1/13/2024 0 Comments Bits and pieces websiteI do think at times people get the cause and effect of players labelled as bits and pieces players the wrong way around. Flintoff was more a bowler who could bat. Ali has quickly and decisively turned quite a few games for England from 7/8, but remains inconsistent with bat and ball. The value of someone like Bailey at 8 was he could stick around for a very long time with the last recognised batsman. New Zealand have often had 3 or 4 in a team and have at times over performed the sum of their parts. Very often players are bits and pieces players in a team are an indication that a country is lacking either good enough bowlers or batsmen. Trevor Bailey was without a doubt a fully fledged bowler and had a better batting average than bowling average (29.7 batting 29.2 bowling). if you have a test class bat/bowler ready to go then sure pick them but if it's a pile of players who aren't quite good enough then i'd go for the allrounder who isn't quite good enough, especially in odis where you need 5 bowlers. So in answer to your question, it really depends on the resources available. I'd level the 'bits and pieces' label more at the likes of nathan mccullum, who was selected as a safe bowler who wouldn't be awful and provided decent lower order hitting and was a gun in the field. likewise chris cairns was a quality test bowler in his own right and for a good 5-8 years averaged 40 with the bat at test level. not international standard in any discipline.Īllrounders might not be one of the best at batting or bowling in their team (though with most test sides resources throughout history they're often not far off making it on batting and bowling anyway) but the all round package they provide is often invaluable.įlintoff is one of the great odi allrounders and in tests i can't think of a batsman or a bowler who was left out of the english side at his expense who can say they were better than him. Im a bit more lenient on the definition of a bits and pieces player i.e. Or does anyone go for another very good specialist ahead of Flintoff/Flintoff lite given these constraints? Who makes the grade for the sake of balance despite being weaker overall? He's possibly a bit too good a bowler to be put into a bits and pieces category though. Try to ignore quality of the wk as a batsman, and assume there isn't a Murali type bowler who can bowl 40% of the innings, as well as assuming there isn't a genuine batting or bowling allrounder available.Īt what point do you select a bits and pieces players for the sake of balance of the side? And who makes the cut under most circumstances? As an example, Flintoff wouldn't make the cut in such a team as a bowler or bat, and in general I think he is somewhat overrated, but he would be a dream given these constraints. Assuming a top 5 bats who are at least very good but not capable as part timers, and 4 very good bowlers. Looking at the RSA team balance leads me to pose a question (not on RSA specifically, just related). This forum is a pretty big fan of specialists.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |