Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 11 of 15 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 213

Thread: Post Packer World XI - a discussion

  1. #151
    International Regular Slifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,123
    Ambrose has a better average, strike rate, and ER than Warne. The teams against whom warne had success (England, RSA, etc.) are the same teams Ambrose succeeded against. And what clinches for me is Ambrose's outstanding record against the best team of his time (Australia) Warne didnt enjoy near that type of success against the best team (batting team) outside of his own, India.
    Cause Slifer said so.........!!!!

  2. #152
    International Coach stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    14,616
    Quote Originally Posted by Slifer View Post
    Ambrose has a better average, strike rate, and ER than Warne. The teams against whom warne had success (England, RSA, etc.) are the same teams Ambrose succeeded against. And what clinches for me is Ambrose's outstanding record against the best team of his time (Australia) Warne didnt enjoy near that type of success against the best team (batting team) outside of his own, India.
    Warne's struggles against India are well publicised.

    What matters is team balance. A team with five seamers is not balanced. Given the choice of Ambrose or Warne any captain who is any good would have picked Warne, given the other seamers on offer.

    There's a reason Warne made the number one side and Ambrose didn't.

    And I rate Ambrose very highly indeed.

  3. #153
    International Debutant Evermind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    I actually think the first side has a miles better pace attack. Saying "if Imran, Hadlee and Marshall can't take wickets, another fast bowler won't" is just a fallacy. Everyone bowls well on different days, and five top-class quicks are 66% more likely to have a player in unstoppable form than three. On the other hand, slow pitches could prove their undoing, but they have Akram in the team for when the ball gets older to offset that to an extent.
    That's a strawman though. If you have Imran, Hadlee and Marshall, sure, having Ambrose in the team will still be effective, but it won't be as effective as having Warne in the team. To me, that is obvious given the pitch conditions, age of ball, batsman's ability to readjust to pace, necessity to force the pace, weather, etc. It has been proven time and again when McGrath has been ineffective and Warne has taken a load of wickets. Variety is always better than more-of-the-same if they're both of the same quality - it works in cricket like it works in real life.

    Let's say you have 1) Claudia Schiffer, 2) Cindy Crawford and 2) Cloning technology.

    You are living with 3 Claudias, havin' a good time, livin' the good life. One day, you decide you need one more. But then Cindy Crawford comes along. What do you do, clone Claudia again - you already get the same conversations and same moves in bed with the other 3 (not that you're complaining) - or get Cindy to join the 3 Claudias you already have? The choice is clear, mon ami.

  4. #154
    International Coach stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    14,616
    Those two are getting on in age now.

    How about some younger guns like Miranda Kerr or Megan Fox.


  5. #155
    International Regular Slifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,123
    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post
    I've done better - I've highlighted games where Warne has outbowled Ambrose himself. To find games where he's outbowled McGrath (who was better than Ambrose) would be easier.

    Cricinfo - 2nd Test: Australia v West Indies at Melbourne, Dec 26-30, 1992

    Cricinfo - 4th Test: West Indies v Australia at Kingston, Apr 29-May 3, 1995

    Cricinfo - 2nd Test: Australia v West Indies at Sydney, Nov 29-Dec 3, 1996

    Also, as to the SRT vs Chappell question - Tendulkar was picked younger, played longer, made more runs and had a higher average.

    U do realise that in the first link u highlighted Ambrose won man of the series in that series right? U do realise in the last two tests of that series Ambrose took 20 wkts. If i really wanted to i dont think it wood be too hard to find games where he outbowled Warne but i wont.

    Just because SRT was picked younger and played longer makes no difference to me. Chappell is one of the few batsmen who has a completely flawless record. His lowest average in ne country is 40 against England and his lowest average against ne team is 40 in England.

    SRT sorry to say doesnt have near as flawless a record.

  6. #156
    International Debutant Evermind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post
    Those two are getting on in age now.

    How about some younger guns like Miranda Kerr or Megan Fox.
    OOoh nice.

    Substitute as necessary. I was trying to think of names from what I guessed to be Uppercut's generation.

  7. #157
    International Regular Slifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,123
    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post
    Warne's struggles against India are well publicised.

    What matters is team balance. A team with five seamers is not balanced. Given the choice of Ambrose or Warne any captain who is any good would have picked Warne, given the other seamers on offer.

