Draft: The Block(er)Chain Draft

[blockerdave]

Continue without me for this, I will rejuvenate until then

Ok, so that makes the prior pick Hedley Verity.

In which case my pick will be Wally Hammond, a world class batsman and decent fast medium bowler, and by all accounts a pretty miserable bugger.

He was obsessed with (and tortured by) Bradman and his relentless scoring feats. Hammonds average of 58 is of course amazing, but when you had Bradman doing his thing in the rival team it of course put even legends in the shade. At least Hammond’s world record 336* put him above Bradman’s 334.

He also had a first class career from 1920-46, with a brief return in 1951 so that gives @Yash. a very wide scope to pick the next link in the chain!!

 

[Yash.]

SIR JACK HOBBS

Statistics
Tests :- 5410 runs @ 56.94 (15 100s, 28 50s, Best 211) in 61 matches
First Class :- 61760 runs @ 50.70 (199 100s, 273 50s, Best 316*) in 834 Matches and 108 wickets @ 25.03 (3 5WI, BBI 7/56)

I'm going with another English legend of the game, with a record that no batsman can ever touch in their lifetime now. Sir Jack Hobbs was a prolific run scorer who scored so many hundreds, that it ain't even funny now. He played against Wally Hammond in county cricket many times, so is valid.

1. Sir Jack Hobbs
2. ?
3. ?
4. ?
5. ?
6. ?
7. ?
8. ?
9. ?
10. ?
11. ?

@Dale88

 

[blockerdave]

SIR JACK HOBBS

Statistics
Tests :- 5410 runs @ 56.94 (15 100s, 28 50s, Best 211) in 61 matches
First Class :- 61760 runs @ 50.70 (199 100s, 273 50s, Best 316*) in 834 Matches and 108 wickets @ 25.03 (3 5WI, BBI 7/56)

I'm going with another English legend of the game, with a record that no batsman can ever touch in their lifetime now. Sir Jack Hobbs was a prolific run scorer who scored so many hundreds, that it ain't even funny now. He played against Wally Hammond in county cricket many times, so is valid.

1. Sir Jack Hobbs
2. ?
3. ?
4. ?
5. ?
6. ?
7. ?
8. ?
9. ?
10. ?
11. ?

@Dale88

great choice, indeed I was between Hobbs and Hammond.

I think they must have played together too for England, so he’d have been valid that way too.

 

[qpeedore]

I think if he creates an original literary work, he gets automatic copyright. How copyright protects your work - GOV.UK

This would be true, except there has been more than one lawsuit over this. By doing what I suggested, there's a bit more of a chain of ownership. Not that these things haven't been in a lawsuit either, but it's about the safest way.

EDIT: I'm hoping that my first pick will be available...

 

[blockerdave]

@Dale88 is late, so @qpeedore can pick.

if @qpeedore picks first, you must use Hobbs as the last link in the chain, and @Dale88 must use who you pick...

 

[Ed Smith]

Totally missed the tag here, sorry.

I'll do a proper write up tomorrow but for now I'll go with the first Englishman to complete 1000 runs and 100 wickets in tests, Wilfred Rhodes.

 

[qpeedore]

Alright, I have Rhodes as the baseline? Damn, you guys are pushing me way back here. I'm going to take "Johnny will hit today" John William Henry Tyler Douglas. As an all rounder at the turn of the last century, he was decent enough with his medium pace and could be handy with the bat as well. Died at sea while trying to save his father amidst heavy fog, this guy deserves a bit more recognition. Add him retrospectively to my "Forgotten" thread, because honestly I wouldn't know of this guy if not for here.

Did I mention the dude was an amateur boxer also? No? Well I just did. Went to the Olympics representing Britain in that sport. And won bouts. EDIT: The guy won GOLD! Didn't even notice that. Yeah, you bet he's in my squad. Which other cricket team can boast an Olympic Gold medalist?

Now, he was sometimes controversial, but if someone like Hobbs can say he's the best bowler he'd ever faced, that says a lot. Stats don't do the man justice. He was better on and off the field than the numbers show.


DOUBLE EDIT:

Test average (batting): 29.15
Highest score: 119
50s/100s: 6/1

Wickets: 45
BBI: 5/46
Test average (bowling): 33.02

TRIPLE EDIT: The picture because...well come on, you guys need to see what awesome looks like.

@ahmedleo414

 

[ahmedleo414]

My first pick goes to Herbert Sutcliffe (who imo has a cooler pic than @qpeedore 's pick )

@Dale88 has the next pick

 

[qpeedore]

Yeah you actually do get the cool pic award if there was one lol. If only for the random rodent on the shoulder of Sutcliffe. But neither the rodent nor the player has Olympic Gold.

EDIT: Kinda looks like Kev Pietersen a little doesn't he? And well the human might resemble someone too.

 

[Ed Smith]

1. Wilfred Rhodes
2. Len Hutton

Hard not to pick a player described as "One of the greatest batsmen in the history of Cricket" who completes my opening pair at the same time, will also captain the side in the interim.

Innings: 138
Not Outs: 15
Aggregate: 6971
Highest Score: 364
Average: 56.67
50s: 33
100s: 19
200s: 4
300s: 1

@Aislabie up next

 

[Aislabie]

Alan Davidson

Test stats: 1,328 runs @ 24.59 (best 80) and 186 wickets @ 20.53 (14 5WI, best 7/93) in 44 matches
Bowling VARP (seam): 65.83%

First-class stats: 6,804 runs @ 32.86 (9 centuries, best 129) and 672 wickets @ 20.90 (33 5WI, best 7/31) in 193 matches

Every fantasy XI includes a top-class left-armer, and in terms of VARP I've selected the leading left-arm seamer in Test history. Although he comes in behind four right-arm bowlers from other eras of the game, his outstanding career in a relatively batsman-dominated era of the game is enough to put him into first place. Where other seamers could be expected to average just under 30 at an economy of 2.3, Davidson averaged barely over 20 at an economy of 1.98. At his very best, he was dominant: four of his first-class centuries at an average of 54, as well as 72 wickets at an average of 15. Few players have ever been capable of that level of performance. His playing career only lasted slightly more than a decade owing to being the original injury prone paceman.

Aislabie's XI so far:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8. Alan Davidson
9. Hedley Verity
10.
11.

@CerealKiller

 

[CerealKiller]

in terms of VARP I've selected the leading left-arm seamer in Test history

That’s because Wasim is too good for VARP

Pick a little later

 

[Aislabie]

That’s because Wasim is too good for VARP

Pick a little later

It's also because Wasim's non-counting stats were worse while his contemporaries' stats were better than Davidson's contemporaries

Therefore his value above a replacement player was lower by about 25%

 

[CerealKiller]

It's also because Wasim's non-counting stats were worse while his contemporaries' stats were better than Davidson's contemporaries

Therefore his value above a replacement player was lower by about 25%

I think that’s where VARP could be perfected, to account for the overall stats of the era (or maybe it is, I don’t know your exact calculations)

 

[Aislabie]

I think that’s where VARP could be perfected, to account for the overall stats of the era (or maybe it is, I don’t know your exact calculations)

It compares the player in question to everyone else who played in their Test matches, on both teams. This has the slight drawback of not completely ironing out minnow-bashing, but then you'd expect a replacement player for those matches to be less good than one for an Ashes Test or something