Test Cricket Decades Draft FINAL: Mani vs Interval

Who will win based on all the players on their peaks?


  • Total voters
    17
  • Poll closed .

Moby

Dick
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
51,356
Location
Barcelona, Catalunya
Welcome to the Test Cricket Decades Draft Final. The two teams will be assessed based on a 3 match test series on the surfaces mentioned below. Only the test performances of the said players will be used for evaluation, no other format has any weight in the match up. The surfaces are:


1. Flat batting pitch with little help for any bowlers.
2. A greentop that aids pace bowling.
3. A slow dustbowl that aids spin bowling.

Please vote for the team that you think will prevail at the end of the series.

TEAM MANI




Openers -Sunil Gavaskar & H.Sutcliffe

Batting opens with S.Gavasakar / H.Sutcliffe)Two technically accomplished batsmen's to deal with any kind of attact best opening combo out of the two team and are in the best position to see through the new ball attack which means my one down batsmen is not exposed to new ball early in the game.

Herbert Sutcliffe scored quickly, faster than any of the heavy run-makers of the time except Bradman, believing that the new ball was more opportunity than threat. On the more-coal-for-the-winter theory, Sutcliffe picked gaps with a forensic eye and ran hard between the wickets. He glanced and cut, as did many of the players of the age, and drove with surprising power. Above all his gifts were those of temperament and application. John Arlott wrote, "Herbert was cool beyond disturbance."

Herbert Sutcliffe, 135 v Australia, MCG, 1928-29
England were buoyant heading into the third Test after taking a 2-0 series lead. Both sides traded blows on the first innings, and Wally Hammond's 200 gave England a slender lead. Then Don Bradman and Bill Woodfull hit centuries and the visitors needed 332 on a wicket spiced up by rain. Sutcliffe countered the tough conditions with a stubborn 135, made from 465 balls in more than six hours. "Scarcely anything in the whole tour approached the long, drawn-out tension of the last innings before the winning hit was made... these runs had to be made on a rain-ruined wicket and anybody who knows the Melbourne ground will appreciate the stupendous effort required," said Wisden. Sutcliffe fell with the job nearly done, and despite a late scare, England wrapped up the series by three wickets


M.Hayden - Plays the specialist position, technically strong against pace or spin.

Strength was Matthew Hayden's strength - both mental and physical. It enabled him to shrug off years of carping that he was technically too limited for Test cricket because of the way he played around his front pad, and it enabled him to touch rarefied heights of batsmanship. Before his maiden first-class innings, he asked if anyone had made 200 on debut, then went out and hit 149. The runs rarely abated over the next 17 years. Tall, powerful and equipped with concentration befitting the fisherman and surfer that he is, he battered the ball at and through the off side for days at a time. He has also made himself a fine catcher in the slips and gully.

Hayden's earliest Tests were exclusively against South Africa and West Indies, a trial for any opener. They were not auspicious, but patience and willpower won the day, especially after the tour of India in 2000-01, where he slog-swept his way to 549 runs, an Australian record for a three-Test series. By the end of 2001 he had broken Bob Simpson's Australian mark for most Test runs in a calendar year - Ricky Ponting first topped Hayden's 1391 in 2003 - and formed a prodigiously prolific opening partnership with Justin Langer. Belatedly he came good in the one-day arena too, and by the time the 2003 World Cup rolled around he was ranked among the top three batsmen in both forms of the game. Later that year he hammered 380 against Zimbabwe at Perth, briefly borrowing the Test record from Brian Lara, and in mid-2004 he was at it again, battering Sri Lanka for twin centuries that took his tally to 20 in only 55 Tests






W.Hammond/ R.Kanhai /AB de Villiers -My all three middle order batsmen can deal with of both pace and spin bowling and their records speak for themselves.

