Playing selector: Lets pick the best test XI of different eras

[thedarkmullet]

Your loss without Mark, someones gotta wear the lycra.

 

[aussie tragic]

Attacking Opener: Slater, Hayden, Sehwag, Navjot Sidhu, Trescothick, Gibbs, Smith, Anwar, Jayasuriya, Greenidge, Gayle

Defensive Opener: Boon, Taylor, Atherton, Gooch, Vaughan, Gavaskar, Langer, Strauss, Wright, Gary Kirsten, Attapattu, Haynes

Openers figures after 1986

Gavaskar: 14 tests, 1102 runs, 55.10, 3 centuries
Hayden: 84 tests, 7326 runs, 53.08, 26 centuries
Sehwag: 49 tests, 4066 runs, 52.12, 12 centuries

Smith: 48 tests, 3891 runs, 49.25, 11 centuries
Strauss: 30 tests, 2505 runs, 46.38, 10 centuries
Boon: 95 tests, 6824 runs, 45.79, 20 centuries
Gooch: 70 tests, 5873 runs, 45.52, 15 centuries
Anwar: 45 tests, 4052 runs, 45.52, 11 centuries
Langer: 100 tests, 7393 runs, 45.35, 22 centuries
Kirsten: 101 tests, 7289 runs, 45.27, 21 centuries
Wright: 38 tests, 3019 runs, 45.05, 8 centuries

Gibbs: 79 tests, 5728 runs, 44.40, 14 centuries
Trescothick: 75 tests, 5815 runs, 44.38, 14 centuries
Haynes: 62 tests, 4253 runs, 44.30, 11 centuries
Taylor: 104 tests, 7525 runs, 43.39, 19 centuries
Sidhu: 49 tests, 3163 runs, 43.32, 9 centuries
Vaughan: 64 tests, 4595 runs, 42.94, 15 centuries
Slater: 74 tests, 5312 runs, 42.83, 14 centuries
Jayasuriya: 105 tests, 6745 runs, 41.12, 14 centuries

Atapattu: 88 tests, 5330 runs, 38.90, 16 centuries
Gayle: 61 tests, 4079 runs, 38.84, 7 centuries
Greenidge: 42 tests, 2742 runs, 38.61, 7 centuries
Atherton: 115 tests, 7728 runs, 37.69, 16 centuries

 

[Swervy]

Here are two pools to choose openers from. Let us please remember that these definitions are broad and open for interpretation. We will start with five each from these pools and sttart the selection.

Attacking Opener: Slater, Hayden, Sehwag, Navjot Sidhu, Trescothick, Gibbs, Smith, Anwar, Jayasuriya, Greenidge, Gayle

Defensive Opener: Boon, Taylor, Atherton, Gooch, Vaughan, Gavaskar, Langer, Strauss, Wright, Gary Kirsten, Attapattu, Haynes

mmm..Gooch(SR 49, which back then was like lightning), Vaughan(SR 52, which is about 3 runs per 100 balls less than Anwar)), Strauss(SR 51)..defensive openers??? Gibbs has a strike rate of 50.

My point really is, why split them into two categories, if they do the job of scoring rns and seeing off the new ball they are good enough anyway, whether they are aggressive or not

 

[aussie tragic]

Can I suggest that for Openers to be eligible, they should have played a minimum of 40 tests since 1986, with a minimum batting average of 40.00

This would reduce the opener list from 23 to 16 players.

IN: Hayden, Sehwag, Smith, Boon, Gooch, Anwar, Langer, Kirsten, Gibbs, Trescothick, Haynes, Taylor, Sidhu, Vaughan, Slater & Jayasuriya

OUT: Gavaskar, Strauss, Wright, Atapattu, Gayle, Greenidge & Atherton.

We could then have two votes. Highest in first vote bats #1, highest of second vote (with #1 excluded) bats #2

Anyone agree?

