Page 3 of 19 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 277

Thread: English ATG Team- Open Voting

  1. #31
    Hall of Fame Member flibbertyjibber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Mrs Miggins pie shop
    Posts
    16,252
    Quote Originally Posted by fredfertang View Post
    Perm any two from Hobbs, Sutcliffe and Hutton - if forced to choose I'd omit Sutcliffe, but only just
    This.

    Only other player to get close is Boycott but can't consider him.

  2. #32
    International Captain kingkallis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    7,294
    Hobbs & Hutton
    CricZo XI - 3 Draft Winner

    Scorecard Draft (2010) V Sehwag, D Amiss, D Bradman (c), C Cowdrey, P Umrigar, A Faulkner, R Marsh +, M Marshall, W Hall, M Hughes, B O'Reilly
    Alphabetical Draft (2011) S Watson, G Kirsten, D Bradman (c), K Sangakkara +, C Cowdrey, K Pietersen, A Flintoff, M Marshall, B O'Reilly, F Trueman, T Alderman
    The Eras Draft (2014) V Trumper, A Morris, N Harvey, J Kallis, S McCabe, F Woolley, Imran Khan (c), J Dujon +, J Briggs, D Steyn, J Snow

  3. #33
    Cricketer Of The Year watson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    8,129
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    See I'm a bit torn here. I'm definitely going to include Grace in my eleven, but obviously England's opening candidates are a lot better than their middle order ones, so I'd prefer to include him in the middle order if I could. I'm just not sure if that's feasible based on where Grace actually batted. I know he opened in all bar one of his Test innings but I'm not actually picking him on the basis of his Test career so I'm more interested in learning if he spent much time in the middle order in county cricket, which is something I don't really know.
    As a general principle I think it safe to say that 1,2 or 3 batsman can bat at 4, 5, or 6 with relative ease. But the reverse is not true.

    If WG Grace floats your boat, then sure, why not bat him in the middle order?
    1. Sunil Gavaskar 2. Virender Sehwag 3. Jimmy Amarnath 4. Sachin Tendulkar 5. Virat Kohli 6. Vinoo Mankad 7. MS Dhoni 8. Kapil Dev 9. Javagal Srinath 10. Zaheer Khan 11. Subhash Gupte

  4. #34
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cribbertopia
    Posts
    50,079
    Quote Originally Posted by watson View Post
    As a general principle I think it safe to say that 1,2 or 3 batsman can bat at 4, 5, or 6 with relative ease. But the reverse is not true.

    If WG Grace floats your boat, then sure, why not bat him in the middle order?
    Well if I had to list England's best six ever batsmen in order of how highly I rated them, I'd probably roll with Grace, Hobbs, Hammond, Hutton, Sutcliffe, Compton. And while I agree that it's easier for openers to slide down the order a bit than the other way around, picking four openers and a #3 as my 1-5 in the batting lineup would take the piss slightly.
    Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09
    Rejecting 'selection deontology' since Mar '15
    'Stats' is not a synonym for 'Career Test Averages'

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffrey Tucker
    People go into politics to change the world. That's a bad idea. The only good reason to go into politics is to sweep government away so that the world can change itself.



  5. #35
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cribbertopia
    Posts
    50,079
    Grace and Hobbs, anyway.

    I'll stick Hutton in at 3 and not bother about Sutcliffe.

    Reality of the matter is, though, Grace won't win this vote, so when the middle order votes comes around I'll probably vote for him again.
    Last edited by Prince EWS; 01-11-2012 at 03:05 AM.

  6. #36
    Eds
    Eds is offline
    International Debutant Eds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    2,190
    Jack Hobbs and Len Hutton.

  7. #37
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cribbertopia
    Posts
    50,079
    On the Sutcliffe v Hutton debate, there is definitely a statistical backing for the idea that Sutcliffe benefited from weaker attacks a little more of the two. When I standardised their averages Hutton's went from 56.67 to 53.94 (95%) while Sutcliffe's went from 60.73 to 56.11 (92%) but certainly neither played in the toughest era to be a batsman by any stretch of the imagination.

    Longevity is why I put Hutton ahead though; he got the equivalent of almost 13 years worth of Tests in, while Sutcliffe didn't make 10. Unpopular reasoning for picking someone so I won't go into that again too much.

  8. #38
    Cricketer Of The Year The Sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    On the Sutcliffe v Hutton debate, there is definitely a statistical backing for the idea that Sutcliffe benefited from weaker attacks a little more of the two. When I standardised their averages Hutton's went from 56.67 to 53.94 (95%) while Sutcliffe's went from 60.73 to 56.11 (92%) but certainly neither played in the toughest era to be a batsman by any stretch of the imagination.

    Longevity is why I put Hutton ahead though; he got the equivalent of almost 13 years worth of Tests in, while Sutcliffe didn't make 10. Unpopular reasoning for picking someone so I won't go into that again too much.
    What did Hobbs change to?
    Member of the Twenty20 is Boring Society

    Quote Originally Posted by grecian View Post
    C'mon Man U.
    RIP Craigos

  9. #39
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cribbertopia
    Posts
    50,079
    Quote Originally Posted by The Sean View Post
    What did Hobbs change to?
    56.95 --> 55.79 (98%)

    He played for bloody ages too; his scorebook average dropped 4 runs in his last 6 Tests, all played after his 47th birthday. He'd probably have a standardised average pushing 60 if his career was Sutcliffe sized or even Hutton sized.

