No. 6 for Post Packer XI

[bagapath]

At no.6 runs > 500; avg > 25


IT Botham (Eng) 1979-1992 85 2347 138 29.70 5 296 8/103 31.25 19 97 0
A Flintoff (Eng) 1998-2009 70 1959 167 32.11 3 199 5/58 33.33 2 48 0
Imran Khan (Pak) 1979-1992 66 918 118 61.20 2 269 8/58 19.45 18 19 0

Imran is a legit no.6 for me....

 

[bagapath]

my choice is imran. but voted for botham hoping i could have him as an option in the last poll. i wont mind a bowling attack of imran, hadlee, botham, marshall and warne. and it will be a killer batting line-up not to mention some very special slip catching.

 

[Ikki]

Imran at #6? That's leaving the batting way too bare. It was between Kallis and Ponting, of course I went Ponting. Kallis isn't getting a bowl in my side even if he were in it. I already have 4 all-timers it would just waste overs. I'll probably be going for Imran in the bowling spot left.

 

[Athlai]

Haha how can the batting be bare when you've got such an awesome top 5, and Gilchrist at 7.

 

[Ikki]

Haha how can the batting be bare when you've got such an awesome top 5, and Gilchrist at 7.

I suppose if Bradman was there we could have Imran even higher then and add another bowler?

This team is facing off against the Pre-Packer team right? The Pre-packer team kills this one in batting, the batting depth will be important. It seems silly to pick a bowling all-rounder @6 if you're picking 4 all-time bowlers. In my attack Imran would be part of the bowling attack and would extend the tail. That way I have no drop in the bowling really and a bigger boost to my batting.

 

[Athlai]

I suppose if Bradman was there we could have Imran even higher then?

This team is facing off against the Pre-Packer team right? The Pre-packer team kills this one in batting, the batting depth will be important.

Kills this one in batting eh? So maybe bowling could be important.

Gilchrist at 6, Imran at 7 is plenty strong.

 

[bagapath]

I suppose if Bradman was there we could have Imran even higher then?

This team is facing off against the Pre-Packer team right? The Pre-packer team kills this one in batting, the batting depth will be important. It seems silly to pick a bowling all-rounder when you already have 4 all-time bowlers.

are we going to do it? i dont mind the idea. but i hope the enthusiasm level is the same as this one. this team selection, btw, has been really exciting. i like the fact that we can still have a few surprise inclusions/ omissions till the last spot is fixed.

 

[Ikki]

Kills this one in batting eh? So maybe bowling could be important.

Gilchrist at 6, Imran at 7 is plenty strong.

The alternatives are:

Gavaskar
Hayden
Richards
Tendulkar
Lara
Ponting
Gilchrist
Imran
Marshall
Warne
Hadlee/McGrath

vs

Gavaskar
Hayden
Richards
Tendulkar
Lara
Gilchrist
Imran
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
McGrath

You don't gain much bowling by having Imran at 6/7 but you gain much more batting with Ponting at 6. Those 4 bowlers will bowl 100 overs in a day easy.

 

[0RI0N]

Post packer XI vs Pre Packer X...
Should select pre packer XI after current poll.

 

[Athlai]

The alternatives are:

Gavaskar
Hayden
Richards
Tendulkar
Lara
Ponting
Gilchrist
Imran
Marshall
Warne
Hadlee/McGrath

vs

Gavaskar
Hayden
Richards
Tendulkar
Lara
Gilchrist
Imran
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
McGrath

You don't gain much bowling by having Imran at 6/7 but you gain much more batting with Ponting at 6.

I'd probably bat Gilchrist ahead of Imran and you gain one of the best bowlers ever for the price of one of the top 20-30 batsman.

You'll lose 10 runs an innings with the bat but when you're already looking at 350 minimum every match thats fine. Especially considering how much you gain with the ball.

 

[Ikki]

I'd probably bat Gilchrist ahead of Imran and you gain one of the best bowlers ever for the price of one of the top 20-30 batsman.

Who is a top 20-30 batsman?

