cricket draft - Red Indian vs akash/nair

Who will win over a 3 match test series


  • Total voters
    8
  • Poll closed .

crappycraperson

"Resident cricket authority"
Scout
Joined
Dec 26, 2003
Messages
38,439
Location
Interweb
Sorry about the slightly poor quality of the write-up and the missing stats. Knocked up in 15 minutes or so while the wife glowers at me for being on the laptop on a Sunday evening.

1. Mark Taylor (c)
2. Marvan Atapattu
3. Nasser Hussain
4. Brian Lara
5. Steve Waugha
6. Ravi Shastri
7. Ian Healy
8. Chaminda Vaas
9. Malcolm Marshall
10. Colin Croft
11. Patrick Patterson

Perhaps by sheer co-incidence, I feel like I’ve landed up with the best batsman and bowler in the draft. As a consequence, I think I’ve put together a superb team. Perfectly balanced between batting and bowling. The one weakness is the lack of a top class spinner but I’ve made up for that with probably the best sub-continent quick after Kapil plus Ravi Shastri who has 150 wickets and was probably the torch bearer for Indian spin through the dark days of the eighties. What’s interesting is that each of the top 6 has been captain of their country for a while…all used to the responsibility of standing up for their team.

Batting
35 centuries between my openers. Both captains of their county - solid and tested in all conditions. They’ll provide a clean base for the superstars coming in after them. At 3 is another man who doesn’t sell his wicket cheap - Nasser Hussain. Then comes the deluge…the ultimate matchwinner in Brian Lara – the man who always stands up when the chips are down. Steve Waugh – the one man who most people would trust to bat for their life. If by some chance there’s a collapse, I have the very sticky Shastri and Healy to stop the rot. It doesn’t stop there – both Vaas and Marshall are no mugs with the bat. Vaas has a century and 13 fifties. Marshall’s got 10 fifties and an average of 19 in a difficult era.

Bowling
"Crofty," a West Indian team-mate once said, "would bounce his grandmother if he thought there was a wicket in it. He’ll rattle them and then they’ll come up against who I regard as the greatest bowler of all time – Malcolm fecking Marshall – Average of 20, strike rate of bloody 47 and that over 81 tests. The second line of bowling is high quality – Vaas has 355 wickets and understands the subcontinent like few others. Patrick Patterson (Average of 31, strike rate of 52) whether you remember him or not was aggression personified for a relatively brief career. They’re backed up by Steve Waugh and Shastri – 250 wickets between them.

Tactics
Akash has a quality batting line-up but it’s heavily dependant on his opening partnership. Once Marshall makes that breakthrough, I’ve exposed the soft center of his batting and I don’t think he’ll be making big totals.

If he does, I have the batting to chase it down. No total is beyond a batting line-up that contains Lara and Steve Waugh. The bowling is solid but I have quality players of pace and Mushtaq isn’t top quality spinner enough to trouble a line-up that knows how to handle spin.


All in all, I think it’ll be close but I think my batting quality and the sheer characters in the team will tell.

vs

Gordon Greenidge and Desmond Haynes - Mentioned together because they are synonymous with each other. The pair opened together for more than 13 years and to date there hasn't been a better opening partnership in test matches. They hold the record for the most runs scored as opening partners at an average nearly touching 47 which includes four 200 run stands.

Richie Richardson (C) - A fantastic number that perfectly compliments the his two West Indian teammates. Richardson will also captain the side. His record of losing only 1 series as captain is a good indicator of his leadership skills.

Graham Yallop - An average of 41 in the 70's and being appointed captain of Australia after just 8 matches should be enough to know that Yallop was very highly rated. Also in his list of achievements is his good performance against the fearsome quicks of the West Indies attack in his debut series.

Carl Hooper - Hooper averages more than 40 batting at his preferred number 5 position and add more West Indian flavour to the side. In addition to his batting he's a very steady bowler with more than 100 wickets at test level. The first player to score 5000 runs, take 100 wickets and 100 catches. Has achieved the feat in both forms of the game.

Arjuna Ranatunga - Averages 38 at number 6 and a very dogged batsman. You can always count on him to dig in and battle on no matter what the conditions. Also provides good leadership and motivational skills. Can also provide some useful seam up bowling given the right conditions.

