World Class list

[Prince EWS]

Most of it spews from the mouth of David Lloyd. Every T20 game you hear him mention at least 5 different theories of things you supposedly need in T20.

One of them is always a wrist spinner, for some reason. Even if he has a crap T20 record or hasn't played much; he's the key!

 

[Uppercut]

So true.

 

[Furball]

The obsession with boundaries and big hitting really grinds my gears as well, although that complaint isn't specific to Bumble.

 

[silentstriker]

All of them. Or maybe all of them except McGrath. And I'd drop Warne too, obviously. He's ****ing Murali! The leading test wicket-taker of ALL TIME! He'd walk into 100% of teams in the history of the game and I can't believe I even have to debate this.

If anyone advocates dropping McGrath for any reason, in any team, even in passing, they will be banned. And flogged.

That's an official warning.

 

[silentstriker]

Australia wouldn't. Look how little Warne and MacGill played together.

 

[silentstriker]

I'm just being arsey.

Although I couldn't disagree more about a team to win in India. Murali ahead of Warne is an interesting shout, but no way do any of Australia's quicks make way for both of them.

Look, I'm the biggest anti-spin guy on the planet....but if you have both Murali and Warne in your side, it's quite possibly the most monumentally stupid decision to leave out either of them.

I shouldn't even say this because there is no way they'd keep him out of a side, it's not even a debate. There is no chance he wouldn't play every single Test match.

Well, we have a bowler here who many consider to be the greatest bowler ever....and I think we'll go with Kaspa. Yup.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Don't want to derail the thread into that debate, but I'd be 99% sure that Murali would never have made in through the Australian domestic game with his action in any event. Or the English one.

 

[Howe_zat]

Don't want to derail the thread into that debate, but I'd be 99% sure that Murali would never have made in through the Australian domestic game with his action in any event. Or the English one.

Kind of irrelevant to the discussion, really. It's an interesting point but really just shows how many routes there are into international cricket. Regardless of style you have to pick your best bowlers and turning down a Warne-Murali partnership would be pretty much unthinkable.

Edit: Thinking about it, the Sri Lankan system of the early 90s that fostered the unorthodoxy of Murali and Jayasuria might be pretty missed, just for those of us who love these players for the sake of their unorthodoxy as well as success. There's still a little bit of it left, of course - there's no way Malinga's action could have got through county cricket.

 

[Furball]

Look, I'm the biggest anti-spin guy on the planet....but if you have both Murali and Warne in your side, it's quite possibly the most monumentally stupid decision to leave out either of them.

I shouldn't even say this because there is no way they'd keep him out of a side, it's not even a debate. There is no chance he wouldn't play every single Test match.

Well, we have a bowler here who many consider to be the greatest bowler ever....and I think we'll go with Kaspa. Yup.

He might be the greatest bowler ever, but he's not more likely to win you a Test in India.

 

[vcs]

Kind of irrelevant to the discussion, really. It's an interesting point but really just shows how many routes there are into international cricket. Regardless of style you have to pick your best bowlers and turning down a Warne-Murali partnership would be pretty much unthinkable.

Edit: Thinking about it, the Sri Lankan system of the early 90s that fostered the unorthodoxy of Murali and Jayasuria might be pretty missed, just for those of us who love these players for the sake of their unorthodoxy as well as success. There's still a little bit of it left, of course - there's no way Malinga's action could have got through county cricket.

But there isn't anything vaguely illegal about Malinga's action, is there? Sure, it's very unorthodox.

 

[Prince EWS]

But there isn't anything vaguely illegal about Malinga's action, is there? Sure, it's very unorthodox.

Would've been coached out of him.

 

[Teja.]

But there isn't anything vaguely illegal about Malinga's action, is there? Sure, it's very unorthodox.

I think he meant his action would never have survived the scrutiny of the Coaches belonging to the English system right from a much younger age and he would have been forced to adapt to a more 'reliable' and orthodox one.

 

[vcs]

Would've been coached out of him.

I think he meant his action would never have survived the scrutiny of the Coaches belonging to the English system right from a much younger age and he would have been forced to adapt to a more 'reliable' and orthodox one.

Yeah, I get your point. SL always seems to produce its share of unorthodox cricketers though.

 

[Prince EWS]

Yeah, I get your point. SL always seems to produce its share of unorthodox cricketers though.

Well, that is the point. In Sri Lanka, unorthodoxy isn't coached out of players if it works.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Not so sure with Malinga in Oz; pound for pound Australia have produced more slingers than anyone else. Thommo the obvious example, but Tait & Johnson both round-armed too so reckon he'd have made it through relatively intact.

None in Malinga's league tho.

 

[ankitj]

Spinners always struggle against Indian batsman - he'd be much better bowling for India.

Yeah that theory should work for Australia too, but I don't know if it's that simple.

It is that simple. All over the world against same opposition they have both done comparably. No reason to think Murali wouldn't do as well as Warne against England, South Africa etc in Australia.

 

[Howe_zat]

Just been thinking - if a World Class player is someone who could get into any team in the world, does that mean an All-Time Great is someone who could get into any team in history?

 

[Prince EWS]

Just been thinking - if a World Class player is someone who could get into any team in the world, does that mean an All-Time Great is someone who could get into any team in history?

Nah, that'd be an all time world class player.

 

[ankitj]

Just been thinking - if a World Class player is someone who could get into any team in the world, does that mean an All-Time Great is someone who could get into any team in history?

We run into paradoxes. Sutcliffe is ATG by that definition but wouldn't be if he and Len Hutton's playing eras are swapped.

 

[Howe_zat]

We run into paradoxes. Sutcliffe is ATG by that definition but wouldn't be if he and Len Hutton's playing eras are swapped.

Please elaborate? Why not?