Test draft - Akshay vs Akash - Akshay wins

Who will win the 3 match test series?


  • Total voters
    14
  • Poll closed .
Fraser's record (or lack of one) in the subcontinent also doesn't matter since he isn't playing in the match on the slow wicket. Ambrose played 6 Tests in Asia and did well in those - I don't think you can say he won't be effective in such conditions on the back of that.

He's playing in the first test though..a batting pitch which I assume will not swing much if at all. Given he's a seam bowler and not much else he going to struggle there where as someone with the variety of Gough will do quite well (and has done well).

He would be effective but I wouldn't extrapolate his record though. We don't know good good he could have been in such places.
 
Against one of the worst Srilankan teams of all time (Even Sangakkara was past it and retired during the series). Their best batsman was Chandimal who's a bit shit and relies on slogging blindly. Not particularly impressive if you ask me.
Well he obviously hasn't played Australia or South Africa on Sri Lankan pitches so I can't really help you there? I don't think it's fair to discount his performances on turners in India against quality batsmen. Unless there's a clarification from Varun to what extent a turning track this should be considered, and which of Ashwin's matches in India qualify as representative of it, this is all a bit pointless.
 
Well he obviously hasn't played Australia or South Africa on Sri Lankan pitches so I can't really help you there? I don't think it's fair to discount his performances on turners in India against quality batsmen. Unless there's a clarification from Varun to what extent a turning track this should be considered, and which of Ashwin's matches in India qualify as representative of it, this is all a bit pointless.

Fair enough but I'm extremely skeptical of Ashwin and I've said this before regardless of this game. The kind of pitches we've seen recently in India have been unreal. Tailored to suit Ashwin and Jadeja because the rest of our bowlers are crap. I do think there's a difference between a normal turner that gets worse as the game progresses and pitches where games barely last 3 days. Upto Varun here. I'm fine either way.
 
He's playing in the first test though..a batting pitch which I assume will not swing much if at all. Given he's a seam bowler and not much else he going to struggle there where as someone with the variety of Gough will do quite well (and has done well).
Fraser won't struggle on a flat pitch. Look at the 1990 series against India, which was played exclusively on flat pitches. Multiple declarations, scores over 600, etc. Indian team featuring batsmen like Shastri, Manjrekar, Vengsarkar, Azharuddin, Tendulkar. Fraser took 16 wickets in 3 Tests at 29 apiece, outdoing Kapil Dev in the process.
 
Great write-up guys.

First impressions are that I like Akash's batting that little more, but what worries me is the perceived lack of depth. As much as I like Hooper, I'm not sure how he'd fare on pitches that offer a little something to the bowlers. Steyn, Ambrose, Lyon (A little underrated perhaps ?) and Ashwin/Fraser will dominate once 4 wickets are lost. Akshay's team though not having standout batsmen (Except Abbas), has a strong collective unit of players that can take up responsibility. Sehwag is probably the decider here. Can he do it against Akhthar and co ?
Discussing it is a little difficult without the Toss being weighed in, so will see how discussions proceed.
 
Darren Gough

That winter, in his first Ashes series, Gough ensured that he did his best to live up to the tag. At Sydney for the New Years’ Test of 1995, after coming in trailing 0-2, Gough had made two ambitious resolutions: not to lose a Test match to Australia in 1995 and not to get out in the middle of a Shane Warne hat-trick. The first resolution was already hanging in the balance when England found themselves shaking at 20 for three, before Atherton and John Crawley addd 174 for the fourth wicket. However, another collapse of four wickets for four runs was to follow, before Gough went out to bat at 197 for seven. “Fasten your seatbelts”, is what Gough told commentator Mark Nicholas, who had wandered into the England dressing room, before he went out to bat on Day Two.

“The next hour was heaven. I swung from the arse…and connected,” wrote Gough. “The Aussies got rattled and started moaning at Craig McDermott. ‘Bounce him.’ He did and that’s when I hooked him for six. Then I hit him back over his head. Finally, I pushed a single for my 50 and then gave the crowd that famous lasso salute, swirling the bat around my head. Of course I was carried away. The SCG (Sydney Cricket Ground) was full, I’d never heard a noise like it and I’d belted the cream of Australia’s bowling to all parts. I was out soon afterwards [for 51], caught hooking, but the whole mood of the game had changed,” as England went past 300. Wisden described Gough’s innings as a “jaunty innings of village-green innocence and charm.” Graham Gooch said that it was “just like having Ian Botham around,” to which Illingworth replied, “Don’t let us compare him to Beefy (Botham), Fred Trueman or anyone else. Let us just be happy we’ve got Goughie.”

