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

[aussie tragic]

dont you want five bowlers?????

If McGrath, Hadlee, Marshall and Warne can't get 20 wickets, then what difference would a 5th bowler make. Besides, Steve Waugh still bowled a bit in 1986 and Kallis may get in as a # 6 batsmen anyway (and Ponting & Sachin can also roll their arm over).

Over to you

 

[bagapath]

If McGrath, Hadlee, Marshall and Warne can't get 20 wickets, then what difference would a 5th bowler make. Besides, Steve Waugh still bowled a bit in 1986 and Kallis may get in as a # 6 batsmen anyway (and Ponting & Sachin can also roll their arm over).

Over to you

who would you go for as a selector if you were to choose between a fourth middle order batsman and an imran or flintoff following ponting, sachin, waugh and gilchrist?

I feel this team is going to be rich in terms of batting talent! imagine we are most likely to leave lara and most definitely leave border out of this team!!!

let us be democratic and see what the general opinion is. let us hear the opinions on keeping the no.6 slot reserved for all-rounders or allowing runners up from no.5 to compete with them.

 

[aussie tragic]

who would you go for as a selector if you were to choose between a fourth middle order batsman and an imran or flintoff following ponting, sachin, waugh and gilchrist?

So you have Gilchrist at # 6 What if Healy wins the wicket-keeper position

 

[bagapath]

So you have Gilchrist at # 6 What if Healy wins the wicket-keeper position

HA HA. I think we know the majority opinion of the forum members on this issue

 

[marc71178]

IMO looking at the stats, Gilchrist should be included as an all rounder.

 

[Burgey]

Imran as all rounder for mine. His stats are amazing and he had longevity as well as bowling with genuine pace. Freddy has similar attributes but the jury must still be out as to whether he will perform at a level similar to Imran for a long period. And imo he should be captain - no one before or since has quite harnessed the ability of the Pakistani team like he did. A wonderful cricketer.

 

[thedarkmullet]

EDIT: To aid a decision, please note the following stats for the nominated Allrounders:

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

I'm a bit confused about the all-rounder criteria, is this the final list to be voted on or will voting involve all players eg:Vettori, who fit into the <20 batting and >35 bowling average criteria?
In that case Botham wouldn't be included anyway with his bowling average of 45 for the period.

Personally I reckon that batting average, at least, is a bit too lenient. 20 suggests a bowler who hangs around in the lower order and may get a few lucky innings in my opinion, not someone who is more or less equally as gifted in both disciplines.

 

[bagapath]

this is not the final list. final list will not have botham but will include vettori. and may be vaas and malcolm marshall too. but we have to choose no 4 and no 5 before that anyway!!!

we have discussed this batting ave being too low for all-rounders. but aussie tragic and i basically decided to keep it a bit lenient since it gives you more options. now since aussie tragic has been suggesting to include the runners up from no.5 in the race for no.6 you may end up voting for a no.6 for his batting ability or bowling ability or for all-round skills. i guess it will boil down to the needs of your team. based on this late development i think the earlier decision to keep the batting average low looks right in retrospect.

 

[marc71178]

So the list of people to bat at 6 includes Vaas, Vettori and Akram?

Hmmm....

 

[BhupinderSingh]

Matthew Hayden
Saeed Anwar
Ricky Ponting
Sachin Tendulkar
Brian Lara
Andy Flower+
Imran Khan*
Wasim Akram
Shane Warne
Muttiah Muralitharan
Glenn McGrath

 

[silentstriker]

If McGrath, Hadlee, Marshall and Warne can't get 20 wickets, then what difference would a 5th bowler make. Besides, Steve Waugh still bowled a bit in 1986 and Kallis may get in as a # 6 batsmen anyway (and Ponting & Sachin can also roll their arm over).

Over to you

You can make the same argument the other way. If Hayden, Anwar, Ponting, Lara and Tendulkar can't get enough runs on the board, then what difference would a #6 make?

 

[silentstriker]

So the list of people to bat at 6 includes Vaas, Vettori and Akram?

Hmmm....

Yea, the list of those who should be in the poll should be actually people who've batted at #6 (and the runner ups from #5).

 

[aussie tragic]

Here's another thought related to team balance....

First, pick the following 10-players:

5 Batsmen
1 Allrounder (to bat between #6 and #8)
1 Wicketkeeper (to bat at #7 or # 8)
2 Pace Bowlers
1 Spinner

For the final position, based on the balance of the side selected above, we choose from the following six players:

(a) The 2 runner-ups from the # 5 Batsmen Poll
(b) The 2 runner-ups from the Pace Bowler Poll
(c) The 2 runner-ups from the Spinner Poll

I don't think you can get more democratic than the above selection process and it allows us to balance out the side, examples:

If Kallis is the allrounder, we may choose a 3rd pacemen or 2nd Spinner;
If Flintoff is the allrounder, we may choose a 2nd spinner;
If Hadlee is the allrounder, we may want a 6th Batsman;
If Healy is the WK, we may want a 6th Batsmen, with the allrounder at # 7
etc....etc....

 

[silentstriker]

Here's another thought related to team balance....

First, pick the following 10-players:

5 Batsmen
1 Allrounder (to bat between #6 and #8)
1 Wicketkeeper (to bat at #7 or # 8)
2 Pace Bowlers
1 Spinner

For the 11th position, based on the balance of the side selected above, we choose from the following six players:

(a) The 2 runner-ups from the # 5 Batsmen Poll
(b) The 2 runner-ups from the Pace Bowler Poll
(c) The 2 runner-ups from the Spinner Poll

I don't think you can get more democratic than the above selection process and it allows us to balance out the side, examples:

If Kallis is the allrounder, we may choose a 3rd pacemen or 2nd Spinner;
If Flintoff is the allrounder, we may choose a 2nd spinner;
If Hadlee is the allrounder, we may want a 6th Batsman;
If Healy is the WK, we may want a 6th Batsmen, with the allrounder at # 7
etc....etc....

