Tbh only Sachin from yours would get into his.
Test Cricket draft: SF : Mani vs Skills @ Lord's, London
- Thread starter The Man Himself
- Start date
I think Skills' batsmen are a better collective. The two openers are more defensive but both are technically tight as they come which is what you need against quick bowlers seaming it around. Amla's very good but the three after that are absolute machines. It's the most formidable middle order in this draft IMO.
I would say when you take into account consistency, only Sachin and Kanhai go down as complete batsmen.
I would say when you take into account consistency, only Sachin and Kanhai go down as complete batsmen.
Kanhai wouldnt get in the team ahead of Amla?
I was looking more at 4 onwards. No 3 is a bit of a specialist position. Tough to say who's a better one between kanhai and amla. Not much between them.
Oh yes, his 5 and 6 are definitely better. No arguments. Kanhai is definitely better than Amla though, everything available on the guy indicates that.
Last edited:
Down by 4 votes already 
You can come back. You've already done it twice!Down by 4 votes already
Hope so. Think his Chappell border Walcott trio is pulling votes which I can't really argue about tbh. I think the likes of kanhai are getting the short end of the stick though, so is our holding Garner Tyson trio especially given we bowl first.
By bowling first,are you talking about the early swing working in your favour ? Because, that pretty much stays the same even on Day 2. He also has the advantage of bowling last, so Swann should get some turn on the last day of the match.
Yeah, I voted for him, because I think his batting just oozes class (Though I hate Chappell). He can bat even upto 8. Cairns is probably the best No 7 All-Rounder you can find in the draft. His biggest problem was his bowling, and he fixed it for the time being with the inclusion of McGrath. Willis and Cairns together can more than make up for a decent bowler. Another problem for you since, Clarke will have to pop in a few overs every now and then just to give your players a break.
Yeah, I'd agree. Batting is a wash, I'd say, and tbh it's difficult to separate the bowlers too. I rate Holding as the best bowler though, and that might be enough to tip it. Also Steyn doesn't have a good record in England.
Early morning conditions would be the same, not talking about that. I'm talking about bowling on a fresh pitch with the grass untouched. Always the best time to bowl.
I don't think a spinner is going to exploit bowling last on a pitch like Lords unlike the subcontinent.
Cairns was a good all rounder obviously but he isn't going to trouble these batsmen with the ball. He'd probably be used if he wants to rest some of his prime bowlers but then I don't really see the need for it given the conditions and the presence of swann. Willis is better but again, not a top bowler from what I know about him which isn't a lot tbf.
Clarke isn't playing btw. No need for him given we have 3 top pacers and a top spinner. That's enough especially in England.
Edit: Also don't see how many runs swann is going to contribute in a match like this for his presence as an 8 to matter. There's just far too much quality in the bowling and batting on both sides for a useful tail or a part time bowler to make any impact. It's about specialists at this stage imo.
Tyson > Willis too and cairns with his few overs of gentle medium pace doesn't make up for that. We also bowl first in a fresh pitch.
Lol. I keep remembering the QF and how the talk of part timers came in to it.
You probably don't, but you are playing three seamers, so it will be difficult to rotate between 4 bowlers.
Spinner will get enough turn to trouble the batsmen, in my opinion. It certainly won't make the batting teams task any easier. I rate the duo of McGrath and Steyn as highly as your 3 tbf. They can be a genuine menace. Between them 2, Willis, Cairns, Swann, 20 wickets should not be much of a problem.
He will hang in there. He won't give his wicket cheaply that's my point. What normally would take maybe 30-45 mins to dismiss the tail may take another 30-45 mins longer because of him.
This is a mofo of choice. Steyn/McGrath vs Holding/Garner. Then Willis/Swann vs Tyson/Gupte. How does one choose????????
But I think Skills' batting is stronger. I agree with Varun that Kanhai and Kallicharan are getting underrated and addition of Sachin has definitely improved Marun's team, but still Skills edges in that department. Skills' also bats deeper and as I pointed before, has a proper 5th bowler who has a good record in England.
Not voting yet, will think more.
But I think Skills' batting is stronger. I agree with Varun that Kanhai and Kallicharan are getting underrated and addition of Sachin has definitely improved Marun's team, but still Skills edges in that department. Skills' also bats deeper and as I pointed before, has a proper 5th bowler who has a good record in England.
Not voting yet, will think more.
Haha, yeah. I know you value part timers, matter of preference I suppose because I don't see them of much use when the quality is so high. I would probably expect Cairns to go wicketless in the game. Mcgrath and Steyn are quality obviously, no arguments there. I think the presence of Holding and Tyson over Willis edges it towards us though.
Agreed. But if you ask me if I think his 5 can take 20 wickets, then I would say yes. Had he not had some one like McGrath and instead Match Fixer Amir, I wouldn't have been so sure.
Alright, guess we have to agree to disagree here because I don't think swann will be doing too much hanging in when holding and garner are running in at him. It's always relative to what you are up against and these guys are a nightmare.
It wouldn't matter much anyways, since he is batting first.
