaps. That is hard to get past so easily with "he does not have a ten for".

 

[mr_mister]

arjuna ranatunga jk shakib after much thought


this was really cool tc. people should do it for other areas of the world eg oceania or africa or eng/wi