***Official** West Indies in England***

[Prince EWS]

Regarding Yardy: there's no point in selecting a squad without a second spinner in it. Who else would you have gone for - Ian Blackwell, Adil Rashid or Gareth Batty?

Yardy's bowling action is unorthodox, yes, but it's not 1,609,344km away from Sanath Jayasuriya and he's proven the worth of flat, niggly left-arm spin in short cricket more times than I've had microwaved lasagne. Whether he can bat is less relevant for me: but I don't think he's an ODI four...

Blackwell > Yardy as a bowler, IMO. And I don't see the absolute need for a second spinner in the first place TBH.

 

[Prince EWS]

Well yeah, but I was refering to his apparent "stance" that Perm was talking about.

Was he really talking about that though? Or was he talking about the fact that he can't get bat on it and never scores any runs? Or maybe the fact that he bowls slow medium pace with no movement?

 

[Scaly piscine]

Picking Yardy is probably a cunning plan to get Vaughan back in the squad quickly as a spin bowling option.

 

[Perm]

You could say the same thing about Chanderpaul tbh...the point is that Yardy is in an orthodox position at the point of the bowler's release.

Chanderpaul is good though, he manages to get bat on ball and look like a quality batsman whereas Yardy comes across as a crap batsman, regardless of his stance.

 

[pup11]

Chanderpaul is good though, he manages to get bat on ball and look like a quality batsman whereas Yardy comes across as a crap batsman, regardless of his stance.

I completly agree with that Yardy is a disgracefull batsman.

 

[Perm]

I completly agree with that Yardy is a disgracefull batsman.

I wouldn't say he is a disgraceful batsman, but there are certainly better ones going around. Not to say that he was picked for his batting, mind you.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Well both Yardy and Chanderpaul can be absolutely dire ODI batsmen, Chanderpaul however can occasionally up the gears and go berserk (and doesn't average under 20).

 

[Richard]

I was just thinking since Richard has pushed so hard for the inclusion of Dimitri Mascarenhas, will he come up with excuses if he fails and goes for quite a few runs? Not to say that Richard would do that sort of thing, but he doesn't seem the kind to cop it on the chin if one of the players whose inclusion he has pushed for proves to be garbage.

To be honest, I'm willing to bet that he would. It's only natural really - if you think a player is good enough and he performs poorly, then you'd naturally look for reasons why it is the case.

I can just see the backlash if that happens, it would be quite amusing.

Marc left remember.

TEC comes and goes whenever he pleases, so it would be amusinmg but not quite the same.

If Mascarenhas bowls crap I'll say he bowled crap. I won't say it was inevitable or that it made his a bad selection, though, because I think he should have been playing 3 years ago. Maybe it might end-up a good thing that he didn't, though...

And Craigos: tec has been as much in favour as me of selecting good OD bowlers for ODI rather than picking those you've picked in Tests like jokes such as Harmison and Plunkett.

I fully hope Mascarenhas performs well and shows how stupid the selection of the Mahmoods et al of this World have been.

 

[Richard]

Regarding Yardy: there's no point in selecting a squad without a second spinner in it. Who else would you have gone for - Ian Blackwell, Adil Rashid or Gareth Batty?

Blackwell and Yardy should really have been even-money, TBH. Though Yardy is at least a genine batsman rather than a small-ground bully, even if he doesn't look like one.

Neither have ever been good OD batsmen, though, and Blackwell is actually a natural spinner, rather than Yardy who was a seamer just 3 years ago (unlike Giles who was 17 when he converted).

 

[Richard]

With all the injuries i'm fairly pleased with some of the new selections. Mascarenhas selection especially is very good since i've been calling for his selection for all long as i've been a CW member so hopefully he will come good.

TBF, I thought Mascarenhas should have been in the team 3 years ago, but in 2005 and 2006 his record was poor and I would have been against his selection at that time as I've never liked picking out-of-form players.

 

[Prince EWS]

Blackwell and Yardy should really have been even-money, TBH. Though Yardy is at least a genine batsman rather than a small-ground bully, even if he doesn't look like one.

Neither have ever been good OD batsmen, though, and Blackwell is actually a natural spinner, rather than Yardy who was a seamer just 3 years ago (unlike Giles who was 17 when he converted).

Given what I've seen of Yardy's bowling, I actually think it would be generous even now to call him a spinner. He bowls chest on, relatively quickly, with no loop, no drift and no spin. Left arm slow-medium would be an apt description for that, IMO.

Admittedly though, he hasn't played a lot of international cricket so I haven't been exposed to much of his bowling.

 

[Richard]

Tremlett has a good List A record, and a pretty good record this season too. Whenever I've seen him bowl in ODIs though, he's been dire. Is there any explanation for that - favourable home conditions or something?

I've always believed he's a Rose Bowl (uneven track) bully and on the not-few occasions I've watched him (all in OD games) he's never seemed to bowl that many wicket-taking deliveries, just get poor strokes as well as benefit from the poor pitches.

I find it far more fitting that he should be a Rose Bowl bully than Mascarenhas. And if he bowled in ODIs again (on half-decent batting pitches) I'd back him to get the treatment again.

 

[Richard]

Given what I've seen of Yardy's bowling, I actually think it would be generous even now to call him a spinner. He bowls chest on, relatively quickly, with no loop, no drift and no spin. Left arm slow-medium would be an apt description for that, IMO.

Admittedly though, he hasn't played a lot of international cricket so I haven't been exposed to much of his bowling.

Absolutely. He's the most obviously contrived spinner I've ever seen. He was impossibly fortunate to get those two pitches he got in his first 2 ODIs and impossibly fortunate with the circumstances of his first 2 games in the Champions Trophy. I've never rated him as a bowler one little bit.

But you should still, IMO, let someone fail before dropping them. Especially if your alternatives haven't failed.

 

[Richard]

BLE?.

FTR, don't think the latest SW\BLE has been banned yet.

 

[Richard]

Flintoff, Hoggard & Harmison are all not playing for various reasons - who else would you pick??

Hoggard and Harmison would not make the attack better.

 

[Prince EWS]

FTR, don't think the latest SW\BLE has been banned yet.

If you are referring to member Pup Clarke quoted back then, there is no evidence at all to suggest it would be BLE, and I'm very confident that it is not.

 

[Richard]

No, was referring to the MiddleOrdaBiffa account which clearly was SW\BLE. This JKL obviously isn't, I have precisely zero doubts even before reading his replies to Pup Clarke.

 

[pup11]

Anyways how long would it take before Freddie is back in action on field??

 

[Richard]

No knowing. Could be fairly quick, could be never.

 

[Prince EWS]

No, was referring to the MiddleOrdaBiffa account which clearly was SW\BLE. This JKL obviously isn't, I have precisely zero doubts even before reading his replies to Pup Clarke.

Oh, right. I assumed that count was banned as he hasn't been posting with it. Best not to test fate anyway IMO - if he's not posting, leave things as they are.