Custom Bats Cricket Forum
General Cricket => World Cricket => England => Topic started by: alexhilly1492 on January 05, 2014, 02:51:44 AM
-
total rebuild, somthing like this:
Cook
robson
bell
root
ballance
stokes
bairstow
borthwick
broad
finn
rankin
or stick with a mix of senior players and youth
cook
carberry
bell
kp
ballance
stokes
prior
bres
broad
anderson
monty
-
Cook
Root
Bell
Pietersen
Taylor
Stokes
Kieswetter
Broad
Finn
Anderson
Panesar.
Borthwick isn't anyway near Test standard.
Not impressed with Ballance.
Carberry seems a nice chap, but lacks the ability.
Bresnan's been found out.
Finn bowls fast, he can be supplemented in a 5 man attack.
Panesar isn't B.S. Bedi, heck he's not Daniel Vettori, but he's easily the best spinner England have got.
Taylor impressed me more than Bairstow, Root or Ballance.
If Pietersen retires, then Robson could open(I'm not convinced he's particularly special otherwise he'd a got a game for NSW, and Cook moves into the middle order.
-
Home. They will go home next. See their wives/families etc.
They will hide from everyone at the Performance centre in Loughborough for a while. Probably with the bowling machine on a nice steady 80mph to get some confidence back.
Then they will have a chat about what went wrong. Where they go from here etc.
I imagine we will see a different team in May. I wouldn't expect too much change.
-
Home I'd imagine. I bet anyone not involved in the one dayers or t20's must be packed and ready to go on the first plane out of aus.
Wonder if there will be any other retirements between now and the season starting. I guess a lot if it depends on what flower does but regardless of the coach is imagine a few people might be told their time is up
-
there are a few things to think about not least that we only have 7 test matched in 2014 then the Aussies are back over in 2015!
we can say with some certainty that for those 7 games this year
cook
bell
kp
stokes
prior
broad
Anderson
are nailed on. this leaves an opener (Root most likely) a number 5 (Ballance most likely) then a quick and a spinner. If Trott is back then he is at 3 and bell at 5.
I would have gone for Finn throughout the Ashes we have just had so he gets the nod for me.
That leaves a spinner. Borthwick isn't a test bowler nor is Rashid. so we are left with, most likely a Treadwell type.
given selectorial past performance, that is what we can expect.
-
They seriously do need a week or 2 to completely shut down
-
Quite apart from the batting what has cost England has been their inability to press home an advantage in the field. Time and again Australia (as of old) have escaped. I think that saps confidence just as much as lack of runs.
-
The pub, get piddled and tell each other how it is.
Or community service.
Or my second team, they're often short. Can't guarantee a bat or bowl though.
-
I look at both teams in the OP and think both look pretty terrible.
The spine the Buzz has outlined masked sense, but it's also that spine that has badly let the team down on this tour.
We need to sort a 3rd seamer out (Maybe Bres can stl do a job with more match fitness under his belt -I'd prefer to see Onions) and a spinner (probably Monty for the foreseeable future)
But at the end of the day it's our top 7 that have let is down. Unfortunately I can't see past any of the players who have played on this tour - it's just a question of whether they can overcome the mental scars of this tour and between them find some sort of collective form.
The cupboard does feel very bare all of a sudden.
-
(I'm not convinced he's particularly special otherwise he'd a got a game for NSW, and Cook moves into the middle order.
Yet further evidence that you don't know your cricketing (No Swearing Please) from your elbow. Robson would have played plenty for NSW were it not for the fact that he was (effectively) ineligible until this season on account of his refusal to give up his domestic qualified player status in the UK - then this season when the Australia domestic qualification rules were changed specifically to allow for Robson to play for NSW (and after much lobbying from, you guessed it, the NSW authorities) he elected instead to spead the Winter with the England Performance Program.
-
Spent a good few hours last night mulling this over. There are two answers here - what I would do, and what I think the selectors will do - the two differ mainly on the point of whether Cook should be allowed to continue as Captain (I would, as noted elsewhere, stand him down and give Prior a go, probably without the gloves).
There is, realistically, a spine of six to eight players who will, if there are no more retirements, make up the core of the playing group - Cook, Root, Bell, Pietersen, Stokes, Prior, Broad and Anderson - Root and Prior being the two not nailed on. Into that group (because it makes more sense to talk about a squad of 14-15 players than it does a single XI, you need to add two more batsmen, a spinner, a second keeper and two or three seam options.
As regards the batsmen, I think Carberry will probably be thanked for his efforts and wished the best in the future, and I doubt that Compton will be considered again (though oddly, having not thought him quite good enough at the time, I now suspect he was quite harshly treated). Ballance...I've said before I think he is probably a year short of the necessary experience, in part because he has tended to bat too low for Yorkshire, but he may well get one slot, and I suspect the other will go to Sam Robson. Interestingly, Scyld Berry was writing in the Torygraph this morning to the effect that a group of ECB bigwigs, asked to predict our next Ashes line up, all had Alex Lees, who I recommended yesterday, in their top 3s, so there may be a possibility of him coming in later in the Summer.
Spinner. England admitted that Borthwick was not up to it when they tossed the ball to KP ahead of him today. They have clearly seen something that worries them in Panesar, and something that they really don't like about Rashid, and Kerrigan will need to think about how he is going to bowl in Test cricket before he can be elevated to that level again. That leaves Tredwell, who wouldn't let anyone down but is not good enough to be a long term option, or Rafiq, who played barely half a season last year and needs time to mature. Who thinks we might go all seam in the start of the year?
Reserve keeper - this slot is up for grabs. In defence of Bairstow, he has been badly treated by the selectors in regards the amount of time he has spent sitting around between infrequent opportunities. That said, he may need the confidence that comes with time back at his county and runs on the board, though the reserve options are not great - Buttler never really scores first class runs and is a similarly inexperienced gloveman, and Foakes is even more junior. If Prior were to be injured, I wonder whether they might give Kieswetter a go?
Seamers - at least here the options are clear. Finn will come back into the group, and Onions will doubtless be there or thereabouts, though I suspect that Bresnan will become a one day specialist going forward. On top of that, I would like to see them bring one of Mills and Topley into the squad - the idea of a left armer would give variety and both have at least one part of the puzzle about them. JAmie Overton could also get an opportunity at some point.
