*Official* England in West Indies

[fredfertang]

Davies doesn't excite people because he is not particularly quick but his record is excellent - the cupboard may well look pretty bare come July and by then he may have an irrestible claim to selection

 

[BoyBrumby]

If the pitch swings then Davies could be a threat, but we already have Jimmeh, Sid & Hoggy for that eventuality. He'll be fodder on a flat deck.

Plus I'm not sure another permanently buggered seamer is exactly what we need.

 

[Prince EWS]

Mark Davies WTF, Hahahaha.

2004 - 50 wickets @ 18.76
2005 - 49 wickets @ 16.53
2006 - only played one game and got injured
2007 - 34 wickets @ 24.23
2008 - 41 wickets @ 14.63

Those are ridiculous looking stats to never get a look in with. I've never actually seen him bowl so I don't bang on about it, but surely he's worth a go on figures alone.

The fact that he seems to get injured so regularly probably counts against him and that's fair enough I guess, but anyone who racks up those sort of figures deserves better than "WTF, Hahahaha".

 

[sammy2]

Tino Best: “I don’t want to disrespect Daren Powell, but he is looking a bit tired and that is my spot. It would be great to run in with Fidel [Edwards] again.”

 

[shivfan]

Jamaicaobserver

We need to keep momentum going

NASH'S NOTES

BRENDAN NASH

Tuesday, March 03, 2009

It was always going to be difficult to get a win on such a batting-friendly pitch. Yesterday the bowlers tried hard... they gave it everything they had, but it was very hard going. We just didn't take enough wickets early on and the game just drifted after that.

Unfortunately for me I missed a catch and Alastair Cook went on to make a century. I just didn't quite get to it, I was running back into this very strong breeze that was actually blowing back against me.

In the end I actually thought the ball was a little bit closer to me than it was and in the end I had to lunge and dive and couldn't quite get the fingers on it. But that's one of those things. Had that catch been taken, you never know what could happen but that's the kind of thing you need on a day like today (yesterday). You need to be able to take the half chances and put pressure on the batting team.

Having said all that, England batted very well on what was a very good batting pitch and a very good outfield.

I have to say these are probably the best batting conditions I have come across in the Caribbean. It was definitely suited for the batsmen and bowlers had to work very, very hard. The scores tell the story.

Towards the end though, the spinners were getting a little bit out of it.

Now we go to Trinidad 1-0 up with one to play, it is important that we recognise that we can't just say 'okay we can't lose the series so let whatever happen, happen'. We can't do that. We have built some good momentum since New Zealand.

We drew that Test series, we have come back here and won at Sabina Park and now we have drawn twice, so now we have to keep that momentum going.

We need to keep fighting and keep on with the good work.

As Nash says, the WI have built some good momentum after New Zealand....

Can they take that into the Trinidad Test?

Does this column come out in the Jamaica Observer after every test?

 

[Richard]

Tino Best: “I don’t want to disrespect Daren Powell, but he is looking a bit tired and that is my spot. It would be great to run in with Fidel [Edwards] again.”

Maybe he should've thought about that before he decided the ICL was the thing then, shouldn't he?

 

[ozone]

Maybe he should've thought about that before he decided the ICL was the thing then, shouldn't he?

Is he qualified to play or not do we know? Cos if, having left the IPL, he is, surely this gives a lot more players (read Bond) hope of playing international cricket again.

 

[Richard]

If the pitch swings

Now that is a WTF-ish statement. Swing has nothing to do with the pitch whatsoever (it's completely reliant on the ball) and rather takes the pitch out of the equation.

He'll be fodder on a flat deck.

There's actually a decent bit of evidence suggesting Davies would be capable of keeping it tight far more effectively than most on a deck offering no seam-movement. He'd not be very likely to bowl many wicket-taking deliveries, but he's probably far less likely to go around the park than most others.

And let's face it, England don't have so much as one bowler apart from Flintoff who can extract anything from an even, non-seaming deck. If the ball's not doing anything through the air and Flintoff's crocked, England are buggered. The best you can hope for under such eventuality is bowlers who can keep it tight, rather than picking utterly hopeless types like Mahmood in the completely vain hope they'll be able to produce the wicket-taking deliveries.

