***Official*** Sri Lanka in New Zealand 2015

[TheJediBrah]

Yeah of course. What I'm saying is that it doesn't make up for a pitiful boundary rate of one every 20 balls. Assuming the guy at the other end faces as many balls, that means on average Bevan hits one boundary per 7 overs of batting. That's just not good enough for a player coming in at the death for an ATG team.

And 2 sixes per 1,000 balls! That would be acceptable for an opener, maybe. Even Kane Williamson hits sixes at three times the rate of Bevan, and he doesn't even try and hit sixes. The only batsman I could find who hit sixes as rarely as Bevan was Andrew Jones.

If Bevan faced 100 balls per innings for five consecutive matches, he'd hit one six. Just not good enough for an ATG team.

this post is worse than AIDS

I really hope you're not serious

 

[Migara]

Once we start dismissing people for less than 200, batting will automatically click.

 

[Dan]

I'd pick both Vettori and Warne. With Brad Hogg very unlucky to miss out.

Not sure how I'd fit both into the XI though. Maybe we can go with 2006 super-sub rules and Vettori can be the Super-sub.

As crazy as it sounds, I'd be tempted to leave out Warne entirely. I never rated Warne as an ODI bowler compared to his Test stuff (probably a result of him ****ing off from ODI cricket right as I started watching regularly), and I seriously rate Vettori as an ODI spinner.

I'd be looking something like:

1. Gilchrist
2. Watson
3. Williamson
4. Ponting
5. Crowe/Jones/Taylor
6. Hussey
7. Bevan
8. Vettori
9. Lee
10. Bond
11. McGrath

12. Warne

Else you can open with M Waugh, drop the floating batsman, move everyone else up and play Cairns as a #7. But that involves picking Cairns, and **** Chris Cairns.

 

[Spark]

As crazy as it sounds, I'd be tempted to leave out Warne entirely. I never rated Warne as an ODI bowler compared to his Test stuff (probably a result of him ****ing off from ODI cricket right as I started watching regularly), and I seriously rate Vettori as an ODI spinner.

I'd be looking something like:

1. Gilchrist
2. Watson
3. Williamson
4. Ponting
5. Crowe/Jones/Taylor
6. Hussey
7. Bevan
8. Vettori
9. Lee
10. Bond
11. McGrath

12. Warne

Else you can open with M Waugh, drop the floating batsman, move everyone else up and play Cairns as a #7. But that involves picking Cairns, and **** Chris Cairns.

Symonds, man. EDIT: Though I guess picking Watson makes him less necessary.

 

[TheJediBrah]

We are not learning. Through history, in LO matches attacking spin was the reason behind SL being comptitive. It's good to pick Vandersay, but he is not an attacking spinner, same goes for Senanayake. Mendis is a joke. Right now, we have only three attacking spinners in the country, who look for wickets rather than containment. Herath, Dilruwan Perera and Suraj Randiv. Perera is particularly good with the bat. We have to play two of them in LO matches regardless of conditions. Herath is slow in the field, obvious choices are Perera and Randiv. For some reason these two are never given chances in ODIs.

Herath should be a walk-in. Not great in non-spin-friendly conditions when you're defending <200, but you'd expect him to go 10-0-40-1 in good batting conditions regularly.

 

[TheJediBrah]

As crazy as it sounds, I'd be tempted to leave out Warne entirely. I never rated Warne as an ODI bowler compared to his Test stuff (probably a result of him ****ing off from ODI cricket right as I started watching regularly), and I seriously rate Vettori as an ODI spinner.

I'd be looking something like:

1. Gilchrist
2. Watson
3. Williamson
4. Ponting
5. Crowe/Jones/Taylor
6. Hussey
7. Bevan
8. Vettori
9. Lee
10. Bond
11. McGrath

12. Warne

Else you can open with M Waugh, drop the floating batsman, move everyone else up and play Cairns as a #7. But that involves picking Cairns, and **** Chris Cairns.

This must be that game where Hayden and Symonds are unavailable on a fishing trip

 

[Migara]

And a drowning trip as well.

 

[Spark]

This must be that game where Hayden and Symonds are unavailable on a fishing trip

Watson over Hayden makes sense if you're not gonna pick Symonds tbf.

