CW Draft League

[watson]

I'm going to do some advertising. Here is some excellent colour footage of Wes Hall in action (see 2 & 4 minute marks) at Lords against England.

Note the 'Bodyline' fields for both Wes Hall and Fred Trueman (see 5 & 8 min 30 sec mark). The pitch must have been a really quick one;

Selected Originals - QUEEN AT LORDS - Technicolor - British Pathé

[AndyZaltzHair]

Jager's turn it is?

[Jager]

Originally Posted by watson

He's obvious if you think about it.

Well I think he is, but then again my brain is a bit strange.

(Think "Tyson" - and a bowling average only one run more than Marshall, Ambrose, or Garner, but better than Lillee, Donald and Steyn.)

Will need this to be translated. Just worked 9 hours and played sport, brain not functioning

[Blakus]

Pretty sure he's talking about Johnny Wardle

[Jager]

I pick Johnny Wardle since I don't rate Briggs all that highly

[Jager]

btw Blakus you better be right

[watson]

More this bloke really....

THE FIRST TEST - British Pathé

He at one end of the pitch, and Tyson at the other would be a frightening proposition for any opening batsman.

[Blakus]

Originally Posted by Jager

btw Blakus you better be right

Still, Wardle is an excellent bowler

[AndyZaltzHair]

Going with one of my favorites, Hanif Mohammad; Frank Worrell to move at no 3 where he flourished too with a mammoth double ton. Flower to retain his place at no 5 to bring stability.

1. Gordon Greenidge
2. Hanif Mohammad
3. Frank Worrell*
4. Garfield Sobers
5. Andrew Flower
6. Doug Walters
7. Farokh Engineer+
8. Harold Larwood
9. Hugh Tayfield
10. Michael Holding
11. Allan Donald

12. Ted Dexter

[Himannv]

Dexter vs Walters is an interesting one. I might have preferred Dexter instead.

[Prince EWS]

Originally Posted by Himannv

Dexter vs Walters is an interesting one. I might have preferred Dexter instead.

Walters the better pick when it's for #6 IMO.

[watson]

Originally Posted by Himannv

Dexter vs Walters is an interesting one. I might have preferred Dexter instead.

This is a difficult one because Dexter was also successful at No.3 like Worrell with an average of over 50, so you could play;

03. Dexter
04. Worrell
05. Flower
06. Sobers

OR

03. Dexter
04. Worrell
05. Sobers
06. Walters

Spoilt for choice really.

I think the latter seems more 'natural' and balanced but I have rational explanation for that other than it 'looks right'.

[Himannv]

Originally Posted by Prince EWS

Walters the better pick when it's for #6 IMO.

Just had a quick look at their records and I see your point.

I would have suggested having Dexter at 3 but it's hard to fit everyone else into their ideal slots. So yeah, Walters does make sense.

[Himannv]

Originally Posted by watson

This is a difficult one because Dexter was also successful at No.3 like Worrell with an average of over 50, so you could play;

03. Dexter
04. Worrell
05. Flower
06. Sobers

OR
,
03. Dexter
04. Worrell
05. Sobers
06. Walters

Spoilt for choice really

Sobers is probably the only one who can basically bat anywhere from 3 - 7. Flower has played his best cricket at 5, and as a specialist batsman I would probably have him in the side ahead of Dexter and Walters. Also Dexter seems to be predominantly a number 3 batsman. All things considered, he's probably made the right move.

Personally I'd have liked to see Dexter in there, but he does cause a bit of a shuffle if he comes in.

[watson]

Yeah you're probably right. It's just that I'm not used to seeing Worrell at No.3, so it feels a bit odd. No doubt I'll get over it though - 15 innings at 53.95 is quite soothing.

kingkallis > watson > party time