All-Time World XIs: Discussion Thread

[Thala_0710]

I have them batting at 11, and Murali was more than decent in the outfield, quite good when he was young. So a smaller factor than it usually is for me.

Yeah I could have gone for Murali too. It's the closest decision in the XI for me. Just that slip fielding is really much more imp than any other fielding position in tests.... So it tips the scales imo.

 

[Johan]

I don't know why Kyear is making such a big deal out of McGrath not being selected yet. There's still #11 spot left, McGrath can easily be voted in for third pacer. Chill.

 

[Thala_0710]

I don't know why Kyear is making such a big deal out of McGrath not being selected yet. There's still #11 spot left, McGrath can easily be voted in for third pacer. Chill.

True, although there might be competition from a certain English early 1900s guy. (I still expect McGrath to win)

 

[capt_Luffy]

I don't know why Kyear is making such a big deal out of McGrath not being selected yet. There's still #11 spot left, McGrath can easily be voted in for third pacer. Chill.

And like, it's not like he can't open the bowling then. It's just 2 pacers who were more sure shot in the XI, not 2 opening bowlers.

 

[Swamp Witch Hattie]

The voting for the third pace bowler is going to be painful for kyear

McGrath should not be selected as the first change pacer as he has a poor and unproven record there:



With just six bowling innings, it would be like selecting Barry Richards as an opener when he had just seven batting innings, an utterly insane option given the paucity of real-world data to support it.

Garner would be a better choice:



It would provide the team with the same height variation as with McGrath: Marshall (shortish), Hadlee (medium) and Garner (tall). Joel could also help to shore up the batting should a middle-order collapse occur by establishing a big partnership with Bradman thus proving the importance of lower-order runs.

 

[Thala_0710]

McGrath should not be selected as the first change pacer as he has a poor and unproven record there:

View attachment 48744

With just six bowling innings, it would be like selecting Barry Richards as an opener when he had just seven batting innings, an utterly insane option given the paucity of real-world data to support it.

Garner would be a better choice:

View attachment 48745

It would provide the team with the same height variation as with McGrath: Marshall (shortish), Hadlee (medium) and Garner (tall). Joel could also help to shore up the batting should a middle-order collapse occur by establishing a big partnership with Bradman thus proving the importance of lower-order runs.

If he's selected, he'll just be selected third in order... There's no compulsion to use him first change

 

[Thala_0710]

Though the basic question is right, who'd be the first change in a pace attack of Marshall, McGrath and Hadlee?

 

[Coronis]

Though the basic question is right, who'd be the first change in a pace attack of Marshall, McGrath and Hadlee?

I’d expect Hadlee, since he has much more experience bowling with an older ball due to lengthy spells. I could be wrong though.

 

[Coronis]

So @kyear2 is Knott your first choice for an ATG XI keeper or not? Or were you just bsing to prove some sort of point?

@kyear2 you’ve replied to multiple other threads but you seem to be ignoring the basic yes/no question you were asked by multiple people in this thread. Any reason why?

 

[Thala_0710]

I’d expect Hadlee, since he has much more experience bowling with an older ball due to lengthy spells. I could be wrong though.

That's probably what I'd go for as well. Although Marshall has some actual experience as the first change, so he's a possibility as well.

 

[Swamp Witch Hattie]

That's probably what I'd go for as well. Although Marshall has some actual experience as the first change, so he's a possibility as well.

The stats for McGrath, Marshall and Hadlee as non-opening bowlers might not mean much as they might be when the bowlers were not prime or when the wicket was lively or dead, etc. but anyway:

McGrath didn't do a lot of bowling as a non-opening bowler (bowling positions 3-5) and wasn't all that successful there:



Marshall bowled over a third of his innings at first or second change (55/151) and did quite well there (he never bowled at bowling position 5 or above but the graphic doesn't show that):



Hadlee bowled just two innings out of 150 as a non-opening bowler:



As you can see, at second change, Hadlee had a WPM of 11 (putting S.F. Barnes to shame), a WPI of 5.5 (Murali shaking his head in disbelief) and a bowling average of 5.27 (George Lohmann turning in his grave, his supremacy threatened), and this was back in 1976, well before Hadlee's prime, so I agree with Coronis: Hadlee's your man with the older cherry! (of course, the reason Coronis gave is a more logical justification!)

 

[kyear2]

The voting for the third pace bowler is going to be painful for kyear

Why?

 

[kyear2]

Chris Martin is a better bowler than Sobers. If we are picking a bowler, might as well pick Martin. The quality of Sobers' batting clearly doesn't count cos Martin batted at 11.

Or we could consider the batting of both people when making a comparison between them?

That was an incredibly idiotic comparison.

Just saying.

 

[sayon basak]

That was an incredibly idiotic comparison.

Just saying.

Obviously it was. That's the whole point.

 

[kyear2]

Sobers isn't the opening bowler for us.
He's not even first change. For the opening bowlers, how good they are with the new ball + complimentary styles to the other 2 quicks surely matters much too rather than just batting avg?

Exactly. There's no more important and critical position than your opening bowlers. That's where your best bowlers are, where victories are set up, they get the absolute best of the new ball.

The only consideration that there should be, and quite frankly, ever has been, is are these the best bowlers, the best combination.

You don't **** around worrying about who had the highest batting average.

 

[sayon basak]

Exactly. There's no more important and critical position than your opening bowlers. That's where your best bowlers are, where victories are set up, they get the absolute best of the new ball.

The only consideration that there should be, and quite frankly, ever has been, is are these the best bowlers, the best combination.

You don't **** around worrying about who had the highest batting average.

You have to acknowledge that people don't think Hadlee and McGrath are in different sub tiers in primary.

 

[sayon basak]

How does McGrath and Marshall not do that

How does Hadlee and Marshall not do that

 

[capt_Luffy]

@kyear2 if you can take only a single player to bat at 4, Sachin Tendulkar or Garry Sobers, will you take SRT?? If not, why? Given it's one of the most important batting positions and you agree Tendulkar is the better batsman???

 

[Bolo.]

That was an incredibly idiotic comparison.

Just saying.

Indeed. The gap in quality between Sobers and Martin can't be ignored just cos Martin batted 11. I wonder what the implications of this could be?

 

[Thala_0710]

You forgot to add Gavaskar in your list of openers who got votes @capt_Luffy