W.Hammond -"In a Test career spanning 85 matches, he scored 7,249 runs and took 83 wickets. Hammond captained England in 20 of those Tests, winning four, losing three, and drawing 13. His career aggregate of runs was the highest in Test cricket until surpassed by Colin Cowdrey in 1970; his total of 22 Test centuries remained an English record until Alastair Cooksurpassed it in December 2012.[notes 1] In 1933, he set a record for the highest individual Test innings of 336 not out, surpassed by Len Hutton in 1938. In all first-class cricket, he scored 50,551 runs and 167 centuries, respectively the seventh and third highest totals by a first-class cricketer.[3] With the ball, he took 732 wickets"



R.Kanhai -

" His batting which West Indies came to rely on for more than 16 years. He didn't score a century until his 13th Test but it was worth waiting for; he smashed 256 runs off the Indian attack at Calcutta. There were centuries too for Sobers and Basil Butcher as West Indies crushed their hosts by an innings and 336 runs. Kanhai followed this with 99 in the next Test as West Indies went on to win the series 3-0. Another double century followed on the same overseas tour, this time in Lahore as West Indies beat Pakistan by an innings. In all he hit 15 Test centuries, averaging 47.53 in Test matches"


AB De Villiers - "
Freak of nature"

AB had three different types of gears while playing in the nets. Sometimes he would watch it so closely that he would defend the ball completely under his eyes. I wish you could see me as I am standing now to imitate what he would do: the ball would basically rest at his feet and he would pick it up and give it back to you. That is quite annoying because as a fast bowler you want to rattle the batsman. This guy has complete control that he can defend the ball coming at 145kph and the ball would rest at his feet. That is a unique talent. That just doesn't happen. Nobody in the world that I have bowled to can do that.

Then there is the second gear that he turns to where he starts to really get into his movements, starts to walk around a lot more. He will stand on middle, and as you release the ball, he is standing two feet outside of off; he will be standing on off stump, and as you release the ball, he is standing one foot outside leg stump and lapping you.
Then he gets into the third gear, where he decides to concentrate on clearing the ropes. He will literally hit every ball in the sweet spot. He has the ability to make you feel completely helpless.
It is almost easier playing him in a match because if he does get out, he is actually out. In nets, even if he gets out he is still there for more time and he is going to smash you. It is torture. - Dale Stern


http://www.thecricketmonthly.com/st...-ability-to-make-you-feel-completely-helpless





LMO-(Sir Frank Worrell/R.Hadlee /W.Akram/S.Warne) Arguably no team in the draft got better LMO than the one i have here,My team can bat till 9 that's a huge plus considring the format of the game. Kippax along with F.Worrell can build a cautious innings lower down he order where as R.Hadle/ Wasim Akram/S.Warne can come in and open up in case when we team need quick runs as well can play some responsible innings in case needed.

Sir Frank Worrell - "West Indies' first appointed black captain was also their most charismatic and influential. Though a fine, stylish batsman, it is as a strong captain and an uniting force that he will be remembered. The affection with which his team was received in Australia during the landmark tour of 1960-61 is enshrined in the trophy named after him, which the two teams play for to date."

Bowling wins test matches,with superior bowling and combination of attack spearheaded by
Sir Richard Hadlee,Wasim Akram,Sir Andy Roberts and Sir Alec Bedser, All 4 premium strike bowler which much variety I got better chance to win this 3 match series Plus I got support from W.Hammond and Sir Frank Worrell with the medium pace can come in handy.

Spin - Shane Warne- Greatest Spin bowler the world had even seen.

You never going go find a spin bowler as good as Shane Warne, he's one in generation bowler the successful Aussie side of mid 90's and early 00's where gifted to have him in his side and was main man in their demolition job.He stands tall among leading Ashes wicket takers with 195 Wkt's with Lillee coming second with 167Wkt's. Man can litterer bowl 6 different balls in one single over,not only his turn that had caused the batsmen trouble but also the drift from the flight of the ball made it difficult to read the ball, his flippers and googly where lethal,his leg breaks where brutal that batsmen's constantly made mistakes in judgemental of the ball.