  10. #40
    Hall of Fame Member Hurricane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Don't be jealous of the Georgie Pie super smash
    Posts
    15,118
    Grace as a genuine vote and 1 to Boycott just so he gets a vote (but think Hobbs is obv better).
    1) Ross is Boss.
    2) See point 1.

    Leading the charge against nuances being used in posts.

    Overrated XI M Bracewell, Burns, Rahane, Don Voges, Bairstow, Alecz Day, Donovan Grobelaar, Luke Ronchi, Faulkner, Dan Christian, Permaul

  11. #41
    Cricketer Of The Year watson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    8,129
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    Well if I had to list England's best six ever batsmen in order of how highly I rated them, I'd probably roll with Grace, Hobbs, Hammond, Hutton, Sutcliffe, Compton. And while I agree that it's easier for openers to slide down the order a bit than the other way around, picking four openers and a #3 as my 1-5 in the batting lineup would take the piss slightly.
    Do you think that your favoured batting line-up of....

    01. Grace
    02. Hobbs
    03. Hammond
    04. Hutton
    05. Sutcliffe
    06. Compton

    ....would score more runs than a more conventional line-up? Such as;

    01. Grace
    02. Hobbs
    03. Hammond
    04. Barrington
    05. May
    06. Compton

    If you do think that your unconventional line-up would score more runs then why not select it? After all, the main objective is to win the Test match, is it not?

  12. #42
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cribbertopia
    Posts
    50,079
    Quote Originally Posted by watson View Post
    Do you think that your favoured batting line-up of....

    01. Grace
    02. Hobbs
    03. Hammond
    04. Hutton
    05. Sutcliffe
    06. Compton

    ....would score more runs than a more conventional line-up? Such as;

    01. Grace
    02. Hobbs
    03. Hammond
    04. Barrington
    05. May
    06. Compton

    If you do think that your unconventional line-up would score more runs then why not select it? After all, the main objective is to win the Test match, is it not?
    I'd probably not actually bat them in that order; that was just an order of best to worst. Sutcliffe from what I know would be less suited to move down the order than the rest, so I'd probably stick him in at opener and roll with:

    1. Hobbs
    2. Sutcliffe
    3. Hutton
    4. Hammond
    5. Grace
    6. Compton

    I'm torn over whether I'd back that lineup to score more runs than one with May or Barrington in for Sutcliffe and a reshuffle though, for instance. Batting the openers out of position gives the team a higher ceiling (ie. if they take to it then it'll better than the alternative) but also a low floor (you increase the chance of outright failure by doing something largely unproven).

  13. #43
    Cricketer Of The Year watson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    8,129
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    I'd probably not actually bat them in that order; that was just an order of best to worst. Sutcliffe from what I know would be less suited to move down the order than the rest, so I'd probably stick him in at opener and roll with:

    1. Hobbs
    2. Sutcliffe
    3. Hutton
    4. Hammond
    5. Grace
    6. Compton

    I'm torn over whether I'd back that lineup to score more runs than one with May or Barrington in for Sutcliffe and a reshuffle though, for instance. Batting the openers out of position gives the team a higher ceiling (ie. if they take to it then it'll better than the alternative) but also a low floor (you increase the chance of outright failure by doing something largely unproven).
    I guess Hutton and Grace are unproven in the middle-order, but the risk must be small. About the only problems they'll encounter is the strange task of facing an old ball and tired bowlers first-up, and a loss of concentration because they're suffering from boredom after waiting too long in the dressing room.

    Are there any other hurdles?

  14. #44
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    20,839
    You answered your own question earlier..
    Quote Originally Posted by watson View Post
    Did Hutton have a weakness against off spin I wonder?
    Its not the easiest thing for a normal opener to come into the middle order against a quality spinner when on 0.


    Hobbs and Hutton are my votes for sure.

  15. #45
    Cricketer Of The Year watson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    8,129
    Quote Originally Posted by NUFAN View Post
    You answered your own question earlier..


    Its not the easiest thing for a normal opener to come into the middle order against a quality spinner when on 0.


    Hobbs and Hutton are my votes for sure.
    Good point. I guess it would be a potential problem to a new ball specialist to face a spin bowler 'cold'. Although it does seem a bit odd being that Hutton et al would have to face spinners after intervals, or at the beginning of a new day farely regularly.

Page 3 of 19 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. CW Premier League - Fixtures List
    By Spark in forum Season 1 Archive
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 16-05-2011, 12:28 AM
  2. Cricket Web Cycling Team
    By Samuel_Vimes in forum General Sports Forum
    Replies: 565
    Last Post: 26-12-2008, 05:52 PM
  3. Relegation/promotion release
    By NZTailender in forum World Club Cricket
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 30-11-2006, 10:33 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •