All of us agree with weighing the primary skills first. We all see it as close enough that his batting becomes a defining factor.
The onus was on you to show how the difference between Imran's bowling and others is more in value than the runs he would score. You haven't gone there.
Apparently for you, the gulf in Imran's bowling to the others is so considerable that it justifies weakening the tail. Please explain that gulf.
So this is the last response, because no one is going to change their minds, and like previous discussions regarding Imran, it seems that it's a subject that garners vigorous and unwarranted defence.
So first of all this isn't about Imran, this is purely philosophical that I, and others agree that you pick the best bowlers, period.
Now if you believe that Imran is top 3 for you, then no conflict and that's the team you should choose.
How is my attack selected? First up is my spear head, Marshall. Express pace, could swing both ways but could adapt to any surface. Had all the tools and knee how and when to use them, for me the greatest ever.
Next up is my corridor bowler, McGrath who edges out Hadlee, though it can switch between the two. The edge for McGrath is with the tougher pitches he encountered, his flawless control paired with the extra bounce he could extract.
Last of all is Steyn, he edges out the Pakistani pair, in order of Imran and Wasim. He was aggressive and relentless always hunting for the edge and had an amazing strike rate and seems the perfect foil for the other bowlers chosen. He too utilized reverse swing and the edge for him was his strike rate, and again from an even more modern era.
Now in a hypothetical series and I believe the tail is especially vulnerable and being exploited, then Hadlee may get a go, but to start I believe that this is the best attack and I also believe that Marshall (who was a better bat than people give him credit for and just didn't apply himself as he probably would have in a weaker team) and Warne provides sufficient cover as far as the batting goes and it's not a team of rabbits which is what is to be avoided.
Also note that the pick between McGrath and Hadlee can and does change, to the point where I started a thread about it.
My issue with the past couple of pages though is dual.
1. It seems as though you take personal affront with my philosophy and wouldn't quit until I see your point. But I do see your perspective, I just don't share it, to the extent that you want me to. and that's ok. But even then, I think Warne and Murali are equal. My tie break then became Gilchrist being the keeper and the familiarity with Warne, and the his batting. It does factor in when the decision is otherwise a difficult one.
2. It seems that you and some others advocate balance and having a rounded team where you factor in the benefits of secondary skills, but that only applies to bowlers and batting deep.
It didn't apply to having a potential 6th bowler to help with the rotation if required, and it didn't ever even mention or factor in having slip specialists.Which to my mind is a more valuable skill and addition to a team than having a bowler average 10 more with the bat, and which does factor into team selections. I've never heard probably should go with Hammond or Smith over Sachin, because the scope is somewhat myopic in nature and focused solely on one single skill, when it requires all of the above to have a balanced team, especially in this imagined scenario.
So in summary, I emphasize and maximize bowler quality and style over all else, band as I've said from the beginning, all other skills are tie breakers rather than primary objectives. I also believe that Marshall and Warne are more than capable with the bat, which is good enough for my objective of not having a long / vulnerable / rabbit tail. And it's not set in stone as I do go back and forth between McGrath and Hadlee because of how close they are, but I also like that little extra that McGrath brings. Finally, if you're pushing well rounded teams, let's not just focus on one area of it, if so miss me with it.
Thank you
