Test draft QF 4 : Skills vs Boycott

[Norris]

Welcome to the 4th QF of the test draft!

• Judge the players on their peaks excluding any 6-12 month purple patch.

• Vote for the team you think will win a 3 match test series between these 2 sides based on the given nature of pitches.

1. 1st test: Good batting pitch.
2. 2nd test: Slow wicket which gets worse as the game goes on and will assist spinners heavily.
3. 3rd test: Green top

Team Skills
Alastair Cook
Michael Slater
Brian Lara
Michael Hussey
Joe Root
Andy Flower
Imran Khan
Kapil Dev
Graeme Swann
Courtney Walsh
Mohammad Asif (Plays 1st and 3rd Test Match)
-
Dilip Doshi (Plays 2nd Test Match)

Team Boycott
Bill Lawry
Stephen Fleming
Rahul Dravid
Kevin Pieterson
Mohammad Azharuddin
Brian McMillan
Adam Gilchrist
Stuart Broad
Malcolm Marshall
Colin Croft
Stuart MacGill (Plays 2nd and 3rd Test)
-
Graham McKenzie (plays 1st Test)

 

[Norris]

Team Skills​

Line Up

Batting

Bowling

 

[Norris]

Team Boycott

*Graham McKenzie to replace Stuart MacGill for the first test (flat wicket)
​

Bill Lawry placed great value on his wicket but he was by no means limited in his repertoire of shots. One of the finest players of fast bowling of his era, he actually begun his career as a bit of a dasher. Young Lawry had the courage and technical execution to take on bowlers with fierce hooks, pulls and drives, which even led to a comparison to the great Donald Bradman. It was in his maiden test series where Lawry learnt the importance of applying steady and secure foundations in conditions which suited swing and seam. He put in a series of patient and crucial innings to cement his spot as the opener, displacing captain Bob Simpson in the process and finishing as leading run scorer with 420 at 52.50. This was just the start of what was to be a successful decade as the fulcrum of the Australian batting line up.

Stephen Fleming with his elegant stroke-play provides good foil at the top of the innings. While his conversion rate isn't great, he makes good contributions, important contributions to build a solid foundation. He has three double centuries to his name and having mainly being a part of a comparatively weak test side talent wise his success as batsman and captain is very impressive. An excellent slip catcher and leader to add.


Rahul Dravid will be the anchor as he always has been. The Wall needs no introduction. Technically proficient, mentally strong, leads by example, digs in and scores big. All qualities which makes him one of the most prolific run scorers of all time. Another excellent slip catcher as well.



Kevin Pietersen polarizes public opinion with his brash personality but no one can discount his special talent. He has not only scored runs all over the world, he has dismantled attacks in the process. Three innings immediately come to mind. 158 at the Oval in the final test of the 2005 Ashes where he toyed with the Aussies and announced himself as an innovative, belting force. 149 against the South Africans at a difficult time for England in 2012, famously taking apart Dale Steyn at one point in what was the series to decide whose number one. And also the 186 in Mumbai later that year which levelled the series and gave England the momentum to go on to win it. His 360 array of shots leave bowlers praying at his imperious best. But he can also dig deep as shown in his 151 in Sri Lanka which was a test of concentration in extremely humid and trying conditions. He has the lot.



Mohammad Azhuruddin exited the game with his name tattered but his talent and performances stand tall. Fluent footwork, timing and strong wrists saw him assert himself without breaking sweat. You dare not bowl a tad off line as the ball will be whipped away to the onside. Anything slightly wide of off will be caressed through the covers. And with this grace, the carefree perception from the outside, his productivity shows there was inner steel to get the job done. And more often than not he did.


Brian McMillan was a favorite of 90s cricket fans. Capable of bowling medium-fast he did his job well as an additional bowler, keeping things tight with consistent line and length while the front-liners got a rest. His accuracy was vital as well in attritional conditions to bowl long spells for not many as his economy rate shows. As a batsman he had a solid technique and excellent temperament which allowed him to contribute in the lower order with tail enders at the other end, which at times saw him miss out on converting 50s into 100s. In my team he has higher quality around him to be able to bat to his full potential.