Australia and West Indies become world beaters without an all rounder -- why is it required that we have one? Put a combination of batsman and all rounders at six, and people will vote for the person they like.

 

[JBH001]

Here's another thought related to team balance....

First, pick the following 10-players:

5 Batsmen
1 Allrounder (to bat between #6 and #8)
1 Wicketkeeper (to bat at #7 or # 8)
2 Pace Bowlers
1 Spinner

For the final position, based on the balance of the side selected above, we choose from the following six players:

(a) The 2 runner-ups from the # 5 Batsmen Poll
(b) The 2 runner-ups from the Pace Bowler Poll
(c) The 2 runner-ups from the Spinner Poll

I don't think you can get more democratic than the above selection process and it allows us to balance out the side, examples:

If Kallis is the allrounder, we may choose a 3rd pacemen or 2nd Spinner;
If Flintoff is the allrounder, we may choose a 2nd spinner;
If Hadlee is the allrounder, we may want a 6th Batsman;
If Healy is the WK, we may want a 6th Batsmen, with the allrounder at # 7
etc....etc....

I can only imagine the amount of hair that bagapath and aussie tragic have lost since this poll began. Guys, the above suggestion regarding team balance is sound to me - whether the allrounder is batsman/bowler or a 'true allrounder' can be decided, and after that we can think about further team placing and balance etc.

 

[bagapath]

Here's another thought related to team balance....

First, pick the following 10-players:

5 Batsmen
1 Allrounder (to bat between #6 and #8)
1 Wicketkeeper (to bat at #7 or # 8)
2 Pace Bowlers
1 Spinner

For the final position, based on the balance of the side selected above, we choose from the following six players:

(a) The 2 runner-ups from the # 5 Batsmen Poll
(b) The 2 runner-ups from the Pace Bowler Poll
(c) The 2 runner-ups from the Spinner Poll

I don't think you can get more democratic than the above selection process and it allows us to balance out the side, examples:

If Kallis is the allrounder, we may choose a 3rd pacemen or 2nd Spinner;
If Flintoff is the allrounder, we may choose a 2nd spinner;
If Hadlee is the allrounder, we may want a 6th Batsman;
If Healy is the WK, we may want a 6th Batsmen, with the allrounder at # 7
etc....etc....

well... this involves non-quantitative elements in deciding the final place. for example, if imran is the all-rounder who is going to be your remaining player? a batsman or bowler? unlike hadlee, flintoff and kallis, imran is both a good late order batsman and a leading bowler. i think we all will get into arguing if a batsman or a bowler should compete for the final place. i've given this example to convey my opinion that we are getting into a vague zone where personal opinion, rather than statistics, will have the say. i would rather create a pool of players using numbers and then bring in personal opinion to finalize choice.

silent striker's opinion can bring all of us half way towards one another and i suggest aussie tragic to consider it seriously. why dont we let runners up from middle order compete with all-rounders? voters can keep their team balance and future choice in mind before voting. it was actually aussie tragic's choice originally.

if we choose one more batsman over the all-rounder let us convert the second spinner's slot to one more fast bowling option. so you end up with 6 batters, 1 wk, 3 pacers and 1 spinner. ok?

but my ideal mix is 5 batters, 1 fast bowling all-rounder, 1 wk, 2 pacers and 2 spinners. let the majority decide what they want.

 

[JBH001]

if we choose one more batsman over the all-rounder let us convert the second spinner's slot to one more fast bowling option. so you end up with 6 batters, 1 wk, 3 pacers and 1 spinner. ok?

but my ideal mix is 5 batters, 1 fast bowling all-rounder, 1 wk, 2 pacers and 2 spinners. let the majority decide what they want.

TBH, I would prefer a fast bowling all-rounder myself, 2 pacers and 2 spinners as that would be an ideal mix.
Or a spinning all-rounder, 3 pacers and a spinner (unfortunately there have been no genuine spinning all-rounders post 86, and very few historically come to that).

The other option is the logical one if someone like Kallis takes the #6 spot. 2 pacers are insufficient (and Kallis is not adequate support) so therefore we would need 3 pacers and a spinner. This latter option though poorer in terms of team balance, would be more entertaining as we can finally see who of CW prefer out of Murali and Warne.

I dunno, it will be a toughie. I would rather not choose Imran as his career began 1975(?) and though he did well post 86 albeit with a poor bowling wkts/test ratio, I consider him to be part of the previous generation.

 

[aussie tragic]

# 4 batsman final vote is now in progress between Border, Dravid, Lara and Tendulker; no real surprises there.

To move up the pace a bit, does anyone object if I open up the Wicket-keeper Poll at the same time as the # 5 Batsman vote (I need a little time to gather the stats).

I propose a 7-day Poll for selection to this position.

 

[Fusion]

# 4 batsman final vote is now in progress between Border, Dravid, Lara and Tendulker; no real surprises there.

To move up the pace a bit, does anyone object if I open up the Wicket-keeper Poll at the same time as the # 5 Batsman vote (I need a little time to gather the stats).

I propose a 7-day Poll for selection to this position.

Excellent idea.

 

[bagapath]

aussie tragic. i suggest for the wk we dont need a prelim poll and a final. we can have one poll and the winner can go through.

we can do the same for the fast bowlers - selecting the top 2 from a single poll. and the spinner too can be picked up in one poll. unlike middle order, where you could split the batsmen according to batting positions, these positions cant be divided. all wks will be in one pool. so will all the pacers be. likewise the spinners. so a straight forward poll is fine, i feel.