-
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.
How many all-rounders would you have in your test and LOI XIs?
- Thread starter subshakerz
- Start date
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Lara is a better batsman, slipper, fielder and captain than Smith IMO.
I would say Smith is the better bowler but I remember playing cricket trump cards back in the 90s and Lara had a bowling average of 11 or something and always won me the opponent's cards.
kyear2
International Coach
To start, I wouldn't choose Pollock over McGrath because of his batting. I've always said tie breakers, but I will say, that if I'm in a team that doesn't have Sobers and 0 great slip fielders I am more likely to make that compromise for a good cordon for my bowlers than for added batting depth. Noting the compromise is Ponting over Sachin compared to Pollock over McGrath.
To answer the question specifically, I really think Ricky is underrated as a batsman and punished more than others for his end of career slide. I also think he's in that category of greatest slip fielders from a mixture of what I've seen and anecdotal evidence (Hammond, Sobers, Simpson, Chappell, Richardson, Hooper, Waugh, Ponting, Kallis)
The same way I believe a team should have a no. 8 at least capable of holding a bat, a batsman who can at least turn over his hand, you absolutely need at a minimum someone great at 2nd slip and that's just as or more important that the other 2. Just watch the game, and even look back and see what Ponting, Waugh and Kallis meant to McGrath and Steyn. What Lloyd, Richards and Richardson meant to the quartet. You can't ignore it.
The truth though is that with Sunny, Sobers and Richards I'm happy enough to go with Sachin, but in an alternate universe Lara, Smith or Ponting would be viable alternates.
Last edited:
Kenneth Viljoen
International Regular
One all rounder who bats in the top 7 for Tests
Two all rounders in ODI - 1 batting , 1 bowling
Two all rounders in ODI - 1 batting , 1 bowling
kyear2
International Coach
Only now seeing this, didn't ignore.
You exactly ignored what I said, I literally said having someone who can hold a bat so the trial wouldn't be a liability, just doesn't have to be an all rounder. That literally what I said. I also said that Marshall and Warne both filled that role adequately. Never said you would ideally want all no. 11's in a tail.
5honk I just answered your second question, but to be clear. You only need 3 slip fielders, and similar as to with having a fifth bowler, Sobers by default takes care of one spot, Richards at 3rd and Sunny at first would suffice. Your second much be elite, I'm not going to sacrifice my entire team to have 3 gods in the cordon. And Lara, while not Godly is close enough and in his prime was consistent, but like his batting was prone to lapses.
As to your last statement, yes wickets are important, but about a 3rd of them goes into the cordon. And I disagree than tail end runs are always more important than slip fielding. Have you seen some of those catches that Waugh, Richardson, Ponting, Sobers, Kallis used to make that mere mortals weren't even getting to, that swing matches? Just listen to the commentary on some of the vids I've sent. You want your bowlers to create chances, but means nothing if you don't have the guys to complete the deal.
kyear2
International Coach
To your first point, if the slip fielders makes the team due to their batting alone so that it's an afterthought, why then are we advocating shoehorning bowling all rounders who wouldn't make it on their primary discipline.
To your second point well I'm definitely picking him ahead of Sutcliffe, but that's just me.
Between him actually batting in the modern era, averaging mid 50's as an opener, providing a more than capable and test standard fifth bowling option and being godly slip fielder. Yes he beings ridiculous value to a team.
But again, not over a Hutton or Gavaskar because the same way I'm not playing Pollock over McGrath you are not going down a level to fill a secondary need.
Last edited:
kyear2
International Coach
Hasn't he been more consistent of late? Yes I seen the out of nowhere drops, but I've also seen him take some blinders, the lean forward half chances than only the great ones take.
kyear2
International Coach
And not to put too fine a point on it, it's not all of a sudden it's the primary focus, it's about the consideration and discussion.
The primary focus should always be the specialists, but after that we ask, is the tail too long, do we have a 5th option, who's the captain?.. I'm just suggesting also asking do we have anyone who can be a great at 2nd and another 2 to compliment?
It's a very important aspect of the game that's taken for granted and is just as vital as the other bits we focus on.
The primary focus should always be the specialists, but after that we ask, is the tail too long, do we have a 5th option, who's the captain?.. I'm just suggesting also asking do we have anyone who can be a great at 2nd and another 2 to compliment?
It's a very important aspect of the game that's taken for granted and is just as vital as the other bits we focus on.
Coronis
International Coach
I don’t.
ataraxia
International Coach
Smith catch probability is inversely proportional to Smith catch difficulty.
GoodAreasShane
Cricketer Of The Year
Yeah, Smith is weird like that. Takes some stunners yet can put some pretty simple ones down at times
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Smith regularly takes catches that even Ponting or Waugh wouldn't get to
But then drops catches that hit him in the guts
But then drops catches that hit him in the guts
kyear2
International Coach
So taking that into consideration, where would you rate him overall?
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
51st IMO.
kyear2
International Coach
Lol, meant more along the lines of sublime, great, good, decent
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
He's good. Can't be more than that while he continues to lose concentration and drop sitters. If he's in ATWXI contention for the 4 or 5 spot then someone like Hammond or Kallis would be a noticeable upgrade as a slipper IMO.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I don't think it's relevant in an ATG team anyway. There's no one who is a better fielder than him by a margin enough to overtake him as an overall player. eg. Ponting is not a good enough batsman despite being a better fielder to overtake him. Tendulkar and Lara aren't better fielders, if you're picking them over Smith it's because of batting, not fielding.
I would also reconsider whether Smith would even be in the slips. He was a pretty great ground fielder in the ring before he moved in there.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
lol talk about over-exaggeration.
I'm not sure a 3rd slip should be more of a consideration than a good fielder elsewhere on the field. You have 3+ slips operating for a pretty low percentage of the game, and not that many catches actually go to 3rd- a big proportion of near catches are wide/short/high that even the best aren't getting to.
I might be completely wrong on this though.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I lean this way but it depends entirely on the captaincy. A more aggressive captain might keep 3 or 4 slips for most of the innings, especially if you have McGrath/Hadlee/Ambrose hitting that line and length all day