Adam Gilchrist is arguably the greatest wicket-keeper/batsman in history. His aggressive stroke-play all over the park made him a nightmare to bowl against as he had the capability to grab the game and completely dominate it. He also evolved the role of a keeper/batsman where more emphasis is now placed on the batting talent and the "pure keeper" of yesteryear is gone. However he was not a make-shift. He had a fantastic record behind the stumps and while never in full capacity, he served as vice-captain and leader admirably.

 

[Norris]

Team Boycott Contd.​

Stuart Broad has developed into one of the leading bowlers of world cricket today. Tall with fast bounce he has ironed out his accuracy to reap full rewards. A rhythmic bowling action for a bowler truly capable of devastating spells. He has control over seam movements to nag at batsman with pitched up deliveries, producing the edge time and time again. In seaming conditions he is the real deal.

Malcolm Marshall goes down in history as arguably the greatest fast bowler ever. A relatively short man he was fearsome. It wasn't just raw pace. He was incredibly skilled. Intelligent. Bouncers, inswingers, outswingers, yorkers, cutters. The complete fast bowler who not only scared batsman, but toyed with them. He succeeded everywhere he played. Words won't do him justice.



Colin Croft had his test career curtailed by joining the rebel tour but in his limited time he made his mark as a blistering fast bowler. He bowled with aggression and did fantastic in Pakistan, his only venture into batting friendly conditions, so one wonders how successful he'd have done had he played a full career. His stats are brilliant as it is and just watch the video underneath to realise the force he had. Interestingly his 37 batting innings brought 22 not outs and having been used as nightwatchman before it suggests he can hold a bat so to speak.



Stuart MacGill can be happy with what he achieved but he knows there would have been a hell of a lot more had he not been in the era of Warne. MacGill himself could spin the team to victory and for a time displace Warne from the team under Steve Waugh's captaincy. A great spinner who perhaps in another era would have got the merit his talent deserved.



Graham McKenzie led the Australian attack for much of the 60s and forged a reputation as not just a quick menacing bowler but a master on unfavourable wickets. 34 wickets in 8 matches in India at 19 and 8 wickets in a solitary match in Pakistan at 16 a piece is brilliant figures and he also did well on flat tracks away from the sub-continent such as Adelaide. Having a wily pacer like him to work batsmen over will be such an asset. With he and Marshall it's arguably the best opening pair on flat tracks in history.

 

[Norris]

Team Boycott Contd..​

I trust my batsmen to bat competitively on all tracks. My opponent has a fine attack. No one can doubt Imran Khan, a true legend, and Walsh has pace to burn. Srinath and Asif had short peaks for different reasons but have the skill having grown up on these pitches, and Swann is a very useful spinner. It is a really well assembled unit and hence I use the word "competitively" because even on a flat track there's going to be something for the bowlers.

You may be wondering why there is no spinner for the first test. My answer honestly a) I fecked up in the beginning re the nationality quota meaning I had some limitations. My bowling has been well rated by voters but it was improving my batting was needed since it was felt I was one short. I have fixed that with Gilchrist. Because of this I could afford a luxury pick with the bowling. I couldn't really upgrade MacGill since those who are seen as upgrades are already taken so having two of the original fab four of the Windies, I took inspiration and thought why not emulate that style. McKenzie was a menace to face in my first game and having read about him he and Marshall would be killers in the first test. I'd rather that and have MacGill come in for test 2 and 3 where he will come into the game more on those conditions. Not to forget Broad and Croft. I believe the difference tilting in my favour is my batsmen are better fit to face his attack than his is to face mine.

 

[Norris]

@Rado_N or @Varun , can one of you please make a poll for this

Who will win the Test Series ?

• Skills 1-0
• Skills 2-0
• Skills 3-0
• Skills 2-1
• Boycott 1-0
• Boycott 2-0
• Boycott 3-0
• Boycott 2-1

Rules: Poll open to public, 24 hours and voters can change vote.
Thank you.

 

[Norris]

Goodluck @Skills and @Boycott...

