Do you believe slip fielding should factor in to your selection of an ATG XI that you intend to take the field

[kyear2]

I had a conversation with a older friend a couple days ago and posed the question, which is more important, going bat deep (at least 1 position, max 2) or having a skilled cordon, he said the question was flawed as a complete team should have both and would be no reason to compromise or go either or . He continued it was a matter of balance, once quality wasn't too compromised, but I did eventually get an answer from him, but not before he waxed lyrically about the first time he saw Imran and the Pakistanis down here in (I think) '76?

So yeah, pretty straight forward, it is a skill that should be factored in team selection in general and also in our fantasy XIs. Is it a valuable and under rated skill that should even be factored in when rating players as cricketers as we do with other secondary skills.

 

[Prince EWS]

A good cordon is just as important as a good lower order. If I post teams that seem to defy this principle it's basically only out of ignorance for the standards and usual fielding positions of many players before my time. It's certainly easier to measure lower order batting skill than slip catching skill, let alone specialists at first, second and third.

 

[Slifer]

Ideally you'll want great bowlers and batsmen who were also gun fielders. That's why Sir Gary for me is a must. He could literally bat anywhere in the order, field anywhere and the bowling is just cherry on the top. No other cricketer comes close to that level of versatility.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Ideally you'll want great bowlers and batsmen who were also gun fielders. That's why Sir Gary for me is a must. He could literally bat anywhere in the order, field anywhere and the bowling is just cherry on the top. No other cricketer comes close to that level of versatility.

Garner

 

[_00_deathscar]

Garner

And also The Answer

 

[mr_mister]

Garner

He didn't say verticality

 

[kyear2]

Garner

Yeah, I know I may be alone in this, but his fielding, especially at 2nd slip is more valuable in an ATG contest than his bowling would be.
Unlike all rounders secondary skills, there's no depreciation.

And not to harken back to the last test series, but Crawley's 9 catches were just as valuable to England drawing the series as anything anyone else did, even the Aussie rear guard actions.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Yeah, I know I may be alone in this, but his fielding, especially at 2nd slip is more valuable in an ATG contest than his bowling would be.
Unlike all rounders secondary skills, there's no depreciation.

And not to harken back to the last test series, but Crawley's 9 catches were just as valuable to England drawing the series as anything anyone else did, even the Aussie rear guard actions.

You are not. I also think this.

 

[SteveNZ]

Joel Garner was a second slip???

 

[Victor Ian]

All fielding positions, not just slips should be tie breakers between thereabouts players. At every batting position, you have multiple contenders, so fielding should be considered. At the tail end, you get some close bat deep options, and there fielding should decide it. The slips are probably filled with batsmen but you need outfielders with bullet arms and quick movement across the ground too.

 

[Jacob Boris]

As crucial as fielding is to the game, I don't think I would ever drop a player due to their subpar fielding skills. Let's say, if I were to compose an ATG T20 XI, there is no way I am dropping Chris Gayle just because he is almost useless in the field.

 

[Coronis]

Wasn’t Garner commonly at gully?

 

[Victor Ian]

As crucial as fielding is to the game, I don't think I would ever drop a player due to their subpar fielding skills. Let's say, if I were to compose an ATG T20 XI, there is no way I am dropping Chris Gayle just because he is almost useless in the field.

But there is way if you have someone else lobbing 6's like Gayle and he stops runs in the field as well. It goes:
Pick on primary skill. If tied;
Pick on secondary skill that will be used (ie. Don't pick Tendulkar over Lara because he bowls better part time). If still tied;
Pick on fielding. If still tied; pick on aesthetics.

 

[Line and Length]

Fielding is indeed a special skill that needs to be considered when selecting ATG teams. However, we don't have access to accurate information regarding fielding ability when it comes to players that we may not have seen. This particularly applies to pre WWII players.
Most ATG batsmen of the modern era are reasonably competent in the field with many being fine slips cordon specialists. With bowlers I would be less inclined to consider their fielding abilities.

 

[Jacob Boris]

But there is way if you have someone else lobbing 6's like Gayle and he stops runs in the field as well. It goes:
Pick on primary skill. If tied;
Pick on secondary skill that will be used (or. Don't pick Tendulkar over Lara because he bowls better part time). If still tied;
Pick on fielding. If still tied; pick on aesthetics.

First thing is primary skill. If a guy's primary skills are unmatched then there is no dropping them on their secondary skills. But also your point is correct if we have to decide between 2 players of similar game level

 

[Coronis]

But there is way if you have someone else lobbing 6's like Gayle and he stops runs in the field as well. It goes:
Pick on primary skill. If tied;
Pick on secondary skill that will be used (or. Don't pick Tendulkar over Lara because he bowls better part time). If still tied;
Pick on fielding. If still tied; pick on aesthetics.

More likely to be used than Lara’s (Lara’s what? did he even have a secondary skill? - what a loser)

 

[kyear2]

I

As crucial as fielding is to the game, I don't think I would ever drop a player due to their subpar fielding skills. Let's say, if I were to compose an ATG T20 XI, there is no way I am dropping Chris Gayle just because he is almost useless in the field.

I think that in T20 out fielding is such a crucial part of the game that you don't want any weak links in the outfield.
In tests it's a little easier to hide or slightly overlook a fielding flaw like Walsh's throwing arm.
I've not watched WI cricket for a short spell, but still can't justify Cornwall's presence on the field, but will leave that alone.
Thankfully though, you also only need 3 fielders for the slips and 1 for gully with the priority being 2nd and 1st where most of the opportunities go.
But I've seen so many matches won through spectacular takes, being able to take half chances that most allow to come to them on the half volley.

 

[kyear2]

First thing is primary skill. If a guy's primary skills are unmatched then there is no dropping them on their secondary skills. But also your point is correct if we have to decide between 2 players of similar game level

Agree, but let's say we get to a point where Sachin and Smith are seen as equals, wouldn't it behoove us to take the one who is mostly special in the cordon? Adding that extra dimension to the team.

 

[Victor Ian]

More likely to be used than Lara’s (Lara’s what? did he even have a secondary skill? - what a loser)

was meant the be ie. (not or.)

I meant, you would not tie break Tendulkar over Lara in an all time game because of his bowling - I would personally pick tendulkar on the primary without needing a tiebreaker, but others can go either way. Then the tie breaker would be their fielding.

 

[Victor Ian]

I

I think that in T20 out fielding is such a crucial part of the game that you don't want any weak links in the outfield.
In tests it's a little easier to hide or slightly overlook a fielding flaw like Walsh's throwing arm.
I've not watched WI cricket for a short spell, but still can't justify Cornwall's presence on the field, but will leave that alone.
Thankfully though, you also only need 3 fielders for the slips and 1 for gully with the priority being 2nd and 1st where most of the opportunities go.
But I've seen so many matches won through spectacular takes, being able to take half chances that most allow to come to them on the half volley.

It's more than just the slips and gully. Imagine if you had Tendulkar fielding like Ponting, Bradman like Symonds, and Gavaskar like Rhodes in the inner circle and Hobbs like Boonie at silly whatever. You need that pressure too, to stop the best batsman in the world being able to rotate strike and stuff as well as superior slips. You need it all. That is why anyone who puts Sangakara behind stumps is bonkers. Gilchrist gets his gig because he was seriously great as a keeper. But for the team to play against him you want a seriously good keeper. Then pick on runs.