*Official* England in West Indies

[Jigga988]

I would love to see West Indies win this series, with some excellent contributions from batsman not called Chanderpaul, Gayle or Sarwan.

As would I my friend, but the chances of that happening are so very slim... Nash is capable providing he's got over the short ball issue and then Devon Smith will most likely have one good 50 for the whole series.

 

[Shoggz]

I really don't know how this series is going to go... As an England fan, of course I want my boys to win, but having said that, I think the West Indies are more likely than any time since 2000 to upset the form book.

I don't think any of the media are giving them a chance and I think they may just spring a surprise or two... (Beyond a magnificent performance by Shivnarine Chanderpaul, which let's face it is de rigueur for him against England)

 

[shivfan]

Benn, Marshall and Baker.

Those are the three I would leave out too, if I was a selector....

However, I hear Richards is struggling to be fit, so Marshall might get another chance to save his Test career.

 

[Jigga988]

Those are the three I would leave out too, if I was a selector....

However, I hear Richards is struggling to be fit, so Marshall might get another chance to save his Test career.

save his test career is a bit ott, the guy's young... look how many chances people like Devon Smith gets. Besides, could be a blessing in disguise, the only time Marshall has done well was at home against Australia opening, and I'd have him doing the same thing, Marshall should open and Dev Smith drop down the order

 

[Jigga988]

I really don't know how this series is going to go... As an England fan, of course I want my boys to win, but having said that, I think the West Indies are more likely than any time since 2000 to upset the form book.

I don't think any of the media are giving them a chance and I think they may just spring a surprise or two... (Beyond a magnificent performance by Shivnarine Chanderpaul, which let's face it is de rigueur for him against England)

Hoping for an upset being a Windies fan, and the only way I can see us winning is if England's bowlers come in tired and under cooked. Anderson is hit and miss, Sidebottom and Flintoff are both not 100% so for the first couple tests England could struggle as they did against Windies 'A' but I don't see Windies bowling out England 8 times in the series, Englands batting line up is way strong and would be a problem for us.

 

[The Masterplan]

Quick question is Marlon Samuels still out for the whole 2 years?

 

[Uppercut]

Hoping for an upset being a Windies fan, and the only way I can see us winning is if England's bowlers come in tired and under cooked. Anderson is hit and miss, Sidebottom and Flintoff are both not 100% so for the first couple tests England could struggle as they did against Windies 'A' but I don't see Windies bowling out England 8 times in the series, Englands batting line up is way strong and would be a problem for us.

I'd say England's bowling is their stronger suit, quite easily in fact, especially when they play five. They only play five specialist batsmen, and of those, there are three- Cook, Bell and Collingwood- who noone's 100% convinced about and are in the team because of the lack of alternatives. Even Strauss is only one two-match series past having his place seriously in doubt, and I'm not sure if he can get away with playing exclusively square of the wicket outside the subcontinent.

Their bowling struggled in India on slow pitches against a quality lineup, but they still have two world-class quicks in Flintoff and Sidebottom if they can stay fit. Harmison and Anderson both vary between excellent and ordinary, and Panesar is either ineffective or a match-winner depending on conditions.

I still think England will win here comfortably, because I believe they're a full class above the West Indies, so much so that noone seems to notice. As an example, Harmison and Edwards are two bowlers who both have a reputation for being erratic but great when they get it right, inconsistent but world-beaters when in rhythm. On the face of it they seem pretty similar, but one averages 31 and the other 38. Chris Gayle is seen as one of the three quality West Indies batsmen, while Alastair Cook seems to be something of a weak link, but Cook averages 42 to Gayle's 39. Sarwan is thought to be their second best batsmen, but he averages 39 to Ian Bell-end's 41.

The difference in quality is so big that it's somehow completely forgotten, when we say "test-class" or "good" about a West Indian batsman we mean something completely different to when we say it about an English one. The West Indies are encouraged by a reasonable display in drawing 0-0 in New Zealand, England were embarrassed that they actually lost a match in winning 2-1. If England are 2-0 down to Australia after three matches this summer, noone will be saying anything about the positives that can be taken or that English cricket could be on the way back up. Make no mistake, England are the much better team and if the West Indies pull off a victory it'll be an absolutely fantastic achievement.

 

[The Masterplan]

Their bowling struggled in India on slow pitches against a quality lineup, but they still have two world-class quicks in Flintoff and Sidebottom if they can stay fit. Harmison and Anderson both vary between excellent and ordinary, and Panesar is either ineffective or a match-winner depending on conditions.

I would have to slightly disagree with your assesment of Sidebottom, he's a handy asset for England to have but I wouldnt say he was world class... I'd agree with Anderson definately being able to produce world class moments but he's not as consistent as he'd like to be, but he is becoming more consistent non the less.

