1. I'm not sure Ali and i would make a good opening pair.

I would try to hit every delivery at his crotch for all the doomsday predictions he makes in the dressing room.Which would result in us being 1 wicket and 2 balls down after the first delivery

2. Originally Posted by salman85
I'm not sure Ali and i would make a good opening pair.

I would try to hit every delivery at his crotch for all the doomsday predictions he makes in the dressing room.Which would result in us being 1 wicket and 2 balls down after the first delivery
Slick

3. Originally Posted by salman85
I'm not sure Ali and i would make a good opening pair.

I would try to hit every delivery at his crotch for all the doomsday predictions he makes in the dressing room.Which would result in us being 1 wicket and 2 balls down after the first delivery
played

I see that you haven't left the habit of focusing on people's crotches

4. Originally Posted by benchmark00
There is no definitive answer to this question.

Like in football how on some days a team's midfield will win the game for their team, other days the forwards or defence will win it.

Can't have a great team without both. Sometimes bowling wins the day, sometimes batsmen.
This

I find the bowlers win matches cliche one of the most simplistic and over-romanticised things on CW.

5. Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero

I find the bowlers win matches cliche one of the most simplistic and over-romanticised things on CW.
How dare you

6. Distinct lack of pretty much irellivant statistics so far in this thread, so I'll change that.

The average average of the the four highest averaging batsmen (min 20 innings) is 70.8175.
The average average of the lowest four averaging bowlers (min 2000 balls) is 13.8525.

The average average of the four lowest averaging batsmen (min 20 innings) is 2.36
The average average of the four highest averaging bowlers (min 2000 balls) is 92.79500

(70.8175/2.36) = 30.0074153
(92.79500/13.8525) = 6.69879085

(30.0074153/6.69879085) = 4.47952712

So in conclusion, batsmen are almost four and a half times more important.

7. Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero
This

I find the bowlers win matches cliche one of the most simplistic and over-romanticised things on CW.
Obviously it's not that batsmen can't win matches but there are fewer bowlers than batsman so individually they have a bigger effect on the outcome of a game. A single bowler being really bad can hurt you a lot more than one batsman being really bad game. Conversely - and due to the number imbalance, a single bowler can run through sides much more often than a single batsmen scores almost all of a team's runs (as a % of wickets or runs respectively). So since their effects are really amplified, they are more important to have in a team IMHO.

8. Originally Posted by weeman27bob
Distinct lack of pretty much irellivant statistics so far in this thread, so I'll change that.

The average average of the the four highest averaging batsmen (min 20 innings) is 70.8175.
The average average of the lowest four averaging bowlers (min 2000 balls) is 13.8525.

The average average of the four lowest averaging batsmen (min 20 innings) is 2.36
The average average of the four highest averaging bowlers (min 2000 balls) is 92.79500

(70.8175/2.36) = 30.0074153
(92.79500/13.8525) = 6.69879085

(30.0074153/6.69879085) = 4.47952712

So in conclusion, batsmen are almost four and a half times more important.
Can't argue with that.

9. Originally Posted by vcs
Seriously speaking, I would think a country has a much better chance of building a good team based on its bowling strength compared to its batting strength. Partly it's because if you find two quality strike bowlers who will do the business more often than not, you only need the others to do a decent, reliable job (see Australia with McWarne). On the other hand, if you want a strong team based on its batting, you cannot afford any passengers out of the 6 batsmen + keeper. That's because even the strongest lineups will collapse occasionally and you need one or two guys who put their hands up and bail you out.

Also, you need a wide variety of skills in your batting lineup to account for all types of conditions. Strong openers who can see off the shine (if you have an aggressive game-breaker like Sehwag, that's a bonus), a quality middle-order that can capitalize or consolidate as the situation demands, and a guy like Steve Waugh/Laxman in the lower-middle order who can firefight and bat with the tail. Harder to find so much quality and expect them to all peak at around the same time.
Superb post.Sums up the debate very well.

A great bowler gives u more bang for buck than a great batsman,but once u start accumulating a number of great batsmen the balance starts to tilt slightly towards batting.
Because its easier to find 2 great bowlers than 5 great batsmen,but again easier to field 5 great batsmen than 4 great bowlers[which is near impossible,done by the west indies].

10. Originally Posted by silentstriker
Obviously it's not that batsmen can't win matches but there are fewer bowlers than batsman so individually they have a bigger effect on the outcome of a game. A single bowler being really bad can hurt you a lot more than one batsman being really bad game. Conversely - and due to the number imbalance, a single bowler can run through sides much more often than a single batsmen scores almost all of a team's runs (as a % of wickets or runs respectively). So since their effects are really amplified, they are more important to have in a team IMHO.
Well yeah, but I didn't say that wasn't true.

None of what you said means that bowlers win matches and batsmen don't. All you've said there is that bowlers are worth more as individuals.

11. Actually thinking deep i would say despite everybody saying indian batting and all the current indian setup seems to be based on model of australia's legendary team.[Not comparing them]
Ofcourse there is a ocean of difference in sheer quality but i'm saying that the basic concept seems similar.

Hayden/sehwag -The destructive FTB

Langer/gambhir - The quiet grafter

Ponting/tendulkar - The genius

Dravid/martyn - Silent accumulators

Hussey/laxman -Firefighter

Gilchrist/dhoni -Low order acceleration

Another at 6 mostly for support

Bowling 1 main strike fast bowler
1 main strike spin bolwer.

Now here is the true great diff with a MASSIVE margin.
Mcgrath and warne are ofc in another league altogether but the basic concept of 1 main spinner and 1 main pacer holds true.
And 2 support pacers.Here is the other great diff as lee and gillespie are probably better than zaheer themselves.
But still if u see the models look similar ,no?
Food for thought.

12. Originally Posted by Austerlitz
Actually thinking deep i would say despite everybody saying indian batting and all the current indian setup seems to be based on model of australia's legendary team.[Not comparing them]
Ofcourse there is a ocean of difference in sheer quality but i'm saying that the basic concept seems similar.

Hayden/sehwag -The destructive FTB

Langer/gambhir - The quiet grafter

Ponting/tendulkar - The genius

Dravid/martyn - Silent accumulators

Hussey/laxman -Firefighter

Gilchrist/dhoni -Low order acceleration

Another at 6 mostly for support

Bowling 1 main strike fast bowler
1 main strike spin bolwer.

Now here is the true great diff with a MASSIVE margin.
Mcgrath and warne are ofc in another league altogether but the basic concept of 1 main spinner and 1 main pacer holds true.
And 2 support pacers.Here is the other great diff as lee and gillespie are probably better than zaheer themselves.
But still if u see the models look similar ,no?
Food for thought.
No

13. I do think a good bowler will win more matches than a good batsman. Look at New Zealand and Sri Lanka; both countries produced some quality batsmen before before they became genuine forces, NZ had Sutcliffe and Donnelly and SL had de Silva and Gurusinha, but it wasn't until both countries had a genuine all-time great bowler in their midsts that they started knocking over the big boys.

14. Bowlers doing well will win you the match.
Bowlers doing **** may lose you the match.
Batsmen doing well may win the match for you.
Batsmen doing **** will lose you the match.

15. Originally Posted by Migara
Bowlers doing well will win you the match.
Bowlers doing **** may lose you the match.
Batsmen doing well may win the match for you.
Batsmen doing **** will lose you the match.

Page 3 of 5 First 12345 Last