Scyld Berry 30 greatest test fast bowlers

[honestbharani]

Would you drop Tendulkar for Steve Smith in an ATG XI based on slips?

Tendulkar dropped far fewer catches than Smith, from memory. So, its not the gotcha you think it is.

 

[DrWolverine]

Fielding is a tertiary skill.

It is not even a secondary skill.

If we are picking cricketers based on secondary and tertiary skill; then Jacques Kallis should be picked ahead of Sachin Tendulkar or Viv Richards.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Tendulkar dropped far fewer catches than Smith, from memory. So, its not the gotcha you think it is.

Yeah, but Kyear clearly rates Smith significantly higher than SRT as a slipper, so his point stands

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah, but Kyear clearly rates Smith significantly higher than SRT as a slipper, so his point stands

I mean, its not based on reality but sure.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I mean, its not based on reality but sure.

This whole **** is very much about Kyear'l selectively applying criterias to different players in his team really.

 

[subshakerz]

Tendulkar dropped far fewer catches than Smith, from memory. So, its not the gotcha you think it is.

He consider Smith an elite slip fielder hence my question.

 

[subshakerz]

Fielding is a tertiary skill.

It is not even a secondary skill.

If we are picking cricketers based on secondary and tertiary skill; then Jacques Kallis should be picked ahead of Sachin Tendulkar or Viv Richards.

Exactly. Viv was great in the slips but I am waiting for Kyear to apply his logic to remove Tendulkar for Smith, Hammond or even Kallis.

As usual, he doesn't apply his logic consistently.

 

[subshakerz]

I also don't get the double standard where it's fine to replace McGrath with Imran (not you but in general) but to replace Sachin with Hammond is a non starter.

Ok so do you replace Tendulkar with Hammond? Yes or no?

Please don't sit on the fence with the 'consider' excuse. Please tell us explicitly.

To quote Subz's previous favorite reference, Mr. Kimber, if you can't take 20 wickets consistently, who's batting at 8 means **** all. And if you're batting is a weak point, no #8 is solving it.

You don't even believe that though. You literally have Imran as an automatic no.8 to solve a no.7 not being strong enough.

 

[Coronis]

Ok so do you replace Tendulkar with Hammond? Yes or no?

Please don't sit on the fence with the 'consider' excuse. Please tell us explicitly.


You don't even believe that though. You literally have Imran as an automatic no.8 to solve a no.7 not being strong enough.

Have both and drop Viv

 

[subshakerz]

Have both and drop Viv

Viv is a great slip

 

[Coronis]

Viv is a great slip

But Hammond is a better/equal batter, far better bowler, and better slip.

 

[subshakerz]

But Hammond is a better/equal batter, far better bowler, and better slip.

Logically he should displace Tendulkar the weaker slip before Viv though, hence why I bring that example to test how Kyear adheres to his own rules.

 

[Thala_0710]

Logically he should displace Tendulkar the weaker slip before Viv though, hence why I bring that example to test how Kyear adheres to his own rules.

He already has Barry, Viv, Sobers and Warne in the cordon though no? Hammond, even though he's an ATG, wouldn't improve it a lot

 

[peterhrt]

Kanhai as a wicketkeeper - perhaps Ramadhin was misremembering… at least I hope so.

Also Dooland is an amusing pick. Great FC but very poor in his few tests. Haven’t heard his name in a long time. Fierce competition for bowling post war for Australia, and he didn’t cut it.

Ramadhin: He [Kanhai] is my keeper, as he started as a wicketkeeper-batsman before he became a tremendous front-line batsman. He was good against all types of bowling.

Kanhai kept wicket in his first three Tests and took over behind the stumps on subsequent occasions when the designated keeper got injured.

After being overlooked by Australia Dooland played professionally in England. He was in Alec Bedser's team: I thought he was a very fine leg-spin bowler and useful lower-order batsman. I felt he should have been on the 1948 and 1953 Ashes tours to England, but others were preferred to him and I don't know why that was. I thought he was the best leg-spinner of that era.

On the wet English pitches of 1956 it was felt at the time that Dooland would have been more use than Benaud and Johnson.

 

[subshakerz]

He already has Barry, Viv, Sobers and Warne in the cordon though no? Hammond, even though he's an ATG, wouldn't improve it a lot

Kyear doesn't rate Warne as a slip.

 

[subshakerz]

Sad how few choose The Master, but explains given most likely almost all of them went with players they saw in action.

You must be happy Gavaskar got so many votes.

 

[capt_Luffy]

You must be happy Gavaskar got so many votes.

I do think it's a better distribution of Openers, being rated mostly on having seen play/played with, than the Lord's XIs one.

 

[subshakerz]

I do think it's a better distribution of Openers, being rated mostly on having seen play/played with, than the Lord's XIs one.

Hobbs being rated so low is wierd though.

 

[Johan]

people haven't seen Hobbs that much

 

[capt_Luffy]

Hobbs being rated so low is wierd though.

I think it's more of a case of people only choosing those they have seen play/played with. Pretty common practice for ex-players, one of the main reasons I take most of their XIs with a grain of salt.