 

[Spoony]

Walsh didn't have pace to burn.

 

[Akshay]

@Rado_N or @Varun , can one of you please make a poll for this

Varun can make polls now?

 

[Norris]

Varun can make polls now?

I'm not sure. I couldn't create one, but he used to make polls in threads he created, without asking a Mod's help. So I am just not sure how extensive his powers are.

 

[Varun]

Can only make polls for threads I start.

Thanks for starting the game Ijazz.

 

[Rado_N]

Poll'd

 

[Varun]

Poll'd

Thanks!

 

[Skills]

@Boycott good luck!

Just want to highlight some of my teams strengths. Im batting deep as feck.

My bowling attack is also very deep, playing 5 bowlers every match.

I also think its a varied attack suitable for all kinds of conditions. I have some traditional swing options, Imran was also one of the first real users of reverse swing and there's also Walsh with his awkward height, bounce and seam movement! I have 2 spinners for the second test, and Swann will at the very least do a job tying up an end even if there isnt much for him in the wicket.

 

[Skills]

BUMP

 

[Boycott]

@Skills good luck pal. You've got a very well assembled unit so this will be a good match-up.

 

[Boycott]

My team strengths:

• I have a deep batting line up with great balance within it. Lawry and Dravid are excellent anchor batsmen who when set bat for long periods. More often than not they dig in. Fleming and Azharuddin are more fluent stroke-makers who can keep the scoreboard ticking over at a good rate. Pietersen and Gilchrist are dominating batsmen who will not let bowlers settle at all. In McMillan I have someone who regularly batted with tail-enders and did relatively well. Take into account Broad and Marshall can both bat I have deep resources to get good scores in both innings.
• For the first test I have both Marshall and McKenzie. Arguably the finest fast bowler along with someone who led the Aussie attack of the 60s and has a tremendous record on these pitches. That's a lethal combination of pace and niggling accuracy but also two intelligent bowlers. Marshall was complete when it came to having the full range of skills such as inswinger/outswinger/bouncer/cutter. McKenzie was well known for using the cutters to great results too.
• Following them is the raw pace and mean Colin Croft who took 17 wickets in a series in Pakistan at 16 a piece. Stuart Broad as fourth seamer is a rich luxury and there is also McMillan to provide some respite.
• MacGill comes in from the second test and should make a difference. He hasn't got a good record against Lara who is probably the greatest player of spin which is why having strong pacers is important against him. Perhaps him coming in at 3 will be at my advantage since if my attack nails one of the openers early (more likely Slater as he did have some tendency of losing focus) then we can get Lara in early. But I can't say anything against his quality so it's a game of judgement from the voters.

 

[Varun]

Cmon guys, some discussion could get this going.

 

[Varun]

@Boycott Will explain my vote. I don't rate broad much, will be out of place in a match like this given skills's batting. I love mcmillan as a kid but he's not a very good test player. You have the best pacer by skills has the better unit and if they can manage Marshall, they'll do well given their quality. Your team would be up against a lot of quality at all times. Imran, Kapil and Walsh is a top trio. His batting is also slightly better.

 

[Boycott]

@Boycott Will explain my vote. I don't rate broad much, will be out of place in a match like this given skills's batting. I love mcmillan as a kid but he's not a very good test player. You have the best pacer by skills has the better unit and if they can manage Marshall, they'll do well given their quality. Your team would be up against a lot of quality at all times. Imran, Kapil and Walsh is a top trio. His batting is also slightly better.

Would Broad really be out of his place? Firstly he's the fourth seamer in the first test therefore there is less pressure. More importantly, Cook and Root are his contemporaries. He's dismissed Hussey 3 times at average of 24 and had a lot of success in the two Ashes series they played against each other. That's 3 of his top 6 which aren't anything which he doesn't know and being one of the best bowlers around in this era that counts surely.

You may argue that's an indictment of this era's bowling but then Cook (most of his career) and Root (all his career) haven't been challenged by GOAT bowlers. I'm not going to hold Cook's debut Ashes against Warne and co since everyone on the team struggled and...it was his first tough assignment. Also modern day cricket is geared to batting with flat pitches, big bats etc.

