Nikhil99.99
U19 Cricketer
Mitchell
Hayden
larwood
Waqar
Hayden
larwood
Waqar
Not a bad take at all.I'm still not voting for Barry Richards. He should either be in the First XI if he qualifies or not at all if he doesn't.
Anyway:
Cook
Turner
Holding
Waqar
Yeah, I've kind of led myself to a similar conclusion. If I am judging him on pure quality and how highly I rate him as a batsman then I should already have picked him. If I am judging him based on Test performances, I can't really see how I'm picking him at all!Not a bad take at all.
Should really be in one of the first two teams selected, but if not an argument can be made that he just doesn't qualify.
A little bit of column A and a little bit of column B.If I am judging him on pure quality and how highly I rate him as a batsman then I should already have picked him. If I am judging him based on Test performances, I can't really see how I'm picking him at all!
So does that mean players with less than 20 tests aren’t eligible for the main XI’s?After the 8 teams are done, I’ll do two extra XIs. One pre WW1, and one for players with less than 20 tests. Players only eligible for one or the other.
Four Tests for Barry Richards is a small sample size, but if you add-on his 10 x unofficial Tests (WSC Super Tests plus Rebel Tours) then you get;Yeah, I've kind of led myself to a similar conclusion. If I am judging him on pure quality and how highly I rate him as a batsman then I should already have picked him. If I am judging him based on Test performances, I can't really see how I'm picking him at all!
No, I don’t see why they should be. But it gives some scope for others who think players need to play an extended amount of tests to prove themselves.So does that mean players with less than 20 tests aren’t eligible for the main XI’s?