Swashbucklers vs Defensive XI

[delkap]

I was thinking of a test squad where everyone was a strokeplayer, and went for runs, regardless of the situation. What would this team look like, compared to a team where everyone looked to play classical test-cricket with proper defence etc.

Or in short, attacking vs defensive XI. I also want bowlers who tend to smash instead of blocking and building a partnership.

Now since most players only started to attack since the ODI's hv started, lets limit the players to ODI era. Although no doubt there were attacking players before, this would be a better comparision as captains now set field differently for each player which could matter in such a scenario.

Also ignore players who play according to situation, and attack only when it's needed (examples can be Lara, Tendulkar, Ponting etc) These are damn good defensive players as well. Pick players who on instinct will attack most time or defend most times in a test match.

Attacking XI

Matthew Hayden
Sanath Jayasuriya
Viv Richards
Virender Sehwag
Chris Cairns
Andrew Flintoff
Adam Gilchrist (wk, vc)
Kapil Dev (c)
Wasim Akram
Harbhajan Singh (I know I'll be hammered on this one..)
Mutthiah Muralitharan


Defensive XI

Sunil Gavaskar (vc)
Mark Richardson
Rahul Dravid
Jacques Kallis
Graham Thorpe
Allan Border (c)
Ian Healy (wk)
Jason Gillespie
Anil Kumble
Allan Donald
Glenn Mcgrath

Clarification on Rules (added to avoid further confusion )

Select Attacking or Defensive players but select the best possible team, i.e people who actually make their team consistently, regardless of their attacking or defensive behaviour.

Also this is based on batting, and bowlers are selected on same criteria: those who will throw their bats or block, but at same time excel in bowling.

Hopefully this will reduce the confusion, and thread can carry on well
My apologies once again for any confusion so far.

PS: I just posted this, cos I thought this could be an interesting discussion. If you think this to be a not a very good topic, you are welcome not to post to it.

 

[Deja moo]

replace Butcher with Mark richardson

Dravid does'nt qualify going by your rules.He can attack hard when required.

Replace Ambrose with Wasim ,atleast he could bat in an attacking manner.

Where's Afridi ?

 

[Tim]

I'd have Mark Richardson to open instead of Butcher...Butcher isn't too defensive these days.

 

[Andre]

I was thinking of a test squad where everyone was a strokeplayer, and went for runs, regardless of the situation. What would this team look like, compared to a team where everyone looked to play classical test-cricket with proper defence etc.

Or in short, attacking vs defensive XI. I also want bowlers who tend to smash instead of blocking and building a partnership.

Now since most players only started to attack since the ODI's hv started, lets limit the players to ODI era. Although no doubt there were attacking players before, this would be a better comparision as captains now set field differently for each player which could matter in such a scenario.

Also ignore players who play according to situation, and attack only when it's needed (examples can be Lara, Tendulkar, Ponting etc) These are damn good defensive players as well. Pick players who on instinct will attack most time or defend most times in a test match.

Attacking XI

Harbhajan Singh (I know I'll be hammered on this one..)

Yes, Harbhajan's bowling these days does encourage a lot of run scoring.

As fo you're defesive XI, I'm not going to touch it. Have you ever watched a match before?

 

[delkap]

replace Butcher with Mark richardson

Dravid does'nt qualify going by your rules.He can attack hard when required.

Replace Ambrose with Wasim ,atleast he could bat in an attacking manner.

Where's Afridi ?

Yeah I agree, Richardson's name slipped my mind when I posted this. thanks for the reminder. And I agree with Wasim as well.

But as for Dravid, he is pre-dominantly defensive. He only attacks when its really needed. Rest of the time he plays slower than others. While for Lara/Ponting/Sachin they will go after a bad ball even if it means taking a risk. They r not as worried abt defence as Dravid. While all Dravid tries to do is "stay out as long as possible". I'll term him defensive, this is tests we are talking about and how many times Dravid gets to a situation where he needs to slog ??

 

[Tim]

Yes im not sure you could count Donald, Gillespie, Kumble or McGrath as defensive bowlers when you look at how many wickets they've taken.

 

[Deja moo]

Then we'll end up with Chris Harris, Larson , etc bowling in tests

 

[Waughney]

Yes im not sure you could count Donald, Gillespie, Kumble or McGrath as defensive bowlers when you look at how many wickets they've taken.

I guess his reasoning was McGrath was his "defensive" line, which is actually a perfect line and should be classed as attacking as there is a good chance of taking a wicket.

 

[delkap]

Yes im not sure you could count Donald, Gillespie, Kumble or McGrath as defensive bowlers when you look at how many wickets they've taken.

Umm I must clarify:

These teams are based on batting skills and not bowling.
Hence what I am saying is that Gillespie, Donald, Kumble, Mcgrath tend to defence when they come out to bat compared to Murali or Harbhajan who tend to throw their bats when they come out to bat.

 

[Waughney]

McGrath just tends to get out, doesn't have enough time to defend.

 

[delkap]

McGrath just tends to get out, doesn't have enough time to defend.

Well he is one of the best bowlers in recent times, and totally incapable of attacking .. hence he finds himself in defensive XI

 

[Waughney]

Didn't you just say this was on batting? The comment wasn't serious anyway

 

[delkap]

Didn't you just say this was on batting? The comment wasn't serious anyway

It is on Batting. However I guess all Mcgrath hopes to do is defend. Thats another thing he isn't good at it. He is a good bowler so he makes the team.

I am trying to pick 4 best bowlers who will defend in batting. They don't hv to be good at it. Hence Donald and Mcgrath.

Cheers.

PS: I didn't take the comment that seriously. Just explaining my point of view. I welcome any criticism/ argument and will consider a better option like Orangepitch pointed out earlier.

 

[superkingdave]

Surely Boycott must be there?

 

[Waughney]

These teams are based on batting skills and not bowling.

Well he is one of the best bowlers in recent times, and totally incapable of attacking .. hence he finds himself in defensive XI

I am trying to pick 4 best bowlers who will defend in batting. They don't hv to be good at it. Hence Donald and Mcgrath.

Seems like you are making this up as you are going along, only managing to confuse everyones including yourself.

 

[Mr. P]

McGrath is an attaking batsman who doesn't have time enough to make runs, he's so bad:P

 

[Swervy]

replace Butcher with Mark richardson

Dravid does'nt qualify going by your rules.He can attack hard when required.

Replace Ambrose with Wasim ,atleast he could bat in an attacking manner.

Where's Afridi ?

so you would have Butcher in the defensive XI but not Dravid...

 

[Neil Pickup]

Nah, he'd have neither. Butcher was in delkap's original XI but was replaced with Rigger after this suggestion.

 

[Swervy]

Nah, he'd have neither. Butcher was in delkap's original XI but was replaced with Rigger after this suggestion.

ooops sorry get all confused

 

[deeps]

drop mcgrath..bring on waqar...waqar is aggresive bowler and batsman

where's good ol afridi? attacking batsman bowler and fielder!