Haha yours was different. I mean weird cases of cricinfo putting the "Fielding position: wicket keeper" on good domestic bats who are part-time keepers and then people picking them up thinking they're keepers. It actually happens with Puttick every time without fail.
1. Puttick 2. Dilshan 3. Watto ** 4. Smith 5. Ballance 6. Watto ** 7. Vilas 8. Starc 9. 10.Shillingford 11.Hogan
1 Puttick 2. Dilshan (p/break) 3. Klinger 4. Ballance 5. Smith (P/break) 6. Watto (5) 7. Vilas + 8. Starc (2) 9. Hazlewood (3) 10.Shillingford (4) 11.Hogan (1)
Pretty happy with my batting depth and seam quartet. Maybe a little light on a genuine spinner given shillingfords current ban
Shillingford is a fairly decent pick IMO. Yeah the bans a bit shit but he went alright. One of the better spinners out
1.Puttick 2.Dilshan 3.Klinger 4.Ballance 5.Smith 6.Watson 7.Bailey 8.Vilas + 9.Starc 10.Shill 11.Hogan 12.Hazlewood
Well I would have used that Bailey pick to grab someone who can play as an all rounder or be solid at 8 at least IMO.
Yeah Bailey was a weird pick. Watson means you don't necessarily need four specialist bowlers, but I think the bloke you stick at 7 should be able to bowl some seam-up stuff even if he's a batting allrounder.
Tbh I just went Bailey because he's easily the best backup bat for my side available IMO. One at least will underperform so now I have cover. Just as hazlewood provides depth. Neither likely to be in first choice XI :ninja:
1.Puttick 2.Dilshan (P/Break) 3.Klinger 4.Ballance 5.Smith (P/Break) 6.Watson (3 + P/Break) 7.Vilas + 8.Parnell/Plunkett/De Silva (5) 9.Starc (2 10.Shillingford (4) 11.Hogan (1) 12.Hazlewood 13.Bailey 14&15 - Parnell/Plunkett/De Silva Bailey may play over Klinger with Watto to bat 3 and Bailey 6
Probably only real places I am a little weak is genuine spin specialists and maybe weak with Vilas then Dilshan for the gloves.
Vilas would be a great understudy to one of your experienced keepers. Will look at your squad so when the trades open I can offer a mutually benif