I don't intend to talk McMillan's bowling up. He's a handy respite which I will use just like the SA team did. It's his batting which can be useful since he has a good record, played mostly with tail-enders and since I've got a great WK/batsman plus two competent lower order bats after he can do more than hold up the end.

Marshall is the obvious bowler from my side to talk about but Croft who was a part of the original fab four, who has exceptional figures in an albeit limited career, and did very well everywhere he did play. McKenzie in the first test who is one of the best pace bowlers in flat conditions sharing the new ball with Marshall. I say Skills too will be up against a lot of quality at all times.

I'm curious to know why his batting is better. It may a marginal difference but an explanation would help.

Also thanks for giving your reasoning. One thing for future matches and future drafts I'd like to bring up is debate should be led by the voters as much as the drafters. Even if it's a short couple of lines to explain their vote as it's a bit hard to argue against silent votes since we don't know why they've gone that way. In my last match Raess had this problem where his voters didn't back their views and I know it was unfair since he was fighting solo. Skills has been actively participating throughout which I appreciate and look forward to discussion with him here.

 

[Akshay]

Yeah, Marshall is the best pace bowler of all time most likely, but Dev and Imran are a solid duo on both slow and seaming wickets, and Walsh is good anywhere. I think the 1st Test would be a draw, but see Skills winning the latter two. Again, MacGill is the best spinner here for me but he's outnumbered by Doshi and Swann, who are both reasonable themselves.

 

[Akshay]

I thought the batting was pretty even actually, not much in it for me. Btw Boycott I don't think I'm entirely clear on what your line up is for each Test. Is it there somewhere? Can't seem to find it.

 

[Boycott]

I thought the batting was pretty even actually, not much in it for me. Btw Boycott I don't think I'm entirely clear on what your line up is for each Test. Is it there somewhere? Can't seem to find it.

McKenzie for MacGill for the 1st test is the only change.

My reasoning is I'd rather take the gamble on having a pace attack which is lethal on a flat track as mine are. It's a bit kamikaze I know but the Windies did so with good result!

 

[Akshay]

McKenzie for MacGill for the 1st test is the only change.

My reasoning is I'd rather take the gamble on having a pace attack which is lethal on a flat track as mine are. It's a bit kamikaze I know but the Windies did so with good result!

Hmm yeah, I could see that working. Just I'm not sure either attack can take 20 wickets in that first Test. It's a bit of a shame because the batsmen are of such quality it seems every match-up the first Test is regarded a draw.

 

[Boycott]

Hmm yeah, I could see that working. Just I'm not sure either attack can take 20 wickets in that first Test. It's a bit of a shame because the batsmen are of such quality it seems every match-up the first Test is regarded a draw.

It's a good point. I imagine since the batting pool is much more deeper everyone can put together a solid unit whereas bowling is more sparse so on a flat track batting cancels each other out more often than not. Even Warne got smacked around in these conditions which came into my mind when taking out MacGill.

 

[Akshay]

It's a good point. I imagine since the batting pool is much more deeper everyone can put together a solid unit whereas bowling is more sparse so on a flat track batting cancels each other out more often than not. Even Warne got smacked around in these conditions which came into my mind when taking out MacGill.

Yeah, to be fair, on a flat enough track any bowler will get spanked. It's mainly a matter of attacking bowlers that can take wickets despite no help from the surface and maybe one bowler who is just good at keeping things tight. I think MacGill would do OK on such a pitch actually, because he bowled fine without pitch assistance plenty of times. McKenzie is a good bowler too though.

 

[Varun]

Would Broad really be out of his place? Firstly he's the fourth seamer in the first test therefore there is less pressure. More importantly, Cook and Root are his contemporaries. He's dismissed Hussey 3 times at average of 24 and had a lot of success in the two Ashes series they played against each other. That's 3 of his top 6 which aren't anything which he doesn't know and being one of the best bowlers around in this era that counts surely.

