Why is it viewed as more important

[OverratedSanity]

Where as if you're playing on a really spicy deck, I don't see how a bowling all rounder with an average of 30 who's your no. 8 batsman is going to be of much help.... When 6 ATG batsmen averaging over 50 and one averaging 100 are not able to score.

I don't follow this logic at all? Surely in low scoring games, every run becomes crucial . Batting depth and lower order runs become even more valuable so that the specialist batsmen have some capable batting partners at the other end to work with when wickets tumble.

 

[Sunil1z]

Someone needs to watch Bumrah and Shami batting at Lords to understand how demoralising lower order batting can be on opposition team.

Similarly one can watch Ashes 1st Test ( Cummins + Lyon Partnership)
Or
Carey-Cummins partnership vs NZ recently

Or Curran batting in 2018 series vs IND .

 

[subshakerz]

That's the thing though, you have to sacrifice bowling strength to include Imran (something not necessary with Hadlee, while still getting the bat), you don't have to do that with Sobers.

What the heck? Why do you insist on just bringing Imran as the only example.

Here is what you said at the beginning: 'Please the purpose is not to turn this into a Sobers vs Imran thread. Just hopefully for once, just discussion.'

You are doing exactly that! Turns out that was your entire hidden agenda.

I thought we are talking the general value of generic no.8 bowling AR.

 

[subshakerz]

I don't follow this logic at all? Surely in low scoring games, every run becomes crucial . Batting depth and lower order runs become even more valuable so that the specialist batsmen have some capable batting partners at the other end to work with when wickets tumble.

Of course, this is self evident.

Also, I could be wrong, but Kyear2 also removed Miller from his ATG Aus XI under the logic that four bowlers are enough in an ATG side.

Now he is contradicting himself to hype up batting ARs. Why?

Imranophobia.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

kyear exposed

 

[trundler]

Someone needs to watch Bumrah and Shami batting at Lords to understand how demoralising lower order batting can be on opposition team.

Similarly one can watch Ashes 1st Test ( Cummins + Lyon Partnership)
Or
Carey-Cummins partnership vs NZ recently

Or Curran batting in 2018 series vs IND .

Motivated reasoning leads people go believe evolution isn't real too. There are many more examples of a top order batsman taking his side home with the help of the lower order in low scoring matches in addition to tail wags changing the game.

 

[Sunil1z]

Motivated reasoning leads people go believe evolution isn't real too. There are many more examples of a top order batsman taking his side home with the help of the lower order in low scoring matches in addition to tail wags changing the game.

I mean in the famous Chennai Test ( Sachin 136) , if one of India’s tail score even 10 runs , India wins that Test .

 

[kyear2]

Just some random reason. Some more meaningful than others.

A lot of the times when the tail is in opposition bowlers are tired and the ball is old. It's often the best batting conditions. Having late order batting to take advantage of this can turn a good score into a great score, a bad one into a par score etc.

Also the mental aspect of it. Top order feel less pressure knowing there is a lot of batting depth and batsmen who find themselves with the tail can play more naturally and not to worry as much about protecting them.

Bowlers who can bat seem to often gain confidence from scoring runs which can translate to bowling better (Mitchell Johnson is a prime example, always seemed to bowl game changing/match winning spells after getting some runs)

Late order runs are also highly demoralizing for the opposition

A lot of times when the 5th bowler is on, the batsmen relax and tend to get out. This can be the pivotal partnership breaker that turns the match.

From the mental aspect of it, bowlers feel.more confident pitching up the ball when they know they have a solid cordon behind the batsmen. They can bowl more naturally rather than trying to bowl different lines to get alternative modes of dismissal.

Batsmen can gain confidence from taking wickets and can lead to them scoring more runs when it's their turn to bat.

Dropped catches are really demoralizing to a team, especially when the batsman goes on to a big score or even a hundred.

All of those are true.

Did anyone even watch that Sten wicket compilation the other day? Kallis was insane at 2nd, tell me none of those ridiculous takes didn't turn matches.

The inability to recognize how important slip catching is is staggering.

The failure to recognize the utility of a 5th bowler is a little baffling. By bowling and giving your guys time to recover is alone 90% of the job. Even if he goes wicketless. If your no. 8 goes out there an scores 12, it's served no purpose. The consistency of the utility is the utility. Everything beyond that is a bonus.

 

[OverratedSanity]

@kyear2

If Imran Khan had played in the WI team of the 80s in place of Joel Garner or in the Australian team of the 2000s in place of Gillespie, would you still be arguing that Marshall/McGrath > Imran as cricketers? I highly doubt it somehow. We'd all be saying Imran was the best player on those teams and the primary reason for their greatness using the same "winner" argument imo. Hypothetically, if he was putting up virtually the same bowling numbers on the same team as Marshall/McGrath, plus solid batting? Everyone would be hailing him as a better cricketer than teammate Marshall/McGrath almost unanimously afaic.

The only reason he's not a better cricketer in your eyes is that he happened to have a different passport. And I'm not accusing you of nationalistic bias when I say that, rather saying that you give an inordinate amount of credit to Marshall/McGrath for their teams being great as though those teams wouldn't have been just as good if Imran/Hadlee had been in the team. I don't buy that they wouldn't have been. Imo those teams would have gone from "greatest team ever" to an almost incomprehensible level of greatness if they had the greatest bowling all rounder ever (whether it's Imran/Hadlee).

