Pick your 30!

[marc71178]

The reason why his average is lower is cus when he doesn't take wickets like he usually does he bowls less overs, cus England hide him in the attack.

So, when did they last hide him in the attack then?

 

[marc71178]

You're not the sharpest tool in the shed, are you mate?

Firstly, you think that a guy who has the following on his resume has 'no hope' of making the team:

* averages 60 in Test Cricket;
* has scored over 10 000 Test runs;
* averages 53 against Australia in Tests;
* averages even more in Australia in Tests;
* scored an unbeaten double-century the last time he played at the SuperTest venue against Australia;
* averaged 50 in his last Test series.

Then you say - stating it like it's the modern day equivalent of the Magna Carta - that he can ONLY be selected INSTEAD of either Lara, Dravid or Kallis, despite the fact that there are as many as SIX batting spots up for grabs. Why can't all four of them make it? As I say, not the sharpest tool in the shed.

With Sangakarra in the side he has to be at at least number 6 in the order to be effective, leaving 3 spaces for the middle order with Flintoff 7 and 4 specialists.

So there's only 3 spaces available (as openers are not the same as middle order players)

 

[marc71178]

my final IX for the test
1.shewag
2.strauss
3.dravid
4.lara
5.inzi
6.sangakkara
7.flintoff
8.pollock
9.kumble
10.akthar
11.murali

i guess it's still to early to post the final IX, but what do u guys think?

I think that switch Kallis for Inzamam and you might just have hit the nail on the head.

 

[marc71178]

I know the English supporters here will really get on my case for not including Flintoff, but I'd say all of these players deserve to be in the side ahead of him at this stage.

*Runs and hides*

Well, if you want to go in with 4 bowlers and exceedingly weak back-up then that's your choice.

Don't forget that this is a good batting line-up, so Kallis won't want to bowl.

 

[Pratters]

I think that switch Kallis for Inzamam and you might just have hit the nail on the head.

Because then he would agree with you?

 

[Pratters]

So either the best batsman in the world on current form has to be shunted around to somewhere he's not played before or the wicket-keeper has to open the batting as well, just so we can include someone who not in anywhere near the same form?

The question shows you give much more priority to current form than any thing else. I look into various factors and not just form and thus my choice of Tendulkar in the middle order.

 

[howardj]

So either the best batsman in the world on current form has to be shunted around to somewhere he's not played before or the wicket-keeper has to open the batting as well, just so we can include someone who not in anywhere near the same form?

You must have access to some sort of crystal ball. How the crap do you know who is going to be in form in August (when the team is picked) or October (when the match is played)? I mean, let's get this right, and expose your flawed thinking. Form is basically the sole premise upon which you are selecting your team. So, not only do you make a mistake by having just one premise, one guiding selection philosophy (ie form), but your premise is largely unknown anyway- as you do not know who will be in form when the match is played in October.

 

[honestbharani]

Form is an important factor, but it should not be the ONLY factor during a selection. After all, Sehwag was in horrible form going into the tour of Australia (in the side games) and Ramesh was scoring more than any other Indian batsman and yet, Sehwag had a good time in the tests......

 

[masterblaster]

Form = Extremely Temporary
Class = Undoubtedly Permanent.

 

[Steulen]

Consensus attempt:

For the Test, general agreement that:
- Sehwag will open
- Lara and Dravid will be in the middle order
- Muralitharan will be picked as a spinner
- Therefore Sangakkara will keep wicket
- Pollock will play as a bowling allrounder at 8
- A second specialist spinner will play, most probably Kumble

This means 7 places are set, leaving open:

- a second opener: Smith or Strauss being the most likely specialist option
- two places in the middle order, to be taken by either Tendulkar and Kallis or Kallis and Flintoff, in which case Tendulkar will open. (making Kallis effectively the 8th set participant)
- one specialist seamer, either Harmison, Shoaib Akhtar or Vaas

with <specialist seamer> and Pollock opening the bowling, Kallis and possibly Flintoff as first change and the spinners waiting in the wings.

