Spinner for 1966-85 World Test XI

[Beleg]

In my opinion, the four best bowlers during the era in discussion were pacers and none of the nominees deserve to be in the team just for sake of choosing a spinner.

But if we are so hell bent on choosing one then really Chandrasekhar is the best choice.

 

[a massive zebra]

I think Underwod is generally regarded as having been much quicker through the air by those who saw them both.

I saw a fair bit of Underwood and always thought he bowled almost like a medium pacer. Fine bowler though.

Have you ever seen Hedley Verity bowl? He was also a bowler of almost medium pace.

 

[silentstriker]

In my opinion, the four best bowlers during the era in discussion were pacers and none of the nominees deserve to be in the team just for sake of choosing a spinner.

But if we are so hell bent on choosing one then really Chandrasekhar is the best choice.

Not really. Even if you argue that the 4th bowler is 'better' than the spinner we pick, the spinner would be more useful than another seamer in the fourth innings. Our other three bowlers can increase their own workload a little bit if necessary (and don't forget our all rounder), but there is nothing like a genuine spinner to win you matches. Ask Australia or Sri Lanka or India.

Or better yet, ask South Africa .

 

[Fratboy]

Not really. Even if you argue that the 4th bowler is 'better' than the spinner we pick, the spinner would be more useful than another seamer in the fourth innings. Our other three bowlers can increase their own workload a little bit if necessary (and don't forget our all rounder), but there is nothing like a genuine spinner to win you matches. Ask Australia or Sri Lanka or India.

Or better yet, ask South Africa .

Generally I would always include a spinner in any team. But TBH, SA in the 90's didn't need a really good spinner to even beat India in India.

 

[Poker Boy]

Bishan Bedi - a lot of Qadir's good work was after '85 and "deadly's" best work was on wet english pitchies(I've assumed that if this team ever played it would be on a covered pitch).

 

[silentstriker]

Generally I would always include a spinner in any team. But TBH, SA in the 90's didn't need a really good spinner to even beat India in India.

And spinner is one of the BIG reasons they never became world champions, and why Australia did.

I bet if WI had a spinner like Warne or Murali, they would have played him over one of the pacers.

 

[Slifer]

Which one? Maybe over Holding or Roberts but thats it. Surely not if they were touring India. But thats a good question though, I wonder who wood have been replaced.

 

[aussie]

Underwood

 

[Beleg]

Not really. Even if you argue that the 4th bowler is 'better' than the spinner we pick, the spinner would be more useful than another seamer in the fourth innings.

This is an assumption. I know that my assertion too isn't really based on facts but I'd wager that someone like Garner's stats are better then anyone else's on this list during the fourth innings. I am too lazy at the moment to do a search but eh.

 

[Beleg]

SS,

The thing is, Murali and Warne are two of the best bowlers of the last twenty years. None of the options in the poll can be concievablly included among the top four of 66-86.

 

[aussie tragic]

Underwood

Did you vote as you're not showing up on the Poll?

 

[silentstriker]

SS,

The thing is, Murali and Warne are two of the best bowlers of the last twenty years. None of the options in the poll can be concievablly included among the top four of 66-86.

If I were looking at stats only, Warne certainly wouldn't make the top five-ten list of bowlers of the last twenty years. Your argument is flawed. Spinners in general have worse stats than pace bowlers. Warne is better because he is one of the best spinners, and the fact that in many situations, good spinner is better than an outstanding fast bowler.


Even if Murali and Warne did not exist, I'd still want a spinner in a side of last twenty years, even if he only plays 60-70% of tests (he would play more than half, easily). With Warne or Murali, you'd play them every time.

 

[Beleg]

If I were looking at stats only, Warne certainly wouldn't make the top five-ten list of bowlers of the last twenty years. Your argument is flawed. Spinners in general have worse stats than pace bowlers. Warne is better because he is one of the best spinners, and the fact that in many situations, good spinner is better than an outstanding fast bowler.

My arguement isn't inherently flawed. You seem unable to look past the convention - which seems to make a lot of sense on paper. However, Clive Lloyd proved that if you have bowlers like Garner, Marshall, Roberts, Croft, Holding, Ambrose and Walsh then you can succeed without a spinner very easily. It is pretty simple: you play your four best bowlers, and calling someone 'best' does factor in their ability to bowl on spin-friendly tracks. Remember, labelling India as a spin-friendly country is erronous. The problem with qualitative stereotyping is that variance can be a real arse. For every Bombay dust-bowl there's a Mohali. Canny quickies can extract more juice out of a supposed 'spinner's paradise' then a less skillful spinner.

