Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

On TMS last night the commentators tried to pick the team of the tournament. This is what they came up with:

1. Guptill
2. McCullum (cap)
3. Sangakarra (wk)
4. Smith
5. De Villiers
6. Maxwell
7. Corey Anderson
8. Vettori
9. Starc
10. Boult
11. Morkel

Pretty hard to argue with that selection. The only picks for me that are not shoo-ins are McCullum, Smith, Vettori and Morkel, and all of them certainly have a strong case for inclusion.

For the opener, you could also make a good case for Dharwan or Dilshan. It hasn't been a great tournament for openers - South Africa, Australia, West Indies, Pakistan and Bangladesh's openers have all got no more than one significant score each, and many of them have none at all.

For number 4, there are a lot of options. My pick would be Brendan Taylor, but Mahmadullah and Faf du Plessis are also strong options as well as Smith.

Spin wise Tahir and Ashwin have both also been excellent and you could make a case for either ahead of Vettori. I think Vettori got in to the commentator team not just due to his bowling, but his all round contribution - he can bat and his fielding has been great.

For the third fast bowler, you could make a case for Shami, Yadav and Riaz as well. Riaz probably gets left out as otherwise you've got five left armers as your primary bowling options!

Who would you pick?

Good team. Shami for Morkel?

Jason Holder for Corey Anderson
Riley Rossow for Steve Smith

Honourable mention for Josh Davey

Otherwise about right

bigfluffylemon wrote:Spin wise Tahir and Ashwin have both also been excellent and you could make a case for either ahead of Vettori. I think Vettori got in to the commentator team not just due to his bowling, but his all round contribution - he can bat and his fielding has been great.

Dan has a better econ and SR than either of his spin rivals. And he was crucial in beating the other best team. Surely he gets in for bowling alone.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:

bigfluffylemon wrote:Spin wise Tahir and Ashwin have both also been excellent and you could make a case for either ahead of Vettori. I think Vettori got in to the commentator team not just due to his bowling, but his all round contribution - he can bat and his fielding has been great.

Dan has a better econ and SR than either of his spin rivals. And he was crucial in beating the other best team. Surely he gets in for bowling alone.

Probably fair.

Holder vs Anderson:

Anderson 231 runs @ 38.5, 2 fifties, SR 109, 14 wickets at 16.2, SR 15, econ 6.45
Holder 155 runs @ 51.66, 2 fifties, SR SR 112, 9 wickets at 39, SR 38, econ 6.05

I'd have Anderson as he's actually contributed to important victories. All of Holder's significant runs have been scored in losing causes, and he's been completely battered with the ball by the better batting lineups (0 for 76 v New Zealand, 1 for 104 v South Africa) - his tally is boosted by cheap wickets against Zimbabwe and UAE who were the weakest teams in the group. Anderson has made his main contributions with the bat at critical times that have resulted in New Zealand victory (v Sri Lanka and South Africa), and has performed well with the ball against stronger batting line ups (South Africa and Sri Lanka again) and consistently chipped in with important wickets in just about every game, although I will concede he got cheap wickets v Scotland too.

Tricky forAnderson, as he pretty much only bowls at the end. Probably accounts for his incredible SR, but his eye watering econ.

Alviro Patterson wrote:Jason Holder for Corey Anderson
Riley Rossow for Steve Smith

Honourable mention for Josh Davey

Otherwise about right

Why Rossow over Smith?

I think Anderson could be the most over-rated player around atm

his bowling sucks , most of his wickets come when the slog is on, I can hardly remember seeing him get a wicket with a decent delivery and he is not much better than a glorified slogger with the bat

he has benefitted a lot from NZ's success as a team and McCullum's approach bowling his main bowlers for long spells at the front which has meant he bowls a lot when people are trying to score quickly as the main bowlers don't have a lot of overs left

With 5 New Zealand players in the above team, and only 3 Aussies, then surely NZ go into the final as clear favorites?

Anderson's wickets are valuable. He just gets all the hard overs. His finishing off of the Aussie innings was a big factor in winning that match. If you only bowl at the end, your wickets won't be orthodox. His econ may be JD, but his SR is the difference.

And he's come in at times in difficult situations and not given it away by slogging. I don't think he's been a star of the competition, and he's not a cert for team of the competition, but he's contributed a lot to the NZ team, in my view.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Anderson's wickets are valuable. He just gets all the hard overs. His finishing off of the Aussie innings was a big factor in winning that match. If you only bowl at the end, your wickets won't be orthodox. His econ may be JD, but his SR is the difference.

And he's come in at times in difficult situations and not given it away by slogging. I don't think he's been a star of the competition, and he's not a cert for team of the competition, but he's contributed a lot to the NZ team, in my view.

his bowling is a full of long hops that get hit to fielders and a perfect example of when stats don't tell the full story , I bet most of his wickets have been catches from mis-timed slogs

Thats a heavy ball he bowls.

rich1uk wrote:

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Anderson's wickets are valuable. He just gets all the hard overs. His finishing off of the Aussie innings was a big factor in winning that match. If you only bowl at the end, your wickets won't be orthodox. His econ may be JD, but his SR is the difference.

And he's come in at times in difficult situations and not given it away by slogging. I don't think he's been a star of the competition, and he's not a cert for team of the competition, but he's contributed a lot to the NZ team, in my view.

his bowling is a full of long hops that get hit to fielders and a perfect example of when stats don't tell the full story , I bet most of his wickets have been catches from mis-timed slogs

Maybe, but when you look at the number of bowlers who simply get caned in the last overs and don't cause the batsman to mis-time, he must have something. I think 90% of the wickets from the 35th over onwards are catches from mistimed slogs or bowled due to missing an attempted slog, regardless of who the bowler is. Some bowlers take wickets during this time, some get smashed.

i'm possibly being harsh on him and I do get what you are saying , I just cant get past how many wickets he gets from terrible deliveries

rich1uk wrote:i'm possibly being harsh on him and I do get what you are saying , I just cant get past how many wickets he gets from terrible deliveries

Point taken.