The Pre-Twenty20 Draft

[Aislabie]

Imran Khan

*snip*

An excellent pick; 100 international sixes in that era was a pretty uncommon stat, and he wasn't even that much of a hitter because that wasn't especially his role in the side. He's exactly the sort of batsman who would adapt to T20 though.

Oh, and he bowled a little bit.

 

[blockerdave]

"So," said my dining companion opposite, fixing me with his eyes, ‘who was the greatest batsman you ever played with or against?’

‘Richards,’ I replied, without a moment’s hesitation.

He continued to chew while he gave this some thought.

‘Fair enough,’ he said, ‘I don’t think anyone could disagree with that. After all, Wisden named him as one of the five cricketers of the century, did they not? King Viv – surely the most…’

‘Barry,’ I corrected him, ‘Barry Richards. Not Viv.’

Murtagh, Andrew. Sundial in the Shade: The Story of Barry Richards: the Genius Lost to Test Cricket.

@Rebel2k19 made an excellent first pick with Richards, but he misspelled Barry.

Richards played just 4 tests yet would still make most "All Time" World XIs, he was that good. Placement, power, improvisation, impeccable technique, you name it he had it. He scored quickly too.

He averaged 40 in List A cricket though there aren't reliable strike rates unfortunately, but in just 7 test match inns he scored 508 runs at 72.57 and with a strike rate of 59.48 and hit 70 4's and 5 6's. He dominated world series cricket too, in just 5 super tests he scored 554 runs at 79.14. I'd have no doubts he'd have been a star in T20 - he was a naturally attacking batsman with all the shots, and all the time in the world.

As in real life he opens in my team.

I'm not sure who he'd be comparable to in current T20 - does God have an IPL contract?

@Sinister One - your go!

 

[Master Bates]

Sir Garfield Sobers

Arguably, one of the greatest all rounder cricket has ever seen. His exceptional Test batting average tells little about the manner in which he made the runs, his elegant yet powerful style marked by all the shots, but memorably his off-side play. As a batsman he was great, as a bowler, merely superb, but would have made the West Indies side as a bowler alone. He was remarkably versatile with the ball, bowling two styles of spin - left-arm orthodox and wrist spin, but was also a fine fast-medium opening bowler. His catching close to the wicket may have been equalled but never surpassed, and he was a brilliant fielder anywhere.

With a Test average of 57, he is supposed to be racking runs in my XI. I feel he could play at no 4 but as of now (will see after draft ends) he will bat at 6 and will be the man for calamity.

With the bowl, his job will be to control the flow of runs and get that odd wicket. He is not a wicket taker but a very good economist.

And just to add to his credentials:

@Bevab

 

[Bevab]

Here’s my two cents about the selection process for my team.

• Minimise speculation regarding how a player could have played quite differently were he to bat/bowl today because of the relatively easier/tougher conditions to bat in/bowl in. T20 for me is a fundamentally different format and several fine stars in test cricket of the modern era have flattered to deceive in the shorter form of the game due to the skills required to thrive here.
• This lends a natural bias towards players belonging to the last three decades of cricket, when ODIs were in their infancy and we got the first glimpse at how a shorter format alters the style of play compared to 5 days of cricket. It is tough to avoid this (especially because my next two picks will be of this era ) but I shall try to look at the previous decades too more fairly.

Here are my two picks that I never really expected to be available at this stage:

Joel Garner

​

Reasons for selection:

• After filtering for minimum appearances, he has the lowest economy rate in the history of ODIs and the second lowest bowling average too, behind only a statpadded Rashid Khan. His dominance is shown clear by the second most economical bowler of his era being Hadlee who is a tier below him.
• He is one of the tallest bowlers to ever grace this game and used his height to full advantage. Every length ball of his ends up just short of it and bounces very awkwardly, leaving batsmen unable to defend and desperately losing their wicket being caught behind or by a slip as evidenced by 60% of his wickets resulting from a catch compared to nearly 55% by Lillee or Hadlee.
• If those awkward length balls and the odd bouncer wasn’t enough trouble, this man will slip in a toe-crushing yorker every now and then that leaves you pretty much praying for your wicket. So good is he with his yorkers that only 9% of his dismissals have been LBWs, as he turns them into bowled dismissals instead.
• His greatest strength according to the man himself? Not his pace, not his bounce and not the fear he strikes into most batsmen’s hearts. It is his accuracy that he rates as his single greatest strength.
• It is a measure of his greatness that most teams chose to respect him and not take him on (a perfectly viable tactic due to the lower scores back then) and yet he picked up wickets regularly.
• Still has the best bowling figures in a World Cup final, sparking a collapse of 7 wickets for just 11 runs. Undoubtedly a big game player indeed.
• Despite his huge body, he is very capable of fielding well and can also smash a few sixes if needed with the bat down the order.

Comparable modern T20 player:

This man here is without doubt the GOAT pace bowler in ODIs, is there anyone who could even hope to stand next to him?

If you were forced to find someone similar to him, I would probably point at Bumrah. Both have teams trying to play them out rather than take them on, both can deliver a good yorker and their stock deliveries are very good and accurate. Garner’s probably quicker, more accurate and has the extra bounce that takes him from the category of legends to standing alone at the top.

Role in the team:

Garner’s overs will be like gold dust in every game. Due to his compatriots being a tad quicker than him, he hasn’t been the first choice option with the new ball in a lot of games which means he has plenty of experience bowling in the middle overs. His ability to bring the economy to almost a standstill when he bowls and the regular wickets he picks up means he will be a useful option in the middle. His ability to bowl yorkers and mix it up with bouncers makes him a natural option for the death overs.

In an ideal world, Garner bowls one over in the powerplay, one in the middle overs and two at the death, completely tightening the noose when teams start to accelerate. Garner’s first over during the death can also be used during the powerplay or middle overs if there’s a chance of sparking a collapse.


My other pick will be Kapil Dev. Will add a description of him tomorrow in another separate post.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. K. Dev
8.
9.
10.
11. J. Garner


Your pick @Sinister One.

 

[Aislabie]

*snip*

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. K. Dev
8.
9.
10.
11. J. Garner

Absolutely fantastic picks. They were probably two of my top four targets, but I was fully prepared to get neither. I also agree for the most part with your selection policy too

 

[blockerdave]

Great picks @Bevab absolutely didn't expect Garner to still be available on my next go but if he had he'd have been my next pick. Kapil also high on my list.

 

[Gaurav_7]

@Rebel2k19 made an excellent first pick with Richards, but he misspelled Barry.

Excellent pick! The downside of being 1st to pick. 12 players are already gone by the time I pick next. And surely those 12 are going to be the top 12 players one would expect to pick.

All others too brilliant picks in Imran Khan, Sobers, Garner and Kapil Dev. This one will be fun.

 

[Master Bates]

Derek Underwood

No nickname was better earned that the "Deadly" which Derek Underwood's Kent team-mates conferred on him for the havoc he caused on rain-affected pitches. Such was his accuracy and, for a left-arm spinner, pace - either side of medium when the ball was really biting - that when conditions favoured him an avalanche of wickets was almost guaranteed. His wizardry brought England one of the most dramatic wins in the history of Tests when, with six minutes left against Australia at The Oval in 1968, he took his fourth wicket in 27 balls. That clinched a 226-run win which squared the series,

To describe Derek Underwood as a slow bowler, or simply a spinner is to give a false picture of a unique performer. Much of his bowling was delivered at a respectable medium pace, and always off a plodding run-up of ten yards or so. When conditions were right he would turn the ball extravagantly, but on good pitches, against good players, he would still take plentiful wickets through his unfailing accuracy. Batsmen, infuriated or entranced by the unhittable length and line firing at them with the remorseless regularity of a bowling machine, would very often commit cricketing suicide in their frustration.

He will be the sole spinner in my XI (second spinner on turning tracks because Sobers will become the other spinner). His accuracy will help in keeping the scoreboard in check and maintain pressure on batsmen.

@blockerdave

 

[Aislabie]

Derek Underwood

I appreciate that you're likely very busy with real life and stuff, but if you could take the time to even write a quick sentence explaining why you've picked somebody it'd really keep the fun of the draft going.

For example: "My pick is Colin Milburn, because every good T20 team needs a mascot, and "Ollie" can do that duty as well as scoring runs." is so much better than just "Colin Milburn".

 

[Master Bates]

I appreciate that you're likely very busy with real life and stuff, but if you could take the time to even write a quick sentence explaining why you've picked somebody it'd really keep the fun of the draft going.

For example: "My pick is Colin Milburn, because every good T20 team needs a mascot, and "Ollie" can do that duty as well as scoring runs." is so much better than just "Colin Milburn".

Student life is tough but I will see what I can do!

 

[blockerdave]

So I’m really stuck between a bowler I don’t think anyone else would pick but I’d be gutted if they did, and a batsman who I think only @Aislabie would pick but I’m not sure would be his next pick...

 

[Aislabie]

So I’m really stuck between a bowler I don’t think anyone else would pick but I’d be gutted if they did, and a batsman who I think only @Aislabie would pick but I’m not sure would be his next pick...

It's like you think I'd be inclined to go off piste and pick someone truly bizarre?

 

[Bevab]

So I’m really stuck between a bowler I don’t think anyone else would pick but I’d be gutted if they did, and a batsman who I think only @Aislabie would pick but I’m not sure would be his next pick...

Please let it not be him... please let it not be him.. please let it not be him

 

[Gaurav_7]

Derek Underwood
@blockerdave

A very good pick, was really high in my list.

 

[Bevab]

I appreciate that you're likely very busy with real life and stuff, but if you could take the time to even write a quick sentence explaining why you've picked somebody it'd really keep the fun of the draft going.

For example: "My pick is Colin Milburn, because every good T20 team needs a mascot, and "Ollie" can do that duty as well as scoring runs." is so much better than just "Colin Milburn".

I agree with this. All of us have plenty of work indeed but it would be nice if you could spare some time to put up a small explanation at least of how he would fit into your hypothetical side. For example, Sobers would be a really valuable player for his incredible versatility (imagine how good it would be to have someone who can bowl nearly any delivery. You could have him bowl spin on dusty pitches or have him exploit the weakness of a batsman). But another school of thought might claim that he is someone who relied far too much on boundaries to score runs which is a lot more easier in a test field. Putting up your explanation at the very least helps others see your point of view. Personally, I love reading the posts of others as there’s always some fascinating tidbit about the players that most choose.