Your second spinner averages 34 brah. Are you planning to chuck pies down one end?
Coronavirus Cricket Auction Draft (Test)
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Bizarre and pathetic reasoning. If you have participated in this draft with so much "passion" then how about adhering to spirit of the rules. You had ample advantage before the finale with TWO picks. This is akin to the under arm bowling BS. Raees made a mistake while drafting when this was intentional. I am happy to respond to posts by neutral posters but won't be entertaining any of opposing team's arguments.
Skills, even if you guys accept 2 vote penalty, it is going against spirit to play them together. Unnecessary as well because you already had a very good team. Even if it is McGrath, you could have left him out after pitch was finalized and you could have played 3 spinners on this pitch with Roberts and Imran being there in addition. On dustbowl, I think it simply comes down to how many options you have. Even an avg spinner becomes deadly on it. Murali and Warne cancel each other more or less, so having Ashwin+Greig was upper hand vs just Sobers on other side.
Wasn't that the case in the 1st round? Ashwin already is a massive upperhand on Sobers.
I don't think it was deliberately done by Raees. He wasn't even aware of vote penalty.
We still had to play against it though. It was all fun and games back then though, because it benefitted the other 14 players in the draft if he managed to take us out of the draft and also essentially knocked himself out at the same time.
Naah I don't think that was the thinking. Else people would have voted for him en masse and you wouldn't be here.
It's the same thing. In either case, the only person who really gets screwed by this rule is the person directly up against the rule-breaker. If I got eliminated, why would I give a single feck that he had to lose 2 players in the next round? I'm out by then.
Nobody gave enough of a shit to point it out in that game, so I don't know why it matters now. We took our penalty.
Last edited:
Only if it is final.
Nope like I said - if Raees knocked me out, why would I give a shit if he has to lose 2 players in the next round? At that point he's already accepted he's not really got a chance so he might as well just screw me on his way out.
There is no point screwing someone else if you are going out anyway next round.
So why did we have to play against both Sanga and Pollock then?
Maybe because it was R1 and there were only 12 players? If we go by what you are saying that people will want to knock two teams out, you wouldn't have won. Doing it deliberately while having choice is pointless because you are unnecessarily in next round after losing two players, whether you draft or don't draft you have to play a round, do write up.. too much pointless effort if you are practically out. Rather play XI which is not breaking rule like Norris did and think somebody else did in R1. If people want to keep game going properly, there is more chance they will vote team which will be competent in next round.
I did it R1 I benched Lee for Smith. Big mistake getting both early on.
So he did have a choice - because we pointed it out. What I'm arguing is, that crappy is in the same situation we were in R1. If you think this is unfair now, you should've thought it was unfair in the first round - and the e-police never turned up then.
We just didn't complain about it because quite frankly we had a better team and should've won anyway.
Nope. The draft ends here, it wasn't going to end for Raees that time. He had even said he is OK if his team is disqualified (although it was his error in not paying attention to rules). I can say that at least I would have voted you even if your team was 40-60 compared to his because him in next round with 2 players gone would have made draft unbalanced.
Why does it matter for me (the person being knocked out of the draft) if it ends now or when Raees knocks me out with his rulebreaking team?
Btw you guys definitely didn't vote for us that round.
Sucks the final is being decided like this. Tbh I don't see anything wrong with what skills/anant have done.
The problem with these drafts is far too many of the posters who take part in them have a 12 foot long rod wedged firmly up their arseholes. So this one is done for me.
It does matter if you want to/ like to screw up things unnecessarily or not.
I don't know about "you guys" part because we didn't discuss once who we will vote for in other matches. Good chance in some matches we voted on different teams.
I really don't get why you feel "record in Asia" matters. A very large percentage of these pitches will be flat so it doesn't represent how bowlers would fare on a dustbowl IMO.
That's not really true when you have spinners like Warne and Murali. Those two will simply bowl all day from one end with minimal breaks and do at least 70% of the damage.
Will the likes of Ashwin help? Sure, but you certainly don't need a third spinner as well and even a part-timer would be fine. A quality fast bowler would be useful and can offer some variation to the barrage of spin.
Consider for example Murali's final Test in Galle. He had Herath with him there as well and did most of the bowling since he was hunting his 800th wicket. Who was the man of the match though? - Lasith freakin Malinga.
Yes so I said Murali and Warne more or less cancel each other.
We also have cases like Ind-Aus Mumbai 2004, which was proper dustbowl, where Clarke picked up 6 for 9 runs and Murali Kartik was MoM. India played with 3 proper spinners. We are not saying here to stack team with only spinners, but even if McGrath is not played, you have Imran and Roberts as fast bowlers. Whatever pitch, you don't usually leave out McGrath, but with the same XI thing, that was one way to avoid the necessary debate.
If most of the overs in day are going to be bowled by spinners, might as well have more options in that department is what I am saying.
I honestly think McGrath would be good even on a dustbowl. He's just a freak of nature. Anyway, I do agree he could have played Gupte instead and avoided the 2-vote loss. However, dropping McGrath for anyone just sounds a bit off to me.
In general I've disliked these pitch-specific matches as it takes away from a well-drafted team. People are just naturally inclined to sort of shoehorn more spinners into the lineup that plays on a dustbowl despite it actually weakening the overall side.
Because you aren't likely to find a dustbowl on other continents. While I agree with you here, most pitches in Asia have traditionally favoured spinners and I can't think of better metric to compare how teams would perform on a spinning track
Ya ya. As I said it is Glenn fookin McGrath and you don't 'drop' him whatever the pitch. It was a suggestion just to avoid the vote penalty, particularly when pitch is dustbowl.
I feel most of the pitches are flat and you get the odd dustbowl here and there. Maybe it's only India that traditionally have pitches that favour spinners, but even there I think there are reasonable number of flat or slow pitches that aren't especially conducive to spin. Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka have more flat pitches than dustbowls and Pakistan, at one point, had very pace friendly pitches.
The better stat would have been how well someone played Murali in Galle or something to that effect, but it involves a bit more work on your part and advanced tweaks in Statsguru to get something more substantial like that.
The real truth though is that probably no one has a very good record against Murali and Warne in Galle (Warne was a nightmare for the Sri Lankans when he played there and pretty much won a match there for Australia). We're talking about the two best spin bowlers of all time here. In reality they will feck everyone up on a dustbowl.
Its better to specify dustbowl to Asia and it would have been far better to judge players performance instead of going general.
@crappycraperson congrats! You built a great side there, and it was a deserved win
Final result
Final:
Skills/Anant 2-11 Crappy
Skills/Anant 2-11 Crappy
Just came across this and see that Cummings has had the 5th highest peak of any Test bowler in history, I wish I had this information earlier when @Himannv was saying I didn't have a bowling attack. Jadeja number 26 all time peak as well.
http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/alltime/test/bowling/
http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/alltime/test/bowling/
You deserved to lose just for calling him Cummings throughout
Haha, very trueYou deserved to lose just for calling him Cummings throughout
It's still a pointless stat mate. I mean, he's ahead of the likes of Steyn, Hadlee, Ambrose, etc. in that list and he's clearly not better than any of them. I mean, just look at who is joint 76th in that list; Wasim fecking Akram. You can't claim he's the 76th best bowler as a result of this stat can you?