ODI Cricket Draft: KM vs PaulScholes

Who will win the match?

  • Total voters
    26
  • Poll closed .
LeChuck said:
I don't think KM's top 3 match up to ps18's top 3. Sehwag and Sangakarra especially are a fair bit ahead in my estimation when compared to Root and Watson (though I do think Root will go on and become excellent in his own right).

But Holding aside, ps18's bowling attack isn't too great...(even though Holding is the best bowler for both sides). It's how much damage can Holding do in his 10 overs.
Click to expand...
What makes you think Holding is the better bowler over Donald ?
 
Samid said:
Armstrong is a grade A cnut who deceived the whole world and threatened anyone that wanted to expose him but winning 7 successive TDFs on drugs is still an achievement considering most of his rivals also were on drugs. Armstrong would still be a first round pick in a cycling draft.
Click to expand...
Tbf, any cycling draft would have to assume PED abuse was allowed, otherwise there wouldn't be anyone left to choose from. Cricket is different.
 
LeChuck said:
I don't think KM's top 3 match up to ps18's top 3. Sehwag and Sangakarra especially are a fair bit ahead in my estimation when compared to Root and Watson (though I do think Root will go on and become excellent in his own right).

But Holding aside, ps18's bowling attack isn't too great...(even though Holding is the best bowler for both sides). It's how much damage can Holding do in his 10 overs.
Click to expand...

Agree about Sangakarra but disagree about Sehwag tbh. His average in Australia was 22.
 
LeChuck said:
Holding is a personal preference, and I just feel he'd be considered higher had he played in the 90s when there were floods of ODI games. But Donald is up there, and KMs bowling array is better than ps18's.
Click to expand...
There isn't too much of a difference between the number of games Holding and Donald played tbf. And some of Holding's numbers would have definitely gotten weaker if he played in the 90s (especially his economy). But of the two, I'd rate Donald as having the more innate ability to be a game changer.
 
Ijazz17 said:
That's not the case here is it ? Ajmal's peers weren't exactly doing the same thing (Not everyone atleast).
Click to expand...

Well you made the comparison, not me. One was a drug cheat that did everything in his power to hide all the traces and took legal action against anyone that claimed he was a druggie.

The other one bowled with the same action throughout his career. He didn't try to hide it, just lazy work from the ICC not exposing him. I saw Ajmal bowl live from side on in WT20 2009, it took me two deliveries to find out that he was chucking. ICC could have stopped him back then. He was allowed to bowl + he had a very good prime = should be treated like any other bowler in the draft.
 
Samid said:
Well you made the comparison, not me. One was a drug cheat that did everything in his power to hide all the traces and took legal action against anyone that claimed he was a druggie.

The other one bowled with the same action throughout his career. He didn't try to hide it, just lazy work from the ICC not exposing him. I saw Ajmal bowl live from side on in WT20 2009, it took me two deliveries to find out that he was chucking. ICC could have stopped him back then. He was allowed to bowl + he had a very good prime = should be treated like any other bowler in the draft.
Click to expand...
I brought up the comparison to highlight the fact that nobody really knows how Armstrong might have performed without the PEDs. So in a cyclign draft, he would still be an R1 pick.for many. But Ajmal statistically struggled after modifying his action. It can be argued that since he is bowling with an action which is very unnatural to him, his form suffered or whatever, but there was too big a difference between the illegal version of Ajmal and the legal version.

Edit: I don't have a problem with someone like Hafeez. His bowling was anyways average even with or without his illegal action. There isn't too much of a gap there. Here the gaps seems a little too big to ignore.
 
Last edited:
I like KM's middle order. All keep the score ticking over without being carefree like you could say the openers from both teams are. Perhaps they're a bit much of a muchness. Buttler is a devastating hitter and maybe could have been promoted up the order to give him the opportunity to go big. I don't know how his stats would match up but I believe he has the capabilities to do so which is important.
 
Ijazz17 said:
I brought up the comparison to highlight the fact that nobody really knows how Armstrong might have performed without the PEDs. So in a cyclign draft, he would still be an R1 pick.for many. But Ajmal statistically struggled after modifying his action. It can be argued that since he is bowling with an action which is very unnatural to him, his form suffered or whatever, but there was too big a difference between the illegal version of Ajmal and the legal version.

Edit: I don't have a problem with someone like Hafeez. His bowling was anyways average even with or without his illegal action. There isn't too much of a gap there. Here the gaps seems a little too big to ignore.
Click to expand...

A 38 year old changing his action will obviously struggle to adapt. He had been bowling with one action throughout his career and at that age you are asked to change the way you bowl. A teenager could've managed to modify it and come back equally strong but in your late 30s you don't have anywhere near the same levels of motor adaption as in your teens.

Don't agree with Hafeez' bowling being average. He would rarely go for more than 4 an over which is incredible considering he bowled a lot in the PP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.