4 & 5

[Flem274*]

I tend to let Sobers and Kallis share 5th bowling duties. Neither are really near the level of the rest with the ball but I can see them producing some golden arm type spells.

Hobbs
Gavaskar (disdain the man, respect the player)
Bradman (c)
Tendulkar
Kallis
Sobers
Gilchrist (wk)
Imran
Hadlee
Warne
Marshall

 

[subshakerz]

But why at 8, does batting average matter more than who's the better bowler.

Even as a batting all-rounder, I'm going to base the selection more on who is better with the bat. That's the primary role.

Because Hadlee was merely useful with the bat and a top 5 bowler, while Imran was a lower order specialist and a top 10 bowler (though top 5 in my book). The gap between the top ten pacers is small anyways to allow for the batting difference.

 

[kyear2]

Well we are talking about no. 8 so batting skills does come into play and you questioned whether Imran was that much better with the bat.

And for me, Hadlee's numbers are good enough for the no 8 position.

You have 3 selections, why would I go lower than I have to to make those 3 selections. I've never said Imran wasn't great. I'm just not putting him in my team to boost the batting, I want as good as an attack as possible. The only reason Hadlee makes it is because he's similar in style and record to McGrath and offers much more with the bat.
So instead of Marshall, Warne, Steyn and McGrath, which is imo the best pure attack. I just substitute Hadlee because if McGrath is 2nd or 3rd, Hadlee is at worth 4th. So the drop off is minimal if it exists at all. Hence
Hadlee, Marshall, Warne, Steyn.

 

[kyear2]

Because Hadlee was merely useful with the bat and a top 5 bowler, while Imran was a lower order specialist and a top 10 bowler (though top 5 in my book). The gap between the top ten pacers is small anyways to allow for the batting difference.

But that where we disagree, yes he's lower half of the top 10. Why skip over so many bowlers for extra runs, when your primary job is to bowl out the opposition.
It's just a difference in philosophy. And again, he's not crap, he makes any 2nd team easily.
I just don't need a lower order specialist, and 27 average is way more than just useful with the bat. And the extra 10 runs isn't worth any perceived drop off.

 

[subshakerz]

And for me, Hadlee's numbers are good enough for the no 8 position.

You have 3 selections, why would I go lower than I have to to make those 3 selections. I've never said Imran wasn't great. I'm just not putting him in my team to boost the batting, I want as good as an attack as possible. The only reason Hadlee makes it is because he's similar in style and record to McGrath and offers much more with the bat.
So instead of Marshall, Warne, Steyn and McGrath, which is imo the best pure attack. I just substitute Hadlee because if McGrath is 2nd or 3rd, Hadlee is at worth 4th. So the drop off is minimal if it exists at all. Hence
Hadlee, Marshall, Warne, Steyn.

I would argue in this case Imran takes precedence over Steyn. Even if you think Steyn is better it isnt as much as the difference with Hadlee, and then you can add another bat in the lineup.

My lineup is Imran, Hadlee, Marshall and Warne.

 

[kyear2]

I would argue in this case Imran takes precedence over Steyn. Even if you think Steyn is better it isnt as much as the difference with Hadlee, and then you can add another bat in the lineup.

My lineup is Imran, Hadlee, Marshall and Warne.

Not to derail this thread further as I just answered you in the other one.

Steyn for me is ranked 2nd or 3rd, definitely no lower than 4th. Imran is 9th. With Hadlee already in the lineup, not need for me to go that low to select a bowler when I already have the no. 8 spot covered. I want to take wickets and my attack is based on who I believe have the best opportunity to do so. Hadlee, Marshall, Warne, Steyn. If I definitely need McGrath, then Hadlee comes out and Marshall slides up to 8.

 

[kyear2]

Was Kallis really that bad a batsman, or like myself with Chanderpaul, just though he was selfish and for that didn't like him? If not for Sobers he would be a lock in every 11, and brings so very much to the table.
I can't say I enjoyed watching him bat, but he was effective.

 

[ankitj]

Sobers can cover any second spin role and I would have Hammond ahead of Kallis.

Disagree. Not in an all time greats contest. Also, wasn't Sobers effective when he was a seam bowler rather than spinner?

 

[kyear2]

Disagree. Not in an all time greats contest. Also, wasn't Sobers effective when he was a seam bowler rather than spinner?

Way more productive. The reason his average and s/r is so high is because of his intial stint as a spinner.
Similar to Smith, same goes for his batting average. As he entered the team as a teenage spinner batting at 8 I think it was

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

I think I'd go

Hobbs
Hutton
Bradman
Grace
Sachin
Sobers

...but if we're not considering Grace then probably Lara gets in. Not much to split most of the batsmen in the poll though. @Himannv will be delighted that you didn't list Sanga as an option. Burgey probably less so that you didn't list Border.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Disagree. Not in an all time greats contest. Also, wasn't Sobers effective when he was a seam bowler rather than spinner?

No proper cricket wicket should need a specialist second spinner

 

[kyear2]

I think I'd go

Hobbs
Hutton
Bradman
Grace
Sachin
Sobers

...but if we're not considering Grace then probably Lara gets in. Not much to split most of the batsmen in the poll though. @Himannv will be delighted that you didn't list Sanga as an option. Burgey probably less so that you didn't list Border.

I wanted to limit it to 10, and I wanted to have persons who have been spoken of in some way as being the best and Sanga isn't that to me. Border though was the first one out and was between him and Ponting and if not for his Viv like decline at the end, he would be though if much more highly. Or so I believe.

 

[trundler]

I'd have Tendulkar at 4 for certain as a sort of insurance policy. #5 could be either Hammond or Lara but it has to be either of those 2 as the other blokes lack the longevity and sustained quality of those 2. Excluding Smith, of course, but if he retired now I'd have him ahead of Chappell still.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Which peers?

Gavaskar and Richards.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Right, so to prove Hadlee was a better all-rounder, lets just discount Imrans best years as an allrounder. Sounds fair.

When you select Hadlee, you get 30 avg batsman + arguably GOAT bowler.

With Imran, i dont know.. ATG bowler + 30 avg bat..? Or a specialist bat + support bowler?

 

[trundler]

You get the greatest ever bowling all rounder.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

You get the greatest ever bowling all rounder.

Procter is already there.

 

[ankitj]

No proper cricket wicket should need a specialist second spinner

?

 

[ankitj]

^ That's desi way of saying gagf. CW should adopt it.

 

[kyear2]

I'd have Tendulkar at 4 for certain as a sort of insurance policy. #5 could be either Hammond or Lara but it has to be either of those 2 as the other blokes lack the longevity and sustained quality of those 2. Excluding Smith, of course, but if he retired now I'd have him ahead of Chappell still.

The list really could have been left at 6.

I agree with you about Sachin. His technique would be a tremendous safety net between the shot makers.

But Smith can possibly replicate his production, but would also slot perfectly into the cordon.

Similarly Lara, but he has that extra gear and the added variety of being a leftie.

Then there is Kallis who would also be a calm in-between the storm, plus the bowling and catching as well.

It's down to those 4 for me.

I think.