Not yet satisfied, Gough followed up his thrilling half-century with six for 49 with the ball, all but completing his own Headingley ’81. “As the wickets fell, I realised that this was my Test. Everything I tried — yorkers, slower balls, off-cutters, leg-spin — worked. It’s a great feeling when anything seems possible. You must grab the moment, because it doesn’t happen that often in your career, however gifted you may be.” Perhaps Gough himself did not know how true those words would turn out to be. He was soon to be ruled out of the rest of the tour after cracking his foot, the first of the many injuries that would dog his career.

Injuries notwithstanding, Gough went on to become England’s first-choice strike bowler for Atherton, and later under Hussain and would be new coach Duncan Fletcher. Throughout the mid-late nineties, England were far from the top row of teams in world cricket and even languished at the bottom of the heap for a while. However, Gough’s mere presence in the dressing room was enough to provide them whatever little belief that they could perform well. “He provided the effervescent spirit and fun that stopped the team becoming too dour under Mike Atherton, or too intense under Nasser Hussain,” wrote Emma John in The Observer.

Gough crafted variations in his bowling to add to his ability of bowling fast and swinging it both ways: he soon developed a deceiving slower ball and also a nipping off-cutter. By the time he visited Australian shores again, he was good enough to become the first England bowler in over a hundred years to get an Ashes hat-trick, also at his beloved SCG, in front of a record turnout of 43,000. He was subsequently named Wisden Cricketer of the Year in 1999. “In a team of brooders and worriers, he stood out for his bullish enthusiasm,” cricket’s bible wrote of him. “England need Darren Gough, and not just for his wickets.”

Under Hussain and Fletcher, Gough was part of a squad that won four series in a row between 2000 and 2001, the first time such a feat had been achieved since the time Mike Brearley was captain. Gough was Man of the Series at home to the West Indies, a historic triumph for England when the Wisden Trophy changed sides for the first time in 27 years, and also on the slow and sluggish wickets of Sri Lanka. No wicket was too flat for him.

Finally, after playing 58 Test matches and getting 229 wickets, Gough called it quits from the longer format in 2003 after another one of his injuries, this time to the knee. It brought an end to an unfulfilled and incomplete chapter in his career, majorly undone by injury, and it’s a pity that he could not go on to play more. If he had played 100, he would easily have gone on to break his idol Botham’s wicket tally in Tests (383).

It is a huge pity that Darren Gough was probably born 10 years too early. Born in 1970, and having played majority of his cricket in the 1990s, a character Gough was unlucky to have been part of possibly the worst England cricket team of all time. The word ‘character’ has been deliberately used here, instead of the more clichéd ‘talent’, because Gough was such a wholehearted and colourful one. He was, as David Lloyd rightly termed, “the heartbeat of the England team”, always enjoying his cricket and doing his best to ensure that his mates enjoy it with him
 
Great write-up guys.

First impressions are that I like Akash's batting that little more, but what worries me is the perceived lack of depth. As much as I like Hooper, I'm not sure how he'd fare on pitches that offer a little something to the bowlers. Steyn, Ambrose, Lyon (A little underrated perhaps ?) and Ashwin/Fraser will dominate once 4 wickets are lost. Akshay's team though not having standout batsmen (Except Abbas), has a strong collective unit of players that can take up responsibility. Sehwag is probably the decider here. Can he do it against Akhthar and co ?
Discussing it is a little difficult without the Toss being weighed in, so will see how discussions proceed.
Gooch is the best batsman on my team imo. I'd have Gower and Abbas on about the same level after that. Overall I think the batting units are about equal.
 
Great write-up guys.

First impressions are that I like Akash's batting that little more, but what worries me is the perceived lack of depth. As much as I like Hooper, I'm not sure how he'd fare on pitches that offer a little something to the bowlers. Steyn, Ambrose, Lyon (A little underrated perhaps ?) and Ashwin/Fraser will dominate once 4 wickets are lost. Akshay's team though not having standout batsmen (Except Abbas), has a strong collective unit of players that can take up responsibility. Sehwag is probably the decider here. Can he do it against Akhthar and co ?
Discussing it is a little difficult without the Toss being weighed in, so will see how discussions proceed.

