***Official*** England in Sri Lanka

[chaminda_00]

Yeah, I was national coach for a fairly brief time. I do still check how the boys are doing, but not that often these days with Staff work and non-CW stuff.

I'll never, ever forget Hakon's prognostication shortly before his Test debut.

I hear they have a Whatmore-esque NT coach these days

 

[Richard]

Pretty good point here. I'm not sure what Key is like as a slipper, and from memory Vaughan is a mediocre catcher. Could be possible that we see Ian Bell and Kevin Pietersen spending some time there when the fast bowlers are operating.

Vaughan's awful and pretty much always has been; Key isn't the worst slip in history (hardly like he's much use anywhere else) but I do hope Bell takes some time in the slips.

For Pietersen, though - just no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Brilliant in the deep, crap in close, been the same story throughout his career.

 

[Perm]

I seem to remember seeing a bit of Pietersen at gully, so I just assumed he would move into the cordon if there were injuries and England needed a full compliment of slips.

 

[Richard]

I certainly remember him being there, and also recall him dropping at least 3 catches there.

 

[gettingbetter]

Key may have been tried but he hasn't really failed awfully. He was a failure in 2002\03 when he was batting in the middle-order (which means little); failed in his first 2 Tests (hardly unusual); and did OK in his most recent spell batting three (most of his runs did indeed owe to dropped catches and the bowling in the West Indies series wasn't exactly first-rate). He was dropped almost by default as Bell sneaked in due to some devastating early form in 2005; had Bell's form been less prolific it's likely Key would've kept his place, and obviously playing Bangladesh he'd probably have been into the Ashes side, thus altering everything and who knows, maybe meaning what turned-out to be the best series in history happened totally differently.

Anyway - the point is I don't think Key has exhausted his opportunities. In his last 7 Tests (the only ones that really matter) he averages 44.25; his first-chance average is much lower, but it's still high enough to be a promising start to a career.

The Shah ODI situation is totally different. In his first 18 ODIs he averaged 18.37, and just twice scored more than 40, including 10 single-figure scores. That's seriously, seriously awful. And as his domestic record clearly shows, he should never, ever have been picked ITFP. Key has done better in his Tests than Shah has in his ODIs, and Key deserved selection; Shah didn't.

Urgh. Once again, I'm not as good as you in manipulating stats, so I won't even bother.

But just quickly, you say that key has done well opening. I'm not 100% sure, but isn't that where Vaughan bats for Yorkshire? If not, we all know that Vaughan's form in the Test arena opening.

Save your time bringing up the Vaughan 2003-04 form attack.

Simply put. Vaughan > Key (as an opener).

 

[pup11]

Is Key a good player of spin, if not then that is one thing that might have gone against him while the selectors picked the test squad.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

while he performed consistently against the West Indies he never managed to post a big score.

Coming in at:

148-3/36.6 overs (42 off 38 in 225)
64-3/12.6 overs (45 off 64 in 217)
33-3/8.5 overs (51 off 66 in 196)

In the context of the England innings, his performances were very good and he didn't really have much option to score big runs, given the lack of support. That said, I agree that he's not set the world alight as an ODI player, but I believe that he needs to be batting at the top of the order, because he's a player who needs to bat through the innings, no come in in the middle of it or at the end.

BTW, it's Shah's birthday today. Or rather, the anniversary of the day of his birth.

 

[aussie]

Yo Richard. Again i think your idea of Vaughan opening being bad & Key getting a chance ahead of Shah is well its has its flaws son.

Vaughan is a natural opener plus he has experience in SRI which will count for alot. Key is probably a good player but i don't trust him in those conditions againts Murali TBH. Shah of late has been playing well and is pretty good player of spin. So i have no qualms about Vaughan opening & Shah batting in the middle-order.

 

[Richard]

Vaughan isn't a natural opener at all, though - he showed great promise batting at four and even six early on in his England career.

And his opening efforts have been all too familiar - get to 20 or 30, give a chance; very occasionally get a massive score. Precisely what you don't want in an opener.

And as I say - in 2007, he finally, at long long last, fulfilled that middle-order promise he showed all the way back in 1999\2000, 2000, 2001 and 2001\02. It's madness that they've thrown it away again already.

And yes, he has experience in SL - that's the same batting two or three.

 

[Richard]

Urgh. Once again, I'm not as good as you in manipulating stats, so I won't even bother.

But just quickly, you say that key has done well opening. I'm not 100% sure, but isn't that where Vaughan bats for Yorkshire? If not, we all know that Vaughan's form in the Test arena opening.

Save your time bringing up the Vaughan 2003-04 form attack.

Simply put. Vaughan > Key (as an opener).

No, not at all. Vaughan mostly only scored the massive scores he got as an opener thanks to dropped catches in 2002, which dried-up in 2003 and early 2004.

He's exactly what you don't want in an opener - get a start then get out (but occasionally go on to a massive score). He's not done so much of this in the middle-order, though.

Yes, he has often opened for Yorkshire (not that he's played much for us in the last 7 years) but that he's never looked his best opening for England.

 

[gettingbetter]

No, not at all. Vaughan mostly only scored the massive scores he got as an opener thanks to dropped catches in 2002, which dried-up in 2003 and early 2004.

He's exactly what you don't want in an opener - get a start then get out (but occasionally go on to a massive score). He's not done so much of this in the middle-order, though.

Yes, he has often opened for Yorkshire (not that he's played much for us in the last 7 years) but that he's never looked his best opening for England.

Oh well, theres no need for us to go around in circles. You've made your point, I've made mine.

What I do agree with you though is that Bell should remain at 6. But it just seems odd, and it did appear that way when Shah returned to the team and batted at 3. Same with SA and Amla batting there. We all know the story about the coveted number 3.

 

[Richard]

If Bell wasn't so obviously suited to the number-six position I'd want him there and Shah lower down, undoubtedly. I do feel there's occasionally a bit of a stigma attached to the three position that there needn't be though - the "your best batsman must bat there". Well, no, all your batsmen should bat in the best position you can find for them.

 

[deira]

Question about this series. why is it such a long one? from October to December? They dont play any games in November why is that? so are the whole england team in Sri lanka for the whole 3 months?

 

[Richard]

No, they flew home after the ODIs, stay at home while the Lankans are playing their Test-series in Australia, and will fly back when their Test leg of the programme starts.

 

[Poker Boy]

I've had internet problems in the last month but now I'm back...the Strauss decision might be a sign that this regime will not be as loyal as the last one (I cannot imagine D Fletcher dropping him) although a question must be asked: why award him a one year central contract a month before ? They must have some inkling...if he does not regain his place in the next year that's ECB money down the plughole. They should have picked a specialist opener (Key) although I'm not anti Vaughan opening as a lot of the cameos Richard mentioned were early in his career or whe n he had just took over the captaincy in 2003. Vaughan is definately preferable to Mustard (a ridiculous selection) or Prior as opener. Bell did open on the last Indian tour (one Test) not a succsess, would they try it again? At least they did not pick Rampraksh which would have been the worst selction ever - had he been say 30 with a poor test record I'd have tried it and seen if he could emulate Hayden, Langer and Martyn and suuceed with maturity but times have changed since the last time England did something similar (Tom Graveney in 1966) and although he was older than Ramps is now (a) he had a good Test record and (b) varreeres lasted longer then anyway...

 

[Olwe]

At least they did not pick Rampraksh which would have been the worst selction ever - had he been say 30 with a poor test record

What!

Ramps is on top form, he last palyed in a test in 1998 when ramps hit a total of 318 (the third best for england)

for surrey he has hit an avridge of over 100 for two years in a row, and hit over 2000 runs in a seaon, and he is appoacing his 100th centurey. he is the only batsmen to have avriged the 100+ in two consecutive English seasons.

he should at least have the chance to repesnt his country as the current best batsmen of the County Championship.

he is also one of the three (alng with Carl Hopper and Chris Adams) to have scored at centurey agaists all 18 County teams.

 

[wpdavid]

What!

Ramps is on top form, he last palyed in a test in 1998 when ramps hit a total of 318 (the third best for england)

No, he played against NZ in 1999, didn't do well and was, imo, something of a scapegoat for that particular debacle. But he came back in 2000, playing a few tests, for some reason, as an opener, before being dropped.
He was picked again in 2001 after a spate of injuries and did reasonably well against Aus. But he toured poorly the following winter, and that's been that.

fwiw I wouldn't have picked him. He's not exactly been short of opportunities, and he could only be a very short term selection.

 

[steds]

he last palyed in a test in 1998 when ramps hit a total of 318 (the third best for england)

Hahaha. Where the hell did he grab that number from? Ramprakash's best Test score is 154.

Wondering is this guy's for real.

 

[Olwe]

oh yes srry, ive just made a huge blunder,

but the figers are right and from the ashes in 2001, i did the fatel mistake of reading the infomation wrong. so yes that was my fault.

but i will still say that he at the moment is the batsmen in the most from in england.
And the riguers from the county championship is all correcet.

info from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_cricket_team_in_England_in_2001

ramps hitting 133 in the 5th test

Date July 5, 2001 - August 27, 2001
Location England
Result Australia won the 5-Test series 4-1

Teams
England Australia
Captains
Nasser Hussain Steve Waugh
Most Runs
Mark Butcher (456)
Marcus Trescothick (321)
Mark Ramprakash (318) Mark Waugh (430)
Damien Martyn (382)
Adam Gilchrist (340)
Most Wickets
Darren Gough (17)
Andrew Caddick (15)
Alex Tudor (7) Glenn McGrath (32)
Shane Warne (31)
Jason Gillespie (19)

 

[wpdavid]

Interesting performance by Harmison in his comeback game in SA. 6 wickets for 90is encouraging, but 14 wides is astonishing.