 

[bagapath]

before we use aussietragic's stats (neat job mate!) and consider the option of keeping only those with a 40+ ave, do u want to go for a left - right combination or a real combination like greenidge - haynes and hayden - langer or simply select two of the best openers? i am asking this since swervy wonders why categorize them into attacking and defensive batsmen.

another technique is to select the first opener of our choice and pick the next one in combination with him.

in terms of cut off, here is my take for the whole team.

minimum tests: 30
batting ave: above 40
keeper's batting ave: above 25 and averaging at least 3 dismissal per test
all rounder: batting ave above 25 and bowling ave under 35
fast bowler: bowling ave under 28 and strike rate of one wicket within 10 overs
spinners: bowling ave under 33 and strike rate of one wicket within 12 overs

more than these numbers we should look at their style, impact and team spirit. we can also look at no of man of the match awards to select the real match winners.

sounds ok?

 

[honestbharani]

this sounds like one interesting thread. wen is the actual voting gonna start?

 

[aussie tragic]

in terms of cut off, here is my take for the whole team.

minimum tests: 30
batting ave: above 40
keeper's batting ave: above 25 and averaging at least 3 dismissal per test
all rounder: batting ave above 25 and bowling ave under 35
fast bowler: bowling ave under 28 and strike rate of one wicket within 10 overs
spinners: bowling ave under 33 and strike rate of one wicket within 12 overs

I just did a check and found that Botham, Hadlee & Akram wouldn't make the allrounder criteria

Imran: 34 tests; 1715 runs @ 50.44; 4 centuries; 113 wkts @ 23.63
Botham: 23 tests; 791 runs @ 23.96; 1 century; 40 wkts @ 45.80
Kapil: 58 tests; 2239 runs @ 32.44; 5 centuries; 154 wkts @ 31.74
Hadlee: 26 tests; 925 runs @ 34.25; 1 century; 132 wkts @ 21.73
Cairns: 62 tests 3320 runs @ 33.53; 5 centuries; 218 wkts @ 29.40
Pollock: 102 tests; 3515 runs @ 31.95; 2 centuries; 395 wkts @ 23.42
Kallis: 102 tests; 8033 runs @ 55.78; 24 centuries; 200 wkts @ 31.71
Flintoff: 62 tests; 3127 runs @ 32.91; 5 centuries; 186 wkts @ 31.32
Akram: 99 tests; 2880 runs @ 22.85; 3 centuries; 394 wkts @ 23.59

 

[silentstriker]

Though people like Botham, Gavaskar, etc peaked before 1986, we should still include them. THey were still playing test cricket in 1986, so they should count.

 

[aussie tragic]

Though people like Botham, Gavaskar, etc peaked before 1986, we should still include them. THey were still playing test cricket in 1986, so they should count.

I also think it would be appropriate to include players like Gavaskar, however the fact he only played 14 tests should be taken into consideration when voting (just like you would consider Gibbs 79 tests vs Strauss's 30 when selecting a 2006 XI).

I propose the following:

Minimum tests: 10
Batting ave: > 40
Keeper's batting ave: > 25 and averaging at least 3 dismissal per test
Allrounder: batting ave > 20 and bowling ave < 35
Fast bowler: bowling ave < 30 and strike rate of < 60.0
Spinners: bowling ave < 35 and strike rate of < 70.0

This means botham would miss out, however with his below average performance after 1986, so he should (IMO, if you don't have a criteria like above, people will vote for him because he's Botham, rather than his actual results).

 

[aussie tragic]

The poll conductor can decide whent to start and end the polls. I am not experienced in running polls. If someone with the knowledge can volunteer, it can avoid a lot of confusion.

baga, I'm happy to start the first poll for opener if you can confirm the selection criteria. I'll include the stats for each player since 1986 and I propose that we leave each position vote open for 7-days? Comments anyone.....

 

[bagapath]

hey aussietragic. sorry for the late reply. was out for a couple of days. please go ahead and start the openers' poll. we shall keep it open for seven days as you suggest. i feel 10 tests is too less. just change it to 20. it means at least four full series. that sound like a reasonable cut-off. doesnt it? so here is the selction requirement.

Minimum tests: 20
Batting ave: > 40
Keeper's batting ave: > 25 and averaging at least 3 dismissal per test
Allrounder: batting ave > 20 and bowling ave < 35
Fast bowler: bowling ave < 30 and strike rate of < 60.0
Spinners: bowling ave < 35 and strike rate of < 70.0

 

[bagapath]

also, as i said before, someone like aussietragic can run the polls and direct the thread. i will be more than happy to just participate and see how it is done. now that we know the selection criteria.. its over to you, man. lets start with the openers.