Well written article on Warne.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/493394.html

Sir Frank Worrell as Captain, No better man to utilise his resources better that Sir Frank Worrell.
Sir Frank was a man of strong convictions, a brave man, and it goes without saying, a great cricketer. Though he made his name as a player his greatest contribution was to destroy for ever the myth that a coloured cricketer was not fit to lead a team. Once appointed, he ended the cliques and rivalries between the players of various islands to weld together a team which in the space of five years became the champions of the world.

S.Warne will play in pitch 1(pitch which is flat) & 3(Pitch which assist Spin) while A.Roberts would play in pitch 2 which assist seam and pace.



TEAM INTERVAL

Customised game plan that will attempt to win against a great Mani team:

So I understand that Mani's team is great. So instead of arguing why my team is better or attempting to make it better, I have drafted a team that will try and expose his relatively few weaknesses and match up to his strengths.

His strengths relative to mine:
(1) Superior openers - not to say that mine are weak - But Sutcliffe and Gavaskar is as good as it gets.
(2) Better spinner - BS Bedi is an ATG but obviously Warne is superior
My strengths
(1) A superior batting order in both depth and strength post the openers - Headley, Dravid, Walcott, Sobers, Miller and Miandad on a spin pitch would be hard to get through even if I don't add Marshall to it. His tail wags a bit with Hadlee but mine is superior
(2) a better battery of quickies - Yes, Akram-Roberts-Hadlee is scary but my quad of Marshall-Holding-Steyn-Miller would be impossible to handle on a quick pitch.
(3) best captain of all time managing the players

How to tackle this:
(a) On a spin friendly pitch, try and draw out that match by stuffing myself with an extra batsmen in the form of Miandad at the expense of Holding.
(b) win the swinging pitch by my battery of quickies attempting to get to his relatively softer MO asap.
(c) On a batsman's paradise, chances of my batting lasting longer to draw the match as equally as good though Warne may prove an X-Factor here


1-0 to me? Maybe?

PS: Both's WK are not first choice for this stage of the tournament. Before He jumps on Walcott - let me highlight that the man averaged 65 and 46 in the 2 test series after his debut series as an inexperienced keeper. In his subsequent series health issues made him give up his gloves. So yes, he can bat as a keeper. WI just preferred he didn't. ABD as a keeper is equally dubious.

For flat tracker and pace track
1. Gary Kirsten
2. Bill Woodfull
3. George Headley
4. Rahul Dravid
5. Sir Clyde Walcott (WK)
6. Sir Garfield Sobers (C)
7. Keith Miller
8. Malcolm Marshall
9. Dale Steyn
10. Michael Holding
11. Bishen Singh Bedi


For spin surface
1. Gary Kirsten
2. Bill Woodfull
3. George Headley
4. Rahul Dravid
5. Javed Miandad
6. Sir Clyde Walcott (WK)
7. Sir Garfield Sobers (C)
8. Keith Miller
9. Malcolm Marshall
10. Dale Steyn
11. Bishen Singh Bedi

1. Gary Kirsten (7.3K runs @ 45)
2. Bill Woodfull (2.3K runs @46, avg of 50 as an opener)
3. George Headley (2.2K runs @62; considered by the opponent Clarrie Grimmet as the best ever)
4. Rahul Dravid (13.3K runs @52)
-/5. Javed Miandad (8.8K runs @ 53)
5/6. Sir Clyde Walcott + (3.8K runs @57; WK)
6/7. Sir Gary Sobers (8K runs @58; Captain)
7/8. Keith Miller (2.9K runs @37)
8/9. Malcolm Marshall (1.8K runs @ 19 with 10 fifties)
-/10. Michael Holding (0.9K runs @13 with 6 fifties)
9/10. Dale Steyn (1.2K runs@13)
11. Bishen Singh Bedi


Bowling
:
Malcom Marshall (376 wickets @21 with SR of 47)
Michael Holding (249 wickets@24 with SR of 51; not on spin wicket)
Dale Steyn (439 wickets @23 with SR of 42; ATG)
Keith Miller (170 wickets @23 with SR of 61; ATG)

