@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???
Garry. Even if he never bowled a ball in his test career it's Garry. Started an entire thread about it.
One, don't think Sachin was a better batsman. And think about outright pace, Sobers was arguably better and behind only IVA Richards.
Considering the amount of right handers in the team, and his record at 4, and the savagery he can provide following Bradman, according to E.W. Swanton, Sobers has to be at 4.
I know the point you're trying to make, but understand it's one I vehemently disagree with. And from multiple perspectives.
Didn't want to derail the thread, but here we go.
There's nothing better Sobers and Tendulkar as bats, two years ago Sobers was 3rd on CW and Tendulkar 4th. There are plenty who rate Sobers as the 2nd best batsman of all time and the BAB. He was the best batsman of his era and for the decade of the 60's.
That is what btw, is the reason he's seen as one of the top two players of all time, not because he's an all rounder, but because he qualifies on his batting alone, but moving on.
Outside of CW, Hadlee isn't mentioned in the GOAT debate, he was seen in his own era as behind Lillee then Marshall, and clearly so in both regards. Barry Richards appears in more AT XI's than Hadlee does and even here (where he's ranked considerably higher than he is outside) in the bowling rankings he falls well behind Marshall and McGrath.
Yes no 4 is probably the 2nd most important middle order batsman in the team, and overall just behind him and and your no. 1 opener. Which is why I generally (not in this instance however) would take Sachin over say a Hammond.
Tour opening bowler specifically however, and the new ball pair in general is the most important aspect of your entire team. They get the new ball, they set the tempo, they are the primary impetus towards 20 wickets and drive wins.
If you have someone who is recognized as one of the two best bowlers ever (generally) and critically, very arguably the greatest new ball bowler ever, you don't skip him because the other guy can bat a bit better.
It's been discussed by many sources of late, and the general consensus is they you select the best bowlers available and take your chances. Having a batter at no. 8, to quote "means **** all" if you're not choosing the best attack.
Now to the crux of your post. There's a reason why the vast majority of AT XI's don't seem overly occupied with stacking the tail, and why we've literally never seen an AT XI with Imran and Hadlee together. Actually why we hardly if ever, see Hadlee at all. It's not a consideration. Persons who make these teams know the primary focus of the bowlers is taking 20 wickets.
Now, when discussing the importance of a strong tail, the argument revolves around shoring up a vulnerable middle or batting order in general.
Surely in a team with a batting line up of (presumably) Hobbs, Hutton, Bradman, Tendulkar, any of Richards / Lara / Smith, Sobers and Gilchrist, the batting of your no. 11 isn't a concern and you can select the best new ball bowler ever?
Taking into account the importance of the new ball attack, and the strength of the batting, you can select the best bowler to take said new ball?
Now to part two, and what you're really aiming at. Why would I take Sobers, and not Hadlee.
As stated above, with the top order batting line up of this squad, and with Marshall and Warne being a dual shoo-in for most of these exercises, there's no need to factor in or even consider batting to ant substantial degree, especially when again, overlooking the best new ball attack.
Now with the what is presumably the greatest bowling attack of all time, let's say the attack being presumed here, Marshall, Hadlee, Warne and McGrath... All 4 of those protagonists take the vast majority of their wickets caught behind the wicket. So while the batting of the top order mitigates the need for a stacked tail, and allows for focus on bowling. Having such an attack accentuates and prioritizes the need to have people to catch those edges. Against a team of again presumably equal batting strength, you want a cordon which would not only give you the best chance of taking every chance, but also, and to quote "turn every quarter chance into a wicket"
In such a scenario, Sobers is a much more required and valuable resource (standing at 2nd slip to the pacers and 1st to Warne) than worrying about who your no. 8 is going to be.
TLDR
The GOAT debate for bowlers currently starts with Marshall and McGrath, for some Barnes and Bumrah is double digit wickets away from joining the debate.
In contrast, Sobers is very much in any debate for the best after Bradman and I can reference quite a few where he's preferred in that debate.
And specifically for this attack, having him at 2nd to the pacers and 1st slip to Warne not only represents the highest percentage of likely dismissals, but provides an invaluable boost to the attack.
Simply put, with this attack, half of the likely wicket taking opportunities will be offered to the slips. Yes Sobers is my choice.
