Bowling Orders

[NZTailender]

Thought I'd create a new thread specifically for discussion about bowling orders, tactics and how defensive, destructive, attacking, steady players go and whats the best way to bowl them, etc.


I personally have NFI. All I know is whenever I put my destructive bowlers to attacking they're very expensive, and when I set to very defensive they bowl as if they were bowling on normal, except they don't take wickets.

Can anyone help me out with my bowling orders? What you would recommend for my team?

My bowling attack, in bowling order:
1. Jimmy Knowles - attacking player - normal - RFM
2. Ed Mills - destructive player - normal - LFM
3. Neale Gleeson - destructive player - normal - RS
4. Wahid Weerappuli - defensive player - normal - RM
5. Stephen Brayley - destructive player - normal - RS

My bowling orders are sets of 5.

 

[chaminda_00]

Unless a player has significant advantage over batsmen from other teams. Play them to mentally, i.e defensive on normal or defensive, attacking on attacking. With regard to destructive players they always seem to go for run unless they they high secondaries. But if you have a few defensive or cautious players you better of risking them going for a few runs for wickets. I got NFI about steady players, I play Granville on normal and he does ok.

You have alot of destructive players, so I would try and spread the tactics out depending on the quality of player. You can't really have them all on attacking except in FC, but you can't have them all on normal or defensive as they wont take many wickets.

 

[NZTailender]

Gleesons wonderful, while Braley is competent. Mills and Knowles both quality. Would it pay to have Gleeson on attacking, Mills & Knowles normal with Brayley defensive?

 

[Nate]

Yeah, have been inspired to change my bowling orders around lately after our losing streak of sorts. Worked wonders in the last few games. Moved their positions and aggressions around to a more attacking base, and tactics from sets of 5 to b2 thru.

 

[chaminda_00]

Gleesons wonderful, while Braley is competent. Mills and Knowles both quality. Would it pay to have Gleeson on attacking, Mills & Knowles normal with Brayley defensive?

Not sure how strong your leagues are but I would be surprised if any batsmen are better then remarkable. So I would go:
- Gleesons (v. attacking)
- Mills (attacking)
- Knowles (attacking)
- Pullers (normal) - i think thats your nickname for you all rounder
- Braley (attacking)

Use tactics where Braley bowls last, but not at death. You should back your other bowlers to knock over the top and middle order on attacking tactics. If that doesn't work try Braley on defensive.

If you have attacking bowlers that are half decent like yours you should always attack with them IMO. My bowlers are only a couple levels better then yours seem to be and that is what I do ATM. It is working so far this season and playing more defensive tactics in past didn't really work.

 

[NZTailender]

Will trial this in the next few OD matches. Have a feeling CD will smash me even more now, though.

Thanks Tharmi

 

[Adamc]

I usually use the 'b2 thru' orders and set my bowlers as follows:

1. Watkins - exceptional/phenomenal defensive RFM - normal
2. Downer - miraculous/exceptional cautious RM - attacking
3. Whitehorne - masterful/phenomenal steady RH Spin - very attacking
4. Ellis - remarkable/elite attacking RM - normal
5. Dissanayake - superb/remarkable cautious RH Spin - very defensive

Generally works alright, Downer and/or Watkins usually account for most of the opposition's decent batsmen and if they make it to the slog overs Whitehorne cleans up. Ellis chips in with the odd wicket and Dissanayake's role is basically not to disgrace himself (haven't had a chance to play him at full fitness yet, so he might be more useful than that suggests).

My ideal bowling lineup would be to have my bowlers (in order of skill): destructive F, attacking FM, steady Spin, cautious M, defensive Spin. Current lineup lacks a fast bowler but it isn't a million miles off.

 

[NZTailender]

It's heartening to know my best bowler would make CW's best BT side. Not meaning to insult your attack, Adam. Just happy that my side is coming along well.

 

[Nate]

Have always made sure I had two bowlers on very defensive for the slog overs. Just assumed it was the way to go.

 

[chaminda_00]

Have always made sure I had two bowlers on very defensive for the slog overs. Just assumed it was the way to go.

Do they go for any less runs though. My main death bowler is on attacking during the death over and he gets most of his wickets during the last 10. Better off trying to get a BT collaspe to go your way then save runs during the last 10 IMO.

 

[Jamee999]

I have Bardle and Kealey on v.aggressive, bowling through, with the other 3 on defensive or v.defensive. Would change if I had a 3rd decent bowler..