And smalishah's avatar is the most classy one by far Jan certainly echoes the sentiments of CW
Yeah we don't crap in the first world; most of us would actually have no idea what that was emanating from Ajmal's backside. Why isn't it roses and rainbows like what happens here? PEWS's retort to Ganeshran on Daemon's picture depicting Ajmal's excreta
Fair enough mate, that explains the lack of Herath.
You can post them in there if you want, don't really see the point of having another thread that's exactly related to this one.
On due reflection if Abbas is batting at 6, might replace him with Mushtaq Mohammad. Gives the team that 5th bowler they need and doesn't hurt the batting that much.
Simpson^ | Hayden | Bradman | Chappell^ | Ponting | Border* | Gilchrist+ | Davidson3 | Warne4^ | Lillee1 | McGrath2
Greenidge | Hunte | Richards^ | Headley* | Lara^ | Sobers5^ | Walcott+ | Marshall1 | Ambrose2 | Holding3 | Garner4
Richards^ | Smith*^ | Amla | Pollock | Kallis5^ | Nourse | Cameron+ | Procter3 | Steyn1 | Tayfield4 | Donald2
Hobbs | Hutton*^ | Hammond^ | Compton | Barrington | Botham5^ | Knott | Trueman1 | Laker4 | Larwood2 | Barnes3
For Pakistan, I feel as though Imran, Wasim and Qadir are very durable bowlers. If necessary Abbas, Younis Khan and Hanif Mohammad can bowl an over or two if the situation ever arrived.
Definitely the fifth bowling spot is weaker compared to say the West Indies and Australia lineups, but I felt Pakistan needed the extra batting to give them a very realistic chance of beating any of the other teams.
Don't reckon Qadir would be good enough when outside the subcontinent.
Most importantly speed kills and Lindwall drove fear into his opponents and was the key factor to what was one of the three greatest teams of All Time and in a recent thread we had, it was acknowledged that until Lillee came around, Lindwall was seen as the Greatest Ever Fast Bowler.
Before someone asks about Mcgrath, as I have continuously said, both Mcgrath and Tendulkar makes my All Time XI basically because of their overall weight of numbers and sustained excellence which are impossible to ignore, and Mcgrath's contribution once again to one of the All Time Great teams. I think that Lara and Ambrose, among others were better at their peak and Akram more talented, but Mcgrath just kept going and was a winner.
I do not dislike Davidson, he was an ATG fast bowler, his left hand variety and lower order batting add even more to his value, but like Garner, the average doesn't tell the entire story. For the record was also an ATG bowler, but even tough he has a lower average I still see Holding as being his superior.
Actually I feel that all the spinners succeeding Qadir were somewhat better than him. I mean I would probably pick Mushy, Saqlain, and Ajmal over them. I think Ajmal is a really good spinner. Should be an ATG in the coming few years (assuming he plays until 40)
Davo will get the job done because he will get Viv bored as **** and then he will get impatient and play a loose shot and get out.
davo > lindwall
Lindy had the benefit of a new ball every 55 overs and was also exceedingly successful when bowling on the flat pitches of the subcontinent.
As far as I understand that was just for one series in '48.
Davidson was a real workhorse. He got his wickets through attrition and frustrating the batsmen. He was very economical and skilful , but had a high SR because he lacked real strike power. Benaud would bowl and bowl and bowl him, and is on record saying how he'd coerce more and more overs out of him (Largely because the attack was often not much more than Benaud & Davo, with guys like MacKay for support, until McKenzie came along).
Davo is a reasonable choice. But he really lacked the firepower and ability to strike that Lindwall, Lillee and McGrath had.
Hutton - Gavaskar - Bradman - Lara - Richards - Sobers - Gilchrist - Hadlee - Akram - Warne - Lillee
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)