Ian Botham - At his peak the best all rounder in world cricket. One of the very few people who could turn a game on it's head with either bat or ball and that's something he did with with great frequency especially against Australia. 14 hundreds and 27 5-wicket hauls is a testament to how good he was. Also holds the record for most catches by an England player (non-WK). An all rounder in every sense of the word.

Syed Kirmani (WK) - Top class wicket keeper who was at ease keeping wickets either against the spinners or the fast bowlers. As a batsmen he averaged a very respectable 28 for a keeper and was someone the team could count on to pitch in when in trouble.

Darren Gough - Englands's strike bowler and lead the attack with great success. An exponent of both the conventional swing and reverse swing. Averages 29 and has a very commendable strike rate of 51. Although he never played test cricket in India , his combined average of 25 in Pakistan and Srilanka shows that he was equally effective on the subcontinent.

Waqar Younis - Fast, accurate, swing and aggressive. All the ingredients you need for a world class bowler and Waqar was just that. His pace and reverse swing combined made him one of the most feared bowlers in world cricket. His bowling average of 23 is impressive but not as impressive as his strike rate of 41 which is the best in this draft.

Mushtaq Ahmed - His greatest strength as a bowler was that he was never afraid to get hit and was always prepared to flight the ball up. Has lots of variations in his locker but none better than his googly which has fooled many a player. His performances away from the spin friendly pitches in the subcontinent are excellent. Named as one of the Wisden Cricketer of the year in 1997.

Terry Alderman (Sub) - Injury and a tour to South Africa restricted Alderman's test career but when he did play he was one of Australia's best bowlers. His haul of 42 wickets in the 1981 ashes is the fourth highest of all time. Has an average of 27 with a strike rate just under 60.



Donaldo has a good bowling lineup but in Haynes and Greenidge I have the best opening combination in the entire draft who are followed by an excellent number 3 in Richardson. All three have faced quality bowling lineups in the 70's and 80's and average well over 40. My team is pretty much guaranteed a good start. Once that is achieved the middle and lower middle order can cash in. At an average bowling average of nearly 40 in Australia/England/India Vettori will not be much of a threat to my middle order.

My bowling lineup is very well suited to take advantage of both the new ball and the old ball unlike Donaldo's. Waqar, Botham and Gough are all very effective with both the new ball and the old ball. In Mushtaq Ahmed I have a quality spin bowler who's very effecive even on pitches that might not traditionally favour spin bowlers. In Carl Hooper I have an excellent foil of Mushtaq Ahmed when he needs a rest or if the wicket is spin friendly.

Another strength of my team is leadership. Of the 11 starters, 7 have previously captained their side to various degrees of success. The team has character and resiliance in abundance and will never be short of ideas to try and nail the batsmen.
 
Hello and welcome to Group A round robin match of test cricket draft.

Please keep in mind that The voters are being asked to choose a team that will prevail over a three match series on these respective grounds.
  • Eden Gardens, Kolkatta
  • Lords, London
  • SCG, Sydney
 
Top 3 RI<Akash
Middle Order RI>Akash
Quicks RI>Akash
Spin RI<Akash

Tough one.
 
Very close this. Unfortunately, akash's write up is for donaldo. Would like to hear his points before voting.
 
I have PMed him and nair.

I agree it is another close one. I am leaning towards akash. I disagree that Akash's quicks are inferior to RI's. Croft may have turned out to be the best of all time but in the end he only played 27 tests. That should count against him. Marshall is the clear standout amongst the seamers but after that I will pick all three of akash's pacers.

RI's main trump card for me is Lara + Waugh. Perfect combo. Drawback is I don't really rate anyone else in his batting order. Attapatu was a dogged player but nothing special, Taylor had some long dry spells and Hussain was just an average player.
 
RI has got a good middle order but a middle order that might be exposed a sooner that it might want to be thereby making them more vulnerable and less effective as a result. In Darren Gough I have a bowler who has dismissed Lara and Waugh 6 and 5 times respectively in addition to getting Mark Taylor out 6 times as well. So in Gough I have someone who knows how to get RI's batsmen out.

RI has great opening bowlers but that's somewhat neutralised given my excellent opening partnership and number 3 and 4 batsmen. RI obviously lacks a spinner which will be telling given two out of the three pitches are spin friendly. Shastri has a strike rate of over a 100 and not someone I'd want as my lead spinner. And Croft played just 27 tests...
 
