*Official* England in West Indies

[Richard]

Mine, I supposed Cook's conversion of seven 100s & nineteen 50s is still a hell of a lot better than Fleming's nine 100s & forty-six 50s. From memory only Ranatunga of specialist batsmen had a worst conversion than Flem

And as I say - his got to almost normal levels in the second half of his career. His record in his first 62 Tests had to be seen to be believed: 31 half-centuries and just 2 centuries. From that WACA 2001/02 game onwards it was (against Test-class teams) 6 centuries and 11 half-centuries, though from 41 games you'd really hope for more than that from a batsman of his calibre.

Interestingly, as I mentioned a bit earlier this thread, Cook was dropped in the 50s or 70s in 3 of his 7 Test centuries, as well as about 5 times at various points in the one at Lord's in 2006, which was a shockingly bad innings. His only centuries where he's not actually given it away at all were Old Trafford 2006, WACA 2006/07 and Lord's 2007.

Had he not had a decent bit of good fortune early in his career we'd probably have been having this discussion a lot earlier.

 

[Zinzan]

And as I say - his got to almost normal levels in the second half of his career. His record in his first 62 Tests had to be seen to be believed: 31 half-centuries and just 2 centuries. From that WACA 2001/02 game onwards it was (against Test-class teams) 6 centuries and 11 half-centuries, though from 41 games you'd really hope for more than that from a batsman of his calibre.

Interestingly, as I mentioned a bit earlier this thread, Cook was dropped in the 50s or 70s in 3 of his 7 Test centuries, as well as about 5 times at various points in the one at Lord's in 2006, which was a shockingly bad innings. His only centuries where he's not actually given it away at all were Old Trafford 2006, WACA 2006/07 and Lord's 2007.

Had he not had a decent bit of good fortune early in his career we'd probably have been having this discussion a lot earlier.

Thats true & thinking about it, Flem's first mistake was so often costly when approaching a hundred, not too mention a few extremely unlucky dismissals

 

[Prince EWS]

Whether or not it's a good idea it won't happen.

There are too many idiots in the loop, ones such as Aggers, who have no idea but will stick their oar in anyway and corrupt the reasoned arguments going on with bollocks. Any sort of proper open debate will just clogged going around in circles because of these know-nothings. It's always the same, things aren't merely debated and decided by the real experts who know what they're doing - the overwhelming mass of idiots have to get involved and give their stupid uninformed opinion and because they're in the majority their voice is the loudest.

I mean for instance for the first couple of years Hawkeye came out these same people were constantly going on about how it wasn't accurate and they don't trust it. Doesn't matter that scientists have been testing it exhaustively to give a proper error margin and so on. These **** who can barely work out how to work a video recorder know better.

Excellent post. AWTA.

 

[Uppercut]

this pitch is far flatter than the last pitch, absolute beauty to bat on IMO. Would take a herculean effort from someone to get 20 wickets here.

It's a bit quicker, so they should be able to take a few wickets, but runs will be easier to come by. It wasn't so much the flatness of the pitch in Antigua that made taking wickets so difficult, it was its horrid slowness, especially late in the game.

 

[Richard]

The pitch at The ARG this series was only flat for perhaps 4 sessions - 5 at the most. Thereafter, it was extremely uneven.

However, even on an uneven deck, slowness is a severe handicap to bowlers, and that ARG deck was slooooooooooowwwwwwww (which isn't really that surprising given it was prepared at 3 days' notice). If you're really good at bowling straight, you'll still have success, but England's bowlers weren't and aren't, so they didn't (quite have enough).

 

[ozone]

It's a bit quicker, so they should be able to take a few wickets, but runs will be easier to come by. It wasn't so much the flatness of the pitch in Antigua that made taking wickets so difficult, it was its horrid slowness, especially late in the game.

Exactly, and TBH, the pitch at Antigua was fairly flat save for the one line where the centre line on the football pitch was. This pitch is probably going to be easier for bowlers to pick up wickets on (if chances are taken!), but is almost certainly going to be far easier to score runs on as well.

 

[Uppercut]

The pitch at The ARG this series was only flat for perhaps 4 sessions - 5 at the most. Thereafter, it was extremely uneven.

