Ian Chappells World Eleven for the Super series

[marc71178]

I wonder how many of you who criticise Chappel so easily, hv played cricket at the highest level, seen the best closely, seen the conditions and hv excelled in this field too. Most of you go by recorsd, which is not always the best way to judge a cricketer.

And the fact he picked 5 Indians in the 11 wouldn't have anything to do with your backing of him would it?

 

[biased indian]

And the fact he picked 5 Indians in the 11 wouldn't have anything to do with your backing of him would it?

same could be the reason for u opposing it

Peter RoeBuck had given his 11 in an indian newspaper column recently

Vaughan
Smith
Dravid
Sachin
Lara
Kallis
Boucher
Harmison
Akthar
Pollock
Kumble

 

[marc71178]

Where have I said I oppose it?

 

[biased indian]

Where have I said I oppose it?

i felt so

 

[marc71178]

As it happens, it is obvious I disagree with it, as I posted my XI in the Experiment thread - but some of the players I would put in from that team.

For me his selection criteria of performances vs Australia is a flawed process, and also it is being adhered to with no VVS in the side.

 

[Kent]

The inconvenient hours to see any recent English or South African tests have skewed Chappell's selections IMO, but it's interesting to see a neutral figure pick Fleming.

The task of getting a group of players this diverse (many with sizeable egos I'd presume) to work as a team shouldn't be underrated. It would also be a brilliant litmus test of Fleming's captaincy to see him in control of world-class firepower again.

 

[Protea]

He should have picked Pollock. That attack is talented but unstable. They could be blasted to all parts on any given day. Pollock could add some stability.

 

[marc71178]

The inconvenient hours to see any recent English or South African tests have skewed Chappell's selections IMO, but it's interesting to see a neutral figure pick Fleming.

Not so interesting as the fact he's picked as an opener!

 

[Loony BoB]

I think the only reason he was put in as an opener rather than at #3 is because Chappell felt that the other players were more solid in different areas.

To be fair to Fleming, I'm pretty sure he averages over 50 as an opener.

EDIT: Mat I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50 0

unfiltered 85 148 10 5335 274* 192 174* 38.65 7 35 11
filtered 4 6 1 280 117 69* 45 56.00 1 1 0

 

[Kent]

Not so interesting as the fact he's picked as an opener!

Not that issue again!

Just because people would prefer to see him as NZ's #3 (a traditional place for a team's best batsman), I'm yet to hear a compelling case as to why he simply can't be a successful opener at test level. He's averaging 56 from 4 tests so far.

 

[superkingdave]

He's only picked one side, i guess its for the test side? Can't believe he didn't pick Pollock!

 

[Kent]

Just as an aside, I'd love to see Fleming open with Graeme Smith.

They'd be so determined to out-do each other, either a mammoth partnership or an early run out would be on the cards.

 

[JASON]

Fleming opening after only 4 tests in this position is high risk IMO, considering the quality of openers who have been left out (ie.Vaughan, Gibbs, Smith, Trescothick, Gayle etc).

I may not be the only one to have picked this, but I think Chappell seems to favour Indian players (picking 5) (despite this not picking VVS) and an apathy to South Africans and Pakistan (not picking Pollock, openers etc).

It may be because he rates India as the second best Team in the world currently, and has little regard for SA's cricketing performances of late.

 

[marc71178]

To be fair to Fleming, I'm pretty sure he averages over 50 as an opener.

EDIT: Mat I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50 0

unfiltered 85 148 10 5335 274* 192 174* 38.65 7 35 11
filtered 4 6 1 280 117 69* 45 56.00 1 1 0

Yes, after a whole 6 innings!

There is no way he is one of the best 2 openers in World Cricket (that aren't Australian) - so why is he in any RoW team as an opener?

 

[delkap]

And the fact he picked 5 Indians in the 11 wouldn't have anything to do with your backing of him would it?

Actually, My team was different from him as well. So I didn't necessarily agree with him. I am only saying that he seems to be in a better position than us on making a judgement, so its unfair that we criticise him. Being a selector is not easy. Imagine is selectors never went with Sachin when he was 16, we wouldn't hv the best batter in the world... They did fail with Kambli at the same time, when he actually looked better. Most of us here r purely selecting on stats, which not the best way. Now I believe Sehwag and Kumble r capable of making the World XI even if I myself didnt pick em

As for Pathan I would hv picked Harmison, but Chappel is obviously looking for a left-armer and he saw more potential in Pathan (a year later) than Vaas. This is the only debatable selection. Others hv proved themselves in test cricket.

 

[delkap]

Yes, after a whole 6 innings!

There is no way he is one of the best 2 openers in World Cricket (that aren't Australian) - so why is he in any RoW team as an opener?

I think Chappel explained that: Better Captain then Vaughan or Smith...

And no.3 isnt far from opening. Over recent years NZ havent had the stability at top, and considering that Fleming has done well enough coming in early. And since it is a ONE-off match, no need for a specialist opener. It's not like he will be found out over a series of innings. I dont see much of a problem with Fleming opening...

 

[Craig]

That said, Kallis cannot be counted out- he has a very good Test and ODI bowling record. Even then, with Sangakkara as a keeper, he has to have 5 genuine bowlers.

Just because a bowler is inexperienced doesn't mean he's not a good bowler, does it? Williams, Bracken, Harmison, Butler and Best have proven that, so why not Pathan?

Pollock's exclusion is also strange, and so is that of Laxman. A more reliable keeper like Mark Boucher would also help the spinners.

Chappell's reasoning is that Sangakkara has to keep to Murali/or has experience in doing so gives him the edge over Boucher who obviously hasn't kept to Murali.

 

[Craig]

same could be the reason for u opposing it

Peter RoeBuck had given his 11 in an indian newspaper column recently

Vaughan
Smith
Dravid
Sachin
Lara
Kallis
Boucher
Harmison
Akthar
Pollock
Kumble

Harmison at no 8

 

[Simon]

if harmison batted in front of pollock and akhtar ill eat my hat.....

 

[Craig]

Really it should be:

Pollock
Kumble
Akhtar
Harmison