The importance of role clarity in squad selection

Aislabie · Feb 16, 2020

Cricket teams are often selected as an effort to try to pick the best eleven players then fit them into a working team, but that often isn't the best way to maximise your resources. It feels at present as though most international teams are failing to use the resources at their disposal to make the absolute best of things, and this really does impact their on-field performances.

For the sake of an example, I will be using the England team, but this is something that absolutely applies to all teams regardless of the size of their talent pool.

- - - - -

Test Cricket

Test cricket is the oldest and grandest format of the game, and it is the one around which conventional thinking is based. As a result, this is the format where my ideas will be least revolutionary.

A Test team should be a team of specialists:

Two opening batsmen (1/2) - Their primary job is to set a secure platform for the rest of the batsmen to build upon. The very best opening batsmen do post huge scores, but the key idea here is one of survival first, and runs second - at least until the ball gets old.
Two top-order batsmen (3/4) - These two batsmen generally ought to be the ones in your team who will bat long and make big hundreds. Usually, the better of these two batsmen ought to bat at four rather than three, to minimise the risk against the moving ball, but this can be a matter of personal preference for the player in question.
Two middle-order batsmen (5/6) - These two batsmen will generally score quicker than any other proper player in the team. Again, the very best of them will make big runs, but if the batsmen above them have done their jobs then they will be cashing in on already-tired bowling.
One wicket-keeper (usually 7) - The wicket-keeper's primary job is to keep wicket. This is something that the modern game has somewhat lost sight of, but to see the importance of such a player one need only look at how important Wriddhiman Saha has been for India. Any runs are a bonus.
One or two seam/swing bowlers - Whether you pick one or two such players will depend upon conditions; in "SENA" Tests, you'll likely need two such bowlers, whereas in the subcontinent you will generally need only one. These bowlers may not trouble the speed gun, but pace is not their prime attribute.
One or two spin bowlers - Again, whether you pick one or two such players will depend upon conditions, and will mirror the number of seam/swing options in your team. Spinners should be wicket-taking options and not merely containing bowlers.
One express pace bowler (rotated) - Sometimes there is no substitute for outright pace, but that can come at a cost to the bowler's body. If at all possible, you want two or three such players available to rotate in this role. They will NOT be used to bowl long spells because that's how you break them.

So in the case of the England team, it looks as though the options in contention are something like this (give or take my expressions of personal preference):

Openers: Rory Burns, Dominic Sibley, Zak Crawley (reserve)
Top-order: Joe Root, Joe Denly, Sam Hain (reserve)
Middle-order: Ben Stokes, Ollie Pope, Sam Northeast (reserve)
Wicket-keeper: Ben Foakes, Jonny Bairstow? (reserve)
Seam/swing bowlers: Jimmy Anderson, Stuart Broad, Sam Curran (reserve), Chris Woakes (reserve)
Spin bowlers: Jack Leach, Dominic Bess, Liam Dawson (reserve)
Express pace bowlers: Jofra Archer, Mark Wood, Ollie Stoke (all rotate)

- - - - -

One-Day Internationals

If Test matches are the simple puzzle, then One-Day Internationals are by far and away the most complex. A perfectly balanced ODI side has to fill fifteen roles, which means either that you will have to find four dual-role cricketers, or you'll have to forego one or more of said roles. That was what made the England World Cup side so good: in Stokes, Buttler, Moeen and Woakes they had those four dual-role cricketers, although Stokes' bowling role was the least pronounced.

