CW50 2nd Edition - No 04

[Spark]

Because it's affecting real-world selection. cf Symonds, North for us.

 

[Burgey]

Beacause you must. Even if it is just a part time bowler and not a full time allrounder, at some point the frontline bowlers will need a rest, or the attack a change of pace. In the last aussie/wi test Watson, Clarke and Hussey turned their arms over and the pressence of Watson and Ramnarine helped influence the team selection in this second test. To me it is required. Just my two cents.

Wasn't required by Australia between 95-08 tbf, or by the West Indies in the 70s and 80s.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Wasn't required by Australia between 95-08 tbf, or by the West Indies in the 70s and 80s.

Had guys like Mark Waugh, Steve Waugh and Viv Richards at various stages to "roll the arm over" and get through a couple of overs. I think that's what kyear2 is getting towards, more than a few others who seem to want someone as good as Imran as a fifth bowler.

 

[Burgey]

Had guys like Mark Waugh, Steve Waugh and Viv Richards at various stages to "roll the arm over" and get through a couple of overs. I think that's what kyear2 is getting towards, more than a few others who seem to want someone as good as Imran as a fifth bowler.

Oh for sure. But I mean every team has had what are now called "part timers". They just used to be called "partnership breakers". Just don't think you have to have five front line standard bowlers to be a great side. if you do, it's a bonus, mind.

 

[smash84]

awta......

heck Australia would skittle line ups with just Warne and McGrath let alone 2 more bowlers of the same calibre

 

[GIMH]

I'd really love to know where this idea that a top cricket side must have five bowlers has come from. Really.

Australia's obsession with it seems to stem from 05 doesn't it?

 

[Spark]

Yeah, stems from Flintoff more or less, and I blame a lot of our middle order instability up until now for it.