subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Which pair gives more value to an average side?
-
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.
Gavaskar/Kapil vs Wasim/Miandad
- Thread starter subshakerz
- Start date
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I find this interesting because Gavaskar and Kapil are objectively slightly more highly rated cricketers than Wasim and Miandad. But the latter are more value IMO.
It's a tough one and a lot would depend on how strong this average teams tail was.
If it's a strong tail and it allows you to play an allrounder at 7 then Kapil is your choice. If it's a weak tail meaning Kapil would have to be a number 8 then Wasim would be the preferred pick.
My choice is Kapil and Wasim
If it's a strong tail and it allows you to play an allrounder at 7 then Kapil is your choice. If it's a weak tail meaning Kapil would have to be a number 8 then Wasim would be the preferred pick.
My choice is Kapil and Wasim
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
That ain't a choice.
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
I mean its average so… its an average tail.
I would like to put some numbers on this though. So for an average team we should have… (post WWI)
#1 37.05
#2 34.79
#3 39.85
#4 41.45
#5 38.65
#6 33.14
#7 28.40+
#8 21.48
#9 15.61
#10 11.51
#11 8.38
Note: impressively the average for a #7 and the average for wicketkeepers overall are almost the same.
You’d have 3 pacers @ 30.24 and a spinner at 31.62 (calculated using only bowling positions 1-4) (if your #6 was an AR they’d be 33.14/41.13 - calculated using bowling position 5+)
I’m gonna try and find some players who fufil these stats and make an XI of them.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
Where is Kapil is more highly rated than Wasim?
Streets ahead as a bowler, Wasim is.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
I'm struggling to see how batting comes into play when the gulf in bowling is so very wide.
The object of this exercise called cricket is to take 20 wickets for as little runs as possible.
Last edited:
Having 5 bowlers allows for more rotation and fresher bowlers have more chance of picking up 20 wickets. Also it makes it easier to plug holes in a bowling line up if a bowler is underperforming.
A great example of this was the English bowling side in the early/mid 00s.
Remove de Grandhomme from the 2010s NZ team and I guarantee you the other bowlers would have been a lot less successful.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
He meant Gavaskar+ Kapil > Wasim+ Miandad. Or Gavaskar > Wasim and Kapil > Miandad. I think that is debatable as they are fairly close, but you didn't read what he said.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
The pick would also take into account that this an average team with an average bowling attack.
Dev plus 4 average bowlers vs Wasim plus 3 average bowlers.
Well with Dev you know has an solid record in performing with this type of team dynamics. Wasim, not so much.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
No Kapil pls Gavaskar are both relatively combined more highly rated.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Dev isn't good enough to be a regular bat even in a average side IMO.
And that's why I said "If it's a strong tail and it allows you to play an allrounder at 7 then Kapil"
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Unlikely for average side.
And that's why I said "If" x2