    There's a reason Warne made the number one side and Ambrose didn't.

    And I rate Ambrose very highly indeed.
    I just realised sumthin. U never actually said thatWarne was a better bowler than Ambrose, u said he was more valuable to the team (due to the variety that a spinner offers) in which case i agree; humbliest apologies. Still though G Chappell> SRT and by > i mean Greg Chappell was a better overall batsman than Tendulkar.

  8. #158
    State 12th Man 0RI0N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Groom Lake
    Posts
    703
    Quote Originally Posted by Slifer View Post
    I just realised sumthin. U never actually said thatWarne was a better bowler than Ambrose, u said he was more valuable to the team (due to the variety that a spinner offers) in which case i agree; humbliest apologies. Still though G Chappell> SRT and by > i mean Greg Chappell was a better overall batsman than Tendulkar.
    warne v ambrose not a good comparison.ambrose vs mcgrath is a better comparison.i'd have liked ambrose in 1st XI.But i'll be very happy when mcgrath doesnt make XI.
    Ambrose just a better bowler than mcgrath. Yes i typed it.so what.

  9. #159
    International Regular Slifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,123
    Mcgrath and Ambrose is a close thing and all but Mcgrath edges it for me due to his superior worldwide success and his successes in generally less bowler friendly conditions.

  10. #160
    International Debutant Evermind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by 0RI0N View Post
    Ambrose just a better bowler than mcgrath. Yes i typed it.so what.

  11. #161
    Hall of Fame Member Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Don't leave me Murph!
    Posts
    15,463
    Quote Originally Posted by Slifer View Post
    Ambrose has a better average, strike rate, and ER than Warne. The teams against whom warne had success (England, RSA, etc.) are the same teams Ambrose succeeded against. And what clinches for me is Ambrose's outstanding record against the best team of his time (Australia) Warne didnt enjoy near that type of success against the best team (batting team) outside of his own, India.
    You can't judge a pacer and a spinner in such a straight manner. Spinners come on at different times, with wickets down, and having to face set batsmen and bowl long hauls. Most places around the world are much better suited for pace also.

    S.Africa were just as good as India in the batting stakes and Warne did more than fine. Funny enough they both did shockingly against India.

    Anyway, I think McGrath or Ambrose should be in the squad but not at Murali's expense. I think McGrath should be in instead of Hadlee but it's not exactly a huge difference. I think Murali is too much though. One spinner is enough, 4 pacers are enough and 5 bowlers, regardless of their trade, is overkill.

    Imran
    Hadlee
    Marshall
    Warne

    is all the attack you need. There are only 20 wickets and a certain amount of balls to bowl in a day. It's the story of diminishing returns. The extra batsman would have been much more beneficial IMO. Either Kallis (if you think 4 just doesn't do it for you) or Ponting IMO should be in the squad.
    Last edited by Ikki; 23-02-2009 at 11:47 PM.
    ★★★★★

  12. #162
    Global Moderator Fusion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    12,300
    Quote Originally Posted by adharcric View Post
    Based on what? Quite easy to say it's harsh on a Dravid, Kallis or Akram when they don't make some sort of all-time XI, but the nature of this side is such that there will be champion cricketers that will be snubbed. Unless you specifically think that Akram should make the side ahead of McGrath, Ambrose, Lillee, Kumble or Botham, I don't understand how it's "harsh" on him.
    Simply stated, I believe Akram to be a good enough bowler to make at least the "second" Post Packer XI. Now, let's address who's in the team. Here's the theoratical Second XI that Pasag posted:

    Greenidge
    Sehwag
    Ponting
    Chappell
    Kallis
    Flower
    Botham
    Akram
    Lillee
    Ambrose
    McGrath

    Stephen responded he liked this side better:

    Greenidge
    Sehwag
    Ponting
    Chappell
    Kallis
    Sangakkara
    Botham
    Lillee
    Ambrose
    McGrath
    Kumble

    So Kumble in for Akram in the bowling department. I personally feel that a bowling lineup consisting of Botham, Lilee, Ambrose, McGrath, and Akram is better than one with Kumble in it (at the expense of a fast bowler). I love Kumble and he's a champion bowler. But unless I have a Murali or Warne, I'll take 4 all-time great quicks over a spinner every time. Specially Akram who can do wonders with the old ball anyway and is left-handed, which adds a nice variety to the team. If one likes to have a spinner in the team, then I can still include Akram in the team at the expense of McGrath. I know not many here may share my opinion, but I don't think there's that much between the two. I know McGrath's stats are better, but I've seen both bowl for the majority of their careers and I believe them to be equal. So if one considers them equal, then I take Akram over McGrath because he's left-handed and can produce that "unplayable" delivery more often than McGrath.

