All I know about Worrell's bowling is that he used it less and less as his career as a batsman progressed. Maybe the burden of batting long innings and then bowling was too much for him or he didn't feel comfortable splitting his practice time? I don't agree though that part-time options are useless against opposing batsmen of sufficient quality. When a captain can't remove an entrenched partnership he may well turn to some less well-known bowler who can offer a different kind of delivery which might do the trick. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
Test Cricket draft: QF : Ijazz17 vs Mani @ National Stadium, Karachi
- Thread starter The Man Himself
- Start date
omg, again, where did I say he was as good as all rounder as those two? You do realize that both Kallis' and Sobers' legacy revolves around their batting, not bowling, so to bring up their standing as an all rounder in the history of the game when their bowling is being discussed is not relevant. Sobers is the greatest batsman in the history of the game as far as I am concerned, let's not even go there.
I'm saying they all had the same roles in the team, not that they were all equally good at it, or had the same stats, or anything like that. Please emphasize on the role. Kallis could easily end this game wicketless as well, in a draft like this I don't consider him, or Sobers, to make a difference with the ball considering the batting line ups. But they would all still bowl a hell lot, as that's what they've done throughout their careers. You made statements like "the others would have to fail for Worrell to bowl". which is simply untrue. No one has to fail for them to bowl. You keep expecting me to provide stats for him that would resemble a strike bowler, that too a great one, when I keep repeating that he was a batting all rounder.
Don't know about the part in bold man, never read enough about him as a bowler to know why he didn't ball enough etc.
I agree with the 2nd bit, options are always good especially if they can break a partnership as you said. Shakib gives him that too. Doesn't make up for lacking a genuine reh bowler though which combined with us batting first would win us the game imo.
Cheers for the educative tone about sobers and Kallis. Being such unknown quantities, I wouldn't have known about them if not for you and your posts.
Re the part in bold, I have already responded in my earlier reply. If you have missed it, go back and read it. If you have but chose to ignore it, I don't care enough to repeat myself.
Re the post in general, I have said enough times for the message to be clear by now. He has 3 genuine bowlers. Shakib and Worrell being able to bowl is not enough to compensate for that considering the pitches and the quality of the batting line ups. Bowlers win you tests. My point about others needing to fail for Worrell was in response to him highlighting his variations as being decisive in the test which is nonsense imo as it's about quality and not quality or we'd all have picked 10 Chris Cairns in the draft.
There was no educative tone there, quite the contrary actually, not sure why that seemed that way when all I was trying to do was explain my point of view?
Yes, he has gone with three specialist bowlers and two all rounders, as opposed to four specialists and one all rounder generally, there's no argument there. Worrell is not going to threaten like a specialist bowler, would have, of course. But he will still constantly bowl in the game, that is all.
Anyway, I'll vote and leave. Good luck with the rest of it.
Where did my write-up talk about Worrel as a prime bowler mate? I said my top 4 itself has enough variation.
If there wasn't, then ignore what I said as that was a result of how it came across to me.
Talking about the number of times you mentioned Hammond Worrell and even Mitchell as being able to bowl and add variety to your attack.
Think it's a pretty small difference tbh. His accurate yorkers will be handy at checking Hammond and Worrell's stroke-play though, I imagine.
That's only because Akshay kept asking me who else could bowl in my team. And all I did was list the set of players who bowled at that level. You're probably reading more into than you should. And we already discussed this previously, at best, not more than 10-12 overs in the first innings, maybe even less in the third.
Edit: I'd imagine Clarke would have to bowl similar in the 2nd Innings and maybe more in the 4th.
The way I see it, if it comes down to the 4th bowler, you'll probably win the first half of the match and I'd probably win the second half.
If it's down to the 5th bowler, I'll win that battle comfortably.
Edit: I should clairfy. You refers to Mani and Varun
If it's down to the 5th bowler, I'll win that battle comfortably.
Edit: I should clairfy. You refers to Mani and Varun
@Aldo I have already said you should ignore my arsey post if you didn't mean it the way I interpreted. Vote for the team you think will win.
Already did, bud.
