ODI Cricket Draft: Skills vs MJJ

Who will win the ODI?


  • Total voters
    17
  • Poll closed .
Well if he wanted free posting rights he should have signed up to play and instead of an AM. 2vs1 ganging up is quite a low blow way to overwhelm the match threads. It's not on being serious or having fun, but on fair play.
I don't think the volume of posts sway the decision of the voters. It's what being posted. If anything, w people ganging up on 1 would be stupid ad it would make people vote the other way
 
I don't think it matters like in a test match, especially with Skills only having the one spinner. Mushtaq is very good, but in the end it's only ten overs to navigate with possibly no one to hold down the other end at times.
Fair enough, but you do understand I'm saying this while assuming that you both more or less even out in the bowling department otherwise.
 
MJJ's lying has basically ruined this draft.

Don't worry though, I'll mod it to make sure he can't win.
 
MJJ's lying has basically ruined this draft.

Don't worry though, I'll mod it to make sure he can't win.

Can we have a rule in the next round where everyone has to swap openers?

Also, I had to get you back for not allowing me to pick fat bermuda whale.
 
This draft seems done, I've had my fun reminiscing about one of my favourite players.
 
At his peak in 2000 he had a career average of 18.8 and a SR of 26.5. He had 186 wickets in 95 matches.
Yeah, at his peak, he was in the elite bracket alongside the obvious 2. No doubt.
 
Yeah, at his peak, he was in the elite bracket alongside the obvious 2. No doubt.
I'd put him higher than Murali at his peak, who had the natural advantage of his deformity (aside from the fact that he was a capable bowler). Saqlain was all guile and shrewdness. What a bowler.
 
I'd put him higher than Murali at his peak, who had the natural advantage of his deformity (aside from the fact that he was a capable bowler). Saqlain was all guile and shrewdness. What a bowler.
Top bowler I agree but wouldn't put him ahead of murali. He's a big plus for skills here ofcourse.
 
Significant enough, non?

On a separate note

Vinod-Sachin.jpg
 
Saqlain is a slightly better version of Ajantha Mendis. Nothing more. Was good while batsmen were clueless but nothing special once they figured him out. There's a good reason why he progressively got worse as his career went on and was eventually discarded while still being fairly young.

Still, perhaps the only bowler (with the exception of Murali) who bowled the doosra without blatantly chucking. So respect to him for that.
 
Saqlain is a slightly better version of Ajantha Mendis. Nothing more. Was good while batsmen were clueless but nothing special once they figured him out. There's a good reason why he progressively got worse as his career went on and was eventually discarded while still being fairly young.

Still, perhaps the only bowler (with the exception of Murali) who bowled the doosra without blatantly chucking. So respect to him for that.

No offence but that's bullshit.
 
It's really not. Not saying he's shit obviously but he's someone who started exceedingly well but his tailed off alarmingly. Still a good bowler but nowhere near the level he's being portrayed here.

His average drop down to 28 and strike rate to 38 in the last 4 years of his career. Basically peaked in his early 20's
 
Saqlain is a slightly better version of Ajantha Mendis. Nothing more. Was good while batsmen were clueless but nothing special once they figured him out. There's a good reason why he progressively got worse as his career went on and was eventually discarded while still being fairly young.

Still, perhaps the only bowler (with the exception of Murali) who bowled the doosra without blatantly chucking. So respect to him for that.
:lol: couldn't give a rat's ass about petty point winning for a draft I'm not even taking part in but that's just rubbish.

He did decline, more down to his own personal and physical issues, and a cricket board which didn't support him. When he came back he was a shadow of his former self.
 
Saqlain is a slightly better version of Ajantha Mendis. Nothing more. Was good while batsmen were clueless but nothing special once they figured him out. There's a good reason why he progressively got worse as his career went on and was eventually discarded while still being fairly young.

Still, perhaps the only bowler (with the exception of Murali) who bowled the doosra without blatantly chucking. So respect to him for that.

saqlain was class dude, comparing him to mendis is an insult.
 
saqlain was class dude, comparing him to mendis is an insult.

It's really not. Mendis was literally unplayable for a while before he was figured out. Just had a look at his stats and they're still ridiculously good and he's played 90 games. And this was at a time when pitches are supposedly flatter (Funnily enough this only seems to be used to dismiss current batsmen and not praise current bowlers)

People like to massively exaggerate how good certain players were. It's classic revisionism.
 

:lol: :lol:
It's really not. Mendis was literally unplayable for a while before he was figured out. Just had a look at his stats and they're still ridiculously good and he's played 90 games. And this was at a time when pitches are supposedly flatter (Funnily enough this only seems to be used to dismiss current batsmen and not praise current bowlers)

People like to massively exaggerate how good certain players were. It's classic revisionism.

mendis was unplayable for only a few series though, after that he became an average bowler. Saqlain was world class for three-four years and after that was still a very good bowler. Just wasnt managed right.
 
It's really not. Mendis was literally unplayable for a while before he was figured out. Just had a look at his stats and they're still ridiculously good and he's played 90 games. And this was at a time when pitches are supposedly flatter (Funnily enough this only seems to be used to dismiss current batsmen and not praise current bowlers)

People like to massively exaggerate how good certain players were. It's classic revisionism.
So a spinner widely regarded at his peak (which lasted a good 5-6 years) by his peers and the global audience as among the very best in the world was actually 'nothing special'

Coz revisinizim mate.