You may argue that's an indictment of this era's bowling but then Cook (most of his career) and Root (all his career) haven't been challenged by GOAT bowlers. I'm not going to hold Cook's debut Ashes against Warne and co since everyone on the team struggled and...it was his first tough assignment. Also modern day cricket is geared to batting with flat pitches, big bats etc.

I don't intend to talk McMillan's bowling up. He's a handy respite which I will use just like the SA team did. It's his batting which can be useful since he has a good record, played mostly with tail-enders and since I've got a great WK/batsman plus two competent lower order bats after he can do more than hold up the end.

Marshall is the obvious bowler from my side to talk about but Croft who was a part of the original fab four, who has exceptional figures in an albeit limited career, and did very well everywhere he did play. McKenzie in the first test who is one of the best pace bowlers in flat conditions sharing the new ball with Marshall. I say Skills too will be up against a lot of quality at all times.

I'm curious to know why his batting is better. It may a marginal difference but an explanation would help.

Also thanks for giving your reasoning. One thing for future matches and future drafts I'd like to bring up is debate should be led by the voters as much as the drafters. Even if it's a short couple of lines to explain their vote as it's a bit hard to argue against silent votes since we don't know why they've gone that way. In my last match Raess had this problem where his voters didn't back their views and I know it was unfair since he was fighting solo. Skills has been actively participating throughout which I appreciate and look forward to discussion with him here.

Agree completely about voters saying why they votes the way they did mate.

Now on to the post.

You're right in saying 3 of skills's top 6 are from broad's era but given he's your 1st/2nd change pacer, he'll be up against his middle and lower order which is very strong. I don't see broad being very effective on flat pitches, let alone the one that's suited to spinners. Hence my comment about him being out of place.

I won't argue about modern pitches etc because I don't think it'd play much of a role here, both teams have a mix of different generations so it'll balance out anyways.

I didn't know mckenzie was playing, didn't say so in the starting 11 mentioned. @Ijazz17 fix that please. Can you tell a bit about him mate, don't know much.

Re the batting, I did say it's only slightly better. Azhar and mcmillan being the deciding factors on your side whilst Kapil being on his tilts the balance slightly to his favour. Having Lara plays a role too.

 

[Boycott]

Yeah, to be fair, on a flat enough track any bowler will get spanked. It's mainly a matter of attacking bowlers that can take wickets despite no help from the surface and maybe one bowler who is just good at keeping things tight. I think MacGill would do OK on such a pitch actually, because he bowled fine without pitch assistance plenty of times. McKenzie is a good bowler too though.

Lara has a strong record against MacGill so I don't want to give him the luxury of facing him on a flat track. I trust my trio of Marshall-McKenzie-Croft to cause a lot of problems and having Broad as a fourth choice is a good addition later on.

 

[Norris]

Fixed. I forgot to ask Boycott about his team.

 

[Akshay]

Lara has a strong record against MacGill so I don't want to give him the luxury of facing him on a flat track. I trust my trio of Marshall-McKenzie-Croft to cause a lot of problems and having Broad as a fourth choice is a good addition later on.

Why not play McKenzie in the 3rd Test btw?

 

[Boycott]

Why not play McKenzie in the 3rd Test btw?

I think Marshall-Croft-Broad is strong enough with McMillan doing his usual part time offerings. These conditions are right to a tee for what they relish. They say if it seams it spins and with the footmarks created MacGill can come into his own. He has the skills to hold up an end, to bamboozle batsmen with flight and turn, the bounce naturally from these pitches and that batsmen may target him as scoring vs the pacers will be a challenge makes it more viable.

I'm not sure they'd be enough support on flat tracks for him and there isn't much sample evidence to suggest that whereas McKenzie is lethal on those pitches.

 

[Akshay]

I think Marshall-Croft-Broad is strong enough with McMillan doing his usual part time offerings. These conditions are right to a tee for what they relish. They say if it seams it spins and with the footmarks created MacGill can come into his own. He has the skills to hold up an end, to bamboozle batsmen with flight and turn, the bounce naturally from these pitches and that batsmen may target him as scoring vs the pacers will be a challenge makes it more viable.

I'm not sure they'd be enough support on flat tracks for him and there isn't much sample evidence to suggest that whereas McKenzie is lethal on those pitches.