Not sure about this mate. My 5/6/7 are Nurse, Hooper and Dujon against Misbah, Ganguly and Healy. I'd say my batting trumps his there. Nurse > Misbah, Ganguly > Hooper and Dujon > Healy.
 
Gooch is the best batsman on my team imo. I'd have Gower and Abbas on about the same level after that. Overall I think the batting units are about equal.

Boon averages more than Gooch does, both as an opener and career overall. As do Crowe and Nurse if we're only looking at pre-modern batters.

If Gooch is your best batter I have at least 2 players who are ahead of him (Gavaskar and Crowe). And another 3 who average more than him.
 
Not sure about this mate. My 5/6/7 are Nurse, Hooper and Dujon against Misbah, Ganguly and Healy. I'd say my batting trumps his there. Nurse > Misbah, Ganguly > Hooper and Dujon > Healy.
Well you are playing Kohli in 2 of the 3 matches? I'd say Misbah is a better test batsman than Kohli. Clearly you don't rate Nurse that highly either, else he would be playing more of the matches.

Dujon vs Healy is an interesting argument. On the face of it, Dujon has a better average (31 to 27). On the other hand, Healy's lower average is mostly due to him struggling with the bat early in his career, when he was overwhelmed by the pressure of being Australia's wicket-keeper. He worked on both his keeping and his batting after that, and from 93-98 (his peak years) his average was significantly better at 35 (he averaged less than 20 in his first few seasons). There's also the matter that he had to face bowlers like Marshall, Ambrose and Walsh instead of get to be on the same side as them :p.

There's also the wicketkeeping dimension. Dujon kept wicket to pretty much a pure pace attack, and has only 5 stumpings in his entire career. There's really not much evidence to suggest he'd be able to replicate the same level to a spinner like Murali. Healy on the other hand kept wicket to fast men and spinners (Warne) alike.
 
Boon averages more than Gooch does, both as an opener and career overall. As do Crowe and Nurse if we're only looking at pre-modern batters.

If Gooch is your best batter I have at least 2 players who are ahead of him (Gavaskar and Crowe). And another 3 who average more than him.
Nah, just looking at aggregate averages is misleading and I think you know that. You're ignoring the fact that Gooch played a 1/4 of his Tests against attacks like Marshall-Holding-Garner-Croft and Ambrose-Walsh. And averaged above 40 against them. Seriously, you are always happy to go to the simplest stats wherever it favors you, but then wherever it doesn't you want to introduce a thousand qualifications like peak, longevity, quality of pitch etc.

Fwiw, I think Crowe is slightly better than Gower and Abbas, but Boon (especially as an opener instead of #3) and Nurse don't even figure in that discussion.
 
@Raees

It's not just West Indies. The guy averages in the 50's in Australia. That's more than Allan Border averages in Australia!

Just something I came across. I thought it was harsh myself - his record is more than good enough against the W. Indies even if he didn't face all 4 of them that often, he still managed a century v all of them and his 236 was also against a strong attack albeit at home.

His average of 50 v Australia is definitely overstated because he didn't play Australia until 1978.. where Lillie and Thompson were not at their peak (both had injuries and by 1976, they weren't the same force anymore). Then world series cricket intervened.

In 77/78 series there was no D. Lillie, just J. Thompson, and in 79/80 both Lillie and Thompson were missing. The only time he came up against Lillie and bear in mind this was 10 years after his physical peak was the 1981 series, where he made the following scores.. 0, 10, 23, 5, 10 and 70. He got out to Lillie twice in three test matches, but his scores tell the story. Imagine if he had faced Lillie and Thompson together at their peak?

Seamers Pitch - TBC

Anyway back to this game, on the seamers pitch Steyn and Ambrose are the better opening pair of bowlers and I fancy them to nick one of either Boon or Sunil.. but at 3 and 4, you have two guys with good character and Crowe in the words of Akram was a brilliant player of pace and could handle Younis/Akram well - Steyn is similar to Younis in terms of style (I rate him slightly higher). Kohli has never played against a world class bowling attack and he has done decent in South african conditions but only played against Steyn twice and done poor v England in seaming conditions. Carl Hooper can make runs in difficult conditions v top bowlers but is very inconsistent and Dujon never played Australia of the 70's or his own bowling attack. Only strong attack he faced was Pakistan where he averaged 17 (in two series he averaged 5 & 6). So not terribly convinced of your batting once Crowe is out of the picture.. on a seaming pitch your batting could collapse.

In terms of Ashkays batting, Zaheer Abbas is very poor v Windies and against peak Australia he is fine, but didn't face Lillie and Thompson enough to say he was anything special. An average batsman for me in this level of draft but the question is whether Akhtar/Gough are that level of bowler to trouble him. Sehwag another who hasn't been tested enough by McGrath and Warne ilk of bowler enough but bowlers below that tier, he can devastate attacks and he has a good record v Akhtar. Ganguly is mediocre v quality bowling, never came up against Gough and never done well v peak Pakistan. Healey can chip in with a 20 against anyone.

I think Akash has the better batting lineup but his bowlers are not as great as Ashkays and will struggle to exploit their weaknesses as much. Tight game.

Spinners wicket - Akash

Murali, Akhtar and Gough.. guys like Younis Khan, Gavaskar .. only one winner for me, Akash.

Batting wicket - Ashkay

Better bowlers and better stroke players .. I think you're more likely to have a chance of limiting their run scoring and have the style of players to really devastate Akashs bowling attack.
 
Well you are playing Kohli in 2 of the 3 matches? I'd say Misbah is a better test batsman than Kohli. Clearly you don't rate Nurse that highly either, else he would be playing more of the matches.

Dujon vs Healy is an interesting argument. On the face of it, Dujon has a better average (31 to 27). On the other hand, Healy's lower average is mostly due to him struggling with the bat early in his career, when he was overwhelmed by the pressure of being Australia's wicket-keeper. He worked on both his keeping and his batting after that, and from 93-98 (his peak years) his average was significantly better at 35 (he averaged less than 20 in his first few seasons). There's also the matter that he had to face bowlers like Marshall, Ambrose and Walsh instead of get to be on the same side as them :p.

There's also the wicketkeeping dimension. Dujon kept wicket to pretty much a pure pace attack, and has only 5 stumpings in his entire career. There's really not much evidence to suggest he'd be able to replicate the same level to a spinner like Murali. Healy on the other hand kept wicket to fast men and spinners (Warne) alike.

That's because people tend to not rate players they had never heard off so I went with the other two instead of Nurse.

I don't think it's even a contest re-Healy and Dujon. You forget that Dujon didn't even get called up to the West Indian team for his keeping. When he made his debut it was purely as a batsman and only when their actual keeper got injured did he begin to play as a keeper. Second, if you're talking about peaks Dujon averaged over 40 in his first and scoring runs against teams with Kapil, Lillee, Thomson and Botham. His average is only 31 because because his form slumped later on his career. The guy was a genuine batsman and a level above Healy. His 100 at WACA when the other WI batsmen were struggling was supposed to be excellent.

As for keeping to spin, we don't know how good he was primarily because he never had the chance which isn't his fault. But below is from Dujon himself suggesting he was more than upto it.

JD: It was that I wasn't a genuine wicket-keeper but my grounding from school was basically to spin so I kept to a lot of spin bowling in school. Coming into the West Indies team having to cope with all of this fast bowling was a difficult experience to start with. Over time I got used to it and overtime I got better at it. I wouldn't say at the beginning of my Test career that I was a good wicket-keeper to fast bowling but eventually with that experience I learned and got better.
 
Nah, just looking at aggregate averages is misleading and I think you know that. You're ignoring the fact that Gooch played a 1/4 of his Tests against attacks like Marshall-Holding-Garner-Croft and Ambrose-Walsh. And averaged above 40 against them. Seriously, you are always happy to go to the simplest stats wherever it favors you, but then wherever it doesn't you want to introduce a thousand qualifications like peak, longevity, quality of pitch etc.

Fwiw, I think Crowe is slightly better than Gower and Abbas, but Boon (especially as an opener instead of #3) and Nurse don't even figure in that discussion.

No, I agree which is why I only mentioned Gavaskar and Crowe as being definitely better. Crowe also faired well against WI and has a higher average overall. Don't think that's a controversial claim at all.

Not sure why you're not rating Boon. he averages 45 as an opener which for his time was bloody brilliant and 43 overall.
 
Akash has said he only wants Shoaib Akhtar judged at his 'peak' which was his performance before the 2003 World Cup and after 1999. At the very end of 99, Akhtar played against Australia and in 3 Tests and only took 6 wickets, conceding 409 runs. A very poor performance.