I don't quite get why my top order's soft. Mark Taylor has an average of 44 with 19 test centuries. Atapattu has 16. They've batted in all conditions and are habitual openers.

His middle order (which really should be the heart of the team) is heaps weaker though. Yallop's played just 39 tests. His average in England and India are both below par. Both Hooper and Ranatunga were notoriously inconsistent. Hooper in fact was famous for it. Botham's hit and miss...brilliant on his day but that day wasn't every day.
 
Yallop might have played just 39 tests but that's still 12 and 11 more than Croft and Patterson respectively, the former who you are really bigging up. You also mention how all of your top 6 have captained their country....I can better that with all of my top 7 having captained their country at some point in time, some very successfully so.

Overall I have the better top 3 players, better spinner and better combination of fast bowlers.
 
I wouldn't say Younis-Gough-Botham are better than Marshall-Croft-Vaas-Patterson. Nor I doubt would any unbiased observer.

Marshall was first among equals in the greatest bowling attack ever assembled. I'll borrow shamelessly from S Rajesh's statistical analysis on Cricinfo
- In the Tests that Marshall played, he took almost a third of the wickets taken by their fast bowlers (31.37%).
- Not only did Marshall get many wickets, he also generally dismissed the top batsmen from the opposition line-ups. Among the batsmen he dismissed most often were Graham Gooch (16 times), Allan Lamb (13 times), Allan Border (11), Vengsarkar (10) and Gavaskar (8).
- Another factor that puts Marshall above many other high-class fast bowlers is his stats in the subcontinent. The relatively slow pitches in the region have thwarted many a fast bowler, but not Marshall, whose varied skills helped him take 71 wickets in 19 Tests at an average of 23.05. Those numbers look even better if his first series in India is excluded: in the 16 remaining Tests he averaged 20.17.

Yes Mushtaq is better than Shastri but he's not going to be a deciding factor here. It would've been different if you had Warne, Murali or Kumble.
 
All I can say is I'm glad I'm not in this group
 
I wouldn't say Younis-Gough-Botham are better than Marshall-Croft-Vaas-Patterson. Nor I doubt would any unbiased observer.

Marshall was first among equals in the greatest bowling attack ever assembled. I'll borrow shamelessly from S Rajesh's statistical analysis on Cricinfo
- In the Tests that Marshall played, he took almost a third of the wickets taken by their fast bowlers (31.37%).
- Not only did Marshall get many wickets, he also generally dismissed the top batsmen from the opposition line-ups. Among the batsmen he dismissed most often were Graham Gooch (16 times), Allan Lamb (13 times), Allan Border (11), Vengsarkar (10) and Gavaskar (8).
- Another factor that puts Marshall above many other high-class fast bowlers is his stats in the subcontinent. The relatively slow pitches in the region have thwarted many a fast bowler, but not Marshall, whose varied skills helped him take 71 wickets in 19 Tests at an average of 23.05. Those numbers look even better if his first series in India is excluded: in the 16 remaining Tests he averaged 20.17.

Yes Mushtaq is better than Shastri but he's not going to be a deciding factor here. It would've been different if you had Warne, Murali or Kumble.

Yes, Marshall is a fantastic bowler. No arguments there from me. But when you take Botham-Younis-Gough together with your pacers I have the better bowling in my opinion. And then there's the fact that Gough seems to have a decent know how how to dismiss 3 of your players.

Mushtaq is comfortably better than Shastri. What you are saying is that unless someone has the above mentioned three spinners it's pointless having a spinner at all. It will make a difference, no doubt
 
I think these are two evenly matched teams who are decided by Ian Botham.

Early era Ian Botham swings this in akash's favour for me, late era Botham takes it Red Indian's way.

Very tough to call.
 
I'm beginning to lean towards Akash, but his middle order will probably get massacred here.
 
I'm beginning to lean towards Akash, but his middle order will probably get massacred here.

It will. There's no doubt about. If you're going to depend on a couple of batsman to make your runs, you don't want all 3 of them to be concentrated in the top 3 against possibly the greatest fast bowler of all time with the new ball in hand. He won't make enough runs to win games.

My best batsmen on the other hand are nicely shielded from the new ball by 3 very sticky batsmen. They'll wear the bowling down and then Lara and Waugh will feast and boy can they feast.
 