Hmm I see. OK, fair enough, can see where you are coming from.

 

[Boycott]

@Varun

Graham McKenzie's easy approach and well-oiled action were deceptive: he hit the pitch, the bat, and sometimes batsmen very hard indeed. Picked on his first Ashes tour as a teenager in 1961, he impressed at once with his pace and poise; nothing seemed to ruffle him, although when stirred he possessed a wicked bouncer. By the age of 23, he had 100 Test wickets; by the age of 27y 200 - this despite a general lack of support and an era of benign pitches. Overwork, however, finally took its toll, and he renounced Test cricket - only two wickets short of the Australian wicket record then held by Richie Benaud - in favour of county cricket with Leicestershire. In 1975, his last year at Grace Road, they won the Championship for the first time.

In the Australian side, McKenzie’s excellent physique led to the nickname ‘Garth’ after the comic-strip hero. McKenzie’s run up was self-taught, influenced by his memories of Ray Lindwall. He ran in with a deceptively gentle action, but hit the deck hard. The balls often flew off the wicket, striking the bat at alarming velocity. Often he did strike the batsman quite painfully as well. In spite of his structure and sometimes hitting the batsmen on their body, McKenzie was not a hostile fast bowler. He seldom sledged. Many felt that he was too nice to be a fast bowler.

It was the Ashes tour of 1964 that saw McKenzie blossom into a top class bowler. He finished the tour with 29 wickets from 5 Tests, equaling the record set by Clarrie Grimmett. It included a toiling sustained effort to capture 7 wickets at Old Trafford as England piled up a 600-plus score. But, his stellar role was in combining with Neil Hawke to rout England in the first innings at Leeds. He took four in the first innings and three in the second, and Australia emerged as winner in the only Test that saw a result during the tour.

It was McKenzie’s greatest phase. He captured 21 more wickets in India and Pakistan, including a 10-wicket haul on the unhelpful track of Madras. Between December 11, 1963 to December 8, 1964 McKenzie managed 73 wickets, surpassing Maurice Tate’s record of 65. He also became the then youngest bowler to reach 100 wickets in Test cricket at the age of 23 years 162 days, a comfortable 139 days younger than Alf Valentine. The great year was capped off with his being named as one of the Wisden Cricketers of the Year in 1965. McKenzie was the first player from Western Australia to be honoured as one.

As he had demonstrated at Madras in 1964, he produced his best on wickets notorious for their lack of life. When other bowlers broke their backs with little to show for their efforts in the wickets column, McKenzie thrived in snaring batsmen out. On the placid Adelaide Oval, he took six for 48 against England in 1965-66, to win the Test for Australia.

However, he also ended on the wrong side of some curious selection policies. After figures of 7 for 66 and 3 for 85 at Melbourne against the touring Indians in 1967-68, McKenzie was dropped from the next two Tests. The official version was that he was being rested, but it was speculated that his dominance over the Indian batting had the potential to end matches too quickly and hence he had been omitted to ensure gate receipts. That Melbourne performance included 6 for 34 on the first morning, which remains the best bowling figures before lunch on the first day of a Test — beating Tom Richardson’s six for 39 achieved seven decades earlier at Leeds in 1896.

He was lethal on unfriendly wickets for pacers which he will be used for me in the first test. Overall he picked up 34 wickets in India at 19.26 and 8 wickets in his solitary test in Pakistan. Interestingly he retired just two wickets shy of beating Richie Benaud's all time record for Australia and in present day now sits in 9th. Having him in tandem with Marshall in the first test will be a great partnership and the batsmen won't be able to get away. McKenzie was capable of bowling lengthy spells so toiling away is no problem.

 

[KM]

Skills team is very strong and will probably win all three test matches but why isn't he posting in the thread? Just one post. That's poor.

 

[harshad]

Skills wins this hands down. His batting can withstand Boycotts bowling and his bowling attack of I.Khan, Kapil and Walsh coupled with Swann and Asif would be difficult fot Boycott's batting.

 

[Boycott]

Congrats @Skills. Good luck in the next round