During those 'peak' years, he played series against Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, a Lara-less West Indies, Sri Lanka, 1 test versus England and two tests against Australia.

Against the Windies, he failed to dismiss either Hooper or Chanderpaul, the only good batsman he took the wicket of was Gayle (at an average of 36).
Against Sri Lanka, he averaged over 26.
Against England, he took only 1 wicket at 64 runs.
Against Australia, he was brilliant the first Test, taking 8-72, but only managed 1 wicket at 42 runs in the second Test.

That's not a particularly exemplary record. Outside of one good performance against Australia he was largely mediocre against any decent standard of opposition. Based on this, I don't expect Akhtar to have much impact on the caliber of batsmen in my lineup.
 
Just something I came across. I thought it was harsh myself - his record is more than good enough against the W. Indies even if he didn't face all 4 of them that often, he still managed a century v all of them and his 236 was also against a strong attack albeit at home.

His average of 50 v Australia is definitely overstated because he didn't play Australia until 1978.. where Lillie and Thompson were not at their peak (both had injuries and by 1976, they weren't the same force anymore). Then world series cricket intervened.

In 77/78 series there was no D. Lillie, just J. Thompson, and in 79/80 both Lillie and Thompson were missing. The only time he came up against Lillie and bear in mind this was 10 years after his physical peak was the 1981 series, where he made the following scores.. 0, 10, 23, 5, 10 and 70. He got out to Lillie twice in three test matches, but his scores tell the story. Imagine if he had faced Lillie and Thompson together at their peak?

I won't claim to be all knowing about the ins and outs but an average of 51 in Australia is outstanding no matter how you look at it. That's why I brought up Alan Border who had a lower average despite growing up on the pitches. Hell, even Ricky Ponting only averaged 55 at home.

Seamers Pitch - TBC
Anyway back to this game, on the seamers pitch Steyn and Ambrose are the better opening pair of bowlers and I fancy them to nick one of either Boon or Sunil.. but at 3 and 4, you have two guys with good character and Crowe in the words of Akram was a brilliant player of pace and could handle Younis/Akram well - Steyn is similar to Younis in terms of style (I rate him slightly higher). Kohli has never played against a world class bowling attack and he has done decent in South african conditions but only played against Steyn twice and done poor v England in seaming conditions. Carl Hooper can make runs in difficult conditions v top bowlers but is very inconsistent and Dujon never played Australia of the 70's or his own bowling attack. Only strong attack he faced was Pakistan where he averaged 17 (in two series he averaged 5 & 6). So not terribly convinced of your batting once Crowe is out of the picture.. on a seaming pitch your batting could collapse.

Couple of things. It will be Nurse at 5 instead of Kohli. But speaking of Kohli he took on Johnson and scored 3 100's in Australia last year so he could play pace bowling alright. Dujon as stated above, averaged 40 at his peak including a brilliant hundred at the WACA. He's good for a few runs I'd say.
 
In terms of Ashkays batting, Zaheer Abbas is very poor v Windies and against peak Australia he is fine, but didn't face Lillie and Thompson enough to say he was anything special. An average batsman for me in this level of draft but the question is whether Akhtar/Gough are that level of bowler to trouble him. Sehwag another who hasn't been tested enough by McGrath and Warne ilk of bowler enough but bowlers below that tier, he can devastate attacks and he has a good record v Akhtar. Ganguly is mediocre v quality bowling, never came up against Gough and never done well v peak Pakistan. Healey can chip in with a 20 against anyone.
Gooch has a fantastic record against top quality fast bowlers, though, I'd fancy him to do well vs Akhtar and Gough. Ganguly may have struggled at times versus better Pakistani bowlers but he has a great record vs Akhtar. Akhtar has dismissed him only twice in 7 matches, for scores of 46 and 48. Honestly I think the seamer pitch favors my team the most because Ambrose and Steyn combined will be simply unplayable.
 
Guys, how about discussion on your bowlers vs opponent batters in the given pitch conditions and how you think that will pan out? That'd be more useful than career stats being compared across generations even though it does have to be taken into account.

It's team A batting vs team B bowling and vice versa that will decide the test after all. Not team A batting vs team B batting and ditto for bowling.
 