 

[Richard]

Is he qualified to play or not do we know? Cos if, having left the IPL, he is, surely this gives a lot more players (read Bond) hope of playing international cricket again.

Haven't a clue, but I imagine players will have to demonstrate a little while at worst of having defected away from the ICL before being allowed back to international cricket.

And as I say every single time this issue arises, Bond is pretty old now and is unlikely to have anything much to offer should he play another year or so of ODIs (he'd already decided to retire from Tests before taking the ICL offer).

 

[sammy2]

“I’m still the quickest bowler in the Caribbean. Ask any of the local commentators and they’ll say that. I have one of the best records for Barbados and I’m still the quickest without a doubt.

 

[ozone]

Haven't a clue, but I imagine players will have to demonstrate a little while at worst of having defected away from the ICL before being allowed back to international cricket.

And as I say every single time this issue arises, Bond is pretty old now and is unlikely to have anything much to offer should he play another year or so of ODIs (he'd already decided to retire from Tests before taking the ICL offer).

On Bond - last year he played for Hampshire in the early season and was quality. He was far and away the best bowler I saw play down there all season (albeit, our overseas player was a certain Darren Powell later in the season). I know its a year on, but he still looked handy a year ago and I wouldn't mind betting that NZ would be a much better side for the next 2 years at least.

 

[Richard]

On Bond - last year he played for Hampshire in the early season and was quality. He was far and away the best bowler I saw play down there all season (albeit, our overseas player was a certain Darren Powell later in the season).

TBF, Powell played in 2007. In 2008, it was Imran Tahir who replaced Bond, and I bet most were left wishing Imran had simply been signed for the entire campaign, much as Bond's seven-for was surely indeed a fair performance.

I know its a year on, but he still looked handy a year ago and I wouldn't mind betting that NZ would be a much better side for the next 2 years at least.

If Bond lasts the next 2 years in a fit state to bowl 10 overs in every ODI NZ play in that time I'll eat my computer.

 

[ozone]

TBF, Powell played in 2007. In 2008, it was Imran Tahir who replaced Bond, and I bet most were left wishing Imran had simply been signed for the entire campaign, much as Bond's seven-for was surely indeed a fair performance.

Ha oops, I thought there was something not quite right as I was writing that, but cba to check it. Point still stands though, Bond was the best bowler to play down there last season. And I had OD cricket in mind, rather than the CC stuff.

If Bond lasts the next 2 years in a fit state to bowl 10 overs in every ODI NZ play in that time I'll eat my computer.

Easy to say when we'll never know.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Now that is a WTF-ish statement. Swing has nothing to do with the pitch whatsoever (it's completely reliant on the ball) and rather takes the pitch out of the equation.

It's not, no. Atmospheric conditions play a part.

My meaning was apparent anyway, when the ball doesn't swing Davies has little to recommend him.

There's actually a decent bit of evidence suggesting Davies would be capable of keeping it tight far more effectively than most on a deck offering no seam-movement. He'd not be very likely to bowl many wicket-taking deliveries, but he's probably far less likely to go around the park than most others.

And let's face it, England don't have so much as one bowler apart from Flintoff who can extract anything from an even, non-seaming deck. If the ball's not doing anything through the air and Flintoff's crocked, England are buggered. The best you can hope for under such eventuality is bowlers who can keep it tight, rather than picking utterly hopeless types like Mahmood in the completely vain hope they'll be able to produce the wicket-taking deliveries.

There is? What?

& playing a swing bowler who can keep it tight worked well with Sidebottom at Bridgetown, eh? You seem to be advocating just hoping we'll pick up wickets, was is bizarre even by your Olympian heights of cobblers.

The only seam-up bowler who got anything out of the pitch was Edwards and that was because he bent his back and bowled with genuine pace. If we'd played Harmison or Khan the result would've almost certainly been the same, but they'd have at least been a different option to turn to.

 

[Woodster]

Bond is an oustanding bowler, such a shame he is not available for international cricket. Some may say he made his choice, although there was an element of backtracking from the NZ cricket board.

Hampshire were probably surprised as to the extent of Imran Tahir's performances last season. They could not have imagined for as much success as he brought. Has had a pretty decent season for Titans in the SuperSport series so far also.

