Cricket Player Manager

View Poll Results: Who are the TWO opening bowlers for the Post Packer Dream XI?

Voters
71. You may not vote on this poll
  • Imran

    9 12.68%
  • Hadlee

    28 39.44%
  • Marshall

    46 64.79%
  • Garner

    5 7.04%
  • Ambrose

    12 16.90%
  • McGrath

    27 38.03%
  • Donald

    3 4.23%
  • Holding

    4 5.63%
  • Pollock

    3 4.23%
  • Akram

    8 11.27%
  • Steyn

    1 1.41%
  • Bishop

    1 1.41%
  • Lillee

    11 15.49%
  • Walsh

    1 1.41%
  • Reid

    1 1.41%
  • Waqar

    2 2.82%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 248

Thread: Choose the two opening bowlers for Post Packer World XI

  1. #151
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,779
    By the way, if we pick McGrath then we should play at Lords.

    YouTube - Ashes 2005 | 1st Test (Lords) Day 1, 3rd Session Highlights

    Just watched it again. What a venemous spell of bowling.

  2. #152
    International Coach G.I.Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    10,947
    Quote Originally Posted by Precambrian View Post
    Do you think 4.4 and 5.2 are worlds apart? I'd rather let their bowling records paper over it.
    Yes, I do. It is the approximately the same as the difference between Tendulkar and Ganguly, for example.

  3. #153
    International Coach G.I.Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    10,947
    Quote Originally Posted by Precambrian View Post
    When did Pakistan not want him? Only towards the very fag end (perhaps the last 5 years of his career). And anyway just as a specialised batsman alone Imran would make it to that Pakistani team. Kapil too was ****e towards the end of his career when he painfully lumbered to that 434 wicket mark. He didn't care to develop his batting and what resulted was the overall balance of the team in pits because selectors didn't have guts to drop him.
    Or maybe Kapil was forced to be the stock bowler for India, thus not developing his batting enough.

  4. #154
    Cricketer Of The Year The Sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,518
    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post
    Actually I didn't forget either Miller or Botham. I just tend to judge allrounders primarily on their stronger discipline and then on their lesser one, rather than rating them equally on both disciplines.
    Where's the cut off - how much better does their stronger discipline have to be than their weaker one before they stop being an all rounder and start being a specialist? If you think Hadlee's superior bowling makes him a better and more valuable cricketer overall than either Miller or Botham then I've got no problem with that - you may well be right. But there's no way in my mind that he's a better all-rounder.

    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post
    Miller, who took under 3 wpm at a higher average than Hadlee.
    He actually took slightly more than 3 wpm...I'm being pedantic now, but this is Nugget we're talking about.

    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post
    Still, there isn't much in it, and I'm sure I'm in the minority with my opinions.
    Nothing wrong with that mate - being in the minority with your opinions is one of life's little pleasures I reckon, and differing opinions are a big part of the enjoyment of this forum.
    Member of the Twenty20 is Boring Society

    Quote Originally Posted by grecian View Post
    C'mon Man U.
    RIP Craigos


  5. #155
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,779
    Quote Originally Posted by The Sean View Post
    Where's the cut off - how much better does their stronger discipline have to be than their weaker one before they stop being an all rounder and start being a specialist? If you think Hadlee's superior bowling makes him a better and more valuable cricketer overall than either Miller or Botham then I've got no problem with that - you may well be right. But there's no way in my mind that he's a better all-rounder.
    Hmmm well it is all dependent isn't it? I mean if a batsman would be more valuable to the team than a bowler then obviously a Kallis or Sobers would be more useful. If a bowler would be better than a batsman then obviously Hadlee or Miller would be picked.

    There is so little between Hadlee and Miller that it really is hard to judge who would win more games for their team. However, my belief is that the strongest skill of a player is their most important and the secondary skill tends to win less games. Miller was a better bat than Hadlee, but Hadlee was a better bowler and carried his team far more than Miller ever did. Which is what tips the balance for me.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Sean View Post
    He actually took slightly more than 3 wpm...I'm being pedantic now, but this is Nugget we're talking about.
    My mistake

  6. #156
    International Captain bagapath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    5,139
    was trying to stay off this topic becuase the all-rounders poll might inspire the same arguments. just one quick note though. miller was a much better bat than hadlee than hadlee was as bowler.

    miller as batsman - hadlee as batsman >> hadlee as bowler - miller as bowler

  7. #157
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,779
    Quote Originally Posted by bagapath View Post
    was trying to stay off this topic becuase the all-rounders poll might inspire the same arguments. just one quick note though. miller was a much better bat than hadlee than hadlee was as bowler.

    miller as batsman - hadlee as batsman >> hadlee as bowler - miller as bowler
    I actually think that Miller was somewhat overrated as a bowler tbh.