Two top-order hitters - These are the sort of players who can score fast but also score big. The prototype of such a player is Rohit Sharma.
One anchor accumulator - This is the sort of player who can score a run-a-ball hundred without anyone really noticing. Someone like Joe Root.
One dynamic accumulator - This is a slightly more dynamic version of the last player - someone who runs fast but can also find the boundary if needs be. This is a very complex role, and is sometimes served for England by Ben Stokes. They often forego this to utilise him as an extra hitter though, which can backfire on challenging surfaces.
Three middle-order hitters - These guys can find and clear the boundaries from the word go, even with five men out on the boundary. If they lose their wickets trying to do that, then so be it. Jos Buttler is one of the best in the world at this role.
One firefighter - A player who can be promoted to stop a collapse, or held back to see that the last 30 or 40 runs are scored in a chase. They might not make big scores but do make big contributions. Even as his powers waned, MS Dhoni remained very good at this role.
One wicket-keeper - In ODI cricket more than the other formats, the keeper should be able to fulfil one of the batting roles as well.
Two stock bowlers - Usually, this will be one seamer and one spinner, but it varies depending on who is available in your team. The best in the world are/were Liam Plunkett and Mohammad Nabi.
Two deceptive bowlers - Again, in an ideal world this would be one seamer and one spinner, but it varies depending on who is available. The best in the world are usually wrist spinners - Rashid Khan immediately springs to mind - but a good deceptive seamer is very valuable.
One death bowler - Usually but not always a seamer who can hit their yorkers. Nobody is better at this than Jasprit Bumrah.
One express pace bowler - Again, even in ODI cricket there's sometimes no substitute for outright pace, as Mark Wood showed throughout the World Cup.

So that's fifteen roles to fit into eleven players. Often it doesn't quite work, leading teams to forego one of their stock or deceptive bowlers, or one of their hitters or accumulators. This is the format with the most variables built into the template, which is what makes it so tricky for a team to get it right in all conditions.

For England, the playing XI and reserves usually look something like:

Jason Roy (top-order hitter)
Jonny Bairstow (top-order hitter / reserve wicket-keeper)
Joe Root (anchor accumulator)
Eoin Morgan (middle-order hitter)
Ben Stokes (dynamic accumulator / stock seamer)
Jos Buttler (middle-order hitter / wicket-keeper)
Moeen Ali (middle-order hitter / stock spinner)
Chris Woakes (firefighter / death bowler)
Tom Curran (deceptive seamer)
Adil Rashid (deceptive spinner)
Jofra Archer (express pace bowler - rotate)

Alex Hales (reserve top-order hitter)
Sam Hain (reserve accumulator)
Sam Billings (reserve middle-order hitter)
Liam Dawson (reserve stock bowler)
Matt Parkinson (reserve deceptive bowler)
Mark Wood (express pace bowler - rotate)

- - - - -

Twenty20

Twenty20 is a reserve to a much simpler team structure, built around specialists. After all, given that a number seven batsman generally faces about five balls an innings in a Twenty20 match, if you need to have a proper batsman all the way down there, chances are you've already lost the game.

First are the five key batting roles:

Two powerplay hitters - These guys need to get the innings off to the fastest possible start. They may not be the best six-hitters in the team, but they will be able to score fast and hit over the infield, as well as pick gaps.
One accumulator - Even in Twenty20, it is better that your team has at least one guy whose job it is to bat like a batsman. This isn't a huge revelation, and just because more of their runs are scored between the wickets than most of their teammates doesn't mean their contributions are any less valuable.
Two finishing hitters - These guys will again have the ability to tee off from ball one, and to bat to a target. Eoin Morgan has for a long time been the archetypal finishing hitter, he's excellent.

Then, there are the five key bowling roles:

One attacking spinner - Spin in T20 cricket is a huge wicket-taker. Again, not a huge revelation that - just look at Rashid Khan.
One containing spinner - It's also harder to score against, which is how guys like Ashton Agar can be really important even if they don't take many wickets.
One deceptive seamer - Changes of pace are huge in Twenty20 cricket more than any other format - you want one in your team.
One death bowler - This would usually be a fast or fastish yorker bowler, but doesn't have to be; for the Afghan national team, Rashid Khan actually takes on this role as a spinner.
One express pace bowler - Sometimes you just can't beat raw pace! Use him wisely though, as it can also be true that the ball coming faster onto the bat also travels faster off it.

And finally, the eleventh player will be one of two things:

Either a wicket keeper - if none of your five main batsmen keeps wicket, then you will want your keeper here as a supplementary batsman.
Or a utility player - if you already have a keeper, then you'll want someone who can provide both an extra batting and bowling option, even though their best performance might result in them doing neither.

Currently, England pick the right players most of the time, but don't manage to deploy them right. Role clarity is huge in T20 cricket:

Jason Roy (powerplay hitter)
Jonny Bairstow (powerplay hitter)
Dawid Malan (accumulator)
Eoin Morgan (finishing hitter)
Jos Buttler (finishing hitter & wicket-keeper)
Ben Stokes (utility player)
Moeen Ali (containing spinner)
Tom Curran (deceptive seamer)
Chris Jordan (death bowler)
Adil Rashid (attacking spinner)
Mark Wood (express pace bowler)

Alex Hales (reserve powerplay hitter)
Joe Root (reserve accumulator)
Sam Billings (reserve finishing hitter)
David Willey (reserve utility player)
Liam Dawson (reserve containing spinner)
Matt Parkinson (reserve attacking spinner)
Chris Woakes (reserve death bowler)
Pat Brown (reserve deceptive seamer)
Jofra Archer (reserve express pace bowler)

Again, looking at a role-based approach can lead to some quite large player pools, but this can absolutely be an advantage. Good squad rotation within clearly defined roles can mean that anybody the team has to call on will be match-ready.

- - - - -

So that's a big player pool isn't it?

Yes, yes it is. And players' unavailability can lead to still more players being tried to fulfil roles. But a greater degree of role clarity will always lead to a better cricket team than one with (for example) the best six batsmen, but all of them wanting to bat at number five.

And in the case of teams with a smaller talent pool to pick from, creating clearly defined roles can help to make the best out of players who may have more limited natural ability than someone like a Ben Stokes - who could probably do most of these roles if he was asked to.

The England player pool, according to these three squads, would be as follows:

| Test Role | ODI Role | T20I Role

That's a huge player pool (32 guys in and around the England side), but that is the case for a reason - there are very few players who are first-choice selections in all three formats, and that is a deliberate piece of workload management. Similarly, reserves being in and around the team will be excellent for their development as cricketers.

If anyone's made it to the end of this post, I'd be very interested in their thoughts!

Aislabie · Feb 16, 2020

I will probably make an effort to work through a bunch of national teams in this thread, though full disclosure there's every chance I'll get distracted and not do that

wasteyouryouth · Feb 16, 2020

Really interesting post, as always @Aislabie

I do see this sort of thinking more prominent in T20, probably because there's more money involved and recruitment (also player 'transfers') is a lot more fluid than most other forms of cricket.

Master Bates · Feb 17, 2020

Aislabie said:
That's a huge player pool

How can you forget Jennings?

This is a really interesting piece of work done by you. Let's see what I can add it. But I won't be writing too much like you.

Bevab · Feb 17, 2020

Aislabie said:
I will probably make an effort to work through a bunch of national teams in this thread, though full disclosure there's every chance I'll get distracted and not do that

I could do one for India! I already did one for the current T20I side which hasn't been posted yet and was inspired by your earlier post.

Master Bates · Feb 17, 2020

Player Pool of Indian Test Team (according to Aislabie's roles):

Openers: Mayank Agarwal (), Prithvi Shaw (), Shubman Gill (?), Rohit Sharma (), Abhimanyu Easwaran (), Priyank Panchal ()
Top-order: Virat Kohli, Chesteshwar Pujara, Hanuma Vihari, Shubman Gill (?)
Middle-order: Ajinkya Rahane, Hanuma Vihari, Rishabh Pant, Ravindra Jadeja,
Wicket-keeper: Wridhiman Saha, Ishan Kishan (?), Srikar Bharat (?), Rishabh Pant ()
Seam/swing bowlers: Mohammed Shami (also as express pace bowler), Ishant Sharma, Mohammad Siraj (reserve), Ishan Porel (?), Bhuvneshwar Kumar (?), Shardul Thakur (?)
Spin bowlers: Ravi Ashwin, Ravi Jadeja, Kuldeep Yadav (reserve), Shahbaz Nadeem (reserve)
Express pace bowlers: Jasprit Bumrah, Umesh Yadav (both Bumrah and Umesh can count in seam/swing bowlers as well), Navdeep Saini (reserve), Avesh Khan (?)

Rohit Sharma and Prithvi Shaw are aggressive batsmen. They are not the kind of players to soften the ball as they go out on attack. So, according to Aislabie's roles, they do not fit.

I am not sure about Top order options. Maybe some Indian can tell me which players are for that role in future.

Players with ? are the ones which are not in the team but could play in the future. Players with :down:

are the ones who do not fit in their role (from what I understood from @Aislabie 's post). Players with :up:

are the ones who fit the bill.

Bevab · Feb 17, 2020

Master Bates said:
Player Pool of Indian Test Team (according to Aislabie's roles):

Openers: Mayank Agarwal (), Prithvi Shaw (), Shubman Gill (?), Rohit Sharma (), Abhimanyu Easwaran (), Priyank Panchal ()

Top-order: Virat Kohli, Chesteshwar Pujara, Hanuma Vihari, Shubman Gill (?)

Middle-order: Ajinkya Rahane, Hanuma Vihari, Rishabh Pant, Ravindra Jadeja,

Wicket-keeper: Wridhiman Saha, Ishan Kishan (?), Srikar Bharat (?), Rishabh Pant ()

Seam/swing bowlers: Mohammed Shami (also as express pace bowler), Ishant Sharma, Mohammad Siraj (reserve), Ishan Porel (?), Bhuvneshwar Kumar (?), Shardul Thakur (?)

Spin bowlers: Ravi Ashwin, Ravi Jadeja, Kuldeep Yadav (reserve), Shahbaz Nadeem (reserve)

Express pace bowlers: Jasprit Bumrah, Umesh Yadav (both Bumrah and Umesh can count in seam/swing bowlers as well), Navdeep Saini (reserve), Avesh Khan (?)

Rohit Sharma and Prithvi Shaw are aggressive batsmen. They are not the kind of players to soften the ball as they go out on attack. So, according to Aislabie's roles, they do not fit.

I am not sure about Top order options. Maybe some Indian can tell me which players are for that role in future.

Players with ? are the ones which are not in the team but could play in the future. Players with are the ones who do not fit in their role (from what I understood from @Aislabie 's post). Players with are the ones who fit the bill.

@Aislabie's roles are not a rigid framework IMO, there are other roles in white ball cricket that he has missed out on. They serve as an excellent guideline for the basic level which helps to add more complex roles that are in use today.

The T20I Indian side by his framework and according to the current management's idea would be

Powerplay hitters: KL Rahul, Rohit, Dhawan
Accumulators: Kohli, Samson
Finishing hitters: Iyer, Pandey, Pant
Utility players: Hardik, Krunal, Dube
Containing spinners: Sundar, Jadeja
Attacking spinners: Kuldeep, Chahal, R Chahar, Markande
Deceptive seam bowlers: Bhuvi, D Chahar, Thakur
Express pace bowlers: Saini, Shami, Khaleel
Death bowlers: Bumrah

This is a big simplification though. Part of what makes this Indian side fascinating is that most of these players are hybrids who don't really fit into the role that they have been chosen to play by the management. IMO, this would be closer to the reality

Rohit frequently takes his time to get going in the powerplay, although he is more aggressive for India and has been using the powerplay more these days to give a quicker start. His modus operandi is scoring steadily and taking his time to build up a score, which is more of an accumulator's function. A powerplay hitter-accumulator hybrid with more emphasis on the accumulating part would be what I call him.
Dhawan doesn't take advantage of the powerplay in T20Is to the extent he does in ODIs, which means calling him a powerplay hitter is stretching it a bit.
Iyer and Pandey are both accumulators who are very good at rotating the strike and scoring from the odd boundary. Iyer is very aggressive versus spin which gives him the outlook of a hitter, while Pandey's ability to find gaps with precise shot selection at the death where bowlers bluff (like a Bevan or Dhoni) is the reason for his recent success. Accumulator-finishing hitter hybrids would describe them better.
Hardik is the most interesting one, as he has served the role of an express pace bowler (as part of the five man bowling attack), finishing hitter and utility player for India. I wouldn't necessarily call another utility player like Stokes as indispensable for England in T20Is where as Hardik is quite essential to this side.
Bumrah could be an express pace bowler too on paper but he has been exclusively used as the death bowler due to the lack of alternatives.

And this explains why the Indian side's tactics in T20Is feel outdated and archaic even with the advent of IPL.

