yeah, but the weakness I was alluding to was in terms of having enough firepower to bowl out subcontinental sides on subcontinental wickets cheaply enough to win, which I mentioned in my original post.
sorry, misinterpreted what you meant.
Very handy side - light a bowler IMO, but with batsmen like that, who'd want to watch them bowl anyway?
so ur team is SO good that u won't need a 11th player?
Let me get this straight - you'd have Mohinder Armanath ahead of the Vishwanaths, Vengsarkars, Hazares etc?
Couldn't think of another bowler - don't want to play two spinners except at home. You can fill in #11 with whatever you want.so ur team is SO good that u won't need a 11th player?
Yes. I thought about Hazare, but chose Amarnath. He was better than Vengsarkar and Vishwanath IMO. Primary reason for that is he was (in my opinion) the best player of quality fast bowling - as good as anyone else on the team. Hazare is extremely close in terms of making it though, and he might if I decide to play only four bowlers (which is what I normally prefer, but in this case, taking 20 wickets is the problem and I don't feel comfortable doing it consistently with this four-man attack).
Almost certainly. He was a better wicketkeeper IMO.
No, not Prasanna or Nadkarni. Like I said, I wouldn't play two spinners except in the subcontinent (and in that case I'd want Bedi plus Kumble, so you'd have very contrasting styles). Overseas, I'd want a fast bowler, but couldn't think of a good one. Thinking about it some more, I'd probably have Ghavri.And you'd leave an 11th spot open, allowing people to assume it'd be Prasanna or Nadkarni in there, rather than Subhash Gupte?
Armanath was a better player of quality seam-bowling than Vishwanath and Vengsarkar?
But Engineer was a better batsman, and more than good enough as a wicketkeeper if not quite as good as Kirmani.
Gupte and Chandra were effective outside the subcontinent though. Why not have Gupte and Bedi at home and Gupte and Chandra away?
Yes.Armanath was a better player of quality seam-bowling than Vishwanath and Vengsarkar?
Yes. But I'd still have Kirmani as Engineer is overrated in terms of his batting ability.
Because I don't want two spinners away, and I think Bedi and Kumble would be better at home. As I mentioned, I'd rather have another fast bowler, like Ghavri, away.
How?
How?
You'd rather have a mediocre seam-bowler like Kharsan Ghavri than a top-notch wristspinner like Gupte or Chandra?
Yea. Kapil and Ghavri formed a decent partnership in the late seventies. I think they are the only partnership (who opened in a minimum 40 innings or something) in the history of cricket to never allow a 100 run opening stand. Obviously, that is more of a statistical anomaly than anything else - Ghavri was an underrated complimentary bowler. At home, I've said that I would play two spinners.You'd rather have a mediocre seam-bowler like Kharsan Ghavri than a top-notch wristspinner like Gupte or Chandra?
I mean, Kirmani ahead of Engineer is one thing, but Sehwag ahead of Merchant?
First post said:
Shows the futility of the exercise I suppose.