You are compounding your errors further by assuming all fourth innings pitches are going to be helpful to the spinners, which simply is not true. Statistics, common sense and a veiwing of the matches verify that.

In a team which has Gary Sobers as a fairly effective part-time spinner, choosing a spinner would be akin to fielding a deliberately under-strength team. Tell me, which of these bowlers is better then any of Marshall, Hadlee, Garner, Lillee or Holding?

To counter your point about the fourth innings.

Lillee's fourth innings average is 26.22.
Holding's fourth innings average is 17.93.
Garner's fourth innings average is 20.43[/b[.
Marshall's fourth innings average is 17.65
Hadlee's fourth innings average is 15.62.
Imran's fourth innings average is 42.09.

Underwood's fourth innings average is 23.40.
Chandrasekhar fourth innings average is 23.47.
Bedi's fourth innings average is 14.41.
Qadir's fourth innings average is 38.0.
Embury's fourth innings average 29.78.

Based on these stats, only Bedi can compete with pacers where performance in the fourth innings in concerned. However, bear in mind that Bedi has a strike-rate of 80.3 in non-fourth innings situations. In terms of pure wicket-taking probability he doesn't compete with any of the pacers mentioned above, all of whom have much better overall strike-rates and comparable strike-rates in the fourth innings.

And Warne isn't one of the best bowlers of the last twenty years? Have you even taken a look at his overall strike-rate? Name me a bowler who has succeeded in so many places so consistently over such a long period of time. The arguement that he has played so many more matches then other bowlers even works out in his favour - the fact that he has been able to maintain such stats over so many years, not to mention rip through line-up after line-up, pretty much nullifies the assumption that other bowlers would have done equally well, given the circumstances.

None of the options in the poll come anywhere close to replicating Warne's figures, even if we take some mitigating circumstances into consideration (which work out in warne's favour anyway, given the general states of the pitches) - to compare someone like Underwood to Warne is being unfair to both of them - they are in two completely different classes as far as wicket-taking abilities are concerned. Generally, we assume wicket-taking abilities to be a measure of a bowler's ability.

 

[Alysum]

Please put the countries of the players....I have no idea who most of them are!

 

[silentstriker]

Please put the countries of the players....I have no idea who most of them are!

Goto cricinfo and type in the player name.

 

[Alysum]

Goto cricinfo and type in the player name.

why waste my time doing that for each person

 

[silentstriker]

why waste my time doing that for each person

So you can learn about cricketers? If you don't want to do that, then whats the point of voting in this thread?

And if you don't know anything about them, why would their country of origin affect your decision on who you believe was better?

 

[aussie tragic]

Please put the countries of the players....I have no idea who most of them are!

^ What SS said ^ To me, the whole point is for people to learn about some players of the past and it's a World XI, not a let's pick the players from our country XI.

 

[bagapath]

Lillee's fourth innings average is 26.22.
Holding's fourth innings average is 17.93.
Garner's fourth innings average is 20.43[/b[.
Marshall's fourth innings average is 17.65
Hadlee's fourth innings average is 15.62.
Imran's fourth innings average is 42.09.

Underwood's fourth innings average is 23.40.
Chandrasekhar fourth innings average is 23.47.
Bedi's fourth innings average is 14.41.
Qadir's fourth innings average is 38.0.
Embury's fourth innings average 29.78.

Based on these stats, only Bedi can compete with pacers where performance in the fourth innings in concerned.

underwood and chandra also seem to have a better fourth innings record than lillee and imran. we have been looking only at bedi, underwood and chandra primarily. stats prove that we are not way off the mark.

we have marshall and lillee in the team already. hadlee and botham are likely to join them. we are better off with a spinner from one the three guys in the list above.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Bishan Bedi - Indian
Bhagwat Chandeasekhar - Indian
Dilip Doshi - Indian
Phil Edmonds - English
John Emburey - English
Lance Gibbs - West Indian
Ashley Mallet - Australian
Erapalli Prasanna - Indian
Abdul Qadir - Pakistani
Iqbal Qasim - Pakistani
Bruce Yardley - Australian