Gingerfinch wrote:C'mon Sussex, you and I know Bevan was an average test player, despite that stat.
Explain why? Any relation to the fact his FC record wasnt great for bowling will obviously lead to a counter argument that he is arguably the best ODI player ever with the bat, and I believe the msot successful Sheffield Shield run scorer in history, at a time the competition was considered at its historical peak. Any expected drop in Bowling would logically assume an opposite and slightly larger shift towards his batting.
This is besides the way point anyway. Australia didnt justify playing an Allrounder at 6, even one performing to a better level than Kapil Dev over both formats. They dropped him, they became a better team.
Not sure why names like Imran Khan are relevant. He is but one name in 100's or 1000's of all rounders that didint make it. If the argument is, does the best allrounder ever justify his selection as a number 6, then yes of course. But there are only possibly 3 names I would pick (Khan/Sobers/Kallis), literalyl everyone else is going into my team at 8. In a perfect team, your four bowlers are going to shred your opposition all the time, so the fifth bowler is redundant. So why pick a guy not to bowl, who isnt batting as well?
Good example. Windies had the best attack ever put together, no spinner, no allrounder, no real 5th bowler...... didnt lose in 15 years. Good or great 4 man attacks utilise the 5th bowler less and less, and therefore good teams require a specialist batter at 6 more simply in terms of efficiency.