Relief
Bishen Singh Bedi (266 wickets @29 with SR of 80; ATG)
Garfield Sobers (235 wickets @34 with SR of 92)


Intro on some of the lesser known players:

Keith Miller: 'I'll tell you what pressure is. Pressure is a Messerschmitt up your arse. Playing cricket is not'."
Against Essex at Southend- on-sea in 1948, the Australians - Bradman's Invincibles - amassed 721 runs in a day, still a record. Promoted to second wicket down and with the score already 364 for two, Miller showed a distaste for the slaughter, and allowed himself to be bowled first ball by Trevor Bailey. "Thank God that's over," he was heard to mutter as he marched back to the pavilion.
Fast, unpredictable bowler who could seam the ball both ways. Imperious batsmen, probably a disservice that I have put him in at 7. I could post tonnes of stuff on him and its genuinely worth knowing if you’re into cricket. Some links:
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2004/oct/12/guardianobituaries.cricket
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/story/125925.html

From: ESPNCRICINFO: Bradman's strong side needed Miller more as a bowler than a batsman, and he ended up with 170 Test wickets, at the excellent average of 22.97. He was the perfect foil to the smooth, skiddy Lindwall: Miller would trundle in off a shortish run, but could send down a thunderbolt himself if he felt like it. Or a legspinner. Or a yorker. Or a bouncer, an overdose of which led to his being booed during the 1948 Trent Bridge Test: Miller simply sat down until the barracking had subsided.

Sir Clyde Walcott:
One of the 3 W’s of West Indies cricket, between them, the Three Ws made 1106, nearly half the 2313 West Indian Test runs. I don’t need to say more than he is amongst the best averaging middle order batsmen ever. He also started his career keeping before back injuries forced him to field in slips. It was Weekes and Walcott, respectively 8th and 13th in the all-time Test batting averages, who overshadowed their captain in Test centuries, with 15 each compared with Worrell's nine.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2006/aug/28/guardianobituaries.obituaries

Malcolm Marshall:
He played against five opponents, and the difference between his best and worst averages against them was slightly more than three runs: his lowest average was against England (19.58) and his highest against Australia (22.51). Of the six countries he played in (including the West Indies), the only place where he averaged more than 25 was in New Zealand (and he only played three Tests there). The difference between his home and away averages was 1.51, and it didn't matter much to him whether his captain won or lost the toss, and whether he had to bowl in the first innings or the last.

George Headley:
Considered the 'Black Bradman'
Clarrie Grimmett described Headley as the strongest on-side player he had ever bowled against. In 1932, in a single month, he hit 344 not out (his highest-ever score), 84, 155 not out and 140 against another English side to visit Jamaica.
 

Interval

Level
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
11,334
Location
Mostly harmless
Also, why didn't a get a mention in the OP this time?

Now that you've reached the final, you forget the people who have cried all tournament looking at that middle order.
:lol: I backspaced so many things


Mani - some questions

1. I can live with Kanhai at 5, but Hayden at 3 is an atrocity.
2. Sir Frank Worrell at 7? Too low?
3. Generally a lack of 5th bowler unless I've missed someone? I can understand Warne can bowl long spells but on a pace track with 4 seamers? A small injury and you'll be asking Worrell to bowl long spells
 

Himannv

Full Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2017
Messages
5,811
Location
Somewhere in the draft forum
@Mani

Hayden at 3 is really the equivalent of shooting yourself on the foot. I get that an opener should be able to play there, but it just looks soooo ugly!

Also I wouldn't drop Warne on any kind of pitch really. 4 fast bowlers is nice, but not always practical and you'll have to rely on someone like Hammond to bowl in an attempt to keep them all fresh. Plus Warne will turn it on any pitch.

Seeing ABdV vs Walcott as the designated keepers for a final has to be a joke of some sort. Was Gilchrist seriously not an option for reinforcement at any point?

I think you have the better team but the tactics are too questionable so can't really vote.
 