    As I never really saw either player too much (too young) I can only really analyse statistics, and while Millers initially appear really good, a low WPM pretty much means that either a) he was in a team full of good bowlers or b) he didn't bowl as much as he should have.

    Lindwall was also in his team and was a better bowler and I'd have to say that Hadlee as a bowler was probably at least Lindwall's equivalent with the ball (probably better in fact). I'm not certain that Miller's batting difference over Hadlee makes up for the difference in bowling, though it would be close either way.

    All I really know is that any captain would squeal with extasy if he had to make the difficult decision to choose which of those two he'd like in his team.

  8. #158
    State Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,226
    Should we not save this discussion of Imran and Botham for another poll?

  9. #159
    Cricketer Of The Year The Sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,518
    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post
    either a) he was in a team full of good bowlers or b) he didn't bowl as much as he should have.
    These are both true. Competition for wickets was fierce particularly with Lindwall and the hugely-underrated Bill Johnston, with a supporting cast including - at various times and to varying degrees - the likes of Johnson, Toshack, McCool, Archer, Benaud and Davidson.

    You're absolutely right that he didn't do as much bowling as he might have, and this was due to the back injury he suffered when he crash landed his Mosquito during WWII. While he played 55 Tests, he didn't do what most people would consider 55 Tests worth of bowling. Hence the relatively ordinary wpm ratio.

  10. #160
    State Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,226
    Quote Originally Posted by bagapath View Post
    was trying to stay off this topic becuase the all-rounders poll might inspire the same arguments. just one quick note though. miller was a much better bat than hadlee than hadlee was as bowler.

    miller as batsman - hadlee as batsman >> hadlee as bowler - miller as bowler
    It's the difference of a good batsman vs. an average batsman against an all-time great bowler vs. a good bowler

  11. #161
    International Captain bagapath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    5,139
    Quote Originally Posted by subshakerz View Post
    Should we not save this discussion of Imran and Botham for another poll?
    yeap

  12. #162
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,779
    Quote Originally Posted by The Sean View Post
    These are both true. Competition for wickets was fierce particularly with Lindwall and the hugely-underrated Bill Johnston, with a supporting cast including - at various times and to varying degrees - the likes of Johnson, Toshack, McCool, Archer, Benaud and Davidson.

    You're absolutely right that he didn't do as much bowling as he might have, and this was due to the back injury he suffered when he crash landed his Mosquito during WWII. While he played 55 Tests, he didn't do what most people would consider 55 Tests worth of bowling. Hence the relatively ordinary wpm ratio.
    Yeah this is all true. Miller was cut short in his prime really. He could have been so much better statistically if he hadn't got the injury. Oh well at least he survived the war and came back and showed us what he did.

  13. #163
    International Coach Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion! Jackpot Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Death Queen Island
    Posts
    12,776
    Quote Originally Posted by subshakerz View Post
    It's the difference of a good batsman vs. an average batsman against an all-time great bowler vs. a good bowler
    I don't think I'd put Hadlee in the "average" batsmen category. It depends who you think is average though.

    I'd say it's the difference between:

    A good batsmen vs someone who can hold the bat if need be; and
    A great bowler (probably outside the all-time greats vs an all-time great.
    ★★★★★

  14. #164
    Cricketer Of The Year The Sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,518
    True - his career was brilliant enough for us to sometimes overlook the fact that, due to the war, Miller played a grand total of one Test before his 27th birthday. And even that wasn't actually recognised as an official Test match until two years later!

    Anyway, I'll stop making this thread into a Miller tribute now.

  15. #165
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Burgess Hill
    Posts
    8,994
    Quote Originally Posted by G.I.Joe View Post
    Well, Botham and Imran offer a perfect example why I think that way. Go by the raw figures. Imran scored 30.2 runs per innings, Botham scored 32.3 runs per innings. Yet their averages of 37 and 33 respectively suggests that Imran contributed a lot more to his team with the bat than Botham did. What good are not outs if you're still contributing less to a team than the guy who did get out?
    My approach to raw figures:


    Batting average
    • Divide runs scored by number of times dismissed.

    • Where a batsman happens to bat for 5 minutes and makes 2 not out, do not treat it as effectively 2-and-out, because that would quite obviously produce an unfairly distorted batting average.
    For all-rounders

    Subtract bowling average from batting average.


    Simple!

Page 11 of 17 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. Pakistan's top 10 bowlers.....ever
    By Xuhaib in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-01-2012, 09:38 AM
  2. Post Packer World XI - a discussion
    By bagapath in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 212
    Last Post: 09-03-2009, 07:43 AM
  3. Choose two openers for post Packer era World XI
    By bagapath in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: 18-02-2009, 11:46 PM
  4. Replies: 68
    Last Post: 28-01-2009, 11:25 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
  •