 

[Uppercut]

I would have to slightly disagree with your assesment of Sidebottom, he's a handy asset for England to have but I wouldnt say he was world class... I'd agree with Anderson definately being able to produce world class moments but he's not as consistent as he'd like to be, but he is becoming more consistent non the less.

Hum, maybe you're right, personally i rate him very highly indeed. He's taken the West Indies completely to pieces before.

 

[Jigga988]

I'd say England's bowling is their stronger suit, quite easily in fact, especially when they play five. They only play five specialist batsmen, and of those, there are three- Cook, Bell and Collingwood- who noone's 100% convinced about and are in the team because of the lack of alternatives. Even Strauss is only one two-match series past having his place seriously in doubt, and I'm not sure if he can get away with playing exclusively square of the wicket outside the subcontinent.

Their bowling struggled in India on slow pitches against a quality lineup, but they still have two world-class quicks in Flintoff and Sidebottom if they can stay fit. Harmison and Anderson both vary between excellent and ordinary, and Panesar is either ineffective or a match-winner depending on conditions.

I still think England will win here comfortably, because I believe they're a full class above the West Indies, so much so that noone seems to notice. As an example, Harmison and Edwards are two bowlers who both have a reputation for being erratic but great when they get it right, inconsistent but world-beaters when in rhythm. On the face of it they seem pretty similar, but one averages 31 and the other 38. Chris Gayle is seen as one of the three quality West Indies batsmen, while Alastair Cook seems to be something of a weak link, but Cook averages 42 to Gayle's 39. Sarwan is thought to be their second best batsmen, but he averages 39 to Ian Bell-end's 41.

The difference in quality is so big that it's somehow completely forgotten, when we say "test-class" or "good" about a West Indian batsman we mean something completely different to when we say it about an English one. The West Indies are encouraged by a reasonable display in drawing 0-0 in New Zealand, England were embarrassed that they actually lost a match in winning 2-1. If England are 2-0 down to Australia after three matches this summer, noone will be saying anything about the positives that can be taken or that English cricket could be on the way back up. Make no mistake, England are the much better team and if the West Indies pull off a victory it'll be an absolutely fantastic achievement.

I should've explained better, what I was getting at is that the Windies attack will struggle to bowl England out, however this is more of a testament to the weakness of the Windies bowling than to the strength of Englands batting.

Re. Harmison and Edwards, like I said a bit ago, Edwards has created a new dimension to his game, yes he can take wickets but he has developed a certain amount of accuracy - definitely more so than he had before and is capable at going 3 an over consistently whilst taking wickets... the only way that average is going is up!

Think Sidebottom is a world-class bowler at full strength but you yourself outlined why Windies have a chance... you said both Harmy and Anderson are hot and cold - which they are - and Sidebottom and Freddy arn't 100% so if these lot arn't firing who have you got - Broad (an average bowler at best) and Panesar who granted could cause trouble. England's bowling line up is a good one when everyone is fit, but fact is 2 bowlers arn't and the other two are hit and miss.

Think Gayle>Cook in the Windies, no swing around makes Gayle an extremely dangerous and destructive batsmen and with Harmy and Anderson not looking all that good I fancy him to reek havoc. Having said that Cook could perform as Windies being the way they are will probobly feed his strength, i.e. the short ball, hoping we have a bit more scense than that though.

 

[Jigga988]

Quick question is Marlon Samuels still out for the whole 2 years?

I know there was a hearing about it due to happen soon but for now the ban is still two years

 

[Uppercut]

I should've explained better, what I was getting at is that the Windies attack will struggle to bowl England out, however this is more of a testament to the weakness of the Windies bowling than to the strength of Englands batting.

Re. Harmison and Edwards, like I said a bit ago, Edwards has created a new dimension to his game, yes he can take wickets but he has developed a certain amount of accuracy - definitely more so than he had before and is capable at going 3 an over consistently whilst taking wickets... the only way that average is going is up!

Think Sidebottom is a world-class bowler at full strength but you yourself outlined why Windies have a chance... you said both Harmy and Anderson are hot and cold - which they are - and Sidebottom and Freddy arn't 100% so if these lot arn't firing who have you got - Broad (an average bowler at best) and Panesar who granted could cause trouble. England's bowling line up is a good one when everyone is fit, but fact is 2 bowlers arn't and the other two are hit and miss.

Think Gayle>Cook in the Windies, no swing around makes Gayle an extremely dangerous and destructive batsmen and with Harmy and Anderson not looking all that good I fancy him to reek havoc. Having said that Cook could perform as Windies being the way they are will probobly feed his strength, i.e. the short ball, hoping we have a bit more scense than that though.

