• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** England in Sri Lanka

Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Neil Pickup said:
Could NZ-England in the new year see the world's first one-day Test?
Click to expand...
If Australia-Bangladesh can't, I somewhat doubt it.

Even if Bond, Hoggard, Franklin, Sidebottom, Oram, Flintoff, Mills, Tremlett, Vettori and MSP were all fit and selected. There'd be an outside-chance of a two-dayer, given good weather and a sporting pitch. But think what a one-day Test would require; basically, it'd require one team twice being dismissed in a session, then another scoring about 200 and being dismissed in the space of a session.

Just not really cricketealogically possible.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Woodster said:
Ravi Bopara appears to be kopping a fair bit of grief on here, and while I can understand it I do not necessarily agree with it. We cannot expect everyone that is new to Test cricket to take to it like a duck to water, now whether anyone thinks he will be good enough or never be good enough is indeed a personal opinion and one in which only time will tell.

Whether Shah should have been selected over him is a good talking point but there are absolutely no guarantees he would have fared any better and people would be questioning why on earth they didn't go with Bopara, such is the fickle nature of a supporter.

I still believe Bopara will go on and become a decent Test cricketer and you can say this was not the time to bring him in, it's too soon, but there are numerous top players that begun with a tough introduction to top flight cricket for one reason or another, yet proved themselves to be quality cricketers. I think Bopara will do the same he is playing only his THIRD Test match. Personally I think the more experienced players need to take a look themselves rather than a guy in his first Test series.
Click to expand...
Bopara's been poor, though, there's no disputing this, and to select him was the wrong decision. To select Shah would have been the right decision, and had he failed as Bopara has so far this series, anyone criticising the decision would have been in the wrong.

Of course, it'd be foolish to write him off based on these 4 innings (so far) especially given that only 2 of them have been out-and-out poor dismissals.

Of course, we don't expect everyone picked for Tests to take to them immediately. But the reason so many fail to do is because they, like Bopara, get picked too soon. And it's doubly galling for everyone involved (including Bopara - imagine if he finishes his Test career with an average just short of 40 including these 3 games and over 40 from his nest Test onwards, because then those simplistic fools who say "must average 40" will have a case they should not have - he is being judged on games he should not have been playing) when there's an alternative who should have been picked instead.
 
Last edited:
Woodster

Woodster

International Captain
Richard said:
Bopara's been poor, though, there's no disputing this, and to select him was the wrong decision. To select Shah would have been the right decision, and had he failed as Bopara has so far this series, anyone criticising the decision would have been in the wrong.

Of course, it'd be foolish to write him off based on these 4 innings (so far) especially given that only 2 of them have been out-and-out poor dismissals.

Of course, we don't expect everyone picked for Tests to take to them immediately. But the reason so many fail to do is because they, like Bopara, get picked too soon. And it's doubly galling for everyone involved (including Bopara - imagine if he finishes his Test career with an average just short of 40 including these 3 games and over 40 from his nest Test onwards, because then those simplistic fools who say "must average 40" will have a case they should not have - he is being judged on games he should not have been playing) when there's an alternative who should have been picked instead.
Click to expand...
Yes he has had a rather poor series, yet I always think with hindsight it is easy to say he is not ready, but I don't suppose you really know unless they are thrown into the firing line. Sure people have opinions on whether they think he is or not, but generally, unless you have seen a certain player a number of times, it is almost guesswork as to how they initially perform, especially with younger players.

One alternative is to wait until a player has played a number of seasons in County cricket and select them when they around their late 20's. I do not believe there should be a set way, as selectors they must be flexible to introduce the youngsters when they feel the time is right. Maybe or maybe not they got the wrong call on Bopara, but if he has learnt from such an experience and improves and scores the winning runs in the next big series, is it not worth it ?
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Bopara's career so far was ample evidence to suggest to me that he wasn't a Test-class batsman at the start of this series TBH. He's had just a single genuinely good season (2007), and until someone's had more than one good season I'm never in favour of giving them a Test. Players have a single good season often enough.

He looked promising all career and did decently in 2006 and 2005, sure, but it's the runs you score, not how good you look when you make a cameo of 20-odd, that makes a batsman. There's nothing more criminal than a batsman who looks good but doesn't translate it into the neccessary volume of runs. The very last thing I'd pick. I'd send them to Academies, and get them with the best coaches I can find, sure. And hopefully that'll mean they do start scoring the runs. But I'd not pick them for Tests until they do.

As I say - it's made all the more galling by the fact that there was someone (Shah) who was doing everything he possibly could to get picked. Apart from a blip in 2006, he's been putting the runs on the board over and over again since 2001. And he's performed better for England A than Bopara.
 
social

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Eng's main problems are bowling and fielding

Interesting point was made in the Daily Telegraph UK yesterday - since the Ashes in 2005, Eng have managed to take an average of 12 wickets per test in away matches.

You dont have to be Einstein to work out that they:

a. are unlikely to win too many games that way; and

b. their batsmen are continually facing a mountain of runs and that eventually pressure will tell, as it has here
 
J

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
I doubt there will be much play on Day 5 -given the heavy showers already and more predicted tomorrow. Even if there is any play it won't be more than 2 sessions at most....And Murali looks as flat as a pancake...Its as good as a draw....I don't think SL deserve any better for the boring draw that was played out in Colombo..
 
Migara

Migara

International Coach
It was frank bad batting from English in 3rd day, with some classic swing bowling from Vaas and Welagedara (this guy is quicker in pace than I thought, getting up to 140k. First I thought he'll be a 125-130k operator).

But with bit more application, now the pitch has absolutely no demons in it. This should be a draw, and English have to have a brain black out to lose this.
 
pup11

pup11

International Coach
Migara said:
This should be a draw, and English have to have a brain black out to lose this.
Click to expand...
TBH can't count that option out with England, but yeah a draw is the most likely result which would mean a 1-0 series win for Sri Lanka but that score-line would hardly do justice to the kind of dominance the Lankans have displayed through this series.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Don't think it is quite the same TBH - sure, SL would probably have won this game but for rain (and there's still the chance they might tomorrow of course) but in 2003\04 it blatantly should have been 3-0 and damn nearly was. This time, the SSC game never even looked like having a result.

We've done better this time than we did in 2003\04, though that's not really saying much.
 
Lostman

Lostman

State Captain
last time Hashan T was captain and that was partly responsible for teh draws, that guy had fielders on the boundary with England needing >350 on 5th day wickets.
 
Migara

Migara

International Coach
Lostman said:
last time Hashan T was captain and that was partly responsible for teh draws, that guy had fielders on the boundary with England needing >350 on 5th day wickets.
Click to expand...
He was never a born leader. His batting was sticking it out there and playing for a draw. He was magnificient in that reagrd but his captaicy did suck from go. In 2003/4 series against Aus, whicl SL lost 3-0, Aussies only dominated it probably 51% of the time. Two teams were very nuch even, but the real difference was in the captaincy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top