Wilfred Rhodes and Jim Laker.
Wilfred Rhodes and Jim Laker.
THE ULTIMATE CRICKET WEB ARCADE EGGS CHAMPION
RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1990-2006
RIP Craig Walsh (AKA "Craig"), 1985-2012
One specialist seamer, Botham, Barnes and two spinners would certainly be an oddly balanced bowling attack. I can see where the motivation to play Rhodes comes from though; Botham and Knott at 6 and 7 is comparatively weak compared to what the other sides will come up with, so to have a tail without a bowling allrounder in it as well would really make for a weak bottom half of the batting lineup. That's actually the main reason I picked Briggs originally (before changing), although I tend to rate his batting a bit higher than most anyway.
~ Cribbertarian ~
Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since December 2009
Tyson, coz the fiery combination with trueman,would be some sight
Laker, coz a world-class offie would provide great variety to the attack
Going to go with
But I think the tail is too long. Almost went with Rhodes for his batting.
Greatest Ever Test XI: JB Hobbs, L Hutton, DG Bradman (c), IVA Richards, BC Lara, GS Sobers, AC Gilchrist (wk), Imran Khan, RJ Hadlee, MD Marshall, SK Warne 12th man: M Muralitharan
Favorite XI: WG Grace, VT Trumper, IVA Richards, DCS Compton, FMM Worrell (c), AC Gilchrist (wk), CL Cairns, SK Warne, FS Trueman, SE Bond, T Richardson 12th man: H Larwood
Laker & Larwood for me.
Lol would be a more than capable #8. Averaged a tick under 20 with the bat and had 3 FC tons.
Cricket Web's 2013/14 Premier League Tipping Champion
- As featured in The Independent.
"I don't believe a word of Pietersen's book, but then I don't believe a word anyone else has said either."
- Simon Barnes renders further comment on KP's autobiography superfluous in a sentence
Extra batting of Rhodes, and Tyson gives you a genuinely quick bowler. Was tempted to go for two spinners, with Hammond as back-up, but decided against it, also thought of throwing Flintoff in there and then Underwood, ideally I wouldn't have had Botham in the last pick though.
Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.
It's the wisdom of crowds and all, but IMHO Botham at #6 looks like overkill on the bowling front with Hammond's decent seam, the not dire leggies of Kenny Barrington and the good-enough-to-take-a-test-Michelle Chinamen of Compton to call on too.
More I look at it the more I agree with that, especially considering Knott was picked to make the most of any chances. That said I'll still add in someone who definately has both disciplines on his CV.
Will change my vote to Hedley Verity and WG Grace please
(formerly Verity and Larwood)
Howe says good things.
WG Grace and Jim Laker.
"If that Swann lad is the future of spin bowling in this country, then we're ****ed." - Nasser Hussain, 1997.
Someone wake me up if the Grace movement takes off enough to actually be realistically worth voting for. I'd be keen to get in on that but given I already spent an opener vote and a middle order vote on it, I feel I've done my part as far as principle votes go for the great man.
WG Grace and Hedley Verity
Larwood and Verity
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)