4 & 5

[subshakerz]

A couple of persons here have referenced the benefit of having a left hander in the middle of the lineup to mix it up a bit, otherwise it's all right handers down to Sobers and Gilly at 6 and 7.

If that sentiment bears merit, then the case of Lara at 4 is more compelling.

The battle for the no. 5 position would then come down to a choice between Sachin or Smith. Even if they are identical batsmen, Smith being an ATG slip fielder has to give him the advantage over the little master.

A cordon of Lara, Sobers and Smith, with Warne or Sunny in the gully would be peerless.

That pretty much settles most of my team (I think), at least for now.

And just to clarify, I look at it more as a selector picking the best team to take the field, rather than honoring a career.

Len Hutton
Sunil Gavaskar
Don Bradman
Brian Lara
Steve Smith
Garry Sobers
Adam Gilchrist
Richard Hadlee
Malcolm Marshall
Shane Warne
Dale Steyn / Imran Khan

The reason I'm still going with Steyn is primarily because I want a bowler from the modern era, who would have experienced these flatter pitches. Also kinda don't want all of the bowlers from the same era, I'd that makes any sense.

But to get back on topic, I thinks it was Subz that would have stated some of Lara's issues. He is a little more vulnerable at the start of innings than Sachin and he wasn't the fondest against hight quality short bowling. But besides Viv, who was? He did have though, some of the most iconic and dominating innings and series I've ever witnessed.
Smith is a machine, and while I'm still not sure how his technique may have held up in previous eras, he can only face the bowlers of this one, and has dominated. His batting combined with his hands and fielding and the ability to chip in a few overs if needed makes this choice a little less difficult than I would have thought.

Having Lara in the lineup just to add a lefthander (while already having Sobers and Gilchrist down the order) must be the worst excuse to include him. Why not just put Sobers up the order in that case? In fact, Sobers' presence in the batting lineup as a stylish lefthanded swashbuckler kind of makes Lara feel redundant, as blasphemous as that sounds.

However, I do think you make a point about Lara bringing a certain X-factor. If I were to include him, I may even play him at no.6 instead and put Sobers at 4. But then assuming we are facing ATG pacers, I would be more comfortable having Viv Richards, who has his own X-factor, instead of Lara.

Also, regarding Steyn and flatter pitches, again I don't know what that means. It's not like flat pitches didn't exist in the 80s and 90s, though perhaps not as common. And it's not like Steyn was a flat wicket specialist, on dead wickets he would be the most likely to be tonked around.

 

[kyear2]

Having Lara in the lineup just to add a lefthander (while already having Sobers and Gilchrist down the order) must be the worst excuse to include him. Why not just put Sobers up the order in that case? In fact, Sobers' presence in the batting lineup as a stylish lefthanded swashbuckler kind of makes Lara feel redundant, as blasphemous as that sounds.

However, I do think you make a point about Lara bringing a certain X-factor. If I were to include him, I may even play him at no.6 instead and put Sobers at 4. But then assuming we are facing ATG pacers, I would be more comfortable having Viv Richards, who has his own X-factor, instead of Lara.

Also, regarding Steyn and flatter pitches, again I don't know what that means. It's not like flat pitches didn't exist in the 80s and 90s, though perhaps not as common. And it's not like Steyn was a flat wicket specialist, on dead wickets he would be the most likely to be tonked around.

The thing is though, that once you narrow it down to just the elites, be it for batting.
Richards, Lara, Smith, Sachin, Kallis
Or bowling
Hadlee, McGrath, Steyn, Imran, Ambrose
It's all a matter of preference, and any advantage, small or large that any player can bring to the table.

And yes, Sobers can easily bat at 4. Him and the Don back to back in the line up would be pure carnage. At 6 though he's just demoralizing, especially with Gilly to follow. Plus if I'm batting Sir Garry at 4, think I want Kallis at 6 and to act as the all rounder.

 

[sunilz]

The thing is though, that once you narrow it down to just the elites, be it for batting.
Richards, Lara, Smith, Sachin
Or bowling
Hadlee, McGrath, Steyn, Imran, Ambrose
It's all a matter of preference, and any advantage, small or large that any player can bring to the table.

And yes, Sobers can easily bat at 4. Him and the Don back to back 8n the line up would be pure carnage. At 6 though he's just demoralizing, especially with Gilly to follow. Plus if I'm batting Sir Garry at 4, think I want Kallis at 6 and to act as the all rounder.

So , when Kallis used to bat at 4 for SA, he wasn't playing as all rounder. ?

 

[TheJediBrah]

So , when Kallis used to bat at 4 for SA, he wasn't playing as all rounder. ?

He took 1.7 wickets a game which is ok but it's not like he was bowling Flintoff or Miller levels of overs

 

[sunilz]

He took 1.7 wickets a game which is ok but it's not like he was bowling Flintoff or Miller levels of overs

Because Kallis was batting all rounder. And Fintoff was a bowling all rounder.

 

[Burgey]

Finally a SC poster gets it. All spinners suck

 

[_00_deathscar]

Finally a SC poster gets it. All spinners suck

Today I learned that Hong Kong is in the subcontinent…

 

[Burgey]

Forgive me for not keeping tabs on your whereabouts. I don’t care enough to do so.

 

[srbhkshk]

In short, all spinners suck. Go with an 8 man pace attack - even your back up/part time bowlers should be serious heat.

We did exactly that with the 80s team in mm's thread and you cried for 2 weeks when that won over the 90s.

 

[_00_deathscar]

We did exactly that with the 80s team in mm's thread and you cried for 2 weeks when that won over the 90s.

Has it been 2 weeks alright? God damn it @mr_mister get onto it!

 

[TheJediBrah]

Because Kallis was batting all rounder. And Fintoff was a bowling all rounder.

Yes and that's why he batted 4, which was your question

 

[sunilz]

Yes and that's why he batted 4, which was your question

No. His point was that since Sobers batted at 4, he wants another all rounder at 6.
And my reply was that batting allrounders can bat at 4. There is no need of other allrounder.

 

[kyear2]

So , when Kallis used to bat at 4 for SA, he wasn't playing as all rounder. ?

Kallis never had the workload that Sobers had to contend with. And if he's batting at 4, would prefer him not to be the primary 5th bowing option.

 

[kyear2]

We did exactly that with the 80s team in mm's thread and you cried for 2 weeks when that won over the 90s.

Wasn't that more to do with the extended tail though?

 

[kyear2]

No. His point was that since Sobers batted at 4, he wants another all rounder at 6.
And my reply was that batting allrounders can bat at 4. There is no need of other allrounder.

Yes, but why is it a big deal, it's just personal preference.

But I'll explain further, there's actually several reasons.

The higher you bat, the greater your responsibility and if he's batting at 4 in this team, would prefer the batting to be his main of not only priority.

When one really looks at the amount of overs Sobers bowled and the various roles for which he was sometimes responsible for, from opening attack bowler all the way to stop bowler, bowling long spells with the primary intent to restrict the scoring. One can only wonder, how much better of a batsman he would have been without that extra burden and work load. So in this scenario let him just be a batsman and hang out at 2nd slip.

Finally, with a lineup above him of consisting of Bradman, Sobers and Smith, and Gilly below, who's better to be in-between them than the potential anchor of Kallis.
Being the anchor or failsafe if the unthinkable happens with the top order, relieving Sobers of extra workload and allowing the 2nd best bat on the team to show his full potential as same, being an upgrade to even Lara at slip and being a solid 5th bowler if needed and his output was no less than any of the others discussed here.

With a core of these brilliant players, the combinations and possibilities are endless.

 

[Raz0r6ack]

Steve Smith has 'only' played 77 tests. In modern terms, that isn't a lot for a batsman. Yes, his peak from 2014-2019 is unparalleled in modern times, but all signs indicate that his peak has ended, and his average since Ashes 2019 is a more sane 40ish in three series since then. I would be interested to see if he can approach the heights of before in the next few years.

If he were to retire now, I would put a * next to him honestly.

That's only because of the suspension and COVID. You can't discredit his longevity as a batsmen because of a Global pandemic and a very harsh ban.

 

[sunilz]

That's only because of the suspension and COVID. You can't discredit his longevity as a batsmen because of a Global pandemic and a very harsh ban.

Covid didn't stop Kohli, Root from playing 10-11 test between Feb-Sept.

Is Covid only for Australians or Steve Smith ?

 

[Burgey]

Covid’s not just for us, but we’ve had it a **** load better than the more death-and-disease ravaged cricket playing nations, thankfully.

sunilz now seems to be suggesting Steve Smith needs to organise his own test matches to play, lest he be regarded a lesser batsman than Root and Kohli, two blokes he’s regularly lapped every time they’ve squared off.

A very peculiar suggestion from, frankly, a ****ing weird unit.

 

[sunilz]

Covid’s not just for us, but we’ve had it a **** load better than the more death-and-disease ravaged cricket playing nations, thankfully.

sunilz now seems to be suggesting Steve Smith needs to organise his own test matches to play, lest he be regarded a lesser batsman than Root and Kohli, two blokes he’s regularly lapped every time they’ve squared off.

A very peculiar suggestion from, frankly, a ****ing weird unit.

Stop giving Covid as excuse for playing less cricket. Your Cricket Board willingly cancelled tour to SA and Bangladesh iirc. You can't keep on cancelling every bilateral tour and then say we played less cricket due to Covid.

Aus managed Covid better because they didn't allow even their own overseas citizens to enter. This is absolutely inhumane. Good luck convincing rest of the World that Australian model was the best to manage Covid.

 

[Coronis]

Hasn’t NZ been covid free for months or something? If we should follow anyone’s model its them. Anyway its not like Smith himself has control over what tests Australia do and do not play, blaming him for not playing throughout that period is just silly. Its not like he’s avoiding tours or skipping tests on purpose.