Continue to post too man. We need some gibberish among all these pearls of wisdom I am throwing around. Hehe
Haha, working on my write up actually.
Good Luck Aldo, that game should be a cracker too...
Voted Mani. Their bowling unit looks better to me. Though Ijazz's batting is stronger, Mani batting first will negate that. Both teams are really fantastic and it will be shame whichever team fails to make semis.
This is tight as fuarck. Think Ijazz edges it though.
Wow. Mani/Varun could be heading towards their second tiebreaker in as many matches.
Yeah, losing toss sucks tbh. But if our batting is better, we should really get a lead which will not make their 2nd batting any easier. Add to that, I have two bowlers who can make more use of that deteriorating pitch than his one.
And as someone mentioned earlier, even if that one spinner takes a couple of crucial wickets, my batting line-up is very deep and the middle order more often than not usually play with a Sr of around 60 and are very used to playing under pressure. They needn't play any big shots or take much risk. They can keep it simple and move things along and win the match. Just my opinion anyways
No, judging by how the recent trend of voting has been, I think it's very possible that they may just nick this one.
No,most of game we were well behind and always try catchingyou.Either you win or tie as I see this.
Yeah your batting is deep than Mani/Varun's no doubt but I doubt impact of Shakib as a bowler. He is Bangladesh's best player no doubt but in drafts, when all top players are put together, I doubt how much he will be able to match them and have an impact. You have Hammond and Worrell who, though not having great records, bowled decent amount in tests whereas Mani and Varun pretty much have to rely on the 4 specialists bowlers but all of those 4 are specialists and v.good bowlers. Shakib to me is not that good a bowler.Yeah, losing toss sucks tbh. But if our batting is better, we should really get a lead which will not make their 2nd batting any easier. Add to that, I have two bowlers who can make more use of that deteriorating pitch than his one.
And as someone mentioned earlier, even if that one spinner takes a couple of crucial wickets, my batting line-up is very deep and the middle order more often than not usually play with a Sr of around 60 and are very used to playing under pressure. They needn't play any big shots or take much risk. They can keep it simple and move things along and win the match. Just my opinion anyways
Well, I've tried my best to convince people that Shakib isn't as bad as people think. Some of the video's I've posted show how he bamboozled some of the best like Smith, Kallis, Pieterson, all very good at reading spin. Some of the turn he generates is ridiculous on a flat pitch. And his arm ball is very deceptive. The video's highlight all that.
If you will judge him by his stats alone, it's a little unfair, because he does play for a poor nation who won't win much in test, naturally his stats will reflect that. Despite that he has a wicket taking record similar to Gupte's (But yes,it includes Zimbabwe and Windies too) And like I said, had he been playing for a nation like India, we might be raving about him and talk about how crucial he is as a bowler to our chances as well. I've seen videos where the likes of Sachin, Manjrekar talk about how crucial his bowling is to his sides chances. I've maintained it all along, he won't be the star in my team, and to be frank in a one-off, I don't see any bolwer taking a fifer. He will be a solid assist to Kumble on that turning pitch. The two of them combined have what it takes to take 7 wickets in the 3rd Innings.
...Yep.
What now @The Man Himself ? I don't know if you can find 3 more voters tbh.
feck sakes
Not even sure what happened with RT. Said he voted by mistake, would read and vote properly later and wasn't seen since.
These ties isn't good for my heart
Here's my idea if you cannot find another 3 votes. I suggest we give an extra point to those voters that participated in the draft at some stage. Even then, I think it is even at 7-7 and in that case the winning vote should be of the Game Mod. It's KM in this case, but since @The Man Himself took over, I think his vote would be the final say.
How about we eliminate both these teams for causing The Man Himself problems? Akash and I will sacrifice our personal time next week to take their place. You can't ask for fairer than that.
Let's see if we can find 3 more votes like last time. Or at least one from some knowledgeable poster.
First 3 votes by 3 PM GMT or else the first vote wins it.
Was tagged earlier but forgot to vote
@RedTiger did you vote by mistake?
Nope. I did at first but I'm sticking with ijaaz
What's your vote Samid ?Was tagged earlier but forgot to vote