However, even on an uneven deck, slowness is a severe handicap to bowlers, and that ARG deck was slooooooooooowwwwwwww (which isn't really that surprising given it was prepared at 3 days' notice). If you're really good at bowling straight, you'll still have success, but England's bowlers weren't and aren't, so they didn't (quite have enough).

It was a pretty good effort getting to within one wicket on that thing really. Failing to take the last wicket in the final ten overs they had to go at Powell and Edwards was the one major disappointment with their bowling performance.

 

[sammy2]

AMG: Would this have been one game where you would have stuck by Harmison for one final chance?

MH: Yes, definitely. When Harmison found out that he was not playing the Test, he might as well have packed up his bags and gone home. There is no point in him hanging around here. This would have been an ideal pitch for him. He is tall, has a fair amount of pace and could have got the ball to bounce disconcertingly at the batsmen, especially with most of the West Indian batsmen being so short. Chris Gayle is the only tall one in that line-up; Shivnarine Chanderpaul, Ramnaresh Sarwan and Devon Smith are all small guys. He wouldn't have had to bang it in half-way; he could have bowled at a reasonably good length and that would have been difficult for the batsmen,

 

[Uppercut]

We hear "this pitch should be PERFECT for Steve Harmison!!" before literally every match and he still takes no wickets.

 

[ozone]

Agree with Holding TBH, Harmison should just go home.

 

[Prince EWS]

AMG: Would this have been one game where you would have stuck by Harmison for one final chance?

MH: Yes, definitely. When Harmison found out that he was not playing the Test, he might as well have packed up his bags and gone home.

Indeed. And that's how it should be. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

 

[oitoitoi]

Agree with Holding TBH, Harmison should just go home.

And never leave again.

 

[ozone]

Beefy reckons the pitch is starting to crack up. Using the fact that Gayle is only using the light-roller as proof he thinks the the pitch will break up as well. Don't really know what to make of that.

 

[Uppercut]

It's gotta be a degree of wishful thinking, but he has a point about Gayle...

 

[Jigga988]

Beefy reckons the pitch is starting to crack up. Using the fact that Gayle is only using the light-roller as proof he thinks the the pitch will break up as well. Don't really know what to make of that.

Barbados, never offers supreme turn though, don't think it will start turning until last day tbh and even then it wont be nothing too bad...

 

[Richard]

I remember it turning plenty in 2001, when SA declared far too late believing a result completely impossible and wasted the chance to win. Nicky Boje ripped it a mile in the few overs he got though.

Nonetheless, a cracking-up deck's main thought is that it'll become uneven.

 

[Jigga988]

I remember it turning plenty in 2001, when SA declared far too late believing a result completely impossible and wasted the chance to win. Nicky Boje ripped it a mile in the few overs he got though.

Nonetheless, a cracking-up deck's main thought is that it'll become uneven.

Yeah, but even by day two, if the pitch is going to have uneven bounce by day four or five you will see signs of it... The odd ball keeping low or going high we have seen absolutely nothing of that, think if anything is to happen it will be the ball turning as opposed to uneven bounce...

 

[ozone]

Nonetheless, a cracking-up deck's main thought is that it'll become uneven.

Yea, this is actually what I was thinking rather than the fact that the ball will turn more for Swann. If the track is going to break up and become uneven, I would definately back England.

 

[Jigga988]

Yea, this is actually what I was thinking rather than the fact that the ball will turn more for Swann. If the track is going to break up and become uneven, I would definately back England.

Really... not all that sure tbh, didn't make it work for you at the ARG and if there is to be uneven bounce it wouldn't be on the scale that it was at the ARG, if I were England I'd prefer turning ball, something that will consistnetly happen and that Strauss can make plans for as opposed to a ball keeping low once or twice a session...

 

[Uppercut]

Really... not all that sure tbh, didn't make it work for you at the ARG and if there is to be uneven bounce it wouldn't be on the scale that it was at the ARG, if I were England I'd prefer turning ball, something that will consistnetly happen and that Strauss can make plans for as opposed to a ball keeping low once or twice a session...

What happened at the ARG isn't relevant though, this pitch is completely different in that it's fast. Uneven bounce here will be a much, much rougher proposition indeed. That's if it happens, and I'm not convinced it will.