All-Time England XIs - A re-run

[kyear2]

To clear things up, Order shuffle is allowed. It has happened before quite a few times, as order can't always be planned exactly beforehand. The best example is probs, Kirsten made SA A as an Opener, but was moved to 3 when Goddard made it as well.

You literally specified the opening vote for the openers.

It wasn't choose 3 batsmen. Right is right and this is trying to alter the results to one you prefer.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Woakes

May

 

[capt_Luffy]

You literally specified the opening vote for the openers.

It wasn't choose 3 batsmen. Right is right and this is trying to alter the results to one you prefer.

Read from here:

All-Time South Africa XIs - A re-run

Would do a crazy Goddard gimmick but it doesn't really balance in any way shape or form. Barlow Kirsten Adcock Taylor It's the Greatest betrayal in Anime history.

www.cricketweb.net

Also it was 5 batsmen for a specific reason, that being England having multiple ATG openers. If the majority of voters don't want him in, he won't make it. He will if they do. Don't claim conspiracy in everything, I tried really hard to run this exercise as much objectively as possible.

 

[ataraxia]

It's actually really tough to run these things in a fair way, because often earlier selections influence later selections in an unfortunate way. Flexibility is the only sensible route. Anyway:

Sutcliffe
Anderson

 

[271 & 16/166]

Barrington
Botham

Botham at 7 and Knott at 8, another pure bowler makes tail ridiculously long

 

[kyear2]

Barrington
Botham

Botham at 7 and Knott at 8, another pure bowler makes tail ridiculously long

Makes sense

 

[kyear2]

It's actually really tough to run these things in a fair way, because often earlier selections influence later selections in an unfortunate way. Flexibility is the only sensible route. Anyway:

Sutcliffe
Anderson

No, but respectfully it's literally trying to get a 2nd chance to change the vote that's been submitted already.

This isn't oh wait, we forgot about this guy, and he fits in better here. This is literally he lost the first time, but let's trying to slip him in via the back door.

The vote was had and this is trying to manipulate it to override it.

 

[capt_Luffy]

No, but respectfully it's literally trying to get a 2nd chance to change the vote that's been submitted already.

This isn't oh wait, we forgot about this guy, and he fits in better here. This is literally he lost the first time, but let's trying to slip him in via the back door.

The vote was had and this is trying to manipulate it to override it.

Respectfully, it's always has been player over position. As I have previously posted, it's nothing new. Nor it's out of any personal alignment. It would have been the same had I hated the guts of Sutcliffe.

 

[Coronis]

Respectfully, it's always has been player over position. As I have previously posted, it's nothing new. Nor it's out of any personal alignment. It would have been the same had I hated the guts of Sutcliffe.

Its ok. He just REALLY doesn’t want Sutcliffe in the first team.

 

[kyear2]

Its ok. He just REALLY doesn’t want Sutcliffe in the first team.

No, I had no comment when people were voting for who they want, it's a democratic process.

But this is just bending the rules to fit the desired objective

 

[Coronis]

No, I had no comment when people were voting for who they want, it's a democratic process.

But this is just bending the rules to fit the desired objective

Not really. We’re voting for another bowler and the final player to complete the team. The final player, whomever they are can fill whichever need the team needs. If people feel Sutcliffe is the best fit, why is that an issue?