Pick TWO opening Bowlers for the 1946-2006 World Test XI

[GIMH]

Only three times. The rest of the time he was busy taking 7 wickets.

Steve Harmison is the world's greatest bowler, ever, we all know it, and it's a travesty that he didn't make it onto this poll

 

[Slifer]

Any one of Marshall, Hadlee or Mcgrath would be a dream attack. In the end i chose Mcgrath and Marshall.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

We'll just get owned more than we already will because of our unnecessarily long batting order and a lack of a bowling all rounder.

FANFARE


That's the 100th time you've said that, I hereby award you this week's star prize of a Do-it-yourself Brain-Surgery Kit with Matching Curtains.

 

[silentstriker]

FANFARE


That's the 100th time you've said that, I hereby award you this week's star prize of a Do-it-yourself Brain-Surgery Kit with Matching Curtains.

Thanks.

 

[silentstriker]

Anyway, just want to say that it was a big mistake to pick six full time batsmen and Gilchrist. We should have Gilly at six and a bowling all rounder at seven, or something similar. Should have either Lara or Sachin, not both.

 

[Fusion]

Anyway, just want to say that it was a big mistake to pick six full time batsmen and Gilchrist. We should have Gilly at six and a bowling all rounder at seven, or something similar. Should have either Lara or Sachin, not both.

No matter how many times he says it, he's still right.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Sobers is an allrounder who is a genuine bowler, just because his batting was even better than his bowling doesn't mean he can't bowl.

 

[silentstriker]

No one said he can't bowl. He'd be a good frontline bowler for any international side. This side is not an international side. This is a side that will go up against Bradman and others who are the best of the pre-war era. For that lineup, you need another bowler.

 

[aussie tragic]

We'll just get owned more than we already will because of our unnecessarily long batting order and a lack of a bowling all rounder.

SS, you’re losing all credibility now as I'll remind you that we previously posted Sobers 5-year stats between 30-Jan-1962 to 30-Jan-1967 as follows:

23 Tests, 2162 runs @ 65.51, 89 wkts @ 27.29, 44 catches

And your response was.....

So he averaged four wickets per test .

And people say he wouldn't have made it with his bowling?

 

[silentstriker]

SS, you’re losing all credibility now as I'll remind you that we previously posted Sobers 5-year stats between 30-Jan-1962 to 30-Jan-1967 as follows:

23 Tests, 2162 runs @ 65.51, 89 wkts @ 27.29, 44 catches

And your response was.....

He would have made it in with his bowling, in the West Indies side. He is a FINE bowler. He is not a top fifteen all time bowler, which is what I would prefer.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

If you have Marshall, Lillee, Hadlee(or Ambrose, McGrath,Trueman), Warne and Sobers, you don't need another bowler.

 

[silentstriker]

If you have Marshall, Lillee, Hadlee(or Ambrose, McGrath,Trueman), Warne and Sobers, you don't need another bowler.

Ehhh..I don't know. Three quicks only (plus sobers)?

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Ehhh..I don't know. Three quicks only (plus sobers)?

It's not just any old "three quicks" though - add the greatest spinner ever plus the greatest all-rounder ever and the attack is more than good enough.

 

[Krishna_j]

New ball bowlers - Lillee of 1977 fame ; Marshall of 1983-84

 

[JBH001]

It's not just any old "three quicks" though - add the greatest spinner ever plus the greatest all-rounder ever and the attack is more than good enough.

Agreed.

As I have said before Sobers is regarded as the best all rounder of all time, not the best batting all rounder of all time - despite your best efforts SS.

Moreover, imo, if a top 15 pace bowler is such a necessity I do not think Miller would make it in, and Imran, arguably, may or may not. Yet, I do not think that Imran's batting is good enough for #6 or #7 in this line-up - Miller's batting, however, may be.

It is not just the fact that this side will take on a batting line-up of Bradman et al - it is also that this side will take on a likely bowling attack of Gregory/Larwood/Barnes/Rhodes/O'Reilly/Grace/Hammond etc on pitches half of which are likely to be uncovered. In such a scenario I want a strengthening of the batting line-up - not a weakening of it by including Imran, who imo, is not upto it as a bat to take his place in this side. Miller, however, might be, and would have been my second option after Sobers. However, given CW's likely voting pattern, Sobers at #5 would have resulted in Imran (instead of Miller which I could have lived with) at #6 or #7 who, frankly, is not upto it with the bat. Therefore, better to go for Sobers, and that is another reason why I voted for him. And also the fact that his bowling is good enough for a 5th bowler and the fact that he can do it all, and also his left armers provide some much needed variety, and so on etc.

 

[aussie tragic]

New ball bowlers - Lillee of 1977 fame ; Marshall of 1983-84

So then how about voting in the poll then

 

[adharcric]

So then how about voting in the poll then

No matter how hard you try, McGrath will prevail.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

No matter how hard you try, McGrath will prevail.

In some ways that does slightly increase the argument for an extra bowler, but his lack of pace and variety compared to other candidates in off-set by his ability to act as the work horse keeping it tight at one end if necessary.

 

[aussie tragic]

So, with a little more than 12 hours to go, it looks like Marshall and McGrath will open the bowling for the post-war XI....

....while Lillee, Hadlee and Ambrose would then battle it out with Warne, Murali, Imran, Miller and Botham for the final two bowlers....

 

[bagapath]

do we need to have all of them in the final poll? is it not enough to have two runners up from each of the current polls? i am just wondering if too many names would unnecessarily dilute the final poll.