Choose the two opening bowlers for Post Packer World XI

[kingkallis]

lol andyc......I was like ahhhhhh someone else also thinks that Donald was worth a try but....grrrrr @ you voting for all!

 

[JBH001]

When does the poll close? I am thinking of voting Akram and Donald, but may hold back a vote if it goes to the wire between Pidge and Paddles.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

When does the poll close?

Says on the poll itself. Six days.

 

[Uppercut]

everyone had "well-left" my comment on hadlee's batting ability being an extra reason to choose him, considering mcgrath and he are inseparable purely on bowling skills. it is a value addition that will come in handy from a team perspective, especially when your attacking wk-batsman at no.7 needs some lower order support.

Ahaha ehm, well, it's not something I wish to consider when picking my opening bowler. Hadlee can get a place as an all-rounder, maybe he can come on first or second change and bat at 8 behind Imran Khan. But if we're looking at who's going to open the bowling to take on a hypothetical Martians XI, I want the best possible bowler, nothing else. And i think McGrath's a comfortably better bowler by as much as one really can be when comparing two such incredible players, I wouldn't say they're "inseparable".

 

[subshakerz]

everyone had "well-left" my comment on hadlee's batting ability being an extra reason to choose him, considering mcgrath and he are inseparable purely on bowling skills. it is a value addition that will come in handy from a team perspective, especially when your attacking wk-batsman at no.7 needs some lower order support.

I agree here. The bowling difference between Hadlee and McGrath is too close to call. Their career stats match up pretty well. McGrath bowled in a batsman-friendly era but had more assistance in terms of fielders, pressure created by support bowlers, and higher batting totals to play around with. Hadlee adds a extra dimension with his batting, which is not good enough to qualify him for the all-rounder slot but good enough to tip this position in his favor.

What an underrated player Hadlee is if you think about it. Imagine a Glen McGrath who could provide a bit with the bat as well.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

McGrath has a very real case for being the greatest bowler of all time IMO.

So do Marshall, Hadlee and Lillee.

Absolutely. In my mind, he was. Marshall a close second.

Your bowling attack would include McGrath, Marshall, Ambrose and Lillee with Imran at 6 even on a dust bowl in Delhi.

 

[stephen]

I agree here. The bowling difference between Hadlee and McGrath is too close to call. Their career stats match up pretty well. McGrath bowled in a batsman-friendly era but had more assistance in terms of fielders, pressure created by support bowlers, and higher batting totals to play around with. Hadlee adds a extra dimension with his batting, which is not good enough to qualify him for the all-rounder slot but good enough to tip this position in his favor.

What an underrated player Hadlee is if you think about it. Imagine a Glen McGrath who could provide a bit with the bat as well.

But that's the point, he was an extremely good all-rounder, behind only (arguably) Sobers, Imran and Kallis.

However he was not quite as good as McGrath, given how much more bowler friendly his era was. McGrath stands head and shoulders over the next best bowlers of his era. Hadlee stands tall in the middle of the best bowlers of his era. The new pill in any of my teams goes to McGrath.

 

[JBH001]

But is that because McGrath was that much better, or because he did not have enough top quality fast bowlers to compare against? Hence why he stands out so easily.

 

[subshakerz]

But is that because McGrath was that much better, or because he did not have enough top quality fast bowlers to compare against? Hence why he stands out so easily.

Exactly. The only reason for being better than Hadlee given is that McGrath bowled in a batting-friendly era, which though correct, Hadlee can counter by saying that he achieved what he did without the support of a champion side. Statistically, there is not really that much to say one is decidedly superior.

 

[Top_Cat]

McGrath and Marshall. Nowhere to go if you're an opening batsman.

But geez it's a tough poll. Hadlee, Garner, Ambrose, Waqar, Wasim, etc. all top picks.

 

[bagapath]

When does the poll close? I am thinking of voting Akram and Donald, but may hold back a vote if it goes to the wire between Pidge and Paddles.

i think you should vote right away - to hadlee and anyone other than mcgrath

 

[stephen]

i think you should vote right away - to hadlee and anyone other than mcgrath

Anti-Australian bias

I can understand why the kiwis want him there so much though, they're unlikely to get anyone else in the team.

I still think that you should play the best bowlers available with the new ball and those two bowlers are McGrath and Marshall.

 

[bagapath]

Anti-Australian bias

you guys are slowly becoming like indian politicians; ascribing any personal opinion to that person's perceived racial, linguistic, nationalistic and religious preferences. why would i be biased against the aussies? after all they produced keith miller, adam gilchrist and victor trumper!

 

[archie mac]

But that's the point, he was an extremely good all-rounder, behind only (arguably) Sobers, Imran and Kallis.

However he was not quite as good as McGrath, given how much more bowler friendly his era was. McGrath stands head and shoulders over the next best bowlers of his era. Hadlee stands tall in the middle of the best bowlers of his era. The new pill in any of my teams goes to McGrath.

I thought him a long way behind them, and would include Dev and Botham as well (not to mention Miller, Gregory, Faulkner, Foster, Mankad, Noble, Giffen, Rhodes, Reid, I could go on but you get the idea). His batting was nothing better then average imo

Personally I would have Paddles in front of McGrath

 

[bagapath]

I thought him a long way behind them, and would include Dev and Botham as well (not to mention Miller, Gregory, Faulkner, Foster, Mankad, Noble, Giffen, Rhodes, Reid, I could go on but you get the idea). His batting was nothing better then average imo

Personally I would have Paddles in front of McGrath

arichiemac! which reid is this?

 

[Furball]

McGrath and Ambrose, simply because they're the best 2 I've seen.

 

[bagapath]

this is going to go down to the wire. anyways, the one losing out will be included in the fourth bowler's poll (where he will lose to murali, in all likelihood )

 

[Ikki]

But that's the point, he was an extremely good all-rounder, behind only (arguably) Sobers, Imran and Kallis.

However he was not quite as good as McGrath, given how much more bowler friendly his era was. McGrath stands head and shoulders over the next best bowlers of his era. Hadlee stands tall in the middle of the best bowlers of his era. The new pill in any of my teams goes to McGrath.

You forgot Miller.

 

[archie mac]

arichiemac! which reid is this?

John Reid the Kiwi legend

 

[bagapath]

John Reid the Kiwi legend

thought as much. but wasn't sure if you'd rank him with the other big names you've got on the list. will read up on this guy.