Test Cricket draft: SF : Mani vs Skills @ Lord's, London

Who will win test match?


  • Total voters
    17
  • Poll closed .

The Man Himself

asked for a tagline change and all I got was this.
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
22,406
Welcome to semi-final match up between Mani and Skills of test cricket sheep draft. Some basic rules to consider while voting:

1) This is test only draft. So, judge players and team on test records only.
2) Match up will be in test format.
3) The ground the match is on is to indicate overall conditions from that country, not JUST the ground. Although, specific ground related records maybe used in discussion.
4) Voting will be available for 24 hours after poll is created.


Skills has won the toss and will be batting first.
 
Mani/Varun XI: Hanif Mohammad, Kepler Wessels, Rohan Kanhai, Sachin Tendulkar, Martin Crowe, Alvin Kallicharran, Jeff Dujon, Michael Holding, Joel Garner, Frank Tyson, Subhash Gupte

Skills XI: Lawry, Langer, Amla, Greg Chappell, A. Border(C), Clyde Walcott (W), Cairns, Swann, Steyn, Bob Willis, Mcgrath
 
Mani/Varun's team:

Openers:

Opening our batting is the original “Little Master”,Hanif Mohammad and the gritty left hander Kepler Wessels. Credited with playing the longest test innings, a staggering 970-minute 337 against West Indies in Bridgetown in 1957-58, Hanif will lead our batting line up and provide it the solid start needed. He is one of the best players you could want to see off the new ball and lay the platform for a big score. He will be supported in this by Wessels who was also known for his determination and ability to provide a solid start to his teams by playing a long innings. This duo will play the very vital role right at the top of the batting order by scoring big and laying the platform for the middle order to come.

Middle order:

The legendary Rohan Kanhai will walk in at No 3 for us. All time greats like Gavaskar and Kallicharran were so inspired by Kanhai that they named their sons after him. Simply put, one of the legends of the game who inspired many after him. A man known as much for his phenomenal defence as for his beautiful strokeplay, many regard him the best batsman they have seen.

Gavaskar on Kanhai:

“Rohan Kanhai is quite simply the greatest batsman I have ever seen. What does one write about one's hero, one's idol, one for whom there is so much admiration? To say that he is the greatest batsman I have ever seen so far is to put it mildly. A controversial statement perhaps, considering that there have been so many outstanding batsmen, and some great batsmen that I have played with and against. But, having seen them all, there is no doubt in my mind that Rohan Kanhai was quite simply the best of them all. Sir Gary Sobers came quite close to being the best batsman, but he was the greatest cricketer ever, and could do just about anything. But as a batsman, I thought Rohan Kanhai was just a little bit better."

Following Kanhai is Sachin Tendulkar. GOD. Enough said.

Martin Crowe and Alvin Kallicharran finish off our top 6. The graceful and technically perfect Martin Crowe needs no introduction. The best batman New Zealand has produced, Crowe started his test career as a 19 yr old and instantly established himself as among the best young batsmen in the world. Capable of playing long innings and scoring all over the wicket, he’ll provide big scores in our middle order. Finally, we have Alvin Kallicharran. Wisden Cricketer of the year for 1973, Kalli is among the true greats of the game. Known for his elegance and panache for long innings, he was also a ruthless stroke player. He once ripped into the great Dennis Lilee hitting him for 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 1, 4, 6, 0, 4 in an incredible spell of 10 balls. Widely recognized as one of the most complete batsman of his generation, the great Alvin Kallicharran finishes our top 6.

Wicket Keeper:

Walking in at No 7 is our wicket keeper, the one and only, Jeff Dujon. It was one of the most spectacular sights of cricket in the 1980s. A great West Indian fast bowler - any of several suspects - roared on by a partisan Caribbean crowd, a short ball rearing, the batsman fending and edging, and behind the stumps, a lithe athlete leaping and plunging to take another one-handed blinder. Jeff Dujon was the gymnastic hub of those all-conquering Windies sides, a man who never participated in a losing series. Equally adept vs pace and spin, Dujon gives our side a fantastic keeper and a great 7th batsman.

In an age when wicket keepers weren’t expected to play much of a role with the bat, Dujon proved his worth with the bat as well. Often left to bat with the tail, he elegantly scored vital runs down the order and introduced the term ‘wicketkeeper-batsman’ to the cricketing vocabulary. Batting in the lower middle order, he scored 3322 runs, including 5 centuries and 16 half centuries. In fact, it was his spirited batting in the highly competitive West Indies domestic circuit that brought Dujon into the limelight when he made his debut as a batsman in place of an injured Gordon Greenidge. His finest moment with the bat was against Australia, on a rain-marred Perth track , when he produced a splendid counter-attacking knock of 139 off just 158 deliveries. Coming in at 186/6, after the more illustrious batsmen in the side had failed, Dujon, despite being hit on the head early on, conquered both the conditions and the Aussie speedsters to set the foundation for an innings victory.

