Best 3rd down Test batsman of all time

[Spark]

We're not talking about ordinary earthbound teams though! That's the whole point.

 

[bagapath]

We're not talking about ordinary earthbound teams though! That's the whole point.

makes it even more important to have the best specialist in each position; like best openers, best spinner, best new ball bowlers, best wicket keeper..... chappell thinks knott is the best wicket keeper. if you think gilly is the better wk then you can argue with him.

i feel bad to have ignored the thread topic for so long. i think AB is a good candidate as the best no.5 of all time. waugh and laxman also have the same qualities to turn the game around from this late middle order spot - namely grit, street smarts, fighting spirit, ability to bat with the tail and switch effortlessly between aggression and defense.

 

[Spark]

And that's fine - but saying "oh, Bradman's so good that he makes Gilly's runs redundant" is just horribly flawed logic.

 

[bagapath]

And that's fine - but saying "oh, Bradman's so good that he makes Gilly's runs redundant" is just horribly flawed logic.

I understand where he is coming from though. imagine choosing imran and hadlee in place of lillee and marshall for the extra runs they can score. with this change, you know the bowling is not losing much and the batting is so much better. but still you wouldn't do it, right? because you know the top order would any way pile on enough runs that whatever extra imran or hadlee would score would be redundant. and you believe marshall + lillee > hadlee + imran in the bowling department. gilly's selection, in chappell's eyes, is similar to this situation. he thinks knott's keeping > gilly's keeping. and that is what he is concerned with.

 

[Prince EWS]

I understand where he is coming from though. imagine choosing imran and hadlee in place of lillee and marshall for the extra runs they can score. with this change, you know the bowling is not losing much and the batting is so much better. but still you wouldn't do it, right? because you know the top order would any way pile on enough runs that whatever extra imran or hadlee would score would be redundant. and you believe marshall + lillee > hadlee + imran in the bowling department. gilly's selection, in chappell's eyes, is similar to this situation. he thinks knott's keeping > gilly's keeping. and that is what he is concerned with.

You don't know that the top order will pile on lots of runs though. You don't even know who they're playing - their theoretical opposition could be a team even better than them with bowlers who'd make Bradman look like a grade cricketer. This is a couple of levels above Test cricket - it's not even just a World XI; it's an all-time World XI. The opposition is going to be bloody good, so you need to balance the team just like you'd do any other. You need a really good #7, you need a decent #8 and you need a fifth bowler.

 

[bagapath]

You don't know that the top order will pile on lots of runs though. You don't even know who they're playing - their theoretical opposition could be a team even better than them with bowlers who'd make Bradman look like a grade cricketer. This is a couple of levels above Test cricket - it's not even just a World XI; it's an all-time World XI. The opposition is going to be bloody good, so you need to balance the team just like you'd do any other. You need a really good #7, you need a decent #8 and you need a fifth bowler.

knott was a good bat too. if you think he was a better keeper than gilly then you should choose him.

if you are so insecure about your top 6, then you should go for imran, hadlee, akram and benaud as your bowlers. sobers will be your fifth bowler anyways.

 

[Howe_zat]

with hobbs, hutton, tendulkar, richards and sobers making it to the top six, very few teams can hope to match them. in addition to them bradman is batting at no.3, which means no team can even dream of matching them. so it makes sense to go for the best keeper and the best bowling combination possible for the rest of the line up and not worry about the batting any more. in chappell's books knott is the best keeper. so he is choosing him. sound cricketing logic, if you ask me.

i dont think gilly is that far behind knott, or anyone else, as a keeper. so i back his selection in the team. but that doesnt make ian chappell's opinion idiotic.

OK. It's hard to describe the extent to which you are not getting it.

Don't imagine the team you're picking won't be going up against some Test-standard outfit. That is pointless. Imagine instead that you are a selector some level higher than Test standard. You might not be superior to this hypothetical opposition. Imagine that your opposition is a fictional side that is the best opposition whether that's possible or not.

So now, the pick between Gilly & Knott is to do with tactics. It's OK if you want to pick Knott to have for keeping skills. But you can't assume your top 6 will beat all opponents because we don't know who the opposition is.

 

[Athlai]

I wonder if Knott's superiority with the gloves would work out as equaling Gilchrist's additional contribution with the gloves.