On a good day, the hybrid batsmen either 'wake up' as hitters (Rohit suddenly being aggressive in a game) or play themselves in sufficiently enough to hit the ball later on and compensate for the initial slower start and the team scores the 200+ totals we are seeing more frequently nowadays due to the new regulars.
On the average day, one of the hybrids transition into hitters to take the team to a par score, which is then defended if the team either collapses (see NZ in the recent series) or the bowlers bowl really well to restrict the opponent to under par scores (the KulCha year of 2018).
On a bad day, the team struggles to be aggressive enough and the hybrids take the game too deep before switching on or fail to even transition having wasted a ton of balls that your average hitter wouldn't have if he failed. These are the games where the opposition cruises to the total we set laboriously.
The pace bowling problem is also clear in that if Bumrah is goes for runs, barring a miracle like in the NZ series we will struggle due to the lack of any other frontline death bowlers. Let us not even entertain the prospect of an extended run of poor form!
The other issue that has gone unnoticed has been the spinner strategy. Till 2016-17, we went largely with the finger spinners (Ashwin and Jadeja) who aren't even as economical as the ones playing for other teams like Wasim, Narine etc. There are even wrist spinners like Badree, Afridi, Zampa and Tahir with better economies than them! The only one who was a regular and was very economical was Harbhajan Singh. This meant that Ashwin largely was an attacking spinner who made up for his lack of wickets relatively with decent control.
After that, we went with two wrist spinners for most games with Sundar being the sole containing spinner at times until Krunal and later Jadeja was brought in as a regular. This meant that we took more wickets at the expense of being hit more frequently. Bumrah and Bhuvi in form masked that to an extent but the wheels came off once the spin twins were figured out and Bhuvi lost form and fitness. This meant a return of Jadeja after his good 2019 IPL and credit to him, he has actually been very economical since his return with his economy comparable to the top spinners.
All of this is further amplified by our poor management and tactics from the support staff which results in Kohli's infamous 'we were 15-20 runs short' on several occasions, frequently scoring at just about par or under par. Our hybrid players should be better coached to take advantage of every opportunity to score more runs even at the risk of losing their wicket instead of conserving it for a push at the death.
This is why players like Pant and Hardik are essential to the side and also why many fans want Pant in the team. Even if he hasn't fired up until now, on paper he is the most destructive batsman of the side with two excellent IPL seasons and can easily take the team home from a lost cause. Hardik's presence also means that the team can afford to not play the extra pacer in Shami or Thakur and go with two spinners, either KulCha or Sundar and one of the spin twins. He also adds to the balance by being one of the two finishers while Iyer+Pandey make up the other if Manish is a regular.

NILAYSHAH60 · Feb 17, 2020

Aislabie said:
I will probably make an effort to work through a bunch of national teams in this thread, though full disclosure there's every chance I'll get distracted and not do that

I can tell you finding the right team for the Indian side can be a tough task because of the pool of talent they have and hence there will always be chances that some of the better players might miss out. It would be an good effort from you if you want put things from their perspective as well.

But what I feel is this matter is very subjective and there are lot of variables to make a side. Because, every team has a different attitude and they play so differently !

I think that this type of balance suits a lot more to England because of the clarity in their team selections off late.

NILAYSHAH60 · Feb 17, 2020

@Bevab I was thinking what should be the role of Kohli ? Because he is a good strike rotater and on his days he find boundaries with ease. On some days even acts as a finisher. He also acts as a utility player because of him being so crucial to the side.

Aislabie · Feb 17, 2020

wasteyouryouth said:
I do see this sort of thinking more prominent in T20, probably because there's more money involved and recruitment (also player 'transfers') is a lot more fluid than most other forms of cricket.

This is probably true, although not always for the reasons you allude to here. With Test cricket, 140 years of collective experience has eased most teams down more or less the right path. There are always exceptions of course - such as England picking five middle-order batsmen for several years, Bangladesh picking four spinners, or South Africa picking four medium-pacers. These teand to be teams that don't work though.

One point of difference for some teams is the selection of an all-rounder; this only really works if they are able to fulfil a specialist role in the team, like a Ben Stokes or a Jacques Kallis. One way of creating this extra player is with a keeping all-rounder - someone like a Quinton de Kock or Rishabh Pant, who can play the role of a middle-order batsman, adds the flexibility of having an extra bowler at number seven. India in particular used this to select two spinners and two seam/swing bowlers, before promoting Jadeja to play as a middle-order batsman with the return of Wriddhiman Saha.