It will. There's no doubt about. If you're going to depend on a couple of batsman to make your runs, you don't want all 3 of them to be concentrated in the top 3 against possibly the greatest fast bowler of all time with the new ball in hand. He won't make enough runs to win games.

My best batsmen on the other hand are nicely shielded from the new ball by 3 very sticky batsmen. They'll wear the bowling down and then Lara and Waugh will feast and boy can they feast.


I don't rate Hussain or Atapattu though. Waqar will eat em for breakfast.
 
It will. There's no doubt about. If you're going to depend on a couple of batsman to make your runs, you don't want all 3 of them to be concentrated in the top 3 against possibly the greatest fast bowler of all time with the new ball in hand. He won't make enough runs to win games.

My best batsmen on the other hand are nicely shielded from the new ball by 3 very sticky batsmen. They'll wear the bowling down and then Lara and Waugh will feast and boy can they feast.

My best batsmen on the other hand will shield my middle order so they can graft away against a team with no frontline spinner
 
It will. There's no doubt about. If you're going to depend on a couple of batsman to make your runs, you don't want all 3 of them to be concentrated in the top 3 against possibly the greatest fast bowler of all time with the new ball in hand. He won't make enough runs to win games.

My best batsmen on the other hand are nicely shielded from the new ball by 3 very sticky batsmen. They'll wear the bowling down and then Lara and Waugh will feast and boy can they feast.

mmmmmm. How does that work? Your inferior openers will protect your middle order while his superior, probably the best pair of all time, would fail to do so?
Richardson is easily better than Hussain as well. Res of the batting order, obviously your 4 and 5 are way way better but I would prefer 6 and 7 from akash.
 
My best batsmen on the other hand will shield my middle order so they can graft away against a team with no frontline spinner

mmmmmm. How does that work? Your inferior openers will protect your middle order while his superior, probably the best pair of all time, would fail to do so?
Richardson is easily better than Hussain as well. Res of the batting order, obviously your 4 and 5 are way way better but I would prefer 6 and 7 from akash.

It can be seen both ways but for me a single breakthrough exposes the soft center of Akash's batting. I'd much prefer my best batsman protected in my middle order.
 
I think these are two evenly matched teams who are decided by Ian Botham.

Early era Ian Botham swings this in akash's favour for me, late era Botham takes it Red Indian's way.

Very tough to call.

Finally. I've seen you so many times in the cricket thread and wondered why you didn't pop in here. Even PM'd you to participate.
 
Very close, but went with RI. Way I see it is, which team has the highest probability of winning at one of the venues? RI would win at Lord's for me and then I look at the other venues.
 
It can be seen both ways but for me a single breakthrough exposes the soft center of Akash's batting. I'd much prefer my best batsman protected in my middle order.

But they won't be protected once Waqar, Gough and Botham are through with them.

Just to re-iterate some points.

1. I have the better spinner. Shastri as a front line spinner does not work. In a series where two of the games are being played at spin friendly venues having one part time spinner is a big drawback.

2. Marshall might be the best bowler in both teams but overall I have the better bowling attack overall which has more variety and more suited to the pitches the games will be played on.

3. In Gough I have someone who knows how to dismiss the 3 best batsmen that RI can offer namely Taylor, Lara and Waugh. He's picked the 3 of them 17 times in total.

4. My openers are more than good enough to deal with the initial onslaught by Croft and Marshall without exposing the middle order. They are the best opening pair in history. Also Yallop is being underrated a little bit. He's done quite well against he Windies pacers of the past.
 
Was very tight but went for RI in the end.

Expect him to win the Lords test comfortably while the other 2 will be very close. Though he has no spinners, in Vaas he has a bowler who knows the conditions and how to take wickets here better than most and in Marshall he has a bowler who'l take wickets anywhere. That compensates for not having someone like Mustaq ahmed as I dont think he's good enough to convince me that akash would win the other 2 tests.
 
But they won't be protected once Waqar, Gough and Botham are through with them.

Just to re-iterate some points.

1. I have the better spinner. Shastri as a front line spinner does not work. In a series where two of the games are being played at spin friendly venues having one part time spinner is a big drawback.
Which is why I have Vaas. No quick is more experienced at bowling in sub-continent conditions than Vaas
2. Marshall might be the best bowler in both teams but overall I have the better bowling attack overall which has more variety and more suited to the pitches the games will be played on.
The spinner's the only advantage you have really.
3. In Gough I have someone who knows how to dismiss the 3 best batsmen that RI can offer namely Taylor, Lara and Waugh. He's picked the 3 of them 17 times in total.
It can't have been very useful. Lara's average against England is 62.14 (he particularly loved Lords) and Steve Waugh's is 58

4. My openers are more than good enough to deal with the initial onslaught by Croft and Marshall without exposing the middle order. They are the best opening pair in history. Also Yallop is being underrated a little bit. He's done quite well against he Windies pacers of the past.
They're a great partnership but they're averages are good without being exceptional. The truly exceptional batsmen of the era - Gavaskar, Boycott, Richards etc. all averaged 50ish.
 
This one was a lot tougher. Went with RI on the basis of the strong middle order as well as a quality pace attack. Shastri as a main spinner is a weakness for me but I'm not that keen on mushtaq ahmed either so it doesn't make that big a difference. Akash has a very good bowling attack, but once the opening partnership is broken, the team can go down without making a huge score. You can't expect the opening pair to deliver massive stands n 6 innings in a row, so the time they fail to do that, there's no one to stay on the pitch a pile a huge score. All good fighting batsmen, sure, but slightly fall short of what's needed here. While in Lara and Waugh you have two players who can score big as well as have enough grit and determination in them to carry on for a long time and save a match if needed. RI has a decent tail who can stand it's ground a fair bit and Waugh was one of the best in getting the best out of a wagging tail.
 
RI's team lacks a quality spinner IMO.
 
I don't think lack of spin is that big an issue. Having spin adds to variety. Its not the sole deciding factor in a test. Many Windies sides after Gibbs won matches only on pace. I just can't decide whether to give Croft any credit or not. PAtterson isn't going to be counted highly in my books. And I rate Vaas quite high. Furthermore, his batting bar the middle order 2 and Taylor seems hit and miss.

On the other hand, the issue with akash is his batting middle order. Yallop, Ranatunga and Hooper just can't cut it. I'm afraid.
 
I don't think lack of spin is that big an issue. Having spin adds to variety. Its not the sole deciding factor in a test. Many Windies sides after Gibbs won matches only on pace. I just can't decide whether to give Croft any credit or not. PAtterson isn't going to be counted highly in my books. And I rate Vaas quite high. Furthermore, his batting bar the middle order 2 and Taylor seems hit and miss.

On the other hand, the issue with akash is his batting middle order. Yallop, Ranatunga and Hooper just can't cut it. I'm afraid.

It's an issue because 2 out 3 games are being played on spin friendly tracks.
 
I don't think lack of spin is that big an issue. Having spin adds to variety. Its not the sole deciding factor in a test. Many Windies sides after Gibbs won matches only on pace. I just can't decide whether to give Croft any credit or not. PAtterson isn't going to be counted highly in my books. And I rate Vaas quite high. Furthermore, his batting bar the middle order 2 and Taylor seems hit and miss.

On the other hand, the issue with akash is his batting middle order. Yallop, Ranatunga and Hooper just can't cut it. I'm afraid.

Yes but the Windies sides had 4 beasts in their bowling lineup. Spin is an issue. You can't just rely on fast bowlers to toil away all day long supplemented Shastri
 
Sydney/ Astralia is hardly spin friendly. It helps ofcourse. But its not a deciding factor. Not every team without a spinner is an automatic loser

From what I read, crappy chose it from a point of view of helping both spin and pace and I think spin bowlers do quite well there.

Not an automatic loser, but you do need a spinner to have balance in the team which is very important. No one here has the quality of that WI foursome to start. They were someone who could be effective on all surfaces and give you wickets and not let you miss a spinner.

More than that you need a spinner to bowl long spells which obviously the quicks can't. Having someone like Murali who can bowl for ages makes life so much easier as you can rotate the quicks from the other end.

And lastly, obviously if you are playing in a spin friendly track, which is the Eden Gardens here, you really have to have a spinner IMO because very few quicks in this draft are capable of getting you the same result without getting much help from the surface and if you don't have a spinner and your opponent has a good one, it would definitely give him a big advantage. Which is why RI got away this time, as Mushtaq isn't really someone IMO who could make best use of that advantage.

Still, any side without even one full time spin option is unbalanced.