You'll lose 10 runs an innings with the bat but when you're already looking at 350 minimum every match thats fine. Especially considering how much you gain with the ball.

You'll lose about 20 runs an inning with the bat and you won't gain much in the bowling stakes because you already have 4 bowlers better than Imran and that are capable to bowl all the overs without dropping in quality.

 

[Athlai]

Who is a top 20-30 batsman?



You'll lose about 20 runs an inning with the bat and you won't gain much in the bowling stakes because you already have 4 bowlers better than Imran and that are capable to bowl all the overs without dropping in quality.

Ponting.

And disagree, 5 world class bowlers are better than 4. Imran also adds captaincy, and averaged 44 in that period, having McGrath in the team instead of Hadlee would lose 15 runs an innings and the gain in bowling is negligible. So how come you don't argue against that selection?

 

[Ikki]

Ponting.

 

[Athlai]

Better than Ponting:

Bradman
Hobbs
Hutton
Tendulkar
Hammond
Sobers
Lara
Gavaskar
Barrington
Chappell (10)
Richards
Weekes
Grace
Sutcliffe
Dravid
Barrington


To be fair to you hard to keep Ponting out from now, 15-30 then.

 

[Matt79]

Would often be tempted to take Kallus as a player that holds his own in an all time top 6, but with Gilchrist, Marshall, and hopefully Hadlee in the 'tail', Imran's batting more than good enough.

 

[Ikki]

Better than Ponting:

Bradman
Hobbs
Hutton
Tendulkar
Hammond
Sobers
Lara
Gavaskar
Barrington
Chappell (10)
Richards
Weekes
Grace
Sutcliffe
Dravid
Barrington


To be fair to you hard to keep Ponting out from now, 15-30 then.

Haha, Gavaskar better than Ponting? Barrington better than Ponting? Dravid better than Ponting? Grace? Why not Trumper too?

Only 1 name above has a legitimate claim to being simply better, a few more names are about equal, the rest are inferior.

If you meant to be funny, you succeeded. If you didn't, pardon the patronising, but you need to learn a tad more about the history of cricket.

 

[Athlai]

Haha, Gavaskar better than Ponting? Barrington better than Ponting? Dravid better than Ponting? Grace? Why not Trumper too?

Only 1 name above has a legitimate claim to being simply better, a few more names are about equal, the rest are inferior.

If you meant to be funny, you succeeded. If you didn't, pardon the patronising, but you need to learn a tad more about the history of cricket.

Many consider Dravid better than Tendulkar. And I think most would agree that they may be better than Ponting.

Oh they aren't Australian I forgot.

 

[bagapath]

Haha, Gavaskar better than Ponting? Barrington better than Ponting? Dravid better than Ponting? Grace? Why not Trumper too?

Only 1 name above has a legitimate claim to being simply better, a few more names are about equal, the rest are inferior.

If you meant to be funny, you succeeded. If you didn't, pardon the patronising, but you need to learn a tad more about the history of cricket.

fellas... keep this thread for selecting no.6... any jokes like "ponting better than gavaskar" can be reserved for other threads....

 

[Athlai]

fellas... keep this thread for selecting no.6... any jokes like "ponting better than gavaskar" can be reserved for other threads....

Haha zing

 

[Ikki]

Many consider Dravid better than Tendulkar. And I think most would agree that they may be better than Ponting.

Oh they aren't Australian I forgot.

Pray tell how that is relevant? The ignorance of putting Ponting as a 15-30 would take some effort to match. That would be like saying Tendulkar is 15-30 batsman. Or Viv Richards is a 20-30 batsman.

Yes, you may find SOME people who say one is better than the other, but you won't find many people saying all Dravid+Kallis+Yousef+Barrington+etc, are better than Tendulkar.

Or like me mentioning McGrath, Lillee, Warne, Murali, Pollock, Donald, Ambrose, Marshall, Roberts, Holding, Lindwall, Spofforth, Davidson, Bannerman, Barnes, Hadlee, Wasim, Waqar.... are better than Imran simply because they are comparable.

What utter non sense.