 

[Goughy]

hey aussietragic. sorry for the late reply. was out for a couple of days. please go ahead and start the openers' poll. we shall keep it open for seven days as you suggest. i feel 10 tests is too less. just change it to 20. it means at least four full series. that sound like a reasonable cut-off. doesnt it? so here is the selction requirement.

Minimum tests: 20
Batting ave: > 40
Keeper's batting ave: > 25 and averaging at least 3 dismissal per test
Allrounder: batting ave > 20 and bowling ave < 35
Fast bowler: bowling ave < 30 and strike rate of < 60.0
Spinners: bowling ave < 35 and strike rate of < 70.0

Why so low with the batting average for the allrounders? 20 is far too low to be considered an allrounder.

Pollock is a bowler that bats rather than a true allrounder and he averages over 30. Chris Lewis averages over 20 and he was rubbish and, despite being a half decent batsman, not even Heath Streaks mother would consider him an allrounder and he averages over 20 with the bat.

Cairns could be considered a true allrounder and he averages over 33 with the bat. An average of 20 does not mean they are an allrounder

 

[GIMH]

Ashely Giles has an average of 20+

 

[bagapath]

benaud and lindwall were considered all-rounders and they averaged under 25 with the bat. so i thought it was a reasonable cut-off point to form your all-rounder pool and decided to lower the requirement from the 25 runs i had set earlier. when we narrow down the pool to five players for final selection we will be left only with quality players without doubt!

guys, but chris lewis and giles averaged > 35 with the ball. so they wont be in our poll anyways.

 

[Goughy]

benaud and lindwall were considered all-rounders and they averaged under 25 with the bat. so i thought it was a reasonable cut-off point to form your all-rounder pool and decided to lower the requirement from the 25 runs i had set earlier. when we narrow down the pool to five players for final selection we will be left only with quality players without doubt!

guys, but chris lewis and giles averaged > 35 with the ball. so they wont be in our poll anyways.

So you are saying Giles and Lewis were/are more batsmen than bowlers as they fulfil the batting criteria but not the bowling?

Also not too many consider Lindwall as a true allrounder. Miller certainly was but not Lindwall. Also Benaud was similar to Illingworth (but of a higher standard) in that they were better bowlers than batsmen.

Just a sidenote, you know neither Lindwall or Benaud played in the last 20 years dont you

 

[aussie tragic]

Just in case you don't know, a seperate Poll thread has just opened for the # 1 Opener (7-days to vote).

 

[marc71178]

Why so low with the batting average for the allrounders? 20 is far too low to be considered an allrounder.

Pollock is a bowler that bats rather than a true allrounder and he averages over 30. Chris Lewis averages over 20 and he was rubbish and, despite being a half decent batsman, not even Heath Streaks mother would consider him an allrounder and he averages over 20 with the bat.

Cairns could be considered a true allrounder and he averages over 33 with the bat. An average of 20 does not mean they are an allrounder

Out of interest how is Pollock a bowler who bats but Cairns a true all rounder?

 

[Goughy]

Out of interest how is Pollock a bowler who bats but Cairns a true all rounder?

Do you even watch cricket? What kind of question is that?

Pollock has played 102 Test
Cairns 62 Tests

Pollock 2 Tons
Cairns 5 Tons

Pollock 17 scores over 50
Cairns 27 scores over 50

Pollock has batted most at #8, Cairns at #7

Pollock 2.72% of innings batted at 6 or above, Cairns 27.88%

Pollock averages 34.46 runs per game, Cairns averages 53.55

To conclude, Pollock has played a vast number of games more than Cairns but has scored far fewer 100s and 50s, bats lower in the order and scores far less runs per game.

Its surely not that complicated to understand

 

[JBH001]

LOL!

Yeah, Cairnsy would have to count as a genuine all-rounder, perhaps the only one apart from Flintoff and amybe Kallis since the Big 4 hung up their boots.

To be honest, Cairnsy was really more of a bowling-batsman in the early part of his career, it was only after midpoint had been reached that he developed his batting enough to qualify as a genuine all-rounder.