-
said it before ill say it again
A.Cook (C)
J.Root
J.Trott (presuming he feels that he is fine to be playing test cricket again)
KP
I.Bell (VC)
S.Davies (WK)
B.Stokes
C.Woakes
S.Broad
J.Anderson (replaced when time is right)
S.Kerrigan
and if trott isnt ok to be playing cricket ballence comes in at 5 and bell goes to 3. Only spot which im not sure about is woakes however a fc batting average of 40 and fc bowling average of 25 does look promising
-
Chopra to open
And please god not woakes shouldn't be any where near selection
Stokes
Prior
Cook
Bell
Taylor
Broad
Anderson
Mills
Root
And a spinner who knows few around but not good ones
-
I also spent some time thinking and also thought that what I'd do is totally different to selectors as they have no spine (bit like normal management really.. Talk about responsibility but rarely actually make those hard calls!)..
Anyway, my squad for the next two years would be
KP (capt) - reason is that he still frightens oppos, still the big wicket and tbh, he's still England's match winner. As capt hopefully it'd bring his mind back into it and offer England that different dimension to the selectors and management who are all gutless.
Prior - vice capt. We have no alternatives currently and i think making him play all county games (championship not crappy 50/20 over!!) will get his confidence back.
Top 3 batsmen
Compton - I'd have him back as he's my 'stand in' but has done better than carbs and is younger so can last upto 4-5 years if needed.
Cook- hopefully released from the pressure can come back to form. However, he needs to go back to leaving the ball again (not sure if it's confidence or just that he's trying to hard to lead from the front )
Robson - he's my young pretender so get him in the mix, however he should not miss any championship games carrying the drinks etc
Bell - he's my number 3 till he losses it. Trott is gone and won't return to test cricket, if he does he won't be as good.
My 4/5/6 would be
Root, ballance, KP as first choice
Taylor is my reserve
Prior at 7
Then the bowlers (I care not about their batting as that's a bonus not a selection criteria
I'd go for broad, Finn, stokes and monty
Monty - we have no other option and he's the best we have
Finn - he should be withdrawn from ODI and t20 crap for club and country and told to play every county game going
Players I've left out
Anderson - I'd still have him in the squad but would assess his hunger, pace early next season. He's showing signs of age and I'd rather use this as a chance to being the next ones through.
Carberry - the guy seems a quality lad and I think that if he felt safe in his position on the side would play as he does. Or ally but at 33 I'm afraid that you are just too old and given the games you've had you've. Of delivered that big innings.
Trott - for me when he's ready he needs to play county cricket to prove it and find form. Potentially could come in but again by then it'll be 33 ish so not really the future
Rankin - ummm did he bowl 90mph once ?? Wasn't accurate and kept bowling too short. Sorry but at 29 you should be at your peak. Fired.
Tremlett - injuries have taken their toll.. No pace. Fired
Swans retired but I'd have fired him anyway as he wasn't the player he was.
Borthwick - more county cricket needed
Anderson, onions, mills and Overton are the bowlers I'd have in the squad to push the others.
With every player though I wouldn't have them as drinks carriers. I'd rather they played local first class games during the series and have some young buck as 12th man etc. I feel for bairstow as he can't have any confidence after playing nothing for so long.
ODI and t20 I don't care about, I'd rather they had totally different squids to protect the best players from tiredness, long schedules and injury
-
you would bat Stokes at 8..
No future at 33 tell that to Rodgers
-
you would bat Stokes at 8..
No future at 33 tell that to Rodgers
How long will he be around ? I like him, seems a genuinely ice bloke and plays in the fight way (unlike Warner), hope he is around for a few years and scores bucket loads. I don't think he'll be around in 2015 though :(
-
you would bat Stokes at 8..
No future at 33 tell that to Rodgers
Stokes is in for his bowling (8 for in this 5th game wasn't it?), batting is a bonus
-
Can we not just go and pinch other peoples players..
Maddinson and Lynn would be ok in our top order
-
Stokes is in for his bowling (8 for in this 5th game wasn't it?), batting is a bonus
When I first saw Stokes play a few years ago I never thought he was going to be a test bowler. He was bowling in the mid 70s in the keeper up, 6 an over sort of style. It's amazing how he's got that extra pace in such a short time.
-
Stokes is in for his bowling (8 for in this 5th game wasn't it?), batting is a bonus
In your team or the actual team mate???
Think he is in as a all rounder batsman who bowls currently but it bodes well if he can keep them both up.
Be a strong side him batting at 8.
-
In your team or the actual team mate???
Think he is in as a all rounder batsman who bowls currently but it bodes well if he can keep them both up.
Be a strong side him batting at 8.
That's just mine fella. Selectors probably have him nailed on 6 now. Would be a good tail with him and the England number 3 (Finn) in it :). Might score a run then :(
This replay of the England innings isn't looking good, it's worse than the ones before :(
-
does anyone think Eoin Morgan or Ravi Bop might get another chance?
-
Morgan is enigma i would love him to make it but will he.
Bopara has the talent but the mind???
-
When I first saw Stokes play a few years ago I never thought he was going to be a test bowler. He was bowling in the mid 70s in the keeper up, 6 an over sort of style. It's amazing how he's got that extra pace in such a short time.
Not really - at 18/19 he was a strip of the lad he has become, no great shock that he put wheels on with it.
-
He is the Wayne Rooney of cricket he plays for the games sake yes there edges to him but you know what your going to get a competitor and somebody who will not back down.
Massive plus this lad time to risk a few more young lads and give them a chance..
-
What faults are people seeing with ballance? Ok so he got pinned once but the rest of the barrage he played as well as anyone can. I thought he looked the best of our new youngsters but am left wondering as some of you have announced worries. What am I missing fellas?
-
Yet further evidence that you don't know your cricketing (No Swearing Please) from your elbow. Robson would have played plenty for NSW were it not for the fact that he was (effectively) ineligible until this season on account of his refusal to give up his domestic qualified player status in the UK - then this season when the Australia domestic qualification rules were changed specifically to allow for Robson to play for NSW (and after much lobbying from, you guessed it, the NSW authorities) he elected instead to spead the Winter with the England Performance Program.
I know common sense is sparse in Yorkshire, but you're a total idiot.
Sam Robson debuted for Middlesex in 2009. Around the time Phillip Hughes got promoted to the Australian Test side. Phil Jaques got badly injured. Simon Katich and Shane Watson where both in the national squad/team.
Yet NSW made no effort to give Robson a chance.
Shows how lowly they thought of him. It wasn't as if any of the other states wanted him either.
After 5 years of County cricket, he's had two decent seasons. 2011, in Div2, 903 runs @ 53. And 2013, Div1, 1180 runs @ 47.
So he's hardly breaking the door down for selection.
If you think he's the saviour, I think you need to see a shrink...
-
Where is Jeet we could have a proper Nerd Crickinfo Fight off...
IT IS A GAME
-
does anyone think Eoin Morgan or Ravi Bop might get another chance?
i know you beileve strongly that cricket has a lot to do with the mind buzz and i think bopara is a perfect example of that, loads of talent at county stage but apart from those 3 innings against the WI it seems he cant handle the pressure. His bowling which has come on recently does give the selectors something to think about. Morgan on the other hand i really like watching in odi's but he must have had 15 tests now and i cant say he warrents to come back in the side.
-
I know common sense is sparse in Yorkshire, but you're a total idiot.
Less of the pathetic insults and baiting!
Put a lid on this attitude! You do research and start looking like you make a little sense.....then you can't help yourself and have to insult people!
-
Less of the pathetic insults and baiting!
Put a lid on this attitude! You do research and start looking like you make a little sense.....then you can't help yourself and have to insult people!
We have a couple of posters currently who seem to think it's ok to constantly abuse people. Maybe people should just ignore them? Soon get bored
-
I think England need to develop a more attacking style of cricket. And bring in a few attacking players.
Someone mentioned hales, but I don't agree, but what about his opening partner micheal lumb?
Granted his fc avg is only 37. But he is an attacking minded cricketer, has a few double centuries among his 19 at fc. Level,
Maybe he could be a short term answer?
Root
Lumb
Cook
Bell
Balance
Stokes
Butler
Borthwick
Finn
Broad
Anderson
-
Cook's captaincy and batting is under scrutiny at the moment he has really got to think about how to got over a 5-0 Ashes loss as Captain because Flintoff when he lost the Ashes 5-0 he went into a big depression and I wonder if Cook can move on from this
-
i said it in the pink test thread, what about moeen ali? good batsman and more than handy spinner, i think he should get a look in and is in and around the england set up, been with the lions this winter i beleive
-
Or my second team, they're often short. Can't guarantee a bat or bowl though.
hahahahaha
-
Get rid of Cook as captain, shown no faith in the new bowlers.
Also with the bowlers bowling ridiculously short, surely this was a naff tactic or Cook should have had a few words with them. Which I didn't see.
-
i said it in the pink test thread, what about moeen ali? good batsman and more than handy spinner, i think he should get a look in and is in and around the england set up, been with the lions this winter i beleive
i really rate him as a batsman , would like to see him in div 1 , but last time i checked his fc bowling average was +40?
-
Sadly I think we need to face facts in England, we have got an absolute lack of high quality spinners to replace Swann with. Monty has had his detractors not sure his bowling is up to it, never mind his inability to field or even hold the bat, for a professional sportsman his fielding is absolutely awful.
-
i really rate him as a batsman , would like to see him in div 1 , but last time i checked his fc bowling average was +40?
Last season Moeen Ali's bowling average was 33 with 28 wickets at less than 3 per over. This might be in division 2 but his figures are better than Briggs, Panesar and Tredwell. He also averaged 62 with the bat. Surely he deserves a chance and would have been a far better bet than Borthwick the pie chucker!
-
Interesting read on ex players views of what England's side should be.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/25638143 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/25638143)
I don't think the changes are much different yo what's already been echoed on here.
-
About time we picked players from less fashionable counties I think .
-
About time we picked players from less fashionable counties I think .
There shouldn't be fashionable counties. There should just be the best 12 players picked for they squad from whoever they play for.
Having said that, does anyone think the way cricket works. With you generally playing for your county all your career, actually work for a good international side?
Granted there are exceptions to this rule, but there is no where near the transfers an such that go on in football.
I think cricket should be more close to football. The top division has the best sides.w oh have the best players. That way. The best players are playing against the best players every week, week on week out. Through in a few high quality internationals. And the level of the top division improves.
Then when I player is picked for international cricket, the gap shouldn't be so huge, that they have a better chance of settling in.
Granted this would make a huge divide between divisions. But surely that's worth the cost to have a better international set up?
IMO opinion no 2nd div player should be considered for England, and if a 2nddeivision player believes he's Good enough. He needs to get in a div 1 side and prove it.
Not moan he's being looked over,m
-
Interesting read on ex players views of what England's side should be.
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/25638143[/url] ([url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/25638143[/url])
I don't think the changes are much different yo what's already been echoed on here.
A good article but weak from Harmison and Tuffnel.
Harmison seems to be influenced by what is being said or what may happen, rather than picking the team he would like to see. As an ex professional I'd prefer his input than mirroring what I've already been fed by the media.
Tuffnel has sat so much on the fence that what he's put is also pointless. He's put a starting 11 of 16 players based on who's performing. Again not much insight provided....
Interesting he puts Morgan in the frame but this seems to me like a lack of knowledge of other county players.
I'm not a fan of his but Vaughn seems to get the article and provides the best response for me.
I knew of Tymal Mills, not so much of Jamie Overton or Sam Robson so that's a new player for me to go look into. I'm sure he's been mentioned on here loads, my finger is just not on the county circuit pulse as much as most of this forum :(
-
Really good input from Tufnell, just picks 16 players to fill 11 spots, sit on the fence even more why don't you Phil
-
Get the Worcester lads in!
Moeen has to be in with a shout surely?
-
There shouldn't be fashionable counties. There should just be the best 12 players picked for they squad from whoever they play for.
Having said that, does anyone think the way cricket works. With you generally playing for your county all your career, actually work for a good international side?
Granted there are exceptions to this rule, but there is no where near the transfers an such that go on in football.
I think cricket should be more close to football. The top division has the best sides.w oh have the best players. That way. The best players are playing against the best players every week, week on week out. Through in a few high quality internationals. And the level of the top division improves.
Then when I player is picked for international cricket, the gap shouldn't be so huge, that they have a better chance of settling in.
Granted this would make a huge divide between divisions. But surely that's worth the cost to have a better international set up?
IMO opinion no 2nd div player should be considered for England, and if a 2nddeivision player believes he's Good enough. He needs to get in a div 1 side and prove it.
Not moan he's being looked over,m
Does this not Stagnate the league though?
Also means that a relegated team would struggle to get back up.
I was of the thought that the 2 league set up was simply so that each team could get an away and home fixture against each team?
-
England do the usual and look for South African talent and ignore young rising British talent!!!!!
-
There shouldn't be fashionable counties. There should just be the best 12 players picked for they squad from whoever they play for.
Having said that, does anyone think the way cricket works. With you generally playing for your county all your career, actually work for a good international side?
Granted there are exceptions to this rule, but there is no where near the transfers an such that go on in football.
I think cricket should be more close to football. The top division has the best sides.w oh have the best players. That way. The best players are playing against the best players every week, week on week out. Through in a few high quality internationals. And the level of the top division improves.
Then when I player is picked for international cricket, the gap shouldn't be so huge, that they have a better chance of settling in.
Granted this would make a huge divide between divisions. But surely that's worth the cost to have a better international set up?
IMO opinion no 2nd div player should be considered for England, and if a 2nddeivision player believes he's Good enough. He needs to get in a div 1 side and prove it.
Not moan he's being looked over,m
More like football ??? Noooooo!!! It's getting to much like football anyway! IMO what a bad idea. Just my opinion though mate :)
-
IMO opinion no 2nd div player should be considered for England, and if a 2nddeivision player believes he's Good enough. He needs to get in a div 1 side and prove it.
Not moan he's being looked over,m
Interesting concept. Wouldn't work.
For example, I am playing for England during the summer and for Yorkshire in the county circuit. I play every T20, ODI and test match and average 100 with the bat and 20 with the ball. Constantly taking 8 wickets plus per game.
Yorkshire, due to the fact that I and several others players play for England, are relegated.
Does that mean I have to negotiate to leave Yorkshire and sign on with another county before the winter tour starts?
-
Interesting concept. Wouldn't work.
For example, I am playing for England during the summer and for Yorkshire in the county circuit. I play every T20, ODI and test match and average 100 with the bat and 20 with the ball. Constantly taking 8 wickets plus per game.
Yorkshire, due to the fact that I and several others players play for England, are relegated.
Does that mean I have to negotiate to leave Yorkshire and sign on with another county before the winter tour starts?
Which would push teams towards overseas players, colpaks etc. what incentive would counties have to produce home grown talent??
-
There shouldn't be fashionable counties. There should just be the best 12 players picked for they squad from whoever they play for.
Having said that, does anyone think the way cricket works. With you generally playing for your county all your career, actually work for a good international side?
Granted there are exceptions to this rule, but there is no where near the transfers an such that go on in football.
I think cricket should be more close to football. The top division has the best sides.w oh have the best players. That way. The best players are playing against the best players every week, week on week out. Through in a few high quality internationals. And the level of the top division improves.
Then when I player is picked for international cricket, the gap shouldn't be so huge, that they have a better chance of settling in.
Granted this would make a huge divide between divisions. But surely that's worth the cost to have a better international set up?
IMO opinion no 2nd div player should be considered for England, and if a 2nddeivision player believes he's Good enough. He needs to get in a div 1 side and prove it.
Not moan he's being looked over,m
Plus the games 'best league in the world' has t exactly helped England/Scotland Wales produce better national sides!! Just more foreign imports and over payed prima donnas
-
ECB won't do that thought as it will kill all ticket sales for division 2 clubs. I'd personally also stop buying membership if all talent was moved to division 1 :D.
-
I think that there is an argument that because of the reduction in quality overseas and Kolpak players there has actually been a detrimental effect on homegrown talent.
First, they don't have to fight past a gnarly old b*stard to win their place
Second, the clubs get money for fielding them whether they've got a snowball's chance of actually playing for England
Third, all the blokes in the other teams are exactly the same so the standard is pap, said homegrown 'talent' learn nothing about cricket from older players who've been there and done that.
Fourth, maybe we need Kolpak groundsmen too, so that the pitches move away from being torpid puddings on which kids like Sibley score 3 day double hundreds when the ball neither bounces higher than his ankles nor moves off the straight.
-
Interesting concept. Wouldn't work.
For example, I am playing for England during the summer and for Yorkshire in the county circuit. I play every T20, ODI and test match and average 100 with the bat and 20 with the ball. Constantly taking 8 wickets plus per game.
Yorkshire, due to the fact that I and several others players play for England, are relegated.
Does that mean I have to negotiate to leave Yorkshire and sign on with another county before the winter tour starts?
Once your picked for England and on a central contract, your not really classed as playing for that county anymore. How many games did root and bairstow play for Yorkshire last year? Very few,
So if Yorkshire do get relegated. Your not really being picked from a div 2 side. As your already playing for England.
If you get drop by England, and lose your cental contract, you should use your epicly great skills at county level(avg 100, and 8 wickets a game) to single handily get Yorkshire back into div 1. Will only take a year,
But then if you really are that good, you wouldn't lose your central contract in the first place. Would you? So that's mute.
Whatever the solution, and mine was just an idea. County players that are on the verge of England, need to be playing high quality cricket week in week out, so the step up isn't such a gulf that it is at moment.
Currently not many seem to manage the step, as they are playing below there level most weeks and get used to that level. Then bam, you get your chance and Johnston/steyn/ajmal make you look like a lemon, and yours took playing county cricket for rest of your life. When you could have been good enough.
-
ECB won't do that thought as it will kill all ticket sales for division 2 clubs. I'd personally also stop buying membership if all talent was moved to division 1 :D.
I went to a division 1 game last year and was less than 50 of us in the crowd. Very Dissapointed.
-
I went to a division 1 game last year and was less than 50 of us in the crowd. Very Dissapointed.
Wow mate, which county was it? Every division 2 game I went to last season had a minimum of 3x that many people. Would also affect the T20 and OD teams though.
-
WHilst I would hate to see England adopt a division one only policy, there is massive gap between the two divisions and I struggle to see how someone who has only got experience of and form in the lower one can relaly be expected to make the step up to Test level. It isn;t that there are no good sides in the Second division - last season you had Lancashire, Hampshire and Northants for example - but that you have so many really poor ones; a batsman last year for Lancashire might have hoped to play more than half of his cricket against Gloucestershire, Leicestershire, Glamorgan, Worcestershire and Kent, all of whom fielded a rag tag gaggle of kids, has beens and never weres. Even if that player struggled against some of the better teams, they had ten knocks to flesh out their stats against the rest.
To highlight the gap that seems to exist between the divisions, I tried to put together a "Best XI" from the Second Division last season, obeying the rule that I would only have a single overseas player and would not select Kolpak players (if I had, SImon KAtich would have come in for Liam Dawson), and would try to maximise ECB age related pay outs (on this note, Kyle Hogg was unlucky to be left out for Matt Coles) . I have taken averages/performances into account but have used them to inform my choice rather than allowing them to be the defining factor. The results are quite startling...
1. Liam Dawson (Hampshire)
2. Michael Carberry (Hampshire)
3. Ravi Bopara (Essex)
4. James Vince (Hampshire)
5. Moeen Ali (Worcestershire)
6. James Foster (Essex, capt)
7. Matt Coles (Kent/Hampshire) or Luis Reece (Lancashire) depending on balance of side
8. David Willey (Northants)
9. Trent Copeland (Northants)
10. Rees Topley (Essex)
11. Simon Kerrigan (Lancs)
-
I went to a division 1 game last year and was less than 50 of us in the crowd. Very Dissapointed.
to be fair, it was raining heavily all day, right? ;)
-
WHilst I would hate to see England adopt a division one only policy, there is massive gap between the two divisions and I struggle to see how someone who has only got experience of and form in the lower one can relaly be expected to make the step up to Test level. It isn;t that there are no good sides in the Second division - last season you had Lancashire, Hampshire and Northants for example - but that you have so many really poor ones; a batsman last year for Lancashire might have hoped to play more than half of his cricket against Gloucestershire, Leicestershire, Glamorgan, Worcestershire and Kent, all of whom fielded a rag tag gaggle of kids, has beens and never weres. Even if that player struggled against some of the better teams, they had ten knocks to flesh out their stats against the rest.
To highlight the gap that seems to exist between the divisions, I tried to put together a "Best XI" from the Second Division last season, obeying the rule that I would only have a single overseas player and would not select Kolpak players (if I had, SImon KAtich would have come in for Liam Dawson), and would try to maximise ECB age related pay outs (on this note, Kyle Hogg was unlucky to be left out for Matt Coles) . I have taken averages/performances into account but have used them to inform my choice rather than allowing them to be the defining factor. The results are quite startling...
1. Liam Dawson (Hampshire)
2. Michael Carberry (Hampshire)
3. Ravi Bopara (Essex)
4. James Vince (Hampshire)
5. Moeen Ali (Worcestershire)
6. James Foster (Essex, capt)
7. Matt Coles (Kent/Hampshire) or Luis Reece (Lancashire) depending on balance of side
8. David Willey (Northants)
9. Trent Copeland (Northants)
10. Rees Topley (Essex)
11. Simon Kerrigan (Lancs)
Sounds like we need to sack off a few county teams full stop! Complete waste of money paying kids, has been sand never will he's if they aren't doing much other than sucking money out the game!
Don't get me wrong, these guys are light years ahead of me but there is some utter trash on the pro circuit that really shouldn't be here.. The goose is a bit fat currently within county cricket... Lots of hangers on it seems
-
Sounds like we need to sack off a few county teams full stop! Complete waste of money paying kids, has been sand never will he's if they aren't doing much other than sucking money out the game!
I'm not going to say we should or shouldn't do this because it is a very emotive issue. What I will say is that there were five counties last season - Gloucestershire, Glamorgan, Leicestershire, Kent and Worcestershire who survived purely on ECB handouts, and whose sides had no one with the remotest chance of playing Test cricket for England who could not have gone elsewhere (the only two I can immediately think of are Moeen Ali, which is at best 50/50 and Shiv Thakore, who will be at Notts by then in any event). I'm not saying that the grounds should be incinerated, but I wonder whether a 13 or 14 team first class structure with the remaining sides joining the Minor Counties wouldn't work. Pie in the sky thinking - if the Minors were given a bit more prominence, they could act as the flagship of the recreational game that would pull together the issues we talked of earlier.
-
Oops, forgot Coles, though his Kent form was getting him nowhere!
-
Will Gidman is unlucky to miss out.
-
Will Gidman is unlucky to miss out.
He isn't a bad player, true - but is he as good as the other options?
-
Will Gidman is unlucky to miss out.
Will Gidman was playing WEPL club cricket last year.
-
You don't see many kolpaks playing Sheffield shield cricket in aus , maybe we should take a leaf out of the Aussies book?
-
Maybe there should be relegtion from the 2nd Div into the minor counties league, giving much more of a fight in div 2, as currently finishing last just means you finish last.
A bit like the rugby union. But also you have to have the facilities to move up.
-
You don't see many kolpaks playing Sheffield shield cricket in aus , maybe we should take a leaf out of the Aussies book?
There are six state teams, 18 counties.
-
He isn't a bad player, true - but is he as good as the other options?
Probably not.
-
Isn't Kolpak an EU thing?
-
Isn't Kolpak an EU thing?
Is South Africa in the EU??
-
Seriously Cam
No it a old trade agreement ref Dutch settlers and so forth
-
Any player from any region can play in the EU as long as there is a trade agreement from the players country.
-
Seriously Cam
No it a old trade agreement ref Dutch settlers and so forth
Was a serious question as McKenzie was a kolpak player & he'd played tests for SA.
I'll be honest, I don't have a clue how the system works... :-[
-
And if I remember correctly there was talk of Warne becoming a Kolpak player (before he (No Swearing Please) off to play poker) and he had 700 test wickets for Australia, how does that work??
-
He can't've played test cricket for 12 months i think. Then He's eligible ala Rudolph.
-
And if I remember correctly there was talk of Warne becoming a Kolpak player (before he (No Swearing Please) off to play poker) and he had 700 test wickets for Australia, how does that work??
Am pretty sure warne qualified as english(non overseas player) when at Hampshire due to his grandma being German. Don't think it was a kolpak thing.
-
Kolpak is an EU thing, hence you don't get Kolpak players in Australia, as the ruling doesn't affect them
-
Marius Kolpak was a SLovak handball player who sued in the European courts for the right to play as a domestic registered player in the German league on the basis of a trade agreement between the Slovak and EU governments.
As South Africa and Australia have outstanding agreements of this type, the implication is that a player of either nationality seeking to establish himself lawfully in Britain has to be allowed to play as a domestic player. This applied to people who qualify for residence on ancestral grounds or through work permit - the work permit loophole has since been closed by stiffening the criteria so that a work permit will only be granted where the player has played International cricket in the preceding period (or where high level coaching qualifications have been obtained), which has reduced the numbers dramatically.
Players who have EEA passports is a seperate thing - there is now almost no regulation of their playing; since Australia and New Zealand have relaxed their rules on players playing as domestic players in two countries, it is pretty much a free market.
-
Was a serious question as McKenzie was a kolpak player & he'd played tests for SA.
I'll be honest, I don't have a clue how the system works... :-[
He just had to say "I have retired from international cricket". A la Jacques Rudolph, he didn;t even have to really mean it!
-
Counties should be financially viable, if they aren't then stop paying players as much! Stop paying coaches, manager and all the hangers on as much! Pretty sure I saw some fancy cars at the Worcester ground for instance driven by players so they are earning a pretty penny. ECB should not fund these clubs, if you don't have the support or sponsorship then shrink. Money should be spent getting more people involved in the sport and raising the standards for mere mortals
-
more than that there should be some consideration of whether they are producing players for England - some counties just don't.
-
Some counties are producing players for Notts, Warks, Lancs and Slurry...
-
that's certainly true of Leicestershire, who seem to be more or less Nottinghamshire 2s (Broad, Taylor, Gurney) but how do you justify, say, Gloucestershire...
-
that's certainly true of Leicestershire, who seem to be more or less Nottinghamshire 2s (Broad, Taylor, Gurney) but how do you justify, say, Gloucestershire...
You can't. And that really pains me to say it.
-
You can't. And that really pains me to say it.
Lol :)
You could put Sommerset, glos and worcs together and for a 'South-West' county side.
-
Lol :)
You could put Sommerset, glos and worcs together and for a 'South-West' county side.
The committees would never allow it to happen.
Somerset are more likely merge withMillfield.
-
The committees would never allow it to happen.
Somerset are more likely merge withMillfield.
Millfield is their seconds isn't it?? :)
I know it would never happen but it makes sense! Bigger talent pool to pick from, higher fan base (once the crabby die hards die out) and they could have a test level venue and attract tests/ODI's or slap and tickles
-
Millfield is their seconds isn't it?? :)
I know it would never happen but it makes sense! Bigger talent pool to pick from, higher fan base (once the crabby die hards die out) and they could have a test level venue and attract tests/ODI's or slap and tickles
Apply that to the whole country. Regional franchises life the Saffers.
-
Lancs and yorks together too :) no more of this roses crap :)
So we'd have...
'South-west'
Birmingham
London
Home Counties
Roses (lanc + yorks)
Wales
North of England
South of England
Who else?
-
Keep it to six
North East
North west
East Midlands
West Midlands
South west
South East
-
Lancs and yorks together too :) no more of this roses crap :)
So we'd have...
'South-west'
Birmingham
London
Home Counties
Roses (lanc + yorks)
Wales
North of England
South of England
Who else?
I think that Roses would win everything, also it would leave the North of England very small
-
Are we talking as in our own version of the IPL/BB here or for all formats? Could go for all the test grounds?
-
All formats. Counties could continue underneath.
-
I think that Roses would win everything, also it would leave the North of England very small
Are you not counting Scotland in the North of England section. ;)
-
I've always thought splitting the country into 3 and every year the best players (that aren't international regulars) from each region are selected. Each team then plays each other once in a FC/OD/T20 match spread throughout the season. Would be a good judge of performance in my opinion. The regions could be :
Essex
Middlesex
Kent
Surrey
Sussex
Hampshire
Somerset
Glamorgan
Gloucestershire
Worcestershire
Warwickshire
Northamptonshire
Leicestershire
Derbyshire
Nottinghamshire
Lancashire
Yorkshire
Durham
Could prove to be some interesting matches. I then also feel we should start a T20 franchise competition split between the test grounds and named after the cities 3/4 overseas per team :
London 1
London 2
Durham (Or Chester-le-street but that isn't quite as appealing to me! Newcastle could also be used to attempt to draw in football fans and remove links to the county?)
Leeds
Manchester
Birmingham
Nottingham
Cardiff
Southampton
The unselected county players could then be allocated to the other 9 teams and play a kind of lessly noticed D2 of this while the main competition is running. No overseas in any teams to all playing time for all remaining English players.
-
I think that Roses would win everything, also it would leave the North of England very small
Why would they?
Of course it wouldn't work as. O one really wants to see the traditional counties go but there are way too many
-
York? Do we have a test arena?
Do you mean Leeds?
-
York? Do we have a test arena?
Do you mean Leeds?
Woopsy ;). Felt like I'd screwed up somewhere!
-
Woopsy ;). Felt like I'd screwed up somewhere!
Thought so. :D
-
No one will support a team called Leeds accept anyone from Leeds!
-
No one will support a team called Leeds accept anyone from Leeds!
No one supports the current ones ! Attendances are rubbish. I don't care how many slap and tickle gets... It's county stuff and maybe 50 over too.
-
No one will support a team called Leeds accept anyone from Leeds!
Same could be said about the IPL/BBL and those teams attempt to cover more areas than those I've listed above!
-
People once they are used to it and have no choice will support them. True you might take a 10 ish year hit as the stuck in the MUDs stop but the next generation will grow up with it and so will know no different. Short term pain, long term gain.. I know it's not a modern way to do things but sometimes it's the way forward!
-
People once they are used to it and have no choice will support them. True you might take a 10 ish year hit as the stuck in the MUDs stop but the next generation will grow up with it and so will know no different. Short term pain, long term gain.. I know it's not a modern way to do things but sometimes it's the way forward!
I would still keep the current county system for FC/OD though (maybe convert the OD competition at a later date if the T20 is successful). In my opinion grouping the FC teams will reduce tickets sales even more. I personally it's not low quality cricket that reduces FC ticket sales but simply the fact that it is FC.
-
I would still keep the current county system for FC/OD though (maybe convert the OD competition at a later date if the T20 is successful). In my opinion grouping the FC teams will reduce tickets sales even more. I personally it's not low quality cricket that reduces FC ticket sales but simply the fact that it is FC.
It's not all about the quality. It's a mixture of everything. Counties can't afford to run.. The system is broken. Slap and tickle has a place on fri evenings starting at 7 so people know when it's on and it's at a time families can go. Put 50 over stuff on Sundays so people can go to them too.
-
I think what would be good would be grouped games. So another county comes down to visit you for a week and you play all 3 formats in a structured fixture list in that week.
-
Currently you have say 100,000 fans spread between 18 counties. Over time if you invest in schools, local clubs and stream line he county game (ie less counties and better planning of the schedule!) you will get. Ore people playing, more people watching and watching at fewer grounds meaning each of them can b far superior in quality than the ones now. Plus again, the ECB should it fund financially failing clubs. If you can't afford as a county to run loads of sides then don't.. If you can only afford to offer players 20k a year rather than 50-60k etc then so be it. It's a sport but it has to be financially self sufficient too
What will grouped games do? People still won't watch it, you'll still not generate more cash so the same issues are there.
-
People wont travel that far to watch FC matches though. There's also the problem of selecting a home ground. I feel the current system supports the English team better which is surely the aim?
-
People wont travel that far to watch FC matches though. There's also the problem of selecting a home ground. I feel the current system supports the English team better which is surely the aim?
How many people watch FC?
If the standard went up and there were fewer games that were generally tip top, then that would be worth it.
No one watches FC in Austtralia.
-
How many people watch FC?
If the standard went up and there were fewer games that were generally tip top, then that would be worth it.
No one watches FC in Austtralia.
But completely removes the chance to develop talent. Ill give my view from a Hampshire supporters perspective. Over the past few years we've had some great players push into the team such as Briggs, Vince, Wood and Dawson. The majority of these got into the team through injuries to other players then cemented their place in the team. If we'd instead been merged with 2 or 3 other counties then this talent wouldnt have been found as theyd be replaced by experieced players.
-
But none are close to the Test team ard they?
County cricket is too cosy and the best players hardly ever play in it.
On the rare occasion KP deigns to play he scores stupidly easy 100s.
-
Two of them are in the development squad... heck, Carberry probably wouldn't be playing cricket anymore if this system was in effect.
-
England need to look at their talents and team of the future must be considered.
Cook (28 - very much future) stokes, Finn, broad, balance, root, Bairstow and the rest. The need to enter a translational period of defeat while the hasbeens gently fade away.
Personally, I feel KP has one more summer, prior perhaps the same.
Anderson maybe one more ashes, Panesar was his best when Swanny peaked so I reckon he's passed it.
Tredwell, slip fielder and spinner - not future but must do till someone like Briggs or Borthwick is ready
-
Two of them are in the development squad... heck, Carberry probably wouldn't be playing cricket anymore if this system was in effect.
He would playing cricket.,, he just might be not playing fully pro cricket and earning the big bucks!
-
Regardless of the personnel, England need to start finding a way to enjoy their cricket.
Once that happens they winning will follow.
At the moment they look to scared of failure to enjoy themselves, let alone to be able to win. England play a brand of joyless cricket which is why there is a disconnect between the team and the supporters.
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/25702462 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/25702462)
Someone out there believes county cricket needs a change
-
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/25702462[/url] ([url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/25702462[/url])
Someone out there believes county cricket needs a change
Won't work, and won't ever happen :D.
-
Won't work, and won't ever happen :D.
No one believes it will ever happen. Mainly because of dinosaurs who very few in number would want to 'save' their bankrupt county. Stop giving them hand outs and let a couple collapse! Would be the best way to go
-
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/25702462[/url] ([url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/25702462[/url])
Someone out there believes county cricket needs a change
I believe the issue goes deeper than county cricket, it goes down to club cricket. The grand vision of the ECB at club cricket level just isn't producing the top class cricketers it was designed to.
I'm talking specifically about the region of the country I play in, but I'm sure it's the same across the UK. A few years ago if you were a good side with talented players you could progress as a club to the highest level of club cricket, and all that mattered were the results you delivered on a Saturday. What has happened more recently in my area of the country is that the Southern Premier League has imposed a range of accreditation requirements before you can get promoted from the Hampshire League (the league I play in), so not only do you need to be a good side, you need to have a raft of requirements in place including a set number of colts sides, boundary sizes, pitch/ground marks to a set standard and specific facilities in place.
Now I'm all for having basic facilities in place, but a number of very good teams over the past few years have been refused promotion due to real technicalities, allowing bigger clubs 2nd teams getting promoted in their place despite finishing lower in the league.
I believe in our region the ECB are trying to create a super league of big clubs in the belief that will deliver the best young cricketers. The impact is that in the smaller clubs, young players who want to play at a high level often have to make the decision to leave their club to join a bigger club in order to do that. I know of a number of talented young players who have chosen to either play a different sport, or stay at their local club and be part of the club they know and like rather than move elsewhere. Either way a potential talent may have been lost to the game at a higher level.
I apologize for the rant, but I have a real issue with what the ECB are doing at club cricket level, and clearly over the past 10 or so years it isn't delivering the required amount of talent to the top level.
Something that always makes me laugh about these Southern League accreditation requirements is that in order to play in the very top league you need to have 2 sight screens at each end. We have players from Australia over who play at a high level back home and have never played a game of cricket with any sight screens, let alone 2 at each end.
-
Steveo who do you play for mate??
Our 1st team are in Silver/Div 1 (or whatever it's called now) and we need to extend the boundary for them to be promoted to Gold/Premier (or whatever it's called now)
-
I believe the issue goes deeper than county cricket, it goes down to club cricket. The grand vision of the ECB at club cricket level just isn't producing the top class cricketers it was designed to.
I'm talking specifically about the region of the country I play in, but I'm sure it's the same across the UK. A few years ago if you were a good side with talented players you could progress as a club to the highest level of club cricket, and all that mattered were the results you delivered on a Saturday. What has happened more recently in my area of the country is that the Southern Premier League has imposed a range of accreditation requirements before you can get promoted from the Hampshire League (the league I play in), so not only do you need to be a good side, you need to have a raft of requirements in place including a set number of colts sides, boundary sizes, pitch/ground marks to a set standard and specific facilities in place.
Now I'm all for having basic facilities in place, but a number of very good teams over the past few years have been refused promotion due to real technicalities, allowing bigger clubs 2nd teams getting promoted in their place despite finishing lower in the league.
I believe in our region the ECB are trying to create a super league of big clubs in the belief that will deliver the best young cricketers. The impact is that in the smaller clubs, young players who want to play at a high level often have to make the decision to leave their club to join a bigger club in order to do that. I know of a number of talented young players who have chosen to either play a different sport, or stay at their local club and be part of the club they know and like rather than move elsewhere. Either way a potential talent may have been lost to the game at a higher level.
I apologize for the rant, but I have a real issue with what the ECB are doing at club cricket level, and clearly over the past 10 or so years it isn't delivering the required amount of talent to the top level.
Something that always makes me laugh about these Southern League accreditation requirements is that in order to play in the very top league you need to have 2 sight screens at each end. We have players from Australia over who play at a high level back home and have never played a game of cricket with any sight screens, let alone 2 at each end.
Whilst I agree the system of 'club mark' and 'focus clubs' doesn't work and only makes clubs put out youth teams as cash cows, I do think that having certain criteria for leagues in terms of ground requirements is a good thing. I mean, I'd hate to find myself playing Saturday league cricket at some ground where the outfield is rutted and the wicket is some doggy pudding. Sight screens, scoreboxes, electronic scoreboards are all fancy things that just 'finish' off grounds by the wicket and outfield should be good to progress.
As for the junior sections.. I believe most clubs just view them as cash cows rather than truly out the time, effort and money into developing them. Probably because they don't have enough volunteers but also because they know most will stop playing, move away or go uni and never come back.
-
Play for Portchester. And I know about Sarisbury's issues.
Despite the fact your 1st team have finished in the promotion spots for the past 2 years in what is affectively div 2 of the premier league they can't go up because the boundary is about 2 meters to short. A good example of the accreditation requirements stopping good players playing at the highest level for their own club.
-
Keep it to six
North East
North west
East Midlands
West Midlands
South west
South East
That would be quite interesting.
South East would be incredibly strong (Middlesex, Surrey, Sussex, Hampshire, Kent plus Berkshire, Bucks and Oxon).
-
Whilst I agree the system of 'club mark' and 'focus clubs' doesn't work and only makes clubs put out youth teams as cash cows, I do think that having certain criteria for leagues in terms of ground requirements is a good thing. I mean, I'd hate to find myself playing Saturday league cricket at some ground where the outfield is rutted and the wicket is some doggy pudding. Sight screens, scoreboxes, electronic scoreboards are all fancy things that just 'finish' off grounds by the wicket and outfield should be good to progress.
As for the junior sections.. I believe most clubs just view them as cash cows rather than truly out the time, effort and money into developing them. Probably because they don't have enough volunteers but also because they know most will stop playing, move away or go uni and never come back.
Focus clubs! That was the expression I was trying to remember when writing earlier.
Totally agree about pitches and outfields, but they don't need to be like lords, just to an acceptable standard. And more often than not it's the other fancy elements that are preventing clubs from promotion. That can't be right in my opinion.
-
Focus clubs! That was the expression I was trying to remember when writing earlier.
Totally agree about pitches and outfields, but they don't need to be like lords, just to an acceptable standard. And more often than not it's the other fancy elements that are preventing clubs from promotion. That can't be right in my opinion.
As you say, boundary ropes, scoreboards etc aren't important. As Lon as the wicket is good, outfield is good and te boundaries anent too short then tbh who cares. Can't say I really bother with sight screens, maybe the odd ground if,the back ground happens to be bad
-
That would be quite interesting.
South East would be incredibly strong (Middlesex, Surrey, Sussex, Hampshire, Kent plus Berkshire, Bucks and Oxon).
I'm sure the yorkies and lancs thnk theirs would also be strong :)
-
Focus clubs! That was the expression I was trying to remember when writing earlier.
Totally agree about pitches and outfields, but they don't need to be like lords, just to an acceptable standard. And more often than not it's the other fancy elements that are preventing clubs from promotion. That can't be right in my opinion.
I won't name any names but playing in County Division 3 last year (so a fairly good standard, although admittedly not top if the tree) we played on a ground where it was bouncing to head high off a good length. That could only be described as dangerous.
Add to that grass clippings still in the outfield and the outfield itself being about as level as Stuart Broad's temper! We had one guy go down for a long barrier to a firmly struck ball that hit something and went ever his head! Not an enjoyable days cricket that...
Like you say they don't need to be Lord's, but ideally they shouldn't be putting the players in danger either!
-
I won't name any names but playing in County Division 3 last year (so a fairly good standard, although admittedly not top if the tree) we played on a ground where it was bouncing to head high off a good length. That could only be described as dangerous.
Add to that grass clippings still in the outfield and the outfield itself being about as level as Stuart Broad's temper! We had one guy go down for a long barrier to a firmly struck ball that hit something and went ever his head! Not an enjoyable days cricket that...
Like you say they don't need to be Lord's, but ideally they shouldn't be putting the players in danger either!
These sorts of wickets and outfields need stamping out. It just ruins the fun. What's the point of batting whenyou know the wicket will gEt you no matter how you play and as for the fielding... It again is bloody annoying and stops fielders from making good stops as you can't trust the ground. Defo lose interest in playing in those games even in leagues which is sad. I think some mates play at two grounds in their league, shurdington and frampton on Severn.. Both by all accounts terrible wickets and outfields.. Just don't get why they are allowed in county div 1 tbh. Send them down to the depths where their wickets belong
-
This just about sums it up for me... fantastic article. No idea who David Hopps is btw and what his credentials are, but I agree with everything that he says!
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/current/story/709591.html (http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/current/story/709591.html)
-
Hopps is a Yorkshire cricket writer, so naturally the best thing since sliced white! ;)
-
Good article that. If they did what he sets out then I suspect 18 counties would work. They won't of course and they'll continue to pump money into a few 'clubmark' 'focus' clubs that fail to produce the good as they are only interested in premier league status and cash.
state schools and strengthening grass roots will show the biggest improvement in the pro game. More people interested in playing, means more crowds, more people playing, meaning more sponsorships, meaning more money, meaning better facilities, meaning better standards, meaning better cricekt from top to bottom.