Line and Length
Cricketer Of The Year
You'll find another one in my survey of top bowlers poll.There is always one Joker in the pack
You'll find another one in my survey of top bowlers poll.There is always one Joker in the pack
Which bowler do you mean?You'll find another one in my survey of top bowlers poll.
I assume you’re just picking Smith for L/R?Sir Jack Hobbs
Graeme Smith^*
Sir Donald Bradman
Sir I. V. A. Richards^
Sachin Tendulkar
Sir Garfield Sobers^(5)
Adam Gilchrist +
Malcolm Marshall (1)
Shane Warne (4)
Dale Steyn (3)
Glenn McGrath (2)
Sir Leonard Hutton
Steve Smith
Sir Richard Hadlee
Muttiah Muralitharan
Injured reserve / 18 man squad
Imran Khan
Brian Lara / Jacques Kallis
Allan Knott
A certain poster has been voting Ashwin at the top of his list for each vote.Which bowler do you mean?
The more I thought about it, the more right it felt.I assume you’re just picking Smith for L/R?
I agree with all of your philosophical points. I believe that it's not about picking the 3 best bowlers but ones who complement each other and fill different roles.Pakistan has been the worst fielding side of all time. If we were to account for bad fielding (and the knock on effect that has), the stats of Akram or Imran would be just like your Steyn, Hadlee or McGrath who had wonderful fielders taking even half chances.
So if I am choosing an ATG attack, I am factoring everything in and the overall skill level of a bowler and what extra they bring to the table. Because attacks work as a group and you need variety to trouble every kind of batsman. With Wasim the left arm angle is a huge plus and certain batsmen are simply not as effective against it coupled with his extravagant swing. Then Ambrose brings his height to the table and how awkward he is to face for any batter.
I mean, if we are being fair then Wasim and especially Imran did had some wonderful umpires to balance the odds....Pakistan has been the worst fielding side of all time. If we were to account for bad fielding (and the knock on effect that has), the stats of Akram or Imran would be just like your Steyn, Hadlee or McGrath who had wonderful fielders taking even half chances.
So if I am choosing an ATG attack, I am factoring everything in and the overall skill level of a bowler and what extra they bring to the table. Because attacks work as a group and you need variety to trouble every kind of batsman. With Wasim the left arm angle is a huge plus and certain batsmen are simply not as effective against it coupled with his extravagant swing. Then Ambrose brings his height to the table and how awkward he is to face for any batter.
Batting wise I'd go Wasim, Marshall, Warne rather than Warne, Wasim, MarshallHobbs
Gavaskar
Bradman
Tendulkar
V Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist
Warne
Wasim Akram (3)
Marshall (1)
McGrath (2)
12th man: Ambrose replaces Wasim on certain pitches.
Variety in attack is much more important IMO instead of having somewhat similar bowlers. You have Marshall you don't need Steyn, you have McGrath don't need Hadlee.
We can agree to disagree. Marshall (skill set, bullet proof overall record), McGrath (consistency, longevity, accuracy) and Hadlee (lone wolf with excellent record) all separate themselves in books from the next 3.even if they averaged 0 with the bat, Imran and Hadlee are top contenders to open an ATG attack.
There is nothing separating Imran, Hadlee, McGrath, Marshall, Steyn and Ambrose at the top layer from one another except our personal preferences.
Lillee, Akram, Donald, Holding and Trueman will be slightly below that layer because one one factor (overseas records) or the other (not so stellar record against one opponent) etc. Barnes is tough to juxtapose against them line by line because we don't know enough. But will be in contention at the third plane anyways with Davidson, Waqar, Lindwall, Cummins, Garner, S Pollock, Roberts and Anderson completing the Top 20.
Building an ATG XI where Imran and Hadlee take the two ball is perfectly legit IMO without factoring in their batting abilities.
Yes there isThere is nothing separating Imran, Hadlee, McGrath, Marshall, Steyn and Ambrose at the top layer from one another except our personal preferences.
I think Marshall was just better, your wrote up said it as well as I could, he just had everything and excelled against everyone in all conditions. No one else can say that.sure... you can argue that. but please argue.
the true pleasure in participating in this forum is reading detailed arguments, even if you don't agree with them, from other posters;
especially in the not-so-clear cut cases like this one.
I am imagining Ambrose with the new ball in his hand. And Imran at the top of his bowling mark.
Who else could be more intimidating and effective than these two as the opening pair, in any condition against any opposition?
I love Marshall and Hadlee; and I selected them in my all-time XI
Bagapath's Greatest XI
Someone else should do one these. Suggesting Bagapath so we can detest his side as well. Thanks to Furball's excellent thread and Pothas' challenge, I am very tempted to share my Greatest XI with you. I started following cricket in the early '80s. But we bought our first TV only in 1985...www.cricketweb.net
But I am not sure if they would be better than Imran and Ambrose.
Or, may be, they will be. In India, perhaps.
But which pair would be better in Pakistan? Or Australia? Or England? In West Indies?
It is an interesting trip to go into the what-ifs.
It is not easy for me to split the six pacers I have mentioned.
I have always voted for Marshall and Hadlee in all the polls;
but I am not sure if I was not wrong in each and every one of those occasions.
This is very important no doubt. Personally I have them 4th and 5th, mainly due to their ineffectiveness in certain countries (yes, India), making them liabilities there, compared to the three i have above them who do not have such glaring holes over such a sample size (lol) of tests.Why do we not rate Murali or Warne higher? Not only are these guys taking a huge chunk of wickets per match, but they are essential to keeping the other bowlers fresh and the over rates up and keeping the threat on while the ball is ****.
To start,. Spinners by default are less efficient, but they somewhat make up for it by volume. They are of ten less effective early in matches and definitely more conditions dependent.Why do we not rate Murali or Warne higher? Not only are these guys taking a huge chunk of wickets per match, but they are essential to keeping the other bowlers fresh and the over rates up and keeping the threat on while the ball is ****.
Yes but say you have an ATG attack of Marshall/McGrath/Hadlee (generally top 3 pacers) and either Murali/Warne. You take this XI to a specific country and Murali/Warne become a liability. The other 3 aren’t - this is why I rate them below.Murali dominated both India and Australia in SL at least tbf.
Yeah no doubt. I just think that it's still some uber specific scenarios where they struggle and it matters less than the sheer volume of wickets they bring. I understand they're less impactful per wicket but they're definitely making up for it imo. Would probably still have them 4th or so anyway so I dont disagree with you.Yes but say you have an ATG attack of Marshall/McGrath/Hadlee (generally top 3 pacers) and either Murali/Warne. You take this XI to a specific country and Murali/Warne become a liability. The other 3 aren’t - this is why I rate them below.