Draft: No Landmarks XI - Poll Added - Running till 25 April

[blockerdave]

I'll pick Wayne "Ned" Larkins instead then, still opening.

1 Stephen Cook
2 Wayne Larkins
3
4 Stuart Law
5
6
7 Ben Hollioake
8 Bob Taylor
9 Ian Salisbury
10
11

 

[Aislabie]

It is a strange quirk of Bangladeshi cricket that the overwhelming majority of overs are bowled by left-arm spinners. As a result, most of their seamers don't really get the chance for big hauls, even if they're good enough. The prime example is Mashrafe Mortaza who never even managed a first-class five-for. Despite that though , he was a Test-class seamer at a time Bangladesh only had one of those, as well as having since shown his excellence as a captain.

1. Bruce Laird
2. Chetan Chauhan
3. Brian Bolus
4.
5.
6.
7. Niroshan Dickwella
8. Winston Benjamin
9. Mashrafe Mortaza
10.
11. Tony Gray

@blockerdave @Master Bates @VC the slogger - Idk WHO is next

 

[Master Bates]

@blockerdave is next.

I have one pick left while @VC the slogger has 5 picks left. I hope he is in a state to post.

 

[Master Bates]

Andre Adams will be at no. 9. His wonderful stats means that he will lead the pace attack along with Hendrick. And his batting is useful. He can hit a few blows. Played only one match but took 6 wickets. Unfortunate to not have played more. Was a domestic champ.

CerealKiller's XI:
01.
02. Parthiv Patel
03.
04.
05. Barry Shepherd
06. Asim Kamal
07. Vallance Jupp
08. Sam Curran
09. Andre Adams
10.
11. Mike Hendrick

 

[blockerdave]

I will pick Adrian Kuiper.

A talented South African all rounder whose career coincided with isolation due to apartheid, he played 1 test for the proteas after readmission and several unofficial tests for the Springboks during the rebel tours of the 80s.

A hard hitting batsman, he will bat number 6 and contribute accurate swing bowling and even occasional offies. Despite that workload, he’s also a strong candidate for captain.

@Master Bates - @VC the slogger has a double pick now, then it’s me again. Given his absence do you want me to go ahead and pick for the sake of speed, or wait 2 days?

 

[Master Bates]

go ahead and pick for the sake of speed

you have ur answer.

 

[blockerdave]

Ok, I pick Dayle Hadlee, less famous brother of the illustrious Sir Richard. 71 wickets at 33.64 with a best of 4/30.

back to @Master Bates

 

[Master Bates]

So, I have managed to form a atron tail which can bat as well. My next pick is Jhye Richardson. A genuine fast bowler who can swing the ball as well, he is surely going to be a superstar in the future for Australian cricket. And he can bat a bit as well. He played 2 tests against Sri Lanka and almost managed to get a 5-fer but it was not to be and he will be in my side to round off my pace quartet.

CerealKiller's XI:
01.
02. Parthiv Patel
03.
04.
05. Barry Shepherd
06. Asim Kamal
07. Vallance Jupp
08. Sam Curran
09. Andre Adams
10. Jhye Richardson
11. Mike Hendrick[DOUBLEPOST=1580440512][/DOUBLEPOST]@Aislabie is next.[DOUBLEPOST=1580440609][/DOUBLEPOST]I see @VC the slogger online. So he can also post his left over picks he want. He might be a bit disadvantaged because many good players have been picked but still many are left! And there is one who I feel he will pick but I should have picked him.

 

[VC the slogger]

Sorry for the delay. I shall pick the following..


VC's XI

1. Alec Bannerman
2. Mike Brearley (C)
3. Joe Denly
4.
5. Ali Bacher
6. Alan Fairfax
7. Jock Cameron (WK)
8.
9. Nuwan Kulasekara
10. Mustafizur Rahman
11.


Will do the writeups when I can spare some time.

@Aislabie

 

[Master Bates]

So far only @VC the slogger has made a team, strictly on the basis of Test matches. Each player has good test match experience, according to this draft.

@Aislabie is also doing the same but picks like Mortaza is not really the best.

@blockerdave is not really making the best xi. I guess he is trying to make an xi of players who were under-achievers.

I (@Master Bates ), on behalf of @CerealKiller , am making an XI of players with good stats. This is for both Test matches and FC games. I am not looking for players who delivered in few Test matches (short term) they played but were not good enough players in domestic (long term)

With all due respect and no biasedness, the current order of teams from strong to weak is
Me > Aislabie > VC the slogger > blockerdave

But if we go by the rule(s) I devised

All the players should be picked on the basis of their Test match performance.

Then the order is

VC the slogger > Aislabie > Me > blockerdave

(It is almost a tie between VC and Aislabie but VC has more players with more caps while Aislabie's pick of Tony Gray, which is actually good, has put him a bit behind him.)

 

[blockerdave]

Question - why is a player with more caps and yet still not reaching one of these landmarks considered better than someone who couldn’t fulfill their potential for other reasons?

Unless there’s considerations of conditions and teams such as with Mortaza, a significant amount of test experience yet not reaching one of these landmarks would generally mark out a not very good player.

Salisbury, Larkins and Hadlee aside, every one I’ve picked is a top class player who didn’t have a long enough career for whatever reason to reach these landmarks.

Larkins and Hadlee were decent enough - only Salisbury is shit.

Give me Stuart Law over Joe Denly any day of the week. And same goes for Jimmy Cook over any other qualifying opener.

 

[blockerdave]

Sorry for the delay. I shall pick the following..


VC's XI

1. Alec Bannerman
2. Mike Brearley (C)
3. Joe Denly
4.
5. Ali Bacher
6. Alan Fairfax
7. Jock Cameron (WK)
8.
9. Nuwan Kulasekara
10. Mustafizur Rahman
11.


Will do the writeups when I can spare some time.

@Aislabie

Bacher is a great pick

 

[Master Bates]

Question - why is a player with more caps and yet still not reaching one of these landmarks considered better than someone who couldn’t fulfill their potential for other reasons?

Since those players played less matches, there is no guarantee they would have fulfilled their potential un long term.

 

[blockerdave]

Since those players played less matches, there is no guarantee they would have fulfilled their potential un long term.

Again, I frankly dispute the presumption that definitely not making the grade makes you somehow better than someone who might have made it had circumstance not denied them the opportunity. Jimmy Cook and Stuart Law both averaged over 50 in first class cricket, in tough competitions. And we're supposed to consider them lesser players than those who averaged much less, and who had more opportunities to make the step up and couldn't?

I don't buy that.

My bowling attack is on the weaker side, but those two batsmen are a cut above anyone else selected yet.

 

[Master Bates]

My bowling attack is on the weaker side, but those two batsmen are a cut above anyone else selected yet.

You know that bowling is more important than batting in winning matches. And with Salisbury you have a team of only 10 players.