Pace Battery:

Michael Holding. Joel Garner. Frank Tyson


This irresistible trio forms our 3 pronged pace attack. Pace, Bounce, Movement and a flurry of wickets, that's what you get when this trio get the ball.

"Whispering death" and "Big Bird" as they came to be christened will lead our pace attack and cause the opposition all sorts of problems. They didnt just take wickets, they induced fear into opposition batsmen. Big Bird possessed the meanest yorker the game has seen and when combined with the ridiculous bouncer that he bowled, you know why batsmen didnt fancy playing him. "You don't, even Viv doesnt hit him in the nets" is Botham's famous reply to Boycott when he asks him for tips on scoring off Garner after struggling the first time he played him. "Typhoon" Tyson completes our pace trio. The man Richie Benaud and Sir Don Bradman consider the fastest bowler ever, he took wickets at a devastating rate.

Spinner:

Subhash Gupte.

The legendary Subhaschandra Gupte completes our bowling attack.

Sobers on Gupte:
Warne's a great bowler but the best leg-spinner I've ever seen is still (Subhash) Gupte. He could do things that I still don't believe all these years later

He so dominated the arena of spin bowlers during the 1950’s that these years were later to be remembered by Indian cricket historians and fans alike, as the “Age of Gupte". Gupte was a world class leg spinner and the man who inspired the likes of Prasanna and Bedi who both consider him their idol. Bedi famously named Gupte as the reason why he took to spin bowling. His impact on Indian cricket went far further than just his performances, Gupte was responsible for inspiring Indians to take to Spin bowling. Gupte famously took 9 wickets in an innings while playing the legendary WI side, denied all 10 because the WK dropped Gibbs. He caused the WI team so many problems that they coined the phrase "Can turn it on glass" to describe him.
 
Mani/Varun's team continued:

Michael Holding


Joel Garner



Frank Tyson



Subhash Gupte
 
Skills' team:

LIvRgbS.png


Skills' team talk:


Langer & Lawry’s batting is economical;
Amla’s high score in England is astronomical;
Border & Chappell build on the start;
Steyn & McGrath rip you apart;
A victory by an innings is pretty possible.
Brap Brap.
 
@Rado_N need help with poll:

Title: Who will win test match?

Option 1: Mani
Option 2: Skills

Similar poll options to the other draft polls.

Thanks in advance.
 
I had a bit of a rough patch with the mods here. :D
Blame fcking Werewolf, thank god I got out of it.
I remember that. You trolled the shit out of the first game you played iirc
 
As good as Gupte was, having swann is obviously an advantage. But mani s batting is much better than skills'.
 
As good as Gupte was, having swann is obviously an advantage. But mani s batting is much better than skills'.
Is it because he's English? Grounds are simply to be used as an indicator of conditions man.
 
Skills batting first adds to our advantage especially with two bowlers(Holding & Garner) would exploit those early moisture in the pitch.
 
As good as Gupte was, having swann is obviously an advantage. But mani s batting is much better than skills'.

Why? Langer is the most impressive opener on the pitch. Lawry and Mohammad played through the same era and Lawry has a slightly more impressive record.

I have a stacked middle order - 3 of them have more than 20 centuries, and 4 of them average more than 50. While only Tendulkar averages 50+ for them.
 
Woah! A great game not getting any attention.

I think both teams are really good obviously and I won't really diss on any of the superb players skills has but I do think us bowling first is a big plus to have enabling our pace trio to make best use of the conditions early in the game and get early wickets. It hallo helps us bat when the pitch has calmed down helping batters. Chris Cairns is sort of a weakness considering the quality of the players involved btw. Same about Bob Willis imo but I don't know enough about him to say for sure so ready to be corrected here if I'm wrong.
 
[QUOTE="Skills, post: 18761998, member: 64110"Why? Langer is the most impressive opener on the pitch. Lawry and Mohammad played through the same era and Lawry has a slightly more impressive record.

I have a stacked middle order - 3 of them have more than 20 centuries, and 4 of them average more than 50. While only Tendulkar averages 50+ for them.[/QUOTE]
Among the openers on the pitch Hanif Mohammad is technically much better batsmen.
 
[QUOTE="Skills, post: 18761998, member: 64110"Why? Langer is the most impressive opener on the pitch. Lawry and Mohammad played through the same era and Lawry has a slightly more impressive record.

I have a stacked middle order - 3 of them have more than 20 centuries, and 4 of them average more than 50. While only Tendulkar averages 50+ for them.
Among the openers on the pitch Hanif Mohammad is technically much better batsmen.[/QUOTE]

I think his middle order and openers are better, but your bowling is a lil better. I've gone for him, but only just. I simply don't rate Wessels, as you could probably tell from my game against you
 
I think his middle order and openers are better, but your bowling is a lil better. I've gone for him, but only just. I simply don't rate Wessels, as you could probably tell from my game against you
His middle order is superb but so is Kanhai-Sachin-Crowe-Kalli. We also get the best crack as we bowl first.
 
Mani/Varun have an advantage by bowling first but Skills has 5 proper bowlers and all very good.
 
Yup Cairns was a very good bowler. In England conditions he will be more useful. Of course he doesn't compare with your 4 but those 4 are compared with Mcgrath-Steyn-Willis-Swann. Cairns is an added advantage in bowling to Skills.
 
What is this shit about an advantage bowling first?

The duke ball swings because of it's pronounced seam - whether that's in the first or second innings. It doesn't make a difference. Of 499 matches in England, 177 of them have been won by the team batting first compared to 144 by the team batting second. Statistically we have the advantage.
 
Yup Cairns was a very good bowler. In England conditions he will be more useful. Of course he doesn't compare with your 4 but those 4 are compared with Mcgrath-Steyn-Willis-Swann. Cairns is an added advantage in bowling to Skills.
Well yeah, he is an additional bowler at his disposal, no arguments there. That said, I don't see someone like Cairns influencing much with the ball in this game because of the quality of batting we have. Even during his playing career, he didn't have a great record vs Aus, Ind, etc who had good batters.
 
What is this shit about an advantage bowling first?

The duke ball swings because of it's pronounced seam - whether that's in the first or second innings. It doesn't make a difference. Of 499 matches in England, 177 of them have been won by the team batting first compared to 144 by the team batting second. Statistically we have the advantage.
It's about the pitch and the conditions. The pitch always offers something to the fast bowlers early on. Team results stats don't mean much because it depends on the quality of the teams whereas here it's pretty much equal and thus bowling first is an advantage both in terms of bowling when the conditions are helpful for pacers and batting when the pitch is at its best for batting.
 
It's about the pitch and the conditions. The pitch always offers something to the fast bowlers early on. Team results stats don't mean much because it depends on the quality of the teams whereas here it's pretty much equal and thus bowling first is an advantage both in terms of bowling when the conditions are helpful for pacers and batting when the pitch is at its best for batting.

Why? What is the scientific reason for the pitch to offer 'more' in the first innings? Or else every team in England would always bowl first. Which is obviously wrong. The team who have won the toss in England have batted first 397 times compared to field first 102 times.
 
What is this shit about an advantage bowling first?

The duke ball swings because of it's pronounced seam - whether that's in the first or second innings. It doesn't make a difference. Of 499 matches in England, 177 of them have been won by the team batting first compared to 144 by the team batting second. Statistically we have the advantage.
Well stats maybe slightly in favor of team winning batting first but there might be other factors which contribute to that. In conditions which help swing bowling, I guess pacers will like first bite of cherry. There are some not so quantitative factors also come in play as in, when you are bowling second even in similar conditions, your batting total and momentum come into play. At start of match, it is clean slate for bowlers.

Mind you, toss is not so much a decisive factor here and as you put, team batting first has won more, but there are certain advantages in seaming conditions of bowling on first morning on a brand new pitch.
 
Among the openers on the pitch Hanif Mohammad is technically much better batsmen.

I think his middle order and openers are better, but your bowling is a lil better. I've gone for him, but only just. I simply don't rate Wessels, as you could probably tell from my game against you[/QUOTE]
But the same.wessels on his debut aganist formidable windies attack scored a century that too on a bouncy wickets of Australia. He's not flashy but just applies his calm nature andlook for an weak ball to discharge to boundry.Hanif is more technical batsmen as he never try to hit ball in air and got better defensive stock play.
 
I think his middle order and openers are better, but your bowling is a lil better. I've gone for him, but only just. I simply don't rate Wessels, as you could probably tell from my game against you
But the same.wessels on his debut aganist formidable windies attack scored a century that too on a bouncy wickets of Australia. He's not flashy but just applies his calm nature andlook for an weak ball to discharge to boundry.Hanif is more technical batsmen as he never try to hit ball in air and got better defensive stock play.[/QUOTE]

I've seen Wessels play. You aren't going to change me mind about him. I don't judge players on one performance, and doubt anybody else does either
 
Why? What is the scientific reason for the pitch to offer 'more' in the first innings? Or else every team in England would always bowl first. Which is obviously wrong. The team who have won the toss in England have batted first 397 times compared to field first 102 times.
Holding and Garner's career strike rate is around 20.00 and in England its much better which means this strike pair got better chance of knocking one by the time over eight starts.
 
Why? What is the scientific reason for the pitch to offer 'more' in the first innings? Or else every team in England would always bowl first. Which is obviously wrong. The team who have won the toss in England have batted first 397 times compared to field first 102 times.
A fresh pitch with grass is the best time for pacers to bowl. Toss here isn't as big a factor as it would be in the subcontinent but bowling first is still a small advantage. Why teams don't always do that is neither here nor there mate as it isn't simply about giving your pacers the best chance. For instance, they could not fancy the pressure of batting 4th to chase down a total.
 
I hope our middle order gets its due credit. Skills has an obviously class one but for the first time in the draft, it is matched by the other side imo.