***Official*** Super Series

[honestbharani]

I assure you that Kallis will do a whole lot better if he gets picked in the test. He looks lost in one dayers sometimes, and can get bogged down, but hes a great test batsman and deserves his spot over the likes of Inzamam or Lara.

So now, Kallis is better than Lara? On what basis is that?

 

[marc71178]

Looking at the 14, I'd say they'll have to play:

Smith
Sehwag
Dravid
Lara
Kallis
Flintoff
Boucher
Pollock
Vettori
Akhtar
Muralitharan.

For me, that's only really 2 spots out from the team that should be there, and in a way the batting wouldn't be any stronger if you substitute the 2 in, but the keeping would be a lot stronger.

 

[JASON]

On the basis of three ODIs Kallis, Pollock, and Akhtar are suddenly not good enough to play a six-day Test? For someone who seems to have a vast knowledge of the game's history, you of all people should recognise the difference between one-day and five-day (or in this case, six-day) cricket.

Sadly Kallis is out of touch and he will definitely be dead weight for the Test Team as far as batting is concerned. The World XI is supposed to represent all the countries. At least thats one of the reasons given for the inclusion of Vettori over Kumble .

Carrying this argument on, As far as I can see, there is little between Harmison,Akhtar and Pollock.

And since there are too many south africans in the Team, some of them must carry the drinks, so that the World XI can be representative of all the countries.

 

[honestbharani]

Of course because his role is to provide blazing starts. I know he doesnt last more than 15 overs a lot.

I won't agree with that, Pratyush. The role of an opener is not just to provide the start, but to take control of the game even after the fielding restrictions are gone and make sure he stays there till the 30th or 35th over. India do not have all that great a batting line up when it comes to ODIs and I, for one, certainly expect a lot more from an opener, especially when he has the obvious natural talent of Sehwag.

 

[honestbharani]

Looking at the 14, I'd say they'll have to play:

Smith
Sehwag
Dravid
Lara
Kallis
Flintoff
Boucher
Pollock
Vettori
Akhtar
Muralitharan.

For me, that's only really 2 spots out from the team that should be there, and in a way the batting wouldn't be any stronger if you substitute the 2 in, but the keeping would be a lot stronger.

Playing Vettori should be dependent on how the pitch is. Otherwise, I would like to see Harmison get a go. IN fact, I wouldn't mind if he is picked ahead of Akhtar, who just hasn't looked the part in this series. And honestly Lara needs to kick it up a notch. He ain't worth anything if he is playing this way. His problem is that he often gets out very soon when he is in bad form and that is not what the World XI want.

 

[Prince EWS]

So now, Kallis is better than Lara? On what basis is that?

1. His test average
2. His technique

 

[Eclipse]

Afridi

 

[SirBloody Idiot]

Afridi ten off two.

 

[Adamc]

Sadly Kallis is out of touch and he will definitely be dead weight for the Test Team as far as batting is concerned. The World XI is supposed to represent all the countries. At least thats one of the reasons given for the inclusion of Vettori over Kumble .

Carrying this argument on, As far as I can see, there is little between Harmison,Akhtar and Pollock.

And since there are too many south africans in the Team, some of them must carry the drinks, so that the World XI can be representative of all the countries.

There's nothing to suggest that Kallis is out of touch in Test matches; his ODI form shouldn't be a factor in the selection of the Test team. The World XI isn't supposed to be representative of all countries (there's a reason why Bangladesh and Zimbabwe have no World XI players); it's supposed to be representative of the best XI players over whatever the selection period is (i.e. the last twelve months or so). It's debatable whether the selectors achieved this aim - certainly Sangakkara and Kumble have been hard done by - but you can't simply say 'there are too many South Africans, so one of them should carry the drinks' when there is no-one better (in the 14-man squad) to replace them. I imagine they will pick the same XI that Marc posted.

 

[honestbharani]

1. His test average
2. His technique

His test average against Australia is mightily lesser than his normal stuff. And secondly, his technique is not all that better than Lara's. And Lara is easily the more better player of the two simply because his talent makes him do much better than Kallis does. And certainly, we don't need a selfish guy in the side.

 

[Knopfler]

Murali getting an award in Australia ?

Yeah Right !

John Howard and Darrell Hair must be the adjudicators !!

I am starting to think that you like Murali. Murali and Vettori have definitely been the best performers for the World XI but with three floggings out of three the MOS must be an Aussie. In fact, they must be Gilly.

P.S. C'mon Afridi give us something to enjoy.

 

[Eclipse]

how can somone hit a six first ball like that

 

[SirBloody Idiot]

I am starting to think that you like Murali. Murali and Vettori have definitely been the best performers for the World XI but with three floggings out of three the MOS must be an Aussie. In fact, they must be Gilly.

P.S. C'mon Afridi give us something to enjoy.

I'd give it to Watson.

Averaging 74 with the bat and 22 with the ball.

 

[Prince EWS]

And Lara is easily the more better player of the two simply because his talent makes him do much better than Kallis does.

But the fact is - he HASNT done better than Kallis has. Hes done marginally worse.

And you never asked me why Kallis should be picked ahead of Lara - you simply asked why I thought Kallis was better. As good as Lara is to watch, I always feel as though he very well could get out of the next ball he faces. I dont get the same feeling with Kallis, as his technique is superb. Hes under-rated severely by people on this board, and the notion that he is "selfish" simply stems from the fact that he cant up the anti when required. Hes not truely selfish, he just appears that way. Either way, it doesnt matter a great deal in a test match if you are selfish or not - it cant actually cause too many dramas.

 

[Jamee999]

Nice start.

 

[honestbharani]

I think Gilchrist has had a bigger impact, taking the game away from the opposition so early.

 

[SirBloody Idiot]

Watson gets his third. White takes a good catch.

 

[honestbharani]

But the fact is - he HASNT done better than Kallis has. Hes done marginally worse.

And you never asked me why Kallis should be picked ahead of Lara - you simply asked why I thought Kallis was better. As good as Lara is to watch, I always feel as though he very well could get out of the next ball he faces. I dont get the same feeling with Kallis, as his technique is superb. Hes under-rated severely by people on this board, and the notion that he is "selfish" simply stems from the fact that he cant up the anti when required. Hes not truely selfish, he just appears that way. Either way, it doesnt matter a great deal in a test match if you are selfish or not - it cant actually cause too many dramas.

If you wanna go by this series' form, both of them should be dropped. And Lara made 4 test hundreds from his last 5 appearances. I wonder where Kallis suddenly became more consistent, if we are to take recent form as an indicator.

 

[Pratters]

Almost over now.

 

[greg]

So you are saying Sehwag gets out after the 15 overs because he has to change the way he plays? Explain his high strike rate in test matches and his high strike rate in the one dayers even after the first 15 overs.

No, I'm saying he gets out because he doesn't change the way he plays.

On average in a ODI game you will be looking for your batsmen to be pushing 5-6 an over in the first 15, 4-5 an over in the middle 25 and 6+ an over in the last 10 (obviously this changes in different conditions and in different parts of the world - on the subcontinent for example you will expect higher in the first 15 and lower in the last 10, the reverse in England).

If you compare two openers, say, then the one with the far superior average is likely to spend a far greater percentage of the time batting in the middle 15 so will likely have a lower strike rate. He could, however, have exactly the same destructive impact in the first 15 overs, and therefore be unambiguously the more valuable player. I don't know how you get figures for strike rate in different periods of the innings though, which is what would be needed to dissect, for example, Gayle and Sehwag's comparative figures.