Does Knott save you 20 runs an innings with the gloves that a keeper of Gilchrist's quality wouldn't match?

 

[bagapath]

I wonder if Knott's superiority with the gloves would work out as equaling Gilchrist's additional contribution with the gloves.

Does Knott save you 20 runs an innings with the gloves that a keeper of Gilchrist's quality wouldn't match?

i dont think so. all that i am saying is chappell thinks so and hence his choice is logical.

 

[bagapath]

OK. It's hard to describe the extent to which you are not getting it.

Don't imagine the team you're picking won't be going up against some Test-standard outfit. That is pointless. Imagine instead that you are a selector some level higher than Test standard. You might not be superior to this hypothetical opposition. Imagine that your opposition is a fictional side that is the best opposition whether that's possible or not.

So now, the pick between Gilly & Knott is to do with tactics. It's OK if you want to pick Knott to have for keeping skills. But you can't assume your top 6 will beat all opponents because we don't know who the opposition is.

it is simple, dude.

my top six has to be the best top 6 possible. ever. i am not going to bring in a batsman who can bowl a bit in place of a better batsman and compromise on my batting. i will select six batters who can score runs anywhere against any combination. this top is the best six batters possible. you can bring a lara in place of sachin or a hammond in place of richards. but the combination still carries similar weight because this is as good as it gets, really.

my bowling combination is the best bowling combination. ever. i am not going to bring in a slightly inferior bowler who can score a few more runs and spoil my chances of taking 20 wickets for minimum runs on any kind of surface against any kind of opposition. my four bowlers are the best four bowlers i can put together as a bowling unit, not just as individual bowlers. lillee, marshall, warne and akram (and sobers) are the best combo possible. replace one or two of them with a barnes or a hadlee or a murali, it doesnt change much. this is the best combo possible.

i am going to choose the best wicket keeper of all time. i dont care if he scores a few runs less than a slightly inferior keeper as long as my chosen keeper can hold on to every chance that comes his way any time of the day. i think gilly is fine for the job.

but chappell thinks knott is the best keeper he has seen. so he doesnt care that gilly scores a few extra runs. it is more important for him that, he believes, knott will take all the chances that come his way whereas gilly might spill a catch or two.

if you think gilly is as good a keeper as knott was, like i do, then choose him. but deep down if there is a doubt that he is slightly suspect then go for knott. there is nothing wrong in chappell asking you to ignore gilly's batting ability and go only for pure wicket keeping skills. a catch can be worth more than 15 extra runs gilly can score over knott, you know?

 

[Prince EWS]

It's not possible to get it any less.

 

[bagapath]

It's not possible to get it any less.

i will try!

 

[bagapath]

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com


here is the list of top run scorers at no.5 in overseas victories against major test nations.

the first guy remains firm even if you include drawn games and then home game.

guess steve waugh deserves the title hands down.

 

[ankitj]

Best no 5 batsman? Don Bradman
Best no 3 batsman? Don Bradman
Best no 11 batsman? Don Bradman

Just because some batsmen didn't bat at certain positions doesn't mean they couldn't have been better than those amassed lot of runs at that position. Why are we even having this discussion?

OK. I am being ridiculous here. Carry on the discussion.

 

[Maximus0723]

Read the OP again and try not to ignore the word "majority".

 

[ankitj]

Read the OP again and try not to ignore the word "majority".

Ok, you worded that post very well. Perhaps you anticipated someone to make an irritating comment like mine

 

[Tom 1972]

My vote is for Douggie Walters.

Averaged 47 with the bat while smoking 40 smokes a day and drinking 20 beers each night before a game. Dab hand at cards - great to have in the dressing room.

 

[AbhishekS]

Who's Laxman?

Australia's nightmare.

 

[smash84]

Australia's nightmare.

 

[dhillon28]

Best 1 down batsmen of all time:

1. Michael Vaughn
2. Jonathon Trott............nah just kidding....LOL

Seriously....

1. Viv Richards
2. Ricky Ponting
3. Rahul Dravid

you can put don bradman at no.1 on this list, but unlike rest of cricketing world, I cant make definitive judgements about someone ive never ever seen play in my life.