One-Day International cricket is a different beast entitely - the sheer amount of roles and difficulty in filling them all does generally lead to very varied approaches depending on the team. Some may forego a sixth bowler, or a firefighter. Others may have players who are good enough to shoulder more than one batting role - it's a high-risk approach, but India often have enough confidence in Sharma and Dhawan that they feel one of their top-order hitters will step up and anchor the innings, leading them to select Virat Kohli as their only (dynamic) accumulator. This usually works for them, but not every team has a Virat Kohli.

Aislabie · Feb 17, 2020

Master Bates said:
How can you forget Jennings?

Quite deliberately. With Burns, Sibley and Crawley as incumbents, he is the fourth choice; he falls under the bit I mentioned before about having players outside the main pool drafted in due to availabiloty issues.

One work-around for a lack of available talent is to draft in a third opener as a top-order batsman; this used to be Ireland's way of doing things. In that situation, yiu want the opener most likely to make a huge score at number three: we used to do that with Ed Joyce.

Aislabie · Feb 17, 2020

Master Bates said:
Rohit Sharma and Prithvi Shaw are aggressive batsmen. They are not the kind of players to soften the ball as they go out on attack. So, according to Aislabie's roles, they do not fit.

One thing that I perhaps didn't make entirely clear is that attacking players can still be effective as opening batsmen - it just isn't their primary role to be aggressive. For example, it is Prithvi Shaw's role to see off 60 to 100 balls as an opener. It doesn't matter whether he scores 20 runs or 80 runs doing that - he's still fulfilling the role.

Though if he is 80* at lunch then it's hard to argue that he's not done his job. The same goes for David Warner in places that aren't England.

Aislabie · Feb 17, 2020

Bevab said:
@Aislabie's roles are not a rigid framework IMO, there are other roles in white ball cricket that he has missed out on. They serve as an excellent guideline for the basic level which helps to add more complex roles that are in use today.

Definitely not a rigid framework, I agree - especially in the white ball formats. Putting aside the points I made earlier about ODI batting, this is huge with the ball in all formats.

It's important to pick the best bowlers you have at your disposal - though a balance of seam and spin is essential, it's not necessarily the best balance for any given team: if you don't have a great deceptive seamer, you may instead replace that role with an additional spinner. Some teams also lack express pace bowlers, which leads them to prioritise other roles.

An interesting example of this is Afghanistan, who would be well-served selecting four spinners for most white-ball games. This would be my ODI attack for them:

Mohammad Nabi (stock spinner)

Rashid Khan (death bowler)

Gulbadin Naib (deceptive seamer)

Dawlat Zadran (pace bowler)

Amir Hamza Hotak (stock spinner)

Mujeeb ur-Rahman (deceptive spinner)

You could even make the case for someone like Qais Ahmed ahead of Gulbadin, which would give you a baffling five spinners.

In T20s you'd have more or less the same players, possibly minus Hamza - though you could retain him and have Nabi as your utility player.

Bevab said:
And this explains why the Indian side's tactics in T20Is feel outdated and archaic even with the advent of IPL.

I would definitely agree here. It's even more noticeable for India because y'all have such a huge talent pool that you could fill every role thrice over if you wanted to. With some proper role clarity, you'd be unbeatable in all three formats.

Aislabie · Feb 17, 2020

Nilay_60 said:
But what I feel is this matter is very subjective and there are lot of variables to make a side. Because, every team has a different attitude and they play so differently !

I think that this type of balance suits a lot more to England because of the clarity in their team selections of late.

There is a certain degree of confirmation bias here though - that England look best-suited to this kind of structure because they're the ones who've stuck to it best.

However I think that New Zealand best demonstrates the merit of approaching the game with these roles in mind: despite a limited player pool and a fairly weak domestic game, they managed to be the second-best Test team, and World Cup runners up. Their T20 team also had an excellent run at around that time.

New Zealand often don't pick an express pace bowler in Test matches, instead using Neil Wagner as their "enforcer", which shows that there's some wiggle room within the roles, but Wagner is the exception not the rule.

