CMS Test XI of last 50 Years- Number 6.

[Arthur Crabtree]

The pivotal position. The luxury position. Your lower order batting saviour, your mercurial all rounder. The tone of the side can be set by the number six. he can be belt and braces, or he can be your versatile match winner.

Setting the first part of the options is easy, just the eight best averaging batters at 5-7 over the past fifty years save for games against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, and not as a keeper (minimum 3000 runs). By chance, these are all the players to average over 50. Other players worth considering- Misbah, Bell, Thorpe, Clive Lloyd.


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... pe=batting

Given the all rounders are going to bat at six, they had to have something of a batting record. That gave me another seven players, who have 150 wickets, and average over 30, plus have at least three Test centuries.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... e=allround

So that's my fifteen. There may be a better way around this, but I think these are all recognisable number sixes, at some time in their career, and I can't see who I've omitted that would get in the team. Suggestions welcome.

[Arthur Crabtree]

I suggested I wouldn't pick Sobers, but his record is good after 1965, so I didn't think there was a good reason not to.

There are two pace bowlers to pick.

viewtopic.php?f=31&t=20743

And then there will be a last poll made up of pace and spin bowlers, in order to complete the eleven. So far the side is:

Sehwag
Gavaskar
Richards
Lara
Tendulkar

Gilchrist
Warne

[Gingerfinch]

Imran

Definitely good enough to bat at six, plus was a wonderful bowler, which will be needed in my side.

[Arthur Crabtree]

I went for Steve Waugh. Got to be in this side. Whether 60-4, or 350-4 he'll grind the opposition. Kallis is tempting. Not really sure if Sobers was at his best after 1965- I suppose he'd be a shoo in for an all time XI.

[Arthur Crabtree]

My guess is Kallis will win this. Though I suppose he and Shastri really aren't sixes actually. But he's the premier batting all rounder of the era.

[Arthur Crabtree]

There's the difference between us Ginger. Me the roundhead, you the cavalier.

[sussexpob]

Assuming the last bowler slot is an allrounder....

In my opinion, the six slot is the most misunderstood position in the game, and the one most resistant to any form of data based analysis. More often that not captains or selectors shove a player down the order at 6 because they arent as experienced or seen as good a batter to play at the top, but I think a lot of failed careers have this as a reason. Batsman like to feel uninhibited to play their natural game, and I think as an opener and in the higher batting slots, those roles allowed for the natural game of a batter more. The batter controls their destiny more, has the freedom to build high scores more. Knows his wicket leads to less risk.

A number six rarely has that. I would hazard a guess that most 6's come in on general 50-65% through an innings (this is a pure guess). They cant look to make massive scores because a wicket at the other end brings them a non-specialist batsman, and two brings the start in most historical cases of the tail. They are under the gun more with time, and rather than play endless and frequently match killing innings, they have to play the situation and add value to an innings depending on the situation.

In the best of times, coming in with a large score and a tired attack, the pressure is probably off. This is not to say that its an easier for them on an individual basis because in these situations the expectation from your team is going to be to lay down quick runs. The last thing your team want at 400-4 is you strolling out and taking 50 balls to play yourself in, before amassing another 150 runs over a day. You have to be pragmatic, and in this situation a run a ball 50 might help more.

At the worst you stroll in on those situations where you have a bowler carving up your top order for 50-4, and this time you know you need to bat as long as possible. But unlike the 1-5, you also have the added pressure of being the last person to break before the lower order, the last chance saloon situation. This is magnified in a second innings situation where a decent total is on the board, or in a first innings where the team batting first have a decent total. You have to make runs, and you have to stick about and be able to manage the tail if needed.

So flexibility is needed in approach. The six needs to be turgid and hard enough to provide assistance when the top batting has failed, and be willing to bat overs and build scores when needed. He needs to be able to accelerate and be aggressive with scoring at times when good starts have been made, or when he's down to the 10 and 11 and still there. The perfect and most consistent players will also do pretty well in the normal innings, but I guess this is where you dont mind when the failures come. The best will always contribute something to those par starts to help them along.

Kallis for me is not the man. He needs his own rhythm up the order, playing through the innings as long as possible and amassing runs without the lower order restriction. I doubt he would do very well at 6 at all, wrong type of batter.

VVS Laxman is a good candidate. He has the match proven ability to play under pressure in the "next wicket loses us the game" way, he has the quality of stroke play, but I also think his record is improved by batting more often in friendly conditions when the ball goes soft, the sun and heat kiills bowlers, and most teams are already dead having spent a day trying to remove Sehwag, Tendulkar and Dravid.

Chanderpaul is a statistical winner, but you never felt like he was batting for the team. He made runs in games Windies were pounded in, the opposition had no interest in getting him out and would let him sit not out at the end of an innings. He rarely did anything inspiring for his team, never really looked to take games to teams to help his team mates, or protect his lower order. He was simply ingrained with a selfish streak to bat endlessly at one end. I dont want a player like that.

Michael Clarke and Ian Bell were good in this position, but I think both were only at their best in these positions when the situations required the least of them or when others contributed before they got there.

Sobers I never seen play. Border is a player I hardly saw play... so I exclude them, strong as they are. This leaves me two players left.

Paul Collingwood was also an excellent six, capable of really batting for his life when you needed it. He really suited that role, and made it a specialist quality.

The first is Mike Hussey. What a player. He had all attributes the six could want. Mental toughness to play with a team in trouble, the ability to play shots and put teams under pressure when not. A good cricketing brain to judge situations. Possibly one of the greatest underrated cricketers in history, especially considering he was what, 30 or 31 when he debuted, and played the vast majority of his test career at the point most batsman are already past their best. He readjusted his technique once it was found out and his form slumped, had he done that at 25 instead of 33 and had another 10-15 years playing on, he would have reached the top in my mind, no doubt A real versatile and strong characterized cricketer who would lay everything on the line for the team.

But Hussey doesnt win because he isnt Steve Waugh. And Steve Waugh is the perfect six for me. The most ruthlessly tough cricketer you could ever face. To beat Australia, you had to get through him, and with him at 6 you had work to do to finish an innings. Just his presence coming in this low would destroy confidence because its no longer the case of "getting into the tail if we get him", more a case of "we need to get this b*stard out before he wins the game".

[Arthur Crabtree]

Great post.

I did actually think of abandoning stats for this position, because it's hard to pin down. But I would have got similar 15 to this anyway. Though I'd have found room for Tony Greig.

It's a good comparison between Waugh and Botham at six. When in a fix, Botham would gamble, he was the whole show, and it was unforgettable when it came off. Waugh had an aura, he would work with his partner and break you slowly. Of course, he was a much better batter, but Botham has 380 Test wickets, so it depends what you want. With Gilchrist at seven, he's a number six anyway.

[Durhamfootman]

For me, Sobers is too far away, and Kallis is a number 3 or 4. I understand the whole number 6 batsman thing in a 4 man bowling attack, but I will forever associate number 6 with the all rounder.

The 70's and 80's was the great era of the all rounder, and most teams had their own great. Imran, Dev, Rice, Hadlee, Botham. Each and every one of them (barring the isolated Rice) would be a worthy contender.

I'm biased though. I was drawn to cricket, as a teenager, thanks to the exploits of the emerging ITB. He made cricket exciting for the first time, and once Botham had me hooked, the sport reeled me in. I'll always be grateful to him for that

I remember Shep talking about Beefy in his autobiography. He recalled standing in a one day match featuring Somerset. Beefy was on strike, with 12 required off the last 3 balls. As the bowler walked back to his mark, Beefy wandered over to have a chat with Shep at square leg, and asked him what he thought the chances were of scoring the 12. Shep was non-committal, so Beefy walked back and smacked the next ball for 6, then wandered back to Shep and asked him again. Then to emphasise the point he blocked the penultimate ball with an outrageously extravagent and theatrical forward defensive, before launching the final ball out of the ground to complete the win.

I like to think that that tale from Shep summed the man up. He was about as far removed from the ultra professional modern player as it's possible to get, and yet it was that flair for the theatrical that made him the player that he was.

There might well be a host of number 6's with better stats than Botham, but none of them will ever surpass him in my book

(just don't make him captain)

[sussexpob]

Great post.

I did actually think of abandoning stats for this position, because it's hard to pin down. But I would have got similar 15 to this anyway. Though I'd have found room for Tony Greig.

It's a good comparison between Waugh and Botham at six. When in a fix, Botham would gamble, he was the whole show, and it was unforgettable when it came off. Waugh had an aura, he would work with his partner and break you slowly. Of course, he was a much better batter, but Botham has 380 Test wickets, so it depends what you want. With Gilchrist at seven, he's a number six anyway.

There are examples either way, but a bowling 6 who averages in the low 30s for me simply leads to an inefficiency in a team. Assuming an innings lasts 100 overs, id want my pacers capable of bowling 25 overs in that. The fifth bowler may contribute a handful here, a handful there, but if needed to join a front line attack my guess would be you are always in trouble. The 5th bowler for me is someone who can partnership break, or send down a few here and there. Its not something that I would be picking in my line up unless my top six literally had nothing in terms of part time options, which is exceedingly rare.

Id rather someone like Botham at 8 in the top of my specialists contributing slightly less with the bat (he wsa the type of batter who will still be out long before the 11 comes in) and have a specialist at 6.

The Waugh brothers are perfect examples. Both were capable of turning their arm and bowling if the 4 specialists fail.

[Durhamfootman]

Odd then that such a great player could have absolutely no understanding of the game. He was a dreadful captain, he remains an awfully inept commentator, but put a ball or a bat in his hand and he just instinctively knew what to do next

[Arthur Crabtree]

Reply to Durham...

Short flash of light with Beefy though. And a lot of fade out.

[Gingerfinch]

If a team has two spinners, you'd need a good third seamer though. If for instance this final XI has three seamers, plus Warne, then I would change my pick to a batter.

[sussexpob]

I remember Shep talking about Beefy in his autobiography. He recalled standing in a one day match featuring Somerset. Beefy was on strike, with 12 required off the last 3 balls. As the bowler walked back to his mark, Beefy wandered over to have a chat with Shep at square leg, and asked him what he thought the chances were of scoring the 12. Shep was non-committal, so Beefy walked back and smacked the next ball for 6, then wandered back to Shep and asked him again. Then to emphasise the point he blocked the penultimate ball with an outrageously extravagent and theatrical forward defensive, before launching the final ball out of the ground to complete the win.

[Gingerfinch]

I remember Beefy blocking all day against Pakistan for an unbeaten 50. I resilient effort but I preferred the other Beefy.