Highly debatable.Jthomas23 said:They have the best opener in cricket (Chris Gayle) but he needs someone with him. but their bowlers are not up to scratch but i agree if they had the bowlers the would be a force
That's an understatement.TT Boy said:Highly debatable.
The middle order is highly talented, but it underperforms too regularly to be classed as a "strength", imo.stumpski said:West indies' strength is their middle order: Lara, Chanderpaul, Sarwan and Bravo. But they could do with a settled opening pair. Devon Smith should get a run in the side, he seems a good player. They're missing a Test class spinner as well, but then they've managed without one since Lance Gibbs retired.
Gayle would get nowhere near the England team, and I'd like to know which 2 middle order players you'd remove for Chanderpaul and Sarwan?Beleg said:Chandepaul, Gayle and Sarwan will walk into Pakistan, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, England and South Africa. Bravo too, probably, except for England.
GayleGayle would get nowhere near the England team, and I'd like to know which 2 middle order players you'd remove for Chanderpaul and Sarwan?
Also, how the hell would those 2 walk into the Pakistan team?
Wow, thats really misguided. Chanderpaul is a good Test player, nothing more nothing less. You would really take him ahead of Mohammad Yousuf and Younis Khan?Beleg said:I would have Chanders ahead of anyone in the current Pakistani team except Inzamam.
Sarwan ahead of KP and Vaughan and to a lesser extent Collingwood is different to how I would select the team. Thats for sureBeleg said:Trescothick
Strauss
Cook
Sarwan
Bell
Chanderpaul
Flintoff
Read/Jones
Hoggard
Harmison
Jones
Collingwood and Pieterson are unproven compared to Sarwan and specially Chanderpaul.
so when is the cut off point of when someone has proven themselves..30 tests, 40tests, what is it????...KP has now performed vs Australia, Pakistan and Sri lanka at home, and did pretty well in India and scored a hundred in Pakistan as well...he has gone past 50 in 10 of his 32 innings, and scored 5 hundreds as well.Beleg said:Collingwood and Pieterson are unproven compared to Sarwan and specially Chanderpaul. I would have Chanders ahead of anyone in the current Pakistani team except Inzamam.
You what?Beleg said:Gayle
Kamran
Inzamam
Sarwan
Younis
Yousuf
Chanders
Rana/Nazir
Shoaib
Kaneria
Asif
Hmm, misguided? I'll be interested in hearing why you consider Yousuf and Younis to be better players then Chanders? I have watched him play a fair deal and I simply have more faith in his batting then either Yousuf or Younis. He might not be as cutesy or as flashy but he is reliable.Wow, thats really misguided. Chanderpaul is a good Test player, nothing more nothing less. You would really take him ahead of Mohammad Yousuf and Younis Khan?
Asking Akmal to open isn't unbalancing the side, he is capable of doing a fairly decent job.You what?
You'd make room for them by unbalancing the side?!
32 innings is not a big enough sample, compared with Sarwan. Give him a couple more years before comparing him with much more experienced players. There might be a significent decrease in his average - it has happened to players before him. He still hasn't played in Australia, South Africa, Sri Lanka or New Zealand. His average outside England is pretty poor. (though that too can change - the sample size is way too small to make any concrete predictions at this stage) At the risk of sounding Richardesque, he gives away more chances then most players I have seen. Anyway, it was a question of choosing between Cook and him and I picked Cook because I like his playing style a lot more and feel he is a much more solid bat.so when is the cut off point of when someone has proven themselves..30 tests, 40tests, what is it????...KP has now performed vs Australia, Pakistan and Sri lanka at home, and did pretty well in India and scored a hundred in Pakistan as well...he has gone past 50 in 10 of his 32 innings, and scored 5 hundreds as well.
Pretty evident to you, maybe - Sarwan is more talented. I agree that Sarwan's stats don't stand up to scrunity if you were comparing him to, say, Younis or Chanderpaul. However, you cannot realistically compare a sample size of 32 innings to more then 100 without major extrapolations - a sample size of 32, which I might add, is good but not spectecular by any means.Don't get me wrong, I really like Sarwan, but I think it is pretty evident that KP is the better batsman of the two...Sarwan has struggled vs the best teams in the world....he has only really excelled vs South Africa and Bangladesh...so has Sarwan really proven himself anyway????