Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Adam Gilchrist
Miller and Border received the same amount of votes.Gilchrist
Why is Miller at 5? Did more people list him there or at 6?
uvelocity to come in here and predict that PEWS will post about longevity shortly.yeah sure we're just gonna bat someone other than clarke at number 5. whatever, losers
Yeah, definitely want it reversed. I'd sooner have Miller below Gilchrist than above Border.Miller and Border received the same amount of votes.
Lineup seemed right with Miller at 5 and Border at 6. Happy to change it if people prefer it reversed.
Miller far too high at 5.Miller's cool at 5.
Wished more people had voted for Neil Harvey. Every bit as good as McCabe, if not better.
+1Gilchrist
Why is Miller at 5? Did more people list him there or at 6?
That's right. The No.5 spot was his natural position - 36 innings at 41 runs a piece.Border's average is (marginally) better at #6 than any other position.
Miller mostly batted at #5, and averaged much higher at #5 than in any other position.
But, I am happy to go with the consensus.
That 1948 side was a pretty good side. Batted above Bill Brown if I remember rightly.His natural spot was 5 because he was one of the five best batsman in his side throughout his career. In an all time XI he is clearly not, so he should bat at 6 or even 7.
BTW, I'm wondering if this format (picking the 6 batsman first) means that when we get to the keeper, we'll be more likely to select the better batting keeper always as we don't know who 8 through to 11 will be. I found when doing the other draft, getting the keeper sorted earlier was a good option and you could always easily do say select the two openers and keeper, or 3 quicks and keeper at the same time to keep it going.