Another draft!-Test players of the 90s and later - FINISHED!

[cricket_icon]

Shane Watson

There was a huge void left by the retirement of Hayden and Langer. Two of the best openers of their generation, they helped thrust Australia into a new mode of aggressive opening batsmanship. If you asked anyone in Australian cricket if they thought Watson would be the heir to the throne, you would have been laughed out of the room.

Yet, in the intervening years, Shane Watson has changed from a bits and pieces cricketer into one of the finest Australian batsman of the last 2 years. The added bonus is that he can also bowl well enough to restrict runs at an economy of 3.11 and a more than healthy average of 31.

Tests 27
Runs 1953
Average 41.55
100s 2
50s 15
Wickets 43
Average 31.41
Econ 3.11
4w 1
5w 2

----------

1. S Watson
2. W Hinds
3. R Ponting C
4. K Pietersen
5. J Ryder
6. T Samaraweera
7. T Taibu WK
8. S Pollock
9. S Akhtar
10. S Mushtaq
11. I Sharma

True batting all the way down to 8, with a more than worthy hitter in Akhtar.
A very good new ball attack in Pollock and Akhtar but then the pace bowling gets slightly weaker with Sharma coming in at first change but Watson adds a little bit of extra depth. Saqlain is a very very good offie who can take wickets in bunches.
Be afraid, be very afraid

----------

On a side note, I would loved to have picked M Waugh but the SL round came first and I couldn't think of a worthy opening batsman who had not already been taken and I needed a middle order batsman. But he was one heck of a player.

 

[shravi]

My Bell pick is looking pretty damn good from where I'm sitting...

 

[sifter132]

^And the Laxman pick not so much That's one of the joys/perils of picking when a series is still going on. Pietersen also looks a great pick now, Dhoni or Gambhir not so much as well.

Indeed, it's a bit surprising and now I really regret my decision of picking Atapattu. I had the option of selecting openers like Watson or Mark Waugh.

@User2010 - Very nice pick there, Macgill was a very nice spinner he was very very unlucky but that doesn't mean that he was not a good spinner, he surely strengthens your bowling attack.

Agree with you all the way, except Mark Waugh wasn't an opener... ODI opener eventually, and a successful one, but he spent 90% of his Test career at #4, the other 10 at #6. If send2yaari doesn't get him, I'm definitely getting him - he's my favourite player EVER

And MacGill, yeah he's not too bad, but for the sake of argument user, personally I would have preferred Harbhajan as my spinner IMHO Harbhajan + Mitchell Johnson (and if Gillespie had still been available - definitely) > Zaheer + MacGill to me, especially when you consider their batting and fielding as well. MacGill had a career trajectory a little like Harbhajan, great at the start and fans wondering whether he was better than the incumbent (Kumble/Warne), and then a slow decline.

 

[Aoun13]

Michael Hussey is my final pick. Will post my final presentation later

My Team:
1. Mathew Hayden
2. Chris Gayle
3. Graham Thorpe
4. Michael Hussey
5. TM Dilshan
6. Brendon McCullum (wk)
7. Lance Klusener
8. Heath Streak
9. Anil Kumble (c)
10. Allan Donald
11. Mohammad Asif

 

[Cricketman]

So...

Gary Kirsten
Tamim Iqbal
Ian Bell
Brian Lara
Michael Clarke
VVS Laxman
+ Ridley Jacobs
Dale Steyn
Shane Bond
Lasith Malinga
Mushtaq Ahmed

Love it. Has to be the prettiest middle order I have ever seen in terms of strokeplay. Bell, Lara, Clarke, and Laxman?? Talk about strokeplay.

Love the fast bowling attack too. Maybe a little one demensional but guys like Malinga are unconventional enough to shake things up. Good job.

 

[Aditya]

Agree with you all the way, except Mark Waugh wasn't an opener... ODI opener eventually, and a successful one, but he spent 90% of his Test career at #4, the other 10 at #6. If send2yaari doesn't get him, I'm definitely getting him - he's my favourite player EVER

Lol, I just forgot for a moment that this is a test draft. Leave Mark Waugh, I still had option of Watson.

 

[Gaurav_7]

personally I would have preferred Harbhajan as my spinner

I love leg spinners. Harbhajan, even if he had been a leg spinner, I wouldn't have had him. I just don't rate him.

I know Mitchell Johnson would have been a good pick. But, I already had 4 pace options and only one spinner in Rafique. So, for that I thought going for MacGill was the right choice. I'm rating my team as one of the best ones in the draft if not the best.

 

[Aditya]

Smurf, as I said somewhere earlier, it comes down to the team composition. I couldn't fit him in my team at this stage. But, yes, Aditya has gone wrong by not picking Dravid earlier and now missing out on some good Aussie players. Some planning has to be involved, you know.

I agree with the Australian one but I'm not really disappointed of not having Dravid in my team. I wanted my team to have quite a few bowlers in it. Take example of any good team in the history of test cricket, more often than not a strong team has at least 4 to 5 very good bowlers. By good bowlers I mean, the bowlers who are capable of delivering to the expectations. Taking wickets is other thing and bowling well is other, in test cricket. A bowler might not be taking wickets but if he is bowling well, the bowler bowling from the other end is benefited.

The point I'm trying to make here is that my team has 6 bowlers in it. Mcgrath, Martin, Gillespie, Swann, Shakib and Ganguly. 3 pace bowlers, 2 spinners and 1 medium pacer. Which team would not love to have 6 bowlers in their side? 6 bowlers in their side and still having a good balanced side. Out of those 6, 3 of them are quite good with the bat. Ganguly, Shakib and Swann (I rate him as a very good batsman). In case of Dravid, he's obviously a batsman and I have very high regards for him as a batsman but my team really didn't have any place for him. I was more concerned about the balance of my side rather than thinking about taking some big players in my side and messing up with the team balance.

 

[AbhishekS]

You gotta accept the fact that you missed a trick, Aditya. Ganguly hardly bowled in tests.

 

[Aditya]

I don't really expect Ganguly to bowl 20 overs for me in a day. It's just that I've got a option as a 6th bowler which does make my bowling attack stronger. My batting does look a little weak and that's why I say that having Watson in my side in place of Atapattu would have really done wonders to my side.

 

[cricket_icon]

i can see where adits coming from. In a test draft post 90, there are only a limited number of truly world class bowlers so adding bowling depth is crucial, hence my most important pick was probably watson.

 

[AbhishekS]

How about simming matches with these teams on Cricsim or any other simulator?

 

[shravi]

How about simming matches with these teams on Cricsim or any other simulator?

We could but it really doesn't ever prove anything. It's just for show.

If you want, we could all just tell you what you want to hear. You win because you have Sehwag and we don't.

 

[AbhishekS]

If you want, we could all just tell you what you want to hear. You win because you have Sehwag and we don't.

Indeed that will be the case and I'd love to see it happen on Cricsim.

 

[cricket_icon]

how does cricsim work. lets try it. would be a laugh.