Mani

Full Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
7,663
@Mani

Hayden at 3 is really the equivalent of shooting yourself on the foot. I get that an opener should be able to play there, but it just looks soooo ugly!

Also I wouldn't drop Warne on any kind of pitch really. 4 fast bowlers is nice, but not always practical and you'll have to rely on someone like Hammond to bowl in an attempt to keep them all fresh. Plus Warne will turn it on any pitch.

Seeing ABdV vs Walcott as the designated keepers for a final has to be a joke of some sort. Was Gilchrist seriously not an option for reinforcement at any point?

I think you have the better team but the tactics are too questionable so can't really vote.
Its not so easy drafting with the criteria and with whatever available I tried to utilise it better way, with just one replacement available for final I need to replace Kippax who had been slammed in the past two rounds, so took H.Sutcliffe, I didn't find better replacement batsmen other than Sutcliffe considering the tough era.Hayden at one down as you said can play there since he's an opener who can adjust to the new ball in case any quick wickets.

Coming to Warne, yeah though he could brilliant in all three pitches but I doesn't want to waste talent such at A.Roberts so he comes in for pitch which assist Pace and seam.

ABD & C.Walcott, same as my first point plus I'd been stacked with my 70' and if there would've been the second pick for final certainly would've picked Gilly if he's available to me.
 

Mani

Full Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
7,663
:lol: I backspaced so many things


Mani - some questions

1. I can live with Kanhai at 5, but Hayden at 3 is an atrocity.
2. Sir Frank Worrell at 7? Too low?
3. Generally a lack of 5th bowler unless I've missed someone? I can understand Warne can bowl long spells but on a pace track with 4 seamers? A small injury and you'll be asking Worrell to bowl long spells

Kanhai at 5 averages 51 so no issue there, Hayden as opener can adjust to the new ball incase of any early wits.

Sir Frank Worrell at 7 can't be a weakness for sure, he too got two bowling allrounders (Hadlee and Akram) to come after him and ABD above him so he's well utilised at his position.

W.Hammond can bowl a bit and he would be my 5th bowler.
 

12OunceEpilogue

In perfect harmony
Scout
Joined
Oct 2, 2016
Messages
18,447
Location
Wigan
It's a tough one. You can't escape the fact Mani seems to have crow-barred a few of his players in, though he's done a pretty decent job and has admitted he's struggled with the draft conditions.

It's a bit of a shame neither finalist could manage to fit in a specialist keeper, I suppose given very few can come in without adversely affecting the middle order and/or blowing apart the draft conditions.

I'll vote later.
 

crappycraperson

"Resident cricket authority"
Scout
Joined
Dec 26, 2003
Messages
38,188
Location
Interweb
It's a tough one. You can't escape the fact Mani seems to have crow-barred a few of his players in, though he's done a pretty decent job and has admitted he's struggled with the draft conditions.

It's a bit of a shame neither finalist could manage to fit in a specialist keeper, I suppose given very few can come in without adversely affecting the middle order and/or blowing apart the draft conditions.

I'll vote later.
It is all his fault. He got too greedy. There was no reason to bring Sutcliffe in. He needed to get a keeper in and push ABD as a middle order batsmen only and he would have won this draft easily. I have him a pass in semis for ABD as a keeper in semis to see if he would correct it in finals given his overall team strength. You need a good keeper with likes of Warne in your attack.
 

12OunceEpilogue

In perfect harmony
Scout
Joined
Oct 2, 2016
Messages
18,447
Location
Wigan
It is all his fault. He got too greedy. There was no reason to bring Sutcliffe in. He needed to get a keeper in and push ABD as a middle order batsmen only and he would have won this draft easily. I have him a pass in semis for ABD as a keeper in semis to see if he would correct it in finals given his overall team strength. You need a good keeper with likes of Warne in your attack.
It's a black mark against him without doubt. The only thing I see as a sticking point is the gulf between Interval's great opening partnership and Mani's otherworldly pair. As you say Warne (and Bedi to be fair) hasn't been given the best foil and I absolutely love Interval's middle order. The bowling is close but I prefer Interval's change of Holding out for extra batting on the spin pitch than Warne out for Roberts on the greentop.

