OB
Full Member
Ok i pick Jacob Oram.
How'd you know he was getting picked?Bah I wanted Oram as my 12th man
How'd you know he was getting picked?Bah I wanted Oram as my 12th man
Gambhir is better in tests away from home. He has above 50 averages in series at RSA, SL, Bangladesh and WI.
Plus, Robin Smith was no mug with the bat either.
And yes, McCullum opens in tests. Its not like their ability to face opening bowlers disappears in tests.
SL Bangladesh and WI are very similar to Indian conditions though.
Never watched Robin Smith play, too young i guess.
Opening in tests is very different to ODIs and you know that IL.
Anyways, never mind. As i said, you have a good team. Lets see how things shape up.
Right then, how many people in front of me before I next need to pick? Just a bit confused as to the order as there hasn't been an updated list in a while.
I have a couple but my first choice is clearly preferable. Because you've repeatedly proven yourself to be a cnut and kps88 has recently joined the ranks with his choice of Astle, I better find a third.
Excellent team as well so far.Hurry up aldo.
I have 1 person on my short list. If he gets picked, I aint playing anymore.
EDIT: Just noticed Donadol's batting
1. Andrew Strauss (vc)
2. xxx - OPENING BATSMEN
3. Ricky Ponting (c)
4. Graham Thorpe
5. Ian Bell
6. Ian Healy (wk)
7. Irfan Pathan (all-rounder)
8. Harbhajan Singh
9. Damien Fleming
10. Patrick Patterson
11. Chris Martin
Don't worry, I need a WK.
Good and deep batting line-up from a test perspective if you get that other opener sorted out.Thoughts Taurean?
Good and deep batting line-up from a test perspective if you get that other opener sorted out.
Who is your frontline(opening) bowler?
TT could you do us a favor.
Go to random.org, go to sequence generator under numbers and create a sequence from 1-16 and post the results here. Let's do the match draw.
Are we doing the KOs thing? If so, does it mean 1 vs 16, 2 vs 15 and so on?
Random sequence
1. 16
2. 13
3. 1
4. 14
5. 15
6. 5
7. 12
8. 9
9. 10
10. 11
11. 6
12. 4
13. 2
14. 7
15. 8
16. 3
Not sure if you required this.
We ain't doing groups?
Groups would mean a minimum of 30 games however you structured it. We discussed this earlier. It wouldn't be practical.
Did we discuss it in the start?Yeah true. Guess it's all down to luck of the draw now.
I say we might as well pick a 12th man since we discussed it from the start. Not too bothered either way.
I thought 12 players meant 12 participants, and he just didn't edit it to 16.12 players. We go from 1 to 16 and then back to 1 till we all have a team of 11 players! In short, 1-16 then 16-1 then 1-16 and so on.
I don't see the point of a 12th man.