Gooch is the best batsman on my team imo. I'd have Gower and Abbas on about the same level after that. Overall I think the batting units are about equal.
I meant the MO, where I thought Abbas was probably the most likely to shine especially in pitches with a bit of turn or no grass at all.

Not sure about this mate. My 5/6/7 are Nurse, Hooper and Dujon against Misbah, Ganguly and Healy. I'd say my batting trumps his there. Nurse > Misbah, Ganguly > Hooper and Dujon > Healy.
I don't know much about Nurse, but Misbah should at least be as good as him or Kohli surely? Dujon better than Healy is fair enough especially considering the era Dujon batted in.
But I guess the point is how they'd do against the opposition bowling. Without proper context, it's a little difficult to judge, but for your team;

Match 1: Kohli/Hooper/Dujon vs Steyn/Ambrose/Fraser/Lyon
Match 2: Kohli/Hooper/Dujon vs Steyn/Ambrose/Lyon/Ashwin
Match 3: Nurse/Hooper/Dujon vs Steyn/Ambrose/Fraser/Lyon

Going by this, in a batting paradise, I still expect Steyn and Ambrose to cause some damage to that LMO, especially Hooper and Dujon
In a pitch that assists spinners, Hooper and Kohli are likely to fair better.
In seaming conditions, it's really hard to judge how Nurse would fair, but I again expect Steyn and co to do their job. Akshay narrowly leads this 2-1


For Akshay's team
Match 1: Misbah/Ganguly/Healy vs Akthar/Gough/Harris/Murali
Match 2: Misbah/Ganguly/Healy vs Akthar/Gough/Harris/Murali
Match 3: Misbah/Ganguly/Healy vs Akthar/Gough/Harris/Murali

Since there aren't many changes, Match 1 I can see Misbah and Ganguly dominate proceedings, thought I do like Harris quite a bit. In seaming and spinning conditions, your bowling should dominate. Gough and Murali will have a field day. You lead this 2-1.
 
Last edited:
Akash has said he only wants Shoaib Akhtar judged at his 'peak' which was his performance before the 2003 World Cup and after 1999. At the very end of 99, Akhtar played against Australia and in 3 Tests and only took 6 wickets, conceding 409 runs. A very poor performance.

During those 'peak' years, he played series against Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, a Lara-less West Indies, Sri Lanka, 1 test versus England and two tests against Australia.

Against the Windies, he failed to dismiss either Hooper or Chanderpaul, the only good batsman he took the wicket of was Gayle (at an average of 36).
Against Sri Lanka, he averaged over 26.
Against England, he took only 1 wicket at 64 runs.
Against Australia, he was brilliant the first Test, taking 8-72, but only managed 1 wicket at 42 runs in the second Test.

That's not a particularly exemplary record. Outside of one good performance against Australia he was largely mediocre against any decent standard of opposition. Based on this, I don't expect Akhtar to have much impact on the caliber of batsmen in my lineup.

This is bizarre and bit dishonest tbh.

What was his strike rate against Srilanka? He took 12 wickets in that 2 match series including Jayasuriya twice. Why not mention that?
Against West Indies he was man of the match in an excellent spell on flat wicket.
Against New-Zeland which you conveniently forgot to mention he took 6 wickets in the only innings he bowled in including Fleming.
Against South Africa (Which you also conveniently forgot to mention) he took 6 wickets in the match including all of Smith, Gibbs and Kallis.
And of course he was brilliant against the best team in the world.

Point was basing anything on a period when he struggled with fitness and other problems doesn't make sense. In that India tour he brought up he struggled with loads of injuries.
 
The amount of bullshit in write ups remind me why i hate drafts.
 
@Ijazz17

Misbah has a questionable record in Australia and South Africa (mis 20's). He's racked up runs on the flat UAE pitches which has boosted his average. I don't see him responding well to Harris, Gough and Akhtar.
 
This is bizarre and bit dishonest tbh.

What was his strike rate against Srilanka? He took 12 wickets in that 2 match series including Jayasuriya twice. Why not mention that?
Against West Indies he was man of the match in an excellent spell on flat wicket.
Against New-Zeland which you conveniently forgot to mention he took 6 wickets in the only innings he bowled in including Fleming.
Against South Africa (Which you also conveniently forgot to mention) he took 6 wickets in the match including all of Smith, Gibbs and Kallis.
And of course he was brilliant against the best team in the world.