I've probably answered my own question really: Interval has a better balance to his team overall and Headley, Dravid, (Miandad,) Walcott, Sobers makes me want to weep.
 

Mani

Full Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
7,663
It is all his fault. He got too greedy. There was no reason to bring Sutcliffe in. He needed to get a keeper in and push ABD as a middle order batsmen only and he would have won this draft easily. I have him a pass in semis for ABD as a keeper in semis to see if he would correct it in finals given his overall team strength. You need a good keeper with likes of Warne in your attack.
You are completely wrong there, I had Hayden 70's and could have picked Gilly 70 and played Gilly as designated WK but need to drop Hayden which means I would've been left with one opener S.Gavaskar and no one to partner him.Or just need to pick some average WK batsmen for the final from smoother era.
 

Himannv

Full Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2017
Messages
5,811
Location
Somewhere in the draft forum
You are completely wrong there, I had Hayden 70's and could have picked Gilly 70 and played Gilly as designated WK but need to drop Hayden which means I would've been left with one opener S.Gavaskar and no one to partner him.Or just need to pick some average WK batsmen for the final from smoother era.
You could have gone with Oldfield instead of Sutcliffe and ended up with something like this:

01. Sunil Gavaskar
02. Matthew Hayden
03. Wally Hammond
04. AB de Villiers
05. Rohan Kanhai
06. Frank Worrell*
07. Richard Hadlee
08. Bert Oldfield+
09. Wasim Akram
10. Shane Warne
11. Andy Roberts

Ideally you'd want a better bowler than Roberts, but other than that, it's fairly balanced and is a final worthy XI. Hadlee, Arkam and Warne all bat alright so depth really isn't a problem. Plus it allows you to point out that you have a better pure keeper and openers, and your opponent is the one trying to shoehorn players into certain roles. Now you have an unbalanced side with Matthew Hayden at 3!
 

Interval

Level
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
11,334
Location
Mostly harmless
It's a black mark against him without doubt. The only thing I see as a sticking point is the gulf between Interval's great opening partnership and Mani's otherworldly pair. As you say Warne (and Bedi to be fair) hasn't been given the best foil and I absolutely love Interval's middle order. The bowling is close but I prefer Interval's change of Holding out for extra batting on the spin pitch than Warne out for Roberts on the greentop.

I've probably answered my own question really: Interval has a better balance to his team overall and Headley, Dravid, (Miandad,) Walcott, Sobers makes me want to weep.
I really think that on swinging, pace friendly pitch - Marshall, Holding, Miller and Steyn is as good as it gets especially since there is sufficiently high quality fifth bowler in the form of Bedi. The idea was to focus on winning that match and draw the other 2. I think on that pitch, he might just struggle for a fifth bowler. I understand that Hadlee and Akram were capable of bowling long spells. But even if you look at Australia in early and mid-2000s when they used to play tests with only 4 specialist bowlers (of whom McGrath and Clark/ Gillespie could bowl long spells) - Warne always ended up bowling a huge quantum of overs.

You could have gone with Oldfield instead of Sutcliffe and ended up with something like this:
....
Ideally you'd want a better bowler than Roberts, but other than that, it's fairly balanced and is a final worthy XI. Hadlee, Arkam and Warne all bat alright so depth really isn't a problem. Plus it allows you to point out that you have a better pure keeper and openers, and your opponent is the one trying to shoehorn players into certain roles. Now you have an unbalanced side with Matthew Hayden at 3!

The thing is - when he went for Sutcliffe, I really thought that his best option was to just drop Hayden and play Saqlain Mushtaq instead. In fact, I partly prepared my write-up expecting that. The same team, just play Kanhai at his place at 3 and move the rest 1 up and play Saqlain as an offie to Warney leg spin with Bedser, Hadlee and Akram to back that up would still be great. But Hayden at nos 3 just doesn't work.
 