Yeah, the thing is, the West Indies need all this stuff to go their way to compete. They need Flintoff and Sidebottom to have fitness issues, Harmison and Anderson to blow cold, none of the pitches to offer turn for Monty, Edwards and Chanderpaul to keep up their recent form and several others to over-perform. If all of that stuff happens, they can win, but it's a lot to hope for. I wouldn't say they have no chance, but they're very much up against it.

I wouldn't say categorically that Gayle>Cook in the West Indies. They're actually both very similar in terms of their weaknesses (no foot movement so vulnerable to the swinging ball outside off) so if one struggles, the other probably will too. Gayle's strike rate is generally better, but even that hasn't been especially great recently. He hasn't scored a home century in four years, remember.

 

[Jigga988]

Yeah, the thing is, the West Indies need all this stuff to go their way to compete. They need Flintoff and Sidebottom to have fitness issues, Harmison and Anderson to blow cold, none of the pitches to offer turn for Monty, Edwards and Chanderpaul to keep up their recent form and several others to over-perform. If all of that stuff happens, they can win, but it's a lot to hope for. I wouldn't say they have no chance, but they're very much up against it.

I wouldn't say categorically that Gayle>Cook in the West Indies. They're actually both very similar in terms of their weaknesses (no foot movement so vulnerable to the swinging ball outside off) so if one struggles, the other probably will too. Gayle's strike rate is generally better, but even that hasn't been especially great recently. He hasn't scored a home century in four years, remember.

Don't worry, that will all change in the first test

You have a point re. Gayle and Cook though I reckon Cook is a lot better at handling swinging conditions. Just like to say that I reckon Gayle has finally developed a head under those broad shoulders. Thee way he played in NZ was fantastic, would like to highlight a particular point where Patel was pitching every ball outside the line of leg stump, trying to tempt him to do something and for about six overs Gayle just padded it away. He finally has some responsibility and looks to be prospering because of it. The fact that his run rate's been down is a good thing tbh and he will still punish a wayward Harmy and Anderson.

Yes we need things to go for us, but they arn't as unlikely as you are making them seem. Edwards has been consistent for the past year and proven he could take wickets when there's no swing around and Taylor is the same though had a poor series in NZ. Chanders and Gayle are in fine form and Sarwan is too good a batsmen to stay out of the runs. If the Windies selectors do as I want then they'll open with Marshall who has proven he can score runs at home opening against the best, and Devon Smith's last match also had him scoring runs down at 5.

If you add all of on top to the fact that there's no swing in Windies which means Jimmy will struggle, that and the fact that Harmison is an ordinary bowler in slow low conditions which is what the Windies are usually - I know Harmy's got a good record against Windies but can't for the life of me see him reproducing that. You got Broad who is just plain old average and Panesar who is low on confidence.

Things need to go for us but the chances of these things going for us in at least the first couple tests are not bad. Windies have a good chance of going out the first two tests level or even dare I say with a lead and then who know what'll happen from then.

 

[FBU]

It's unlikely Anderson will play.

We will have two all rounders in Flintoff and Broad, one has not bowled on tour yet and the other 14 overs and has a strike rate of 83. Then we will have Sidebottom who hasn't played in 6 months and Harmison.

I have more confidence in the West Indies

Against Australia in WI

Chanderpaul 147.33
Sarwan 45.83
Marshall 45.50

Edwards 3 Tests 15 wickets at 25.13
Taylor 2 Tests 8 wickets at 29.75

 

[Jigga988]

FBU is typing a lot of scense, it's hardly like Windies are favourties, it's just the odds of them doing well arn't as long as you make them out to be. I think as the series progresses England could very well dominate but for the first two tests, the whole thing is up in the air.

 

[Uppercut]

Don't worry, that will all change in the first test

You have a point re. Gayle and Cook though I reckon Cook is a lot better at handling swinging conditions. Just like to say that I reckon Gayle has finally developed a head under those broad shoulders. Thee way he played in NZ was fantastic, would like to highlight a particular point where Patel was pitching every ball outside the line of leg stump, trying to tempt him to do something and for about six overs Gayle just padded it away. He finally has some responsibility and looks to be prospering because of it. The fact that his run rate's been down is a good thing tbh and he will still punish a wayward Harmy and Anderson.

Yes we need things to go for us, but they arn't as unlikely as you are making them seem. Edwards has been consistent for the past year and proven he could take wickets when there's no swing around and Taylor is the same though had a poor series in NZ. Chanders and Gayle are in fine form and Sarwan is too good a batsmen to stay out of the runs. If the Windies selectors do as I want then they'll open with Marshall who has proven he can score runs at home opening against the best, and Devon Smith's last match also had him scoring runs down at 5.

If you add all of on top to the fact that there's no swing in Windies which means Jimmy will struggle, that and the fact that Harmison is an ordinary bowler in slow low conditions which is what the Windies are usually - I know Harmy's got a good record against Windies but can't for the life of me see him reproducing that. You got Broad who is just plain old average and Panesar who is low on confidence.

