All Formats Draft

[watson]

Should be one poll. The point is to pick one team regardless of format. If you have three polls, a specialist t20 or odi or test team can sneak a win, in theory. Doesn't make sense to have three separate polls if it's to decide which team will be the most versatile across formats.

Edit: I see you want voters to pick the best team for each format individually regardless. Hmm, I thought a single poll simply asking for voters to vote for the best team for all 3 formats might have worked

Yeah fair point. If there is to be a single normal voting thread then I really like your phrase, 'most versatile across formats' as I think it captures the essence of Howe's concept.

 

[Howe_zat]

Just thinking about voting.

OPTION 1: What about 3 seperate voting threads, one for each format? Voters must vote in all 3 voting threads.

The winner of the All Formats Draft would be the one with the highest combined tally.

OPTION 2: The other way of voting would be to have 1 thread, and each voter nominate 3 winners in a single post. For example;

Best Test Match Team = Fred
Best ODI Team = PEWS
Best T20 Team = NUFAN

Again, the winner would be one with the highest combined tally.

OPTION 3: Just a standard as per normal voting thread. No change.


Just an idea because this a unique Draft with more than one team per drafter. Thoughts?

It'll be 1 thread where I'll tally up the votes myself rather than rely on a poll.

(Edit: That's your option 2.)

I'll make it tonight if I can so people need to get their lineups posted.

 

[watson]

Was thinking the same thing. Three threads for the different formats but that would take a lot of work.

Setting up 14 Tables showing 3 teams each in a single thread would also take a lot of work. Therefore, not much difference setting up a single thread or 3 separate threads IMO.

 

[Prince EWS]

Edit: I see you want voters to pick the best team for each format individually regardless. Hmm, I thought a single poll simply asking for voters to vote for the best team for all 3 formats might have worked

I thought that too, but if you back and re-read the OP, Howe talks of three separate tournaments, rather than one tournament in which matches of three different formats all count for points. I think if it was the latter it'd be right to ask which team was the best across all formats, but with three separate tournaments I think you do need somewhat separate voting.

It really depends on what sort of team you'd rather follow as a voter too. For example, would you rather have/support/be in a team that came third in all three competitions, or a team that took out one of the competitions but finished last in the other two?

 

[watson]

Here are my finalised teams Howe. I'm tipping moderate-ish votes in each of the 3 formats to give a competitive combined total at the end. But I'll just have to wait and see I guess. Could get SFA in the final wash-up.

TEST SERIES XI 01. Graeme Smith 02. Gordon Greenidge 03. Rahul Dravid 04. Mark Waugh 05. David Gower* 06. Shakib Al-Hasan 07. Kapil Dev 08. Ian Healy+ 09. Abdul Qadir 10. Joel Garner 11. Allan Donald 12th. Michael Bevan

ODI SERIES XI 01. Mark Waugh 02. Gordon Greenidge 03. David Gower 04. Rahul Dravid 05. Shakib Al-Hasan 06. Michael Bevan 07. Kapil Dev* 08. Ian Healy+ 09. Abdul Qadir 10. Joel Garner 11. Allan Donald 12th. Graeme Smith

T20 TOURNAMENT XI 01. Graeme Smith* 02. Gordon Greenidge 03. David Gower 04. Kapil Dev 05. Shakib Al-Hasan 06. Mark Waugh 07. Michael Bevan 08. Ian Healy+ 09. Abdul Qadir 10. Joel Garner 11. Allan Donald 12th. Rahul Dravid

 

[kyear2]

Love Donald and Garner together. Probably the two most under rated bowlers in Test and odi cricket history.

 

[NUFAN]

What is the reason behind batting Gower so low in your T20 team Watson?

 

[morgieb]

Tests 1. Gary Kirsten 2. Graeme Gooch 3. Wally Hammond 4. Javed Miandad 5. Shivnarine Chanderpaul 6. Ian Botham 7. Imran Khan* 8. Ian Smith+ 9. Graeme Swann 10. Jason Gillespie 11. Curtly Ambrose 12. Tillakaratne Dilshan

ODI 1. Tillakaratne Dilshan 2. Graeme Gooch 3. Gary Kirsten 4. Javed Miandad 5. Shivnarine Chanderpaul 6. Ian Botham 7. Imran Khan* 8. Ian Smith+ 9. Graeme Swann 10. Jason Gillespie 11. Curtly Ambrose 12. Wally Hammond

T20 1. Tillakaratne Dilshan 2. Graeme Gooch 3. Wally Hammond 4. Javed Miandad 5. Shivnarine Chanderpaul 6. Ian Botham 7. Imran Khan* 8. Ian Smith+ 9. Graeme Swann 10. Jason Gillespie 11. Curtly Ambrose 12. Gary Kirsten

Any amendments people suggest to that?

 

[NUFAN]

Difficult decision but Hammond seems wasted as 12th man in the ODI side.

Not a big deal but I would often bat Gillespie ahead of Swann in the Test team. Awesome bowling unit btw.

 

[morgieb]

Difficult decision but Hammond seems wasted as 12th man in the ODI side.

Not a big deal but I would often bat Gillespie ahead of Swann in the Test team. Awesome bowling unit btw.

Yeah I guess so, but he hasn't played ODI's whereas all my other 11 have.

Cheers.

 

[watson]

What is the reason behind batting Gower so low in your T20 team Watson?

Smith and Greenidge have to open. No.3 is Shakib's standard T20 spot. Kapil Dev is probably the team's biggest hitter (ODI SR = 95.07) so he deserves No.4.

Looking at their total number of sixes I guess that the order should really be Waugh-Gower-Bevan. So minor adjustment made.

However, having said all that, all of those middle-order batsman are pretty good sluggers tbh, so it really doesn't matter too much what order you put them in as long as Kapil Dev is in the top 4.

 

[Dan]

I thought that too, but if you back and re-read the OP, Howe talks of three separate tournaments, rather than one tournament in which matches of three different formats all count for points. I think if it was the latter it'd be right to ask which team was the best across all formats, but with three separate tournaments I think you do need somewhat separate voting.

It really depends on what sort of team you'd rather follow as a voter too. For example, would you rather have/support/be in a team that came third in all three competitions, or a team that took out one of the competitions but finished last in the other two?

At the same time, though, a lot of voters could/would prioritise the Test team's results above all else, so you could win by drafting a gun Test XI and completely ignoring the spirit of the draft

Maybe split the difference and have 4 categories?

Best Test
Best ODI
Best T20
Best Across All Formats

Obviously it's Howe's call in the end, however. More than happy to follow whatever he decides.

 

[watson]

Difficult decision but Hammond seems wasted as 12th man in the ODI side.

Not a big deal but I would often bat Gillespie ahead of Swann in the Test team. Awesome bowling unit btw.

Yes, but who are you going to leave out of the top 5? I suppose that Kirsten could slot into Gooch's opening spot so Hammond could squeeze into No.3.

However, Hammond rarely played the hook shot because of his general distaste for fast bowling, and while his off-drive was something special the Aussie bowlers used to tie him up (especially O'Reilly) by bowling 'slow leg theory' as they called it. Hammond's medium pace is a bonus, but Morgieb has already chosen 5 very good bowlers who probably don't need support.

 

[watson]

At the same time, though, a lot of voters could/would prioritise the Test team's results above all else, so you could win by drafting a gun Test XI and completely ignoring the spirit of the draft

Maybe split the difference and have 4 categories?

Best Test
Best ODI
Best T20
Best Across All Formats

Obviously it's Howe's call in the end, however. More than happy to follow whatever he decides.

4 categories seems like a good idea to me.

However, the term 'Best Across All Formats' seems pretty hard to define. What does it actually mean? I can understand 'Most Versatile Team' a little better because some cricketers are better at adapting to different playing conditions than others. For example, Tendulkar is good at every type of game no matter the continent it happens to be in. But I'm struggling with 'Best Across All Formats'.

Edit: I think that I've just answered my own question.

 

[Prince EWS]

However, the term 'Best Across All Formats' seems pretty hard to define. What does it actually mean? I can understand 'Most Versatile Team' a little better for some reason, but I'm struggling with 'Best Across All Formats'.

Imagine a competition where each team plays each other three times - once in a Test, one in an ODI, once in a T20I. Two points for a win, one point for a draw or tie: who finishes on the top of the ladder?

 

[watson]

Imagine a competition where each team plays each other three times - once in a Test, one in an ODI, once in a T20I. Two points for a win, one point for a draw or tie: who finishes on the top of the ladder?

Don't we achieve that effect by voting for the best team in each format?

And if that's the case then having a 4th generalised category may confuse things.

 

[Prince EWS]

Don't we acheive that effect by voting for the best team in each format?

Well no, not really. The second or third best team in each format may actually be the team that came top in a combined competition like that if the best team in each format was never the same team and had gaping holes in one or both of the other formats.

 

[watson]

Well no, not really. The second or third best team in each format may actually be the team that came top in a combined competition like that if the best team in each format was never the same team and had gaping holes in one or both of the other formats.

Fred's Test Team X = 1 vote (13th place)
Fred's ODI Team Y = 12 votes (3rd place)
Fred's T20 Team Z = 10 votes (3rd place)

Combined Total = 23 votes (most votes, 1st place, and winner)

I think that's pretty close to what you are trying to say PEWS. Although I'm probably missing something.

 

[Prince EWS]

Although I'm probably missing something.

Yeah, you are, in a huge way. I give up though.

 

[Prince EWS]

Okay, I'll give this another try:

Imagine a competition where each team plays each other three times - once in a Test, one in an ODI, once in a T20I. Two points for a win, one point for a draw or tie: who finishes on the top of the ladder?

As in, an actual competition. Not a voting thing.

You'd then vote on who you think would win that competition. You'd have to vote on who you think would win four imaginary cricket competitions in total - a T20 comp, an ODI comp, a Test comp, and a competition where you played some of each (or in which results - not votes - from all the other competitions all counted if that makes more sense to you).