Point was basing anything on a period when he struggled with fitness and other problems doesn't make sense. In that India tour he brought up he struggled with loads of injuries.
It's not dishonest. I didn't mention strike rates throughout, I looked at averages. The West Indies didn't have any quality batsmen except the ones I mentioned. Lara didn't play. My point was that he's done very well against poor batsmen but not consistently against the greats, during the period you specified as his peak.

Sri Lanka I can agree he took wickets but was somewhat expensive. It doesn't impress me particularly.

South Africa I didn't mention because it was after the period you specified as his peak. If you're going to include South Africa then you might as well include India tour as well.
 
@Ijazz17

Misbah has a questionable record in Australia and South Africa (mis 20's). He's racked up runs on the flat UAE pitches which has boosted his average. I don't see him responding well to Harris, Gough and Akhtar.
Which is why I said he's likely to do well in a batting paradise with little to no assist for pace bowlers. He's not going to get the same joy batting against Gough or Harris in other conditions. I know Akthar is one of your frontmen for the pace attack, but I don't really rate him all that much. He's great in home conditions, but his lack of temperament, inability to bowl long spells is a huge negative for me. The same could be said for Harris's inablitity to bowl long spells. Who do you have as the 5th bowler ?
 
It's not dishonest. I didn't mention strike rates throughout, I looked at averages. The West Indies didn't have any quality batsmen except the ones I mentioned. Lara didn't play. My point was that he's done very well against poor batsmen but not consistently against the greats, during the period you specified as his peak.

Sri Lanka I can agree he took wickets but was somewhat expensive. It doesn't impress me particularly.

South Africa I didn't mention because it was after the period you specified as his peak. If you're going to include South Africa then you might as well include India tour as well.

Strike rates are more pertinent I feel. Not that I'd class 26 as expensive.

You also mentioned 1999 though when I said the peak was after 2000;)
 
Which is why I said he's likely to do well in a batting paradise with little to no assist for pace bowlers. He's not going to get the same joy batting against Gough or Harris in other conditions. I know Akthar is one of your frontmen for the pace attack, but I don't really rate him all that much. He's great in home conditions, but his lack of temperament, inability to bowl long spells is a huge negative for me. The same could be said for Harris's inablitity to bowl long spells. Who do you have as the 5th bowler ?

Kinda my point. Akhtar and Gough (and Murali) are great in perceived batting conditions. Kohli has shown he can play really fast bowling in SA and Australia against Steyn and Johnson. Misbah hasn't outside of UAE.
 
Kinda my point. Akhtar and Gough (and Murali) are great in perceived batting conditions. Kohli has shown he can really fast bowling in SA and Australia against Steyn and Johnson. Misbah hasn't outside of UAE.
But he also has insane records in India and the Windies (Okay, might have been a rubbish team), two perceived Spin and Bounce favouring conditions. His record in the UAE is against SA, Australia and England, to name a few. So it's not too far fetched to suggest, he can hold his own against your bowlers.
 
Strike rates are more pertinent I feel. Not that I'd class 26 as expensive.

You also mentioned 1999 though when I said the peak was after 2000;)
Yeah I did because there was such a staggering contrast between that Australia tour and the one during his peak. I just found that remarkable. To be honest, I like Akhtar and his sheer pace does have the capacity to take wickets on any pitch, because he doesn't need a lot of surface assistance. He's also a bit of an unpredictable livewire, though, and I don't think he'll be able to bowl a niggling consistent spell which I think will prove expensive on the first pitch against my batsmen. I think he might be able to get Abbas cheaply, but I think the rest would do well against him. Of course we also hope to get Younis Khan out cheaply in the same way :).
 
@Akshay IMO

Gavaskar > Sehwag
Boon < Gooch
Younis > Abbass
Crowe > Gower
Kohli / Nurse > Misbah
Hooper < Ganguly
Dujon > Healy

Batting wise I have the better team and quite clearly IMO.

Akhtar < Ambrose
Harris < Steyn
Gough > Fraser
Murali > Ashwin / Lyon

Your bowling has an edge but imo there's a stark drop in quality after the first two. I don't see you keeping the pressure up on my batsmen throughout. Where as in my case I have 4 genuine wicket takers while still having very good averages. The pressure will be on you throughout especially with Murali bowling long spells through the game.

Get Gooch out early and the batting looks incredibly vulnerable to pace and swing (reverse or conventional).
 
Last edited:
Why?

