If you aren't picking 11 bowlers, you are compromising on bowling quality. You aren't even picking 5.
You are perfectly fine with compromising the bowling quality. You just don't like this compromise.
If Ambrose had the batting career of Lara, you would pick him. See last paragraph.
Pick the 4 best bowlers (and a balanced attack) is a principle that often holds true in real world teams. They lack the resources. At a hypothetical level, you don't believe this principle would hold true, unless you want to argue you wouldn't pick Ambrose/Lara. Imran and Hadlee are real world examples of where this principle breaks down for a lot of people.
The poll is settled and the goal was never to turn this into an Imran thing, but this argument is hilarious.
The opening line is stupid. Teams are constructed as they are, and have been for quite some time now.
So there's no compromise even to start and that's the new patron saints of straw man arguments.
Ambrose doesn't have the batting career of Lara and there's an all rounder spot for such unicorns. And that's just it, there's on all rounder spot, and at most a consideration at 8, and even that isn't universal.
Yes, pick the best 4 bowlers and a balanced attack is a principal for normal teams, but is it for lack of resources or prioritizing bowling out the opposition to win matches.
We go through pains to say why Sachin is the perfect middle order batsman and ideal for the no. 4 or spot spot for such a team, and as we should, because that's his primary job, even though he could never match the utility or value of a Hammond or Kallis.
But his primary job is to score at 4 / 5 and he's the best suited and skilled to do so.
I just don't know, how the same though process is somehow ignored for the bowlers of the team. Essentially when bowlers have been the heart beat and central figures of every great and successful team. Bowlers are no less important than batting, and again, on a team where you have such strong batting, you have the luxury of selecting what ever is perceived to be the best attack.
A small but vocal segment of this community has decided that batting depth trumps all, and because they have been vocal it's been perceived that it's the predominant doctrine, but based on this and other polls, it's clearly not the case.
It's also not the case outside of CW either, where you will literally never find an attack based on batting prowess. You will literally never seen a bowling lineup of Imran, Hadlee, Marshall and Warne. No matter how well Hadlee batted, he wasn't seen as better than McGrath or Lillee by the vast majority, even during his own era, and he is seen well above where Imran is as well.
People who understand the sport, understand that the ultimate goal is 20 wickets and the getting them as fast and as cheaply and efficiently as possible is the objective.