 

[OverratedSanity]

I mean, imagine 2000s Australia with the cheat code of Gilchrist at 7 and then you add Imran on top of that at number 8? It'd be an absolute nightmare trying to bowl that team out.

 

[kyear2]

I don't follow this logic at all? Surely in low scoring games, every run becomes crucial . Batting depth and lower order runs become even more valuable so that the specialist batsmen have some capable batting partners at the other end to work with when wickets tumble.

And what if he scores 10?

i don't understand the logic of the post I was responding to either, the one I believe you liked btw. It made 0 sense.

none of us would trust Carl Hooper to win or even save us test matches consistently, yet for some reason we apply that standard to these guys.

the 5th bowling option is to help the attack rotate and stay fresh as possible, not to bowl out the other side. Same way I'm not expecting the bowling all-rounders to produce 50's.

And surely in low scoring games you can't afford dropped catches either, yet you seem to not value trying to make sure that doesn't happen either.

My argument isn't that the bowling all rounder has no value, though in this hypothetical scenario it's surely lessened. My argument is that all three have value, while yours is, no please, just ours is valuable, the others don't matter. When every cricket match I've ever watched says otherwise.

 

[OverratedSanity]

My argument is that all three have value, while yours is, no please, just ours is valuable, the others don't matter. When every cricket match I've ever watched says otherwise.

You're just inventing stuff now

 

[kyear2]

Someone needs to watch Bumrah and Shami batting at Lords to understand how demoralising lower order batting can be on opposition team.

Similarly one can watch Ashes 1st Test ( Cummins + Lyon Partnership)
Or
Carey-Cummins partnership vs NZ recently

Or Curran batting in 2018 series vs IND .

I fully agree and none of them are all rounders. Hence one of my earlier points, even decent lower order guys can achieve that for you. Hell Warne and Marshall did it multiple times.

@Coronis made this exact same point yesterday and I mentioned it multiple times.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I fully agree and none of them are all rounders. Hence one of my earlier points, even decent lower order guys can achieve that for you. Hell Warne and Marshall did it multiple times.

Proper all rounders can do it more often!

 

[kyear2]

What the heck? Why do you insist on just bringing Imran as the only example.

Here is what you said at the beginning: 'Please the purpose is not to turn this into a Sobers vs Imran thread. Just hopefully for once, just discussion.'

You are doing exactly that! Turns out that was your entire hidden agenda.

I thought we are talking the general value of generic no.8 bowling AR.

Nope, look back at who brought up the names, after I avoided both. I just responded to you. Look at what I responded to.

Are you really that obtuse?

 

[subshakerz]

Nope, look back at who brought up the names, after I avoided both. I just responded to you. Look at what I responded to.

Are you really that obtuse?

You brought up Sobers yourself in a separate post unrelated to mine.

 

[subshakerz]

I fully agree and none of them are all rounders. Hence one of my earlier points, even decent lower order guys can achieve that for you. Hell Warne and Marshall did it multiple times.

@Coronis made this exact same point yesterday and I mentioned it multiple times.

Dude this is stupefying. Marshall and Warne are not going to bail out as regularly as Imran and Hadlee, anymore than Hadlee and Imran are going to build huge innings as much as Tendulkar and Lara.

You are outright contradicting yourself when you say 'well I can't see Imran/Hadlee really doing anything if the entire ATG middle order has failed' and then saying 'yeah Marshall/Warne have proven to be so helpful bailing out time and again as tailenders'.

Here is what you said before about ATG contests.

I believe definitely low scoring.

Over the history of the game, I believe that great bowling has impacted great batsmen more than the other way round. Especially the faster guys. And hunting in packs like this, seriously believe that these games will be low scoring affairs

So in a low scoring game where ATG pacers are all over great bats, is a fifth bowler more important or handy runs down the order?

Stop speaking in pretzels.

 

[kyear2]

Of course, this is self evident.

Also, I could be wrong, but Kyear2 also removed Miller from his ATG Aus XI under the logic that four bowlers are enough in an ATG side.

Now he is contradicting himself to hype up batting ARs. Why?

Imranophobia.

You are being disingenuous and a liar at this point, and it's 3 posts in a row.

I remove Miller because it weakens the batting and Simpson and even Chappell / Border are enough to fill the 5th bowler role.

My same point as here, no need to weaken either significantly to get utility skills.

The problem with you is that while I'm trying to argue a point, you're just trying to argue a player.

If I had your beliefs I would have Hammond over Tendulkar, but I believe you try to get utility if possibly with the least amount of loss to the primary skills. At most Sunny over Hutton. The great thing about Sobers is that it requires no sacrifices at all, same thing with Hadlee. That's why they are better.

 

[kyear2]

kyear exposed

Or @subshakerz is disingenuous and you, his willing accomplice.

 

[subshakerz]

You are being disingenuous and a liar at this point, and it's 3 posts in a row.

I remove Miller because it weakens the batting and Simpson and even Chappell / Border are enough to fill the 5th bowler role.

Fair enough, I prefaced it with 'I could be wrong' as I wasn't sure of your intent. However, you will admit Simpson/Border for an ATG side isn't really a formidable fifth bowler option, because you don't really need one of great skill.

If I had your beliefs I would have Hammond over Tendulkar, but I believe you try to get utility if possibly with the least amount of loss to the primary skills. At most Sunny over Hutton. The great thing about Sobers is that it requires no sacrifices at all, same thing with Hadlee. That's why they are better.

Except I am arguing against overrating batting ARs. I agree with you on prioritizing primary skills. You don't do that when you bring in slip fielding though as a heavy factor.