 

[honestbharani]

Consensus attempt:

For the Test, general agreement that:
- Sehwag will open
- Lara and Dravid will be in the middle order
- Muralitharan will be picked as a spinner
- Therefore Sangakkara will keep wicket
- Pollock will play as a bowling allrounder at 8
- A second specialist spinner will play, most probably Kumble

This means 7 places are set, leaving open:

- a second opener: Smith or Strauss being the most likely specialist option
- two places in the middle order, to be taken by either Tendulkar and Kallis or Kallis and Flintoff, in which case Tendulkar will open.
- one specialist seamer, either Harmison, Shoaib Akhtar or Vaas

with <specialist seamer> and Pollock opening the bowling, Kallis and/or Flintoff as first change and the spinners waiting in the wings.

That bowling attack looks worser than Australia's....... Scary thought.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I would say Tendulkar is a definate pick in the middle order. Do you really think that an ICC XI picked by a panel headed by Gavaskar would leave out Tendulkar? The uproar would be simply astonishing, even if Tendulkar hadn't scored a run in a year.

And he won't open either, if he does I'll eat my hat.

Dravid won't be left out, for similar reasons, so it's either Kallis, Lara or Flintoff who will miss out.

 

[honestbharani]

I don't think Lara would be left out..... Surely, us fans deserve an opportunity to watch Lara and Sachin bat together....

 

[Steulen]

I would say Tendulkar is a definate pick in the middle order. Do you really think that an ICC XI picked by a panel headed by Gavaskar would leave out Tendulkar? The uproar would be simply astonishing, even if Tendulkar hadn't scored a run in a year.

And he won't open either, if he does I'll eat my hat.

Dravid won't be left out, for similar reasons, so it's either Kallis, Lara or Flintoff who will miss out.

Barring an exceptional Ashes, that would mean no Flintoff in the World XI. Justifiably so, perhaps, but somehow I just cannot see that happen.

 

[Steulen]

That bowling attack looks worser than Australia's....... Scary thought.

Well, there's a reason Australia is such a dominant force, and there you have it.

 

[chaminda_00]

Who are the two best batsmen aganist the Aussies over the last 10 years, Tendulkar and Lara. Dravid is the best batsmen going around at the moment, man it a no brainer really. That your 3,4,5 and the rest well it up to the pitch and form.

 

[masterblaster]

I don't think Lara would be left out..... Surely, us fans deserve an opportunity to watch Lara and Sachin bat together....

It's what I've been saying all along....

 

[chaminda_00]

That bowling attack looks worser than Australia's....... Scary thought.

But does a possible batting line up look worse then Australia??

 

[Steulen]

But does a possible batting line up look worse then Australia??

Pace bowling: McGrath/Gillespie/Kasprowicz vs. Pollock/Harmison or Akhtar or Vaas/Kallis/Flintoff
Definitely advantage Australia.

Spin bowling: Warne + part-timers vs. Muralitharan/Kumble + part-timers...for sustained pressure from both ends, I'll give the advantage to the World XI.

Over to the batting;

openers: Hayden/Langer vs. Sehwag/Strauss or Smith...i'd say slight advantage Australia

middle order: Ponting/Martyn/Katich/Clarke vs. Dravid/Lara/Tendulkar/Kallis...ouch, this might be the deciding factor, definite advantage World XI.

keeper: Gilchrist vs. Sangakkara, not much too choose between them, but I think it's slightly more likely Gilchrist will play a deciding innings with the bat. advantage Australia

the tail: Warne/Gillespie and bunnies vs. Pollock and bunnies...advantage Australia.

If the Aussie bowling attack can negotiate that wonderful World XI middle order, they will win the Test.

 

[chaminda_00]

Langer = Shewag ( on par)
Hayden = Strauss/Smith/Gibbs/Vaughan (all in all i think they are even, Hayden at home gives him a slight advantage, but if Vaughan gets pick the advantage goes)
Middle Order: i see a advantage to World XI, personally i think Dravid, Lara and Tendulkar are all better the any of the Aussie middle order batsmen, Pointing close but get shaded)
Keeper = Major adavatage to Australia, Gilchrist is a better keeper and batsmen
Lower Order = Personly i think Pollock give the World XI a advantage, if Kumble plays he batting as as Warne in Test Cricket.
Bowling = Australia have an advantage
Batting = i think that the World XI's middle order gives it the advantage over Australia