Aislabie · Feb 20, 2020

Australia

Test Team

Opening Batsmen: David Warner, Joe Burns, Nic Maddinson (R)
Top-Order Batsmen: Steven Smith, Marnus Labuschagne, Usman Khawaja (R)
Middle-Order Batsmen: Travis Head, Kurtis Patterson, Matthew Wade (R)

Wicket-Keeper: Tim Paine, Alex Carey (R) - Personally, I still really rate Peter Nevill but I think the selectors have moved past him

Express Pace: Mitchell Starc, Jhye Richardson (Rotation)
Swing/Seam: Pat Cummins, Josh Hazlewood, James Pattinson (R), Michael Neser (R)
Spinners: Nathan Lyon, Steve O'Keefe, Ashton Agar (R) - A real lack of good spinners here in all honesty

First XI

David Warner
Joe Burns
Marnus Labuschagne
Steve Smith
Travis Head
Kurtis Patterson
Tim Paine
Pat Cummins
Mitchell Starc
Nathan Lyon
Josh Hazlewood

ODI Team

Top-Order Hitters: David Warner, Aaron Finch, Matthew Wade (R)
Anchor Accumulator: Marnus Labuschagne, Shaun Marsh (R)
Dynamic Accumulator: Steven Smith, Peter Handscomb (R)
Middle-Order Hitters: Glenn Maxwell

, Mitchell Marsh

, Alex Carey

Ashton Turner (R), Marcus Stoinis

(R)
Firefighter: Ashton Agar

, Alex Carey

(R)

Wicket-Keeper: Alex Carey

, Matthew Wade (R)

Stock Bowlers: Ashton Agar

, Glenn Maxwell

, Mitchell Marsh

, Marcus Stoinis

(R)
Deceptive Bowlers: Adam Zampa, AJ Tye (R), Fawad Ahmed (R)
Death Bowler: Pat Cummins, Mitchell Starc (R)
Express Pace: Mitchell Starc, Jhye Richardson, Billy Stanlake (Rotation)

A couple of players appear multiple times here because they fill in for another role if the first player isn't playing - such as Carey filling in as firefighter to bring in another middle-order hitter. Also, there's an extra stock bowler, as this suits the balance of the batting order better.

First XI

David Warner
Aaron Finch
Steve Smith
Marnus Labuschagne
Glenn Maxwell
Mitchell Marsh
Alex Carey
Ashton Agar
Mitchell Starc
Pat Cummins
Adam Zampa

T20 XI

Powerplay Hitter: David Warner, Aaron Finch, Matthew Wade (R)
Accumulator: Steven Smith, Peter Handscomb (R)
Finishing Hitter: Glenn Maxwell, Mitchell Marsh, Ashton Turner (R)

Wicket-Keeper: Alex Carey, Matthew Wade (R)
Utility Player: Marcus Stoinis (R)

Attacking Spinner: Adam Zampa, Fawad Ahmed (R)
Containing Spinner: Ashton Agar, Steve O'Keefe (R)
Death Bowler: Mitchell Starc, Pat Cummins (Rotation)
Deceptive Seamer: AJ Tye, James Faulkner (R)
Express Pace: Jhye Richardson, Billy Stanlake (Rotation)

First XI

David Warner
Aaron Finch
Steve Smith
Glenn Maxwell
Mitchell Marsh
Alex Carey
Ashton Agar
Mitchell Starc
AJ Tye
Jhye Richardson
Adam Zampa

I might edit in the big player pool table later, but right now I want to sleep.

The importance of role clarity in squad selection

Aislabie

Test Cricket is Best Cricket

Aislabie

Test Cricket is Best Cricket

wasteyouryouth

Verified

Master Bates

School Cricketer

Bevab

Staff Member

Master Bates

School Cricketer

Bevab

Staff Member

NILAYSHAH60

Dreamcatcher

NILAYSHAH60

Dreamcatcher

Aislabie

Test Cricket is Best Cricket

Aislabie

Test Cricket is Best Cricket

Aislabie

Test Cricket is Best Cricket

Aislabie

Test Cricket is Best Cricket

Aislabie

Test Cricket is Best Cricket

Aislabie

Test Cricket is Best Cricket

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread