Topic: English Post Mortem (Read 39193 times)

skip1973 · « **Reply #90 on:** March 10, 2015, 09:43:38 AM »

Quote from: ProCricketer1982 on March 10, 2015, 07:14:49 AM

play more slog fests.. that'll increase skill and ability to play test matches.

Australia & SA have a high mix of test players in their ODI teams, they like to play attacking cricket be it test or one day, hardly sloggers.

TangoWhiskey · « **Reply #91 on:** March 10, 2015, 09:45:16 AM »

Quote from: Buzz on March 10, 2015, 09:41:14 AM

this highlights the major problem that England have. Our bowling resources are thin. We have loads of talented batsmen - some who haven't been picked, some who are underperforming and some who have had their talent coached out of them.

But the bowling.

arrgg - who is going to be scared of that attack?

Who cares? Play to your strengths. You just said we've go loads of talented batsmen. Pick 'em and score 350 every match and play to your strengths. What's the point in picking a thin bowling line up, them getting pumped every game then trying to chase down big targets with effectively six wickets?

skip1973 · « **Reply #92 on:** March 10, 2015, 09:45:38 AM »

Quote from: Buzz on March 10, 2015, 09:41:14 AM

this highlights the major problem that England have. Our bowling resources are thin. We have loads of talented batsmen - some who haven't been picked, some who are underperforming and some who have had their talent coached out of them.

But the bowling.

arrgg - who is going to be scared of that attack?

Does that mean your batters aren't necessarily that talented if they are not facing top class bowlers?

Buzz · « **Reply #93 on:** March 10, 2015, 09:55:37 AM »

Quote from: skip1973 on March 10, 2015, 09:45:38 AM

Does that mean your batters aren't necessarily that talented if they are not facing top class bowlers?

Last night my son asked me what infinity plus 1 was. I told him it was still infinity, but he should discuss it with a math professor.

your question, equally needs to be discussed with someone with more experience than me...

smilley792 · « **Reply #94 on:** March 10, 2015, 10:18:36 AM »

As much as I'd love to troll Gerry. I de agree with him. De cock is a good talent. And it's only due to his injury plagued build up he's yet to score runs.
Maybe a reason why he shouldn't be picked and should be replaced with another currently(as with ballance)
As in the knock out stages. Losing a wicket cheaply could cost them.

As for bell, well he doesn't keep. A strong string quintet has in his bow.

edge · « **Reply #95 on:** March 10, 2015, 10:27:47 AM »

Got to be worth giving some of the pace talent a few games to get them involved in the setup - works well for Australia! Look how long Cummins/Hazlewood/Pattinson/Starc have been around their side, all under 25 and all made their international debut by 20. None of them have individually played that many games but look at the amount of bowlers they can call in with confidence and decent international experience. Sensible management, Aus test and limited overs bowling units have effectively been treated as separate for years now and they're reaping the rewards.

Can you see a promising young English pace bowler getting games like this? Only one I can think of is Meaker getting a couple of games a few years ago and then getting dropped because he wasn't that accurate. Newsflash - anyone who is in their early 20s and bowls gas tends not to be super consistent! Got to give them a chance to learn that, gee players up and back them to do what they do best and learn with experience. Sadly this seems to extend to a lot of the counties as well as the national team.

Off the top of my head:
Meaker, Mills, Topley, Overton, Jordan, Woakes, Wood, Dunn. All quick, all young. Managed well, got to be at least a few of them make it as good international bowlers.

uknsaunders · « **Reply #96 on:** March 10, 2015, 10:56:49 AM »

The continuing issue for me is the county structure. Our players aren't good enough because they are playing at a lower level than other countries domestic structures. 18 counties is too many for the talent we have, no matter how much we have. This talent needs to be pushed and weaknesses found out before they reach the England setup. "A" tours are a great help in this regard but they need to be challenged more often.

Those quickies mentioned - imagine having a Topley/Meaker as a pair in each team - do you think Ravi Bops weakness against pace would of been found out before he played several test matches? Or Bairstow and the short ball in his initial tests? Ali, was playing in Div 2 but ought to be able to play a bouncer but now he's getting peppered by Sri Lanka of all people!

My point is County Cricket isn't the finishing school people thought it was for test and more so ODI cricket. The reason why people want our players in the BB and IPL is because the standard is higher (though I'm not sure about some of IPL home grown players) and they will be tested. If this is the case, why not just create the right structure in the UK in the first place.

csnew · « **Reply #97 on:** March 10, 2015, 11:13:01 AM »

Have to agree with the above. Far too many teams playing county cricket reducing the quality. Mind you the ECB will never change the county structure as it will upset the counties and of course the counties won't vote it in. All the ECB care about is profits and increasing ticket prices.

It's interesting that everyone is now saying english players should go to the Ipl, the same lot were saying the Ipl standard is rubbish etc. Now all of a sudden it's the solution. All well and good saying go play in the Ipl, but only buttler is good enough. The rest have no chance particularly given the patchy relationship between the English players and the Indians (apart from KP, bopara and morgan).

The solution is import more players from abroad, it's worked before

.

Manormanic · « **Reply #98 on:** March 10, 2015, 11:14:04 AM »

Quote from: uknsaunders on March 10, 2015, 10:56:49 AM

My point is County Cricket isn't the finishing school people thought it was for test and more so ODI cricket. The reason why people want our players in the BB and IPL is because the standard is higher (though I'm not sure about some of IPL home grown players) and they will be tested. If this is the case, why not just create the right structure in the UK in the first place.

County cricket CAN be of an exceptionally high standard - I'd back Yorkshire's First XI from last season against any first class side on the planet and both Durham and Nottinghamshire have had very strong sides in recent seasons - but there are too many teams of a lower standard, especially in division 2, and there is a bigger disconnect between the skill sets used to acheive success in county cricket and those that would work on the international stage than there are in (because they are places that I know enough about) Australia and South Africa.

What does that mean? Well, when it comes down to it, the success of dobbing medium pacers such as David Masters, Ed Giddens, John Lewis, Mike Smith etc who nibble the ball around in the low to mid 70s on fresh decks, rarely brake down but provide a steady supply of accurate fuss free overs. Because the pitches are harder and the number of players/teams proportionately fewer, you don't tend to find these types in other countries. Or in Test cricket...

uknsaunders · « **Reply #99 on:** March 10, 2015, 11:36:30 AM »

Quote from: Manormanic on March 10, 2015, 11:14:04 AM

County cricket CAN be of an exceptionally high standard - I'd back Yorkshire's First XI from last season against any first class side on the planet and both Durham and Nottinghamshire have had very strong sides in recent seasons - but there are too many teams of a lower standard, especially in division 2, and there is a bigger disconnect between the skill sets used to acheive success in county cricket and those that would work on the international stage than there are in (because they are places that I know enough about) Australia and South Africa.

What does that mean? Well, when it comes down to it, the success of dobbing medium pacers such as David Masters, Ed Giddens, John Lewis, Mike Smith etc who nibble the ball around in the low to mid 70s on fresh decks, rarely brake down but provide a steady supply of accurate fuss free overs. Because the pitches are harder and the number of players/teams proportionately fewer, you don't tend to find these types in other countries. Or in Test cricket...

Totally agree, some of County Cricket is of a high standard. Especially in Div 1. This to me only highlights the issues that were swept under the carpet when we went to 2 Divisions, namely there wasn't enough quality cricket being played. That is still the case today and while I think you will always get clever dobbers on English decks, it is a symptom of the gentle nature of some FC cricket.

I think eventually the ECB/Graves will have to buy counties out or force them to go bankrupt to make changes. By "buying them out" I mean literally paying them not to play and combining them with another county. While the counties may argue they supply players to England and they deserve the handout they get. The ECB can argue they don't need 18 counties to do that thanks very much and we'll support 12. The FC structure drains �40m out of the game each year that could be spent on grass roots cricket. Any saving from a more efficient FC structure could do wonders for the game at lower levels as well as giving England better equipped players.

Manormanic · « **Reply #100 on:** March 10, 2015, 11:36:47 AM »

Quote from: edge on March 10, 2015, 10:27:47 AM

Can you see a promising young English pace bowler getting games like this? Only one I can think of is Meaker getting a couple of games a few years ago and then getting dropped because he wasn't that accurate. Newsflash - anyone who is in their early 20s and bowls gas tends not to be super consistent! Got to give them a chance to learn that, gee players up and back them to do what they do best and learn with experience. Sadly this seems to extend to a lot of the counties as well as the national team.

Off the top of my head:
Meaker, Mills, Topley, Overton, Jordan, Woakes, Wood, Dunn. All quick, all young. Managed well, got to be at least a few of them make it as good international bowlers.

Someone made the claim elsewhere that England were just going through a personnel slump and that this never happened to Australia. Said person must not remember the problems that the Aussies had when McGrath, Gillespie, Lee, Warne etc were no longer available - yes, there have been some great players found in the last few years, and there is now considerable strength in depth, but that was not always the case...

After all, would anyone argue that Beau Casson, Dan Cullen, Clint McKay, Andrew MacDonald, Peter George, Trent Copeland, Michael Beer, John Hastings, James Hopes, Ashley Noffke, Brett Dorey, Mick Lewis, Ben Laughlin, Shane Harwood were anything other than the chaff sorted through to find gems like Starc, Pattinson, Hazlewood and Cummins?

So, do England have guys with the potential to get up to that level? There is - or rather has been - definitely a fallow period between Anderson/Broad/Bresnan and the youngsters that have not yet reached Test cricket. Australia, for they have become our comparator here, managed to polish Ryan Harris from a 30 year old jobbing quick with serious injury issues into a world class operator and to produce a much better verion of Mitchell Johnson.

So who do England have in the 25-30 age group? Finn has been wrecked, Plunkett is seen as a Test match option. Other than that you're left hoping that someone like Jack Brooks could step up or that common sense will see them give Mark Footitt a chance...or we skip a generation and take a look at the two Overtons, Matt Dunn, Mills, Topley or, just further down the line Matt Fisher, who will be absolute quality...

Manormanic · « **Reply #101 on:** March 10, 2015, 11:43:43 AM »

Quote from: uknsaunders on March 10, 2015, 11:36:30 AM

I think eventually the ECB/Graves will have to buy counties out or force them to go bankrupt to make changes. By "buying them out" I mean literally paying them not to play and combining them with another county. While the counties may argue they supply players to England and they deserve the handout they get. The ECB can argue they don't need 18 counties to do that thanks very much and we'll support 12. The FC structure drains �40m out of the game each year that could be spent on grass roots cricket. Any saving from a more efficient FC structure could do wonders for the game at lower levels as well as giving England better equipped players.

There are a few things that could be considered to raise standards short of mass bankruptcies:
1. The ECB could generate a number of Central Contracts - say nine - financed by the Sky TV money and could be given the right to use them to, in effect, buy players from Second Division sides and move them to the top division. This would allow, for example, the likes of Rees Topley at Essex to be moved to a Division One county to see how he does at the higher level.
2. The ECB could allow D2 counties to hire additional players from Overseas to play first class cricket only - there would be a steady stream of decent South African and Australian state players interested, as well as a number of Test players from places like Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.
3. The first class structure could be redesigned to allow for a regional competition over 3 weeks in early summer to act as Test trials.

arsenal123 · « **Reply #102 on:** March 10, 2015, 11:53:59 AM »

Quote from: Manormanic on March 10, 2015, 11:14:04 AM

County cricket CAN be of an exceptionally high standard - I'd back Yorkshire's First XI from last season against any first class side on the planet and both Durham and Nottinghamshire have had very strong sides in recent seasons - but there are too many teams of a lower standard, especially in division 2, and there is a bigger disconnect between the skill sets used to acheive success in county cricket and those that would work on the international stage than there are in (because they are places that I know enough about) Australia and South Africa.

What does that mean? Well, when it comes down to it, the success of dobbing medium pacers such as David Masters, Ed Giddens, John Lewis, Mike Smith etc who nibble the ball around in the low to mid 70s on fresh decks, rarely brake down but provide a steady supply of accurate fuss free overs. Because the pitches are harder and the number of players/teams proportionately fewer, you don't tend to find these types in other countries. Or in Test cricket...

I dislike it when these names are trotted out though. The success of Vernon Philander shows that bowlers of 80mph should not just be readily discarded.

skip1973 · « **Reply #103 on:** March 10, 2015, 11:56:47 AM »

Bowlers like Philander need a certain type of wicket though.

Manormanic · « **Reply #104 on:** March 10, 2015, 12:03:50 PM »

Quote from: arsenal123 on March 10, 2015, 11:53:59 AM

I dislike it when these names are trotted out though. The success of Vernon Philander shows that bowlers of 80mph should not just be readily discarded.

Philander is a bit quicker than 80 to be fair, and the ones I mentioned were all closer to 70.

In any event, I'm not suggesting that bowlers at or around 80 can't be effective - Shaun Pollock managed it - but that they have to be exceptionally skilled to do that at Test level, and that the issue is more foussed on lack of familiarity with quality fast bowling in division 2.

Author Topic: English Post Mortem (Read 39193 times)

skip1973

Re: English Post Mortem

TangoWhiskey

Re: English Post Mortem

skip1973

Re: English Post Mortem

Buzz

Re: English Post Mortem

smilley792

Re: English Post Mortem

edge

Re: English Post Mortem

uknsaunders

Re: English Post Mortem

csnew

Re: English Post Mortem

Manormanic

Re: English Post Mortem

uknsaunders

Re: English Post Mortem

Manormanic

Re: English Post Mortem

Manormanic

Re: English Post Mortem

arsenal123

Re: English Post Mortem

skip1973

Re: English Post Mortem

Manormanic

Re: English Post Mortem