Symonds lets you pick a more sensible batting order though, Hussey 6 Bevan 7 seems a bit of a waste on both fronts (Hussey is a finisher, Bevan is a chaser; get the latter up the order)

 

[Dan]

btw the original post was an exaggeration, pretty sure he wasn't saying that NZ never produced any players worthy of an ATG XI. They've produced some beauties, especially for such a small population.

Yeah, but he was using it to write off people selecting NZers in a combined XI. Which is ridiculous. Great players have played for **** teams all the time, and NZ have been consistently decent (without ever being spectacular) in ODI cricket. It is a huge leap to suggest that because NZ have never been a spectacular team, their absolute best players can't possibly be as good as the absolute best players from a country with more tournament success.

And anyway, tournament success isn't that great a metric anyway; South Africa has never won one (and obvs that does raise questions), but it doesn't mean that ABdV, Amla, Pollock and Kallis must necessarily be worse than Ponting, Bevan, Symonds or McGrath for that reason.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Watson over Hayden makes sense if you're not gonna pick Symonds tbf.

so get rid of the Crowe/Jones/Taylor for Hayden and move Watson to 7

or get rid of them and Watson and add in the drowing duo

either way would be a better team

 

[Dan]

Symonds, man. EDIT: Though I guess picking Watson makes him less necessary.

Yeah, almost considered Symonds for that floating #5 slot, but I don't quite rate him as highly as Crowe/Jones/Taylor as a pure batsman. And I don't trust his bowling for a full allotment of 10 in an ATG context (meaning I still have to pick Watson or Cairns anyway)

 

[Dan]

Not denying Symonds is an ATG ODI player, just at ATG level I see him slipping through the cracks in team balance.

His bowling would be too bits-and-pieces vs. the Martians, imo.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

goes to report posts for being off topic/thread derailing

three mods involved in convo

 

[kiwiviktor81]

this post is worse than AIDS

I really hope you're not serious

More facts about Michael "The Greatest Finisher in the History of ODI cricket" Bevan:

Runs in boundaries per 1,000 balls faced:

Bevan 204, Taylor 370. Massive difference

Corey Anderson, in 35 ODI games, had hit twice as many sixes as Bevan hit in his entire career (23).

Martin Guptill today hit a third as many sixes as Bevan hit in his entire career. If Bevan faced 150 balls every innings it would still take him 30 innings to equal the six count of Guptill's innings today.

As clever as he was, Bevan simply could not hit it well enough to get in an ATG ODI XI.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

make it stop please

 

[Dan]

Watson opening: 45.13 @ 91.68
Watson at 6-7: 36.61 @ 90.27

That opening record is absolutely elite, and he bowls too. 6-7 is still very good, but I'd prefer Hussey there.

 

[Dan]

Should really split all the posts off to a separate thread, but that's effort which I'm not nearly motivated enough to expend.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Yeah, but he was using it to write off people selecting NZers in a combined XI. Which is ridiculous. Great players have played for **** teams all the time, and NZ have been consistently decent (without ever being spectacular) in ODI cricket. It is a huge leap to suggest that because NZ have never been a spectacular team, their absolute best players can't possibly be as good as the absolute best players from a country with more tournament success.

And anyway, tournament success isn't that great a metric anyway; South Africa has never won one (and obvs that does raise questions), but it doesn't mean that ABdV, Amla, Pollock and Kallis must necessarily be worse than Ponting, Bevan, Symonds or McGrath for that reason.

His logic sounds like genius however when comparing it to

"Bevan simply could not hit it well enough to get in an ATG ODI XI."

 

[Gob]

We are not learning. Through history, in LO matches attacking spin was the reason behind SL being comptitive. It's good to pick Vandersay, but he is not an attacking spinner, same goes for Senanayake. Mendis is a joke. Right now, we have only three attacking spinners in the country, who look for wickets rather than containment. Herath, Dilruwan Perera and Suraj Randiv. Perera is particularly good with the bat. We have to play two of them in LO matches regardless of conditions. Herath is slow in the field, obvious choices are Perera and Randiv. For some reason these two are never given chances in ODIs.

Thread hijacking alert

 

[TheJediBrah]

Watson opening: 45.13 @ 91.68
Watson at 6-7: 36.61 @ 90.27

That opening record is absolutely elite, and he bowls too. 6-7 is still very good, but I'd prefer Hussey there.

Gotta remember than Watson played as opener when he had the best form of his life for ~ 2 years, and when he played at 6-7 he was starting his career

You're right though, of course. I just want Symonds in the team because I love him.