Don't agree though.
Hmm, I've always rated Gooch as one of the better batsmen of that era. Crowe for me is around the same category as Gower and Abbas (but slightly better), after the bigger greats. I also think he didn't face Holding and Garner in their physical primes, whereas Gooch played a lot against them from the start.
 
@Akshay IMO

Gavaskar > Sehwag
Boon < Gooch
Younis > Abbass
Crowe > Gower
Kohli / Nurse > Misbah
Hooper < Ganguly
Dujon > Healy

Batting wise I have the better team and quite clearly IMO.

Akhtar > Ambrose
Harris < Steyn
Gough > Fraser
Murali > Ashwin / Lyon

Your bowling has an edge but imo there's a stark drop in quality after the first two. I don't see you keeping the pressure up on my batsmen throughout. Where as in my case I have 4 genuine wicket takers while still having very good averages. The pressure will be on you throughout especially with Murali bowling long spells through the game.

Get Gooch out early and the batting looks incredibly vulnerable to pace and swing (reverse or conventional).
Don't agree with Kohli > Misbah at all. Dujon vs Healy is splitting hairs to me. So I rate it as about even.

Bowling wise, I can only assume that Akhtar > Ambrose is a typo. Gough and Fraser have different roles. Gough is a better spearhead and wicket-taker, but Fraser is better at containment and can bowl longer spells, giving my spearheads more rest and letting them bowl in explosive bursts. Probably Harris versus Fraser is a better comparison. Murali is better than either of my spinners, but I think being able to deploy spin from both ends on a turner is very valuable and something people are not taking into sufficient consideration. We can deliver far more overs of spin than Murali can alone. It's not a contest (in spin department) on the other pitches, although I think Lyon has done fairly well on seamer-friendly surfaces in Australia all things considered.
 
Akhtar > Ambrose
Erm, No. Just no. The others you can debate, but Ambrose is by far the better bowler. I know numbers might favour Akthar, but Ambrose I reckon is the better bowler.
 
Erm, No. Just no. The others you can debate, but Ambrose is by far the better bowler. I know numbers might favour Akthar, but Ambrose I reckon is the better bowler.

Definitely. Was a typo!
 
Don't agree with Kohli > Misbah at all. Dujon vs Healy is splitting hairs to me. So I rate it as about even.

Bowling wise, I can only assume that Akhtar > Ambrose is a typo. Gough and Fraser have different roles. Gough is a better spearhead and wicket-taker, but Fraser is better at containment and can bowl longer spells, giving my spearheads more rest and letting them bowl in explosive bursts. Probably Harris versus Fraser is a better comparison. Murali is better than either of my spinners, but I think being able to deploy spin from both ends on a turner is very valuable and something people are not taking into sufficient consideration. We can deliver far more overs of spin than Murali can alone. It's not a contest (in spin department) on the other pitches, although I think Lyon has done fairly well on seamer-friendly surfaces in Australia all things considered.

You never replied to my Dujon post. By every metric, Dujon is a better batter than Healy.

Ah, yeah. Typo. Corrected that.

I'm not sure any Englishman would say Fraser = Gough. Gough is clearly better and a lot more versatile.

As for spin, you can deliver more overs of spin but Lyon is a bit average to be honest. Do you really see him troubling such good players? I don't see it. What overs Murali will bowl will undoubtedly be of a higher quality.
 
You never replied to my Dujon post. By every metric, Dujon is a better batter than Healy.

Ah, yeah. Typo. Corrected that.

I'm not sure any Englishman would say Fraser = Gough. Gough is clearly better and a lot more versatile.

As for spin, you can deliver more overs of spin but Lyon is a bit average to be honest. Do you really see him troubling such good players? I don't see it. What overs Murali will bowl will undoubtedly be of a higher quality.
Saying Fraser and Gough serve different roles in the attack, so don't want to really compare them head to head. Harris and Fraser is a better comparison I think, and both come off equal-ish to me (hard to judge again though as Harris had such a stop-start career due to injuries, and again, they are still quite different kinds of bowlers).

Which years are you saying were Dujon's prime?

Lyon isn't a great spinner, but he has picked up the wickets of some good batsmen. He's dismissed Bell 5 times, Cook 5 times, Pietersen 4 times, Tendulkar 4 times, Kohli 4 times. A fair number of those games have been on spin-unfriendly tracks as well. He's not going to be a major focus of our attack in any match, but I think he will play a useful role.