12OunceEpilogue

In perfect harmony
Scout
Joined
Oct 2, 2016
Messages
18,447
Location
Wigan
I really think that on swinging, pace friendly pitch - Marshall, Holding, Miller and Steyn is as good as it gets especially since there is sufficiently high quality fifth bowler in the form of Bedi. The idea was to focus on winning that match and draw the other 2. I think on that pitch, he might just struggle for a fifth bowler. I understand that Hadlee and Akram were capable of bowling long spells. But even if you look at Australia in early and mid-2000s when they used to play tests with only 4 specialist bowlers (of whom McGrath and Clark/ Gillespie could bowl long spells) - Warne always ended up bowling a huge quantum of overs.




The thing is - when he went for Sutcliffe, I really thought that his best option was to just drop Hayden and play Saqlain Mushtaq instead. In fact, I partly prepared my write-up expecting that. The same team, just play Kanhai at his place at 3 and move the rest 1 up and play Saqlain as an offie to Warney leg spin with Bedser, Hadlee and Akram to back that up would still be great. But Hayden at nos 3 just doesn't work.
I see what you mean. On the pace pitch Mani has Hadlee-Wasim-Roberts-Bedsar, plus Hammond and Worrell turning their arms over, which is pretty bloody good in its own right. But as you say having to sacrifice Warne for a fourth quick is a shame as he'd still be dangerous on a green track while offering respite for three quicks.

Were you tempted to get a stellar keeping specialist in at any point, and if so how would you have shuffled the pack?
 

Interval

Level
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
11,334
Location
Mostly harmless
I see what you mean. On the pace pitch Mani has Hadlee-Wasim-Roberts-Bedsar, plus Hammond and Worrell turning their arms over, which is pretty bloody good in its own right. But as you say having to sacrifice Warne for a fourth quick is a shame as he'd still be dangerous on a green track while offering respite for three quicks.

Were you tempted to get a stellar keeping specialist in at any point, and if so how would you have shuffled the pack?
yeah, fine margins.

Yes, I was. But I had a lot of rebuilding to do because I had 1 average and 1 poor player from the 1890s and 1900s. And given the limited pool of players to choose from in that era, I had to reshuffle a lot of choices. In fact, I have to play Miandad off the bench which is sacrilige by itself. Unfortunately, I only time I really could have reinforced was between the semis and the finals and at that stage it was sacrificing Holding for Gilly that would have left me a bowler short (I picked Steyn instead). But if I had Steyn from earlier, I'd have put Gilly at 7 below Sobers at 6 and Walcott at 5 and gone in with 4 specialist bowlers - it would have needed Sobers and Bedi to bowl a lot of overs with Steyn, Marshall and Miller the pace trio.
 

Interval

Level
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
11,334
Location
Mostly harmless
Also, worth pointing out that Hayden averages sub35 in England, RSA and NZ as an opener. At nos 3 against Marshall, Holding, Miller and Steyn, hes too weak a nos 3.
 

Mani

Full Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
7,663
Also, worth pointing out that Hayden averages sub35 in England, RSA and NZ as an opener. At nos 3 against Marshall, Holding, Miller and Steyn, hes too weak a nos 3.
Before that you team need to get rid of Gavaskar and H.Sutcliffe, who are better at getting through this new ball.Where as your opening pair of Kristen/Woodfull against Akram/Hadlee/Roberts and Bedser will get my team got better passage to your middle order.
 

Interval

Level
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
11,334
Location
Mostly harmless
Final bump before I head to bed. Still think Hayden is an egregious error at this stage of tournament considering is subpar travel performances
 

Interval

Level
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
11,334
Location
Mostly harmless
Congrats Mani. Well deserved. I really think you blew the final but on the whole a much better draft and a deserved win.
 

Mani

Full Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
7,663
Hard luck Interval,you had a good team.At one point of final I lost all hope and didn’t think I would win this.Lesson learnt on Hayden and ABD as wk.Overall good draft and nice learning on lot of old players.Also thank @Moby for this draft.