  13. #163
    Hall of Fame Member Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Don't leave me Murph!
    Posts
    15,463
    TBF, Wasim is simply better than Kumble, no matter how you wish to bend it. Kumble is really only valuable at home and Wasim is not that far from Kumble's record in India, against them. Everywhere else he is better. And the swing and left-handedness is sufficiently different from the other bowlers, when it comes to reasons of variation. IF a spinner is simply a must, I'd rather go for Macgill or Saqlain.

  14. #164
    International Coach adharcric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Posts
    10,898
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki
    You can't judge a pacer and a spinner in such a straight manner. Spinners come on at different times, with wickets down, and having to face set batsmen and bowl long hauls.
    That doesn't apply as much to Warne, not with McGrath and co. coming before him.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki
    S.Africa were just as good as India in the batting stakes and Warne did more than fine.
    India were the best players of spin and Warne failed against them. South Africa may have been a good batting side but they didn't match up to India against spin.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki
    Anyway, I think McGrath or Ambrose should be in the squad but not at Murali's expense. I think McGrath should be in instead of Hadlee but it's not exactly a huge difference. I think Murali is too much though. One spinner is enough, 4 pacers are enough and 5 bowlers, regardless of their trade, is overkill.

    Imran
    Hadlee
    Marshall
    Warne

    is all the attack you need. There are only 20 wickets and a certain amount of balls to bowl in a day. It's the story of diminishing returns. The extra batsman would have been much more beneficial IMO. Either Kallis (if you think 4 just doesn't do it for you) or Ponting IMO should be in the squad.
    Instead of that extra batsman, we chose several bowlers that can bat and that opened the door for the inclusion of a fifth strike bowler. McGrath > Hadlee as a bowler for me, given that he did all that on batting-friendly pitches, but not by much. Hadlee's batting gives him the nod. Five bowlers are not overkill against the likes of Bradman and Sobers, especially when four of them are solid lower-order batsmen.
    Last edited by adharcric; 23-02-2009 at 11:59 PM.

  15. #165
    International Coach adharcric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Posts
    10,898
    Quote Originally Posted by Fusion View Post
    Simply stated, I believe Akram to be a good enough bowler to make at least the "second" Post Packer XI. Now, let's address who's in the team. Here's the theoratical Second XI that Pasag posted:

    Greenidge
    Sehwag
    Ponting
    Chappell
    Kallis
    Flower
    Botham
    Akram
    Lillee
    Ambrose
    McGrath

    Stephen responded he liked this side better:

    Greenidge
    Sehwag
    Ponting
    Chappell
    Kallis
    Sangakkara
    Botham
    Lillee
    Ambrose
    McGrath
    Kumble

    So Kumble in for Akram in the bowling department. I personally feel that a bowling lineup consisting of Botham, Lilee, Ambrose, McGrath, and Akram is better than one with Kumble in it (at the expense of a fast bowler). I love Kumble and he's a champion bowler. But unless I have a Murali or Warne, I'll take 4 all-time great quicks over a spinner every time. Specially Akram who can do wonders with the old ball anyway and is left-handed, which adds a nice variety to the team. If one likes to have a spinner in the team, then I can still include Akram in the team at the expense of McGrath. I know not many here may share my opinion, but I don't think there's that much between the two. I know McGrath's stats are better, but I've seen both bowl for the majority of their careers and I believe them to be equal. So if one considers them equal, then I take Akram over McGrath because he's left-handed and can produce that "unplayable" delivery more often than McGrath.
    Fair enough and I completely agree - I've just read too many of these "harsh on so-and-so" comments without justification to let it go this time.

Page 11 of 15 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. ***Official*** Australian Domestic Season 2008/09
    By Jakester1288 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 2856
    Last Post: 07-07-2009, 12:20 AM
  2. Post your favourite ODI kits
    By Xuhaib in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 01-02-2009, 11:26 PM
  3. Replies: 68
    Last Post: 28-01-2009, 10:25 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •