Will Mark Ramprakash play for England this summer?

[GIMH]

Where would you bat him/instead of who?

 

[Top_Cat]

Test cricket on the other hand is supposed to be the ultimate test both of technique and temperament...and I've always been of the opinion you pick your best team to win the next match. If two players are on equal footing and one is 25, the other 36, then obviously you take the 25 year old. However I hate to see a test batsman being overlooked for an inferior one on the basis of age.

But that's not the only reason at play here, is it? Facts are he's been tried, tested and hasn't lasted. You can't just ignore the sheer weight of evidence against his temperament just because he's scoring heavily at the same level he's scored heavily at before. Seriously, how much more evidence do you need that he's not up to it? A miraculous mental turnaround at age 38? Highly doubt it but it would seem to not be about just age at all.

The question here for me really is if England were simply to pick the XI most likely to win the next test match would Mark Ramprakash be a part of it?
I tend to think he would..

He may possibly be up there in the batting stakes but in a Test, it's not just about picking the best players based on raw talent alone; you also have to pick the best team. Ramp's pretty chequered past as a team player counts against him. Is he one of the best batsmen in the country? Possibly but there are others who are just as talented and on raw talent, the current English batting line-up is just as highly vaunted as he. Would he contribute to a successful team environment and result in more wins for England? The past evidence (of which there is quite a bit) would suggest not. If raw talent was enough to guarantee a place in a Test side, Marty Love, Stuart Law and co would have played more Test cricket than they did.

There's also the intangibles. If Ramps is so unbackable to be picked, why hasn't he been picked already? The last English season ended almost a year ago and he had a very prolific season before that so the selectors have had ample opportunity to pick him, particularly for a tour to NZ which they fully expected to win against an under-strength home side. It seems pretty clear they're not that interested so obviously they're also considering more than sheer weight of runs. And as Geraint said, who would you drop?

 

[pasag]

Don't have a lot of time (assignments ), but you've got to select your best players for every Test regardless of their age. In ODIs the notion of preparing for the World Cup by breeding new players is a valid one but in Test cricket you play every series on its merits.

That's one of the reasons why Test cricket is the greatest of them all, in theory, because every match is played with the countries greatest available XI against the other countries XI at this point in time. The only time age should come into it is when the two players vying for the spot are equal, then age should be the deciding factor.

However, here we have an England batting lineup that has failed constantly for quite some time now and there are no real younger players that are screaming pick me (besides Shah, who I'd like to see there ASAP) so when you've got a bloke who has been ripping it up domestically and in the form of his life, you owe it to yourself to give him another try at least. If he fails, get him out early before any major damage is done, but it can't really be worse than what you've got now, which is nothing special. And at best he could gun it on the international scene for a few years, which would be a massive boost to a faltering England side. It's a gamble England need to take.

 

[Richard]

I think there's simply a difference in approaches here between Aus and England. Interestingly, the one time England approached a series with an attitude similar to ours and with a positive apporach they beat us quite convincingly. Since then it's been a massive backward step.

That's a very simplistic way of looking at it I'm afraid.

 

[Richard]

But that's not the only reason at play here, is it? Facts are he's been tried, tested and hasn't lasted. You can't just ignore the sheer weight of evidence against his temperament just because he's scoring heavily at the same level he's scored heavily at before. Seriously, how much more evidence do you need that he's not up to it? A miraculous mental turnaround at age 38? Highly doubt it but it would seem to not be about just age at all.

The point is, the reasons for not selecting him should be nothing to do with age. Nothing at all. The only reason he should not be selected is his past failures.

That's the only reason I'm hesitant to pick him. I couldn't care less about him being 38 if I was highly confident of his success.

 

[Jamee999]

I wouldn't mind seeing this - itbt:

Cook - Vaughan - Bell - Pietersen - Collingwood- Ramprakash - Ambrose

But that's another kick in the teeth for Shah, who I do rate...

EDIT: 11,000 posts!

 

[BoyBrumby]

I wouldn't mind seeing this - itbt:

Cook - Vaughan - Bell - Pietersen - Collingwood- Ramprakash - Ambrose

But that's another kick in the teeth for Shah, who I do rate...

EDIT: 11,000 posts!

Fair play. Congrats.

Would be really stiff on Shah tho, as you say. If (say) Strauss reverts to mediocrity & KP's hamstring (god forbid) went twang I think Ramps should probably be the second cab off the rank.

Other people's points about his previous failings are well made, but his form has been Bradmanesque over the last 2 seasons (back-to-back season averages of 100+ is unprecedented post WW2 & probably ever) so has probably earned a final shot. It comes with no guarantees of his success, obviously &, as saggers observes, if he fails again he should be dropped summarily.

 

[iamdavid]

But that's not the only reason at play here, is it? Facts are he's been tried, tested and hasn't lasted. You can't just ignore the sheer weight of evidence against his temperament just because he's scoring heavily at the same level he's scored heavily at before. Seriously, how much more evidence do you need that he's not up to it? A miraculous mental turnaround at age 38? Highly doubt it but it would seem to not be about just age at all.



He may possibly be up there in the batting stakes but in a Test, it's not just about picking the best players based on raw talent alone; you also have to pick the best team. Ramp's pretty chequered past as a team player counts against him. Is he one of the best batsmen in the country? Possibly but there are others who are just as talented and on raw talent, the current English batting line-up is just as highly vaunted as he. Would he contribute to a successful team environment and result in more wins for England? The past evidence (of which there is quite a bit) would suggest not. If raw talent was enough to guarantee a place in a Test side, Marty Love, Stuart Law and co would have played more Test cricket than they did.

True, tbh I was just trying to discount his age as a reason to not pick him. There is still the debate over whether he is infact worthy of a place on merit alone....and I lean towards thinking he is.

He's always had the talent and the technique to do well at test level imo and as you say it was the mental side of his game which let him down.
He also found the step up from county to test level in terms of the accuracy of bowling a big challenge, as has been said here at FC level he is a strokemaker where as at test level he was pretty easily restricted and turned into more of a grafter, which wasnt his natural way, and he had a tendancy to fall to ugly shots rather than superb balls as he tried to counter this.

He was found out at test level no questions about it, my thinking that he'd do better now is based more on the way standards have declined than his improvement. Although it does appear that he plays in a far more carefree manner nowdays, placing less pressure on himself and enjoying his cricket alot more. Whereas during his England days I got the impression he almost wanted success too badly and the fear of failure was a big inhibitor.
If he were to take this mindset into the test arena against the likes of Mitchell Johnson, Dale Steyn, RP Singh...as opposed to Courtney Walsh, Curtley Ambrose and Glenn McGrath....then I'd have my money on him doing well.

There's also the intangibles. If Ramps is so unbackable to be picked, why hasn't he been picked already? The last English season ended almost a year ago and he had a very prolific season before that so the selectors have had ample opportunity to pick him, particularly for a tour to NZ which they fully expected to win against an under-strength home side. It seems pretty clear they're not that interested so obviously they're also considering more than sheer weight of runs. And as Geraint said, who would you drop?

The fact that he has been found wanting in the past will always count against him (and the stigma that the English selectors in the 90's were idiots for giving him and Hick as many chances as they did and they would face an outcry from some quarters if they were to do it again). Plus his age obviously dosent help matters...

Had Strauss not scored his 170 then there would be a pretty obvious possible route into the side. Unfortunately he did so its unlikely Shah or Ramps will figure early on atleast...

 

[Richard]

Other people's points about his previous failings are well made, but his form has been Bradmanesque over the last 2 seasons (back-to-back season averages of 100+ is unprecedented post WW2 & probably ever) so has probably earned a final shot. It comes with no guarantees of his success, obviously &, as saggers observes, if he fails again he should be dropped summarily.

The trouble is, as Kev observed in an earlier thread - what's the point in picking someone at all if it's 2 bad Tests and they're straight out again?

Ramprakash's previous failures mean that if he were to be picked, he'd almost certainly have to score in his first 4 innings.

And while his previous two seasons' form has been even better than ever, it's not like him dominating the domestic scene is anything remotely new. That he can take what he has already done to a higher level is not, to me, terribly indicative of whether he can take something he was lacking in to something no longer lacking in.

 

[BoyBrumby]

The trouble is, as Kev observed in an earlier thread - what's the point in picking someone at all if it's 2 bad Tests and they're straight out again?

Ramprakash's previous failures mean that if he were to be picked, he'd almost certainly have to score in his first 4 innings.

And while his previous two seasons' form has been even better than ever, it's not like him dominating the domestic scene is anything remotely new. That he can take what he has already done to a higher level is not, to me, terribly indicative of whether he can take something he was lacking in to something no longer lacking in.

I don't think it'd be too much to ask of a player in the form of his life to make one score in four digs. If he can't, then so be it & if he can't handle the pressure that knowledge brings then he's clearly temperamentally unsuited to the game at the highest level.

 

[gettingbetter]

Then you have someone like Shah who was dumped after 1 dig anyway...

 

[Manee]

I don't think it'd be too much to ask of a player in the form of his life to make one score in four digs. If he can't, then so be it & if he can't handle the pressure that knowledge brings then he's clearly temperamentally unsuited to the game at the highest level.

AWTA.

 

[Richard]

Then you have someone like Shah who was dumped after 1 dig anyway...

Shah wasn't exactly dumped - he was never dropped. Both of his selections only came about due to injuries to other players. It was always made clear that he was not picked as a first-choice, and that the player he was replacing would return to the side when they were fit.

It's a great shame Shah has not had doors open for him, but it's no real error of selection that he's been left-out the game after playing, just misfortune on Shah's part to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The only time Shah's non-selection was truly deplorable was this winter when Bopara was picked ahead of him, then Strauss was recalled to bat at three instead of him.

 

[vic_orthdox]

The fact is that the level of Division One County Cricket has increased vastly since the 1990s, Shane Warne said that the good players have become concentrated toward Division One in an interview last year and I concurr.

Do you really not believe that a person with an average of 101.30 this season and the top scorer of many seasons before does not deserve one more chance. Who cares if England possibly waste some matches, the fact is that he has earned a recall and that those who terrorised him in his previous stint have all since retired. There is no future consequence, this is one last chance for a County superstar on the way out. He has stepped up his County Cricket performances significently, with far higher season averages than before, who is to say that this is not a step up in international potential?

You do realise that everything you say there seems to elevate the individual above the team?

 

[Manee]

You do realise that everything you say there seems to elevate the individual above the team?

I am not saying that he should be straight back into the team with little thought about the current members; but he is currently almost isolated from any sort of selection for the squad. I feel that he provides superior credentials than a Shah or Bopara who occupy the benches of the team, suitable for a single recall in time of a minor injury to a batsman. I also feel that Ramprakash is at a stage in his playing career whereas he will not be damaged in the long term by isolated Test matches at different positions in the order whereas a Shah or Bopara will be seen as poor performers if they do not quickly adapt to a role which they may be given if put into the side in place of an injured batsman.

 

[Jono]

It's worth picking him for the summer just so we can see who is right here

Haha so true, and I was hoping England would stuff up in the last test (and Strauss would fail) with the hope that Ramps would be selected. It'd make for great viewing! Imagine the pressure, Jeez.

I'd be backing him though, simply because I've always loved his surname. Ramprakash, just sounds awesome.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Ramps started the new County season with another century today.

 

[gettingbetter]

Ramps started the new County season with another century today.

As did Shah, but NOT Strauss.

 

[James_W]

Would be awesome if he came back and scored his 100th FC Century in his first innings back.

 

[wpdavid]

Would be awesome if he came back and scored his 100th FC Century in his first innings back.

At present rate, it would be more of a surprise if he didn't have his 100 tons before the first test. However, it would be fun to see him reach the landmark in tests, especially at his old county ground.