My point is, that since a spinner can do the stock bowling job of two seamers, you could pick an extra batsman/allrounder/specialist fielder/whatever you like. I personally don't feel that one would be justified making an all time team without one.Sobers was not always a front-line bowler, and when he was was never close to being an all-time great bowler. He'd seriously struggle against batting-line-ups featuring the likes of himself and Bradman.
A top class spinner will give you many more options, especially on a wearing pitch, but a top class seamer like Marshall who knows how to bowl properly those pitches can do almost as well, and much better in the first couple days as well. Marshall did extremely well in the 4th innings of a Test match, with very few players, such as Bishan Singh Bedi (average of 14) outdoing him. Now, if you were going into Kandy knowing exactly what the pitch is like, then I might be persuaded to add a spinner, as you know its going to offer something from the very beginning, but in most instances, I think its unnecessary.
Why have a stock-bowler when you can have someone who is both stock- and strike-bowler, the way all the very best seamers are?
Often its because spinners are being successful in tying an end down and its done out of desperation. You can bet that a seamer will offer a relatively loose ball sooner or later, but the best spinners can hit the same spot over and over again. Anyway, I have a feeling that this is going to go around in circles, but I feel that the fact that batsmen need to resort to manufactured strokes means that the bowler is likely being successful.
Because the very best spinners (Warne, Murali, Grimmet, et al) are the same.
Except the top class pacers tend to be better at it than the top class spinners.
True, spinners tend to have more "stock character" than seamers, and seamers tend to have more "strike character" but that doesn't mean that spinners can't do the job as well as seamers.
Nah, don't agree, seamers can be every bit as accurate as spinners. Again, remembering we're comparing the best with the best.
Maybe. There's no conclusive way to prove what I said above, it's just a feeling I get and obviously you get a different one. Detailed pitchmaps would be the only way to prove it one way or t'other.
Oh, of course it does. It's the same with seamers and spinners, though - just with the spinners the likelihood of them trying it is far higher. With seamers, usually batsmen just sit tight and accept that they're not going to be able to up the tempo. Surely you don't dispute that? It is far less common to see manufactured strokes against seamers in Tests than it is spinners?
I think often thats because there is no need. A loosish ball eventually comes and the batsman can flash at it with the pace on the ball sending it to the boundary. Its not very pretty, but it happens very often, and those kind of runs are usually around the corner with seamers, making the use of manufactured strokes mostly unnecessary.