I don't want to diss on Cairns TMH as he was a good allrounder but look at the quality of the batters here. He'll pitch in and do his share of overs but he'd probably go wicketless in a match like this. Unless you too think swann is going to pitch in with runs vs holding and garner, both teams have equal depth in batting.
Yeah, any attack that has Mcgrath and Steyn in it are more than capable of picking 20 wickets. Those 2 would need to pick the bulk of them though with swann and Willis pitching in with wickets and providing support, that's my only point. I'm just saying Cairns the bowler isn't going to be of much use in terms of wickets here.
Didn't get you sorry.
I'd disagree with that bit. Cairns is an excellent option to have as a No 5. He has a good record in NZ, Eng. He has the ability to swing it as well. He may not have the pace to trouble the batsmen, but he can generate enough seam to be a nuisance. Only slight negative I'll hold against him is that, he tends to give away a little too many runs.
Also with regards to the depth in batting, I think Aldo mentioned it, with the exception of Hanif and Sachin, nobody else would really make it into Skills's top 7.
It probably would have mattered more in the 4th innings, if BY CHANCE, Skills's team is down to the barebones and need to eke out a draw, I can certainly see Swann, Cairns being a part of managing that.
Last edited:
Cairns may go wicketless or pick an odd one or two if batsmen try to go after him. If the other team also has a v.good batting lineup, your lack of 5th bowler may result in tiring of regular ones and no cover of 5th to support. Cairns can easily fill up, contain runs as batsmen will have to be careful and may pick up wicket if batsmen lose concentration.
About batting depth, it is relative. So, Swann/Steyn won't make much runs but so will be case with your tail. In the end, Skills' tail has players who are more likely to get around 20-25 runs more than your tail.
I would put Kanhai ahead of Amla and in batting its more like 3 vs 3
Hanif/Kanhai/Sachin vs Greg/border/Walcott
and
M.Crowe/Kallicharran vs Amla/Cairns
His MO looks good but has batting lot as a whole we edge past his with more depth in batting.
I would actually remove Amla, put Walcott in at 3. Then play Walcott/Sachin/Chappell/Border. And Hanif probably for Lawry.
I don't see the more in depth batting tbh. Could you elaborate why you think that ?
In my last post instead of Lawry i mentioned as Cairns.
Cairns more suited for ODI format than test as batsmen.
I wouldn't necessarily agree, but suppose I did. Even your No 7 isn't great. So I still don't see the better depth.
Was thinking whom did i miss there, it was Larry instead of Cairns.So it means Wessels/Dujon vs Lawry/Langer as well?
Wessels vs Langer, imo both are similar with their approach, so didn't count them.
I think Willis on home ground has to be considered around the equal of Tyson. The brevity of Tyson's test career does count against him somewhat. And well, you know I rate the impact of additional options like Cairns.
We had difference with Dujon as batsmen in our last match.
Your last match was against me.
. he had no impact whatsoever.Alright, guess we just disagree on Cairns.
Re the batting, moving Walcott to 3 improves him but let's the overall batting down. Having kanhai at 3 instead of Amla makes more sense which is why I'd say he gets into the team too.
Who does Sachin replace then ?
And how does it let the overall batting down. They are still solid till 7.
I agree he has a 5th bowler which we don't. What I'm saying is that he won't really be making an impact. Even if we had Cairns instead of him for instance, I wouldn't expect it to make a difference vs his batting line up. It would still be on our top 4 to bowl them out. As you rightly said, he can give them rest but seeing as he has 4 bowlers and the match is in England unlike say the subcontinent with the heat issue, I don't think Cairns would bowl much. It's a luxury ofcourse but not needed.
I don't expect either of the 8-11 to score runs, yeah. Steyn + Mcgrath and our 3 would see to that.
Yeah, I know which is the same with Ijazz. Matter of preference really.
Middle order would be kanhai Sachin Chappell border and Walcott.
It let's his overall batting down because if he moves Walcott to 3, where does he play Amla who has always played at 3?
I meant it as an example i.e if Sachin and Hanif were to play in his team, I would remove Amla, play Walcott at 3 and the rest as I mentioned above.
Cairns is an extremely intelligent bowler. He will probably be more effective than the genuine pacers like Tyson imo. English pitches more than supporting pace, it's more helpful for bowlers with very good movement. You see tons of matches in which you see even the best of batsmen get outside edges off Finn, broad and Anderson because of their late swing. It happens more than in Australia and SA where bounce is slightly different. It's very difficult to do that when you bowl at 150mph like holding and all.
Handling cairns and McGrath alone will be tougher than handling all other bowlers. Others have pace but the likes of chapell/langer/border and Sachin/Kanhai/Crowe and all will be more than competent and all are not going to be affected by them much. I wouldn't be surprised if cairns gets more wickets than steyn actually. I think cairns was the one who got Chris read using a disguised slow ball?
Handling cairns and McGrath alone will be tougher than handling all other bowlers. Others have pace but the likes of chapell/langer/border and Sachin/Kanhai/Crowe and all will be more than competent and all are not going to be affected by them much. I wouldn't be surprised if cairns gets more wickets than steyn actually. I think cairns was the one who got Chris read using a disguised slow ball?