Things need to go for us but the chances of these things going for us in at least the first couple tests are not bad. Windies have a good chance of going out the first two tests level or even dare I say with a lead and then who know what'll happen from then.

Yeah, that's where we disagree- i think it's very unlikely, you're a bit more confident.

I think that there's a bit of a double-standard when judging the teams. You say Sarwan is too good a batsman to stay out of the runs for long, but the fact remains that he scores far less runs than he looks like he should, and if he scored that few playing for England they'd be questioning his place in the side- as Ian Bell has found out, despite scoring at a better average than Sarwan. You call Edwards a consistent bowler for averaging around 30, whereas for England a consistent performer is someone like Ryan Sidebottom, averaging 25. Chris Gayle went almost four years without a century and was made captain, Alastair Cook went one year without one and had questions raised.

West Indies have become a whole class below so that solid players like Gayle and Sarwan are mistaken for quality ones, atrocious young players like Powell and M****n for promising ones, a run of good bowling like that of Edwards for a purple streak. What was once denounced as mediocre is now praised as the start of a revival. They have such a great history, and everyone wants to see them back to being competitive, but when I look at their team all I see is a county-standard side.

Featuring the best batsman in the world, mind.

 

[Uppercut]

Against Australia in WI

Chanderpaul 147.33
Sarwan 45.83
Edwards 3 Tests 15 wickets at 25.13
Taylor 2 Tests 8 wickets at 29.75

They still lost the series 2-0 though. If they want to win here, they'll need contributions from more than just those four players (who, bar Chanderpaul, can hardly be relied upon to deliver themselves). It's almost more damning of the side that when four of their five quality players all performed extremely well for a home series, they still lost it 2-0 with the drawn match only ever having one winner.

 

[Jigga988]

Yeah, that's where we disagree- i think it's very unlikely, you're a bit more confident.

I think that there's a bit of a double-standard when judging the teams. You say Sarwan is too good a batsman to stay out of the runs for long, but the fact remains that he scores far less runs than he looks like he should, and if he scored that few playing for England they'd be questioning his place in the side- as Ian Bell has found out, despite scoring at a better average than Sarwan. You call Edwards a consistent bowler for averaging around 30, whereas for England a consistent performer is someone like Ryan Sidebottom, averaging 25. Chris Gayle went almost four years without a century and was made captain, Alastair Cook went one year without one and had questions raised.

West Indies have become a whole class below so that solid players like Gayle and Sarwan are mistaken for quality ones, atrocious young players like Powell and M****n for promising ones, a run of good bowling like that of Edwards for a purple streak. What was once denounced as mediocre is now praised as the start of a revival. They have such a great history, and everyone wants to see them back to being competitive, but when I look at their team all I see is a county-standard side.

Featuring the best batsman in the world, mind.

I think with Sarwan you have a poiont, can't really pick holes in that argument, except for the fact that the last two series we have been at home he has scored a bucket full of runs and apart from KP and maybe Strauss don't think anyone will score more runs than Chanders and Gayle (respectively, not collectively as I am sure you would assume) conditions are unbelievably perfect for Gayle, so much so that I asked my brother to put £25 on him scoring first century (had to ask my brother because I am too young to bet.)

 

[Uppercut]

I think with Sarwan you have a poiont, can't really pick holes in that argument, except for the fact that the last two series we have been at home he has scored a bucket full of runs and apart from KP and maybe Strauss don't think anyone will score more runs than Chanders and Gayle (respectively, not collectively as I am sure you would assume) conditions are unbelievably perfect for Gayle, so much so that I asked my brother to put £25 on him scoring first century (had to ask my brother because I am too young to bet.)

Gayle's problem this series is that he has an issue with medium-fast bowling- he's stated in the past that he absolutely hates facing bowlers who put down the ball at 80mph, basically admitting that Chaminda Vaas had the wood on him. Matthew Hoggard and Zaheer Khan are two others who gave him all kinds of trouble, dismissing him five times each in tests. I can see Ryan Sidebottom regularly getting him early, and if he doesn't, Steve Harmison's had him seven times too.

 

[Jigga988]

Gayle's problem this series is that he has an issue with medium-fast bowling- he's stated in the past that he absolutely hates facing bowlers who put down the ball at 80mph, basically admitting that Chaminda Vaas had the wood on him. Matthew Hoggard and Zaheer Khan are two others who gave him all kinds of trouble, dismissing him five times each in tests. I can see Ryan Sidebottom regularly getting him early, and if he doesn't, Steve Harmison's had him seven times too.

James Franklin is a left arm medium pacer and Gayle seemed to handle him O.K, not saying Gayle will find it easy but he is turning a corner and Sidebottom not being at full fitness should be a factor to consider.