Why is it viewed as more important

[TheJediBrah]

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.

Don't think so tbh. They wouldn't because he wouldn't be putting up the same bowling numbers, because he wasn't as good a bowler.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Don't think so tbh. They wouldn't because he wouldn't be putting up the same bowling numbers, because he wasn't as good a bowler.

The same bowling numbers that he did in his career anyway*. Not the same bowling numbers as Marshall.

*(obviously a hypothetical and a conversation can be had how his WPM/average would change but I doubt it'd be significant)

 

[Himannv]

I feel the recent weirdness associated with Team India has messed with people’s understanding of cricket.

Ashwin and Jadeja outplaying the actual batsmen has messed with everyone’s minds and they now expect Bumrah and Shami to do the same without looking at the actual problem. As a result the bowlers suddenly need to bat or the team are likely to lolapse. Woe is me.

 

[_00_deathscar]

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 .

Or any test involving Pant, Jadeja and Ashwin in the last 5 years

 

[Sunil1z]

Or any test involving Pant, Jadeja and Ashwin in the last 5 years

Pant is not lower order batsman

 

[Xix2565]

I feel the recent weirdness associated with Team India has messed with people’s understanding of cricket.

Ashwin and Jadeja outplaying the actual batsmen has messed with everyone’s minds and they now expect Bumrah and Shami to do the same without looking at the actual problem. As a result the bowlers suddenly need to bat or the team are likely to lolapse. Woe is me.

What weirdness? People just suck at realizing bowling ARs are useful, and that you can pick 5 good bowlers in a team and win Tests. Especially some people here. India if anything recently just prove my point given their record in recent times.

 

[Coronis]

Pant is not lower order batsman

Isn’t he?

 

[Sunil1z]

Isn’t he?

Middle order batsman. Comes at 3 or 4 down

 

[Himannv]

What weirdness? People just suck at realizing bowling ARs are useful, and that you can pick 5 good bowlers in a team and win Tests. Especially some people here. India if anything recently just prove my point given their record in recent times.

You’re not going to convince me with 3 sentences, gonna need more than that.

 

[Xix2565]

What needs convincing? I would've thought a lot of this would be Captain Obvious stuff. Especially India's recent Test record.

 

[Coronis]

Middle order batsman. Comes at 3 or 4 down

Usually comes in at 6 or 7 I’d call that lower order.

 

[ankitj]

Usually comes in at 6 or 7 I’d call that lower order.

He plays #5 regularly, ahead of one specialist batsman. Check where he batted in the Gabba test.

 

[Himannv]

What needs convincing? I would've thought a lot of this would be Captain Obvious stuff. Especially India's recent Test record.

So India rely on the batting of their bowlers to win games because their batsmen are not pulling their weight (excluding Rohit of course who definitely pulls his weight)? I for one think Kohli is to blame.

 

[Socerer 01]

Usually comes in at 6 or 7 I’d call that lower order.

before his driving incident he batted at 5 ahead of Shreyas

 

[shortpitched713]

In @kyear2s fantasy ATG game, we would see Marshall, Hadlee, Steyn, Warne rip through the opposition and reduce them to 90/5. Then completely against the flow of the game, they bring in Sobers or Kallis' into the attack against a similar ATG lineup under pressure. Inexplicably, instead of milking this bowler, they slip up and lose their wicket.

Then when the team has a chance to bat, their upper middle order struggles, and therefore Hadlee instantly gets out when coming at no.8. but between Marshall, Steyn and Warne they shore up the rest of the batting and chase the score to win.

As strawman as this is, it's also kind of hilarious as a scenario.

Quite probably there's some nuance to be had here, instead of arguing for extremes of either side.

 

[Coronis]

He plays #5 regularly, ahead of one specialist batsman. Check where he batted in the Gabba test.

before his driving incident he batted at 5 ahead of Shreyas

Read: Usually.

 

[reyrey]

I feel the recent weirdness associated with Team India has messed with people’s understanding of cricket.

Ashwin and Jadeja outplaying the actual batsmen has messed with everyone’s minds and they now expect Bumrah and Shami to do the same without looking at the actual problem. As a result the bowlers suddenly need to bat or the team are likely to lolapse. Woe is me.

Cairns, Nash and Vettori did it long before Ashwin and Jadeja.

 

[reyrey]

I was using that to show you your arguments can work both ways. Guess you missed that.

And yes, a strong keeper is a given.

For the argument to go both ways you'd need to argue the advantages of not having a bowling all rounder at 8 and maybe just picking your best bowlers.

I gave some reasons why it's advantageous having bowling all rounders, but it wasn't an argument against batting all rounders. Ideal world I'd have both in my team!

 

[Xix2565]

So India rely on the batting of their bowlers to win games because their batsmen are not pulling their weight (excluding Rohit of course who definitely pulls his weight)? I for one think Kohli is to blame.

No, the bowlers have always been the ones winning games ever since Test cricket began. India is no different here, only that two of their bowlers can bat and so can be played to have a batting lineup stretch till 8.

To win Tests you need to take 20 wickets and have more runs than the opposition, and bowling allows you to take wickets and control the opposition's runs. That makes them the most valuable resource in Tests, and having as many good bowlers as is possible (within the constraint of team balance) is a good thing.

 

[ataraxia]

To win Tests you need to take 20 wickets and have more runs than the opposition, and bowling allows you to take wickets and control the opposition's runs. That makes them the most valuable resource in Tests, and having as many good bowlers as is possible (within the constraint of team balance) is a good thing.

This is an odd take tstl.