Test XI for The Last Quarter Century

[trundler]

Pollock over Waqar and change the order accordingly

 

[trundler]

Switch AB and Chanders too.

 

[trundler]

How valuable is Kallis's bowling? He would just be the 5th bowler and wouldn't take a big load (ha). I suppose it wouldn't be too big a loss. He bowls 20 or so per test anyway. The main concern is the tail.

 

[trundler]

And the keeper' of course.

 

[Daemon]

How valuable is Kallis's bowling? He would just be the 5th bowler and wouldn't take a big load (ha). I suppose it wouldn't be too big a loss. He bowls 20 or so per test anyway. The main concern is the tail.

It's more than valuable enough for the minuscule increase in batting with whoever you would replace him with. Also got hands like buckets so that's slip sorted.

 

[Bolo]

In a 5 man attack, I don't think Waqar is too far ahead of Pollock as a bowler. Potentially even behind him for the sake of team balance from time to time, because there are a lot more great swing bowlers than seamers.

With 4 bowlers though, I really want the extra striking power. With 6 top bats plus Sanga keeping I'm more worried about the bowling than the batting.

Pollock is a better player, but I'm sticking with Waqar.

 

[trundler]

He is a lock in the first team for sure. A slip cordon of him, Warne, and Ponting would be legendary. My point was about an alternative in the 2nd XI

 

[Bolo]

His 10 overs are massively valuable. The number of extra runs a batting side will milk from a Tendulkar quality part timer in 10 overs is already greater than the difference between him and whoever you think the best bat is. And this excludes the fact that he is picking up wickets.

There isn't an alternative for him in the 2nd team. You are just left deciding what type of balance problem you want to go with.

Best option is to hope the first team don't pick Waugh. With him around, the problem is manageable.

 

[trundler]

His 10 overs are massively valuable. The number of extra runs a batting side will milk from a Tendulkar quality part timer in 10 overs is already greater than the difference between him and whoever you think the best bat is. And this excludes the fact that he is picking up wickets.

There isn't an alternative for him in the 2nd team. You are just left deciding what type of balance problem you want to go with.

Best option is to hope the first team don't pick Waugh. With him around, the problem is manageable.

Well a bowling all rounder (Pollock) and a decent part timer like Waugh should bridge it somewhat.

 

[trundler]

In a 5 man attack, I don't think Waqar is too far ahead of Pollock as a bowler. Potentially even behind him for the sake of team balance from time to time, because there are a lot more great swing bowlers than seamers.

With 4 bowlers though, I really want the extra striking power. With 6 top bats plus Sanga keeping I'm more worried about the bowling than the batting.

Pollock is a better player, but I'm sticking with Waqar.

Pollock was gun for 78 at tests, statistically as good as Waqar as a bowler, better batter, and fielder. That's about as many Waqar played too. A tail with Gilly and Akram is very strong and you cant have 4 #11s to counter that

 

[Bolo]

Waqars strike rate was 30%? better than Pollock's. Not that important if you are playing 5 bowlers, but with only 4 specialists it means your 5th bowler needs to send down more overs.

It's manageable if you have a Kallis to fill the quota, and even maybe a Waugh. But in this team, it means you are going to have one of the worst part timers ever to turn an arm at international level tossing pies at Lara, Ponting etc. Bloodbath.

Yes, this leaves the batting weaker than the 1st team. But the bowling is already weaker than the 1st. Choose your evil.

Best balance would likely be to drop Waqar and Chanders and add in Pollock and Shakib. Definitely a stronger bowling outfit than the 4 tailenders only, and at least comparable in the batting. As you say, a top bat who bowls reasonable part-timers would work with Pollock instead of Shakib as well, but I can't think of one except those in the 1st team.

 

[trundler]

Poor Freddie not even being considered

 

[Red]

Sanga only became great right at the end and was meh for a long, long time.

24, 55, 50, 41, 55, 32, 69, 138, 39, 57, 99, 49, 51, 85, 71, 40

Sanga's yearly averages during his career (200-2015)

Can't see much in there that is "meh".

 

[harsh.ag]

Widely accepted to be great is more accurate. But that too happened around 2011, I think, not at the end.

 

[trundler]

Maybe meh wasn't the best word to describe an ATG in retrospect. Still a lot of minnow-bashing compared to Punter though. Sanga doesn't break into the Lara-Ponting-Dravid class. Personal opinion, of course.

 

[Engle]

Anyone know what Sanga's average is as a pure batsman ? (i.e. without constraints of 'keeping )

 

[Starfighter]

Anyone know what Sanga's average is as a pure batsman ? (i.e. without constraints of 'keeping )

66.78 (!)

 

[Bolo]

There's no way to know how much Sangas stats are affected by wk though. With the gloves measures his formative batting years. Without them measures his prime batting years. I'm inclined to say it's more this than the gloves, because we know from other players prime years makes a big difference, but we don't really know how much of an affect keeping has on anyone. Plus his ODI stats went through the roof as well, despite continuing to keep.

 

[Starfighter]

There's no way to know how much Sangas stats are affected by wk though. With the gloves measures his formative batting years. Without them measures his prime batting years. I'm inclined to say it's more this than the gloves, because we know from other players prime years makes a big difference, but we don't really know how much of an affect keeping has on anyone. Plus his ODI stats went through the roof as well.

This. His development and maturation as a batsmen was as much to do with his improvement in his average as anything.

 

[Bolo]

Compare to AB. Averages 57.41 with the gloves, way above career average. But he only played as wk when he was in his prime as a bat- it's not likely he improved with the bat by taking the gloves.