 

[Richard]

It's not, no. Atmospheric conditions play a part.

They play a part, certainly, but a good bowler with a good ball will achieve swing whatever the atmospheric conditions.

My meaning was apparent anyway, when the ball doesn't swing Davies has little to recommend him.

Might've been a good idea to say that then, rather than blurring the issue of swinging balls and seaming pitches.

There is? What?

Look at his figures for Durham on flat pitches. On the seaming, uneven ones he's been economical and lethal; on the even, non-seaming ones he's been economical and unpenetrative. He seems to possess accuracy beyond most bowlers.

& playing a swing bowler who can keep it tight worked well with Sidebottom at Bridgetown, eh?

Sidebottom couldn't keep it tight at Kensington Oval - in case you missed it, he went for 4-an-over. That isn't keeping it tight. At Sabina Park, however, he managed the role well indeed.

I've said many times that there's no place in Test cricket for a bowler whose only ability is to bowl economically. However, on pitches such as Kensington Oval, England have a sum-total of one bowler who can do anything more than that, and he's currently injured... again. If you can't bowl wicket-taking deliveries (and there's no-one available to England who's fit as of this post who can do that in conditions like we had at Kensington) then bowling economically with no penetration is simply better than bowling expensively with no penetration.

You seem to be advocating just hoping we'll pick up wickets, was is bizarre even by your Olympian heights of cobblers.

Well when your choice is between hoping you'll pick-up wickets and, well... hoping you'll pick-up wickets, it's not really a surprise that hoping you'll pick-up wickets is the choice which ends-up being made.

Some people don't like that, with no Flintoff, England's only chance to pick-up wickets on flat pitches with a ball that doesn't swing for long is to hope. But that's the reality. You can try as many rubbish bowlers as you want - the fact is England currently have one bowler and one bowler only who actually offers penetration on all surfaces with all condition of cricket balls. And he's a regular crock.

The only seam-up bowler who got anything out of the pitch was Edwards and that was because he bent his back and bowled with genuine pace. If we'd played Harmison or Khan the result would've almost certainly been the same, but they'd have at least been a different option to turn to.

A different option which achieves the same end is no different, really.

 

[Jigga988]

Tino Best: “I don’t want to disrespect Daren Powell, but he is looking a bit tired and that is my spot. It would be great to run in with Fidel [Edwards] again.”

What the hell is Tino on about... why is the guy speaking up when he knows he can't play for us... although by the way you'd hear him you'd think he could.... Hate to see someone criticising existing players like that, as if you would ever catch an England player say something like that.

and btw, re. Davies, the guy must keep it relatively tight to have such high averages, can't say I've seen him bowl more than once in the past two years...

Congrats to the English selectors for picking Batty , seriously what a joke that is, and I'm relatively sure he'll play too (Rashid isn't accurate enough as yet to play in OD's)

it's not whether a man looks plump or not that decides his fitness btw, England mentioned a fitness test and he didn't pass, when he had passed a year ago, so to say that he's just naturally plump or naturally unfit is a bit ludacrist...

Had a bit of a chuckle at the suggestion of fining teams for flat pitches, how could the ICC just call it a flat pitch when it could've just been good batting or bad bowling, its a fine line. There are some painfully obvious ones in subcontinent, but I don't think the plan would ever really come to fruition...

 

[roseboy64]

As Nash says, the WI have built some good momentum after New Zealand....

Can they take that into the Trinidad Test?

Does this column come out in the Jamaica Observer after every test?

He writes one after every day's play. They're sponsored by the company he works for. Is a coach for them, an insurance company.

 

[Richard]

Had a bit of a chuckle at the suggestion of fining teams for flat pitches, how could the ICC just call it a flat pitch when it could've just been good batting or bad bowling, its a fine line. There are some painfully obvious ones in subcontinent, but I don't think the plan would ever really come to fruition...

There can obviously be no case where I$C$C ever fines boards for pitches. The ludicrous thing, though, is that people make threatening noises (that's all they can do, they can't actually act on these threats because there's no protocol on which to do so) about pitches which actually offer something (be it lots and lots of turn or lots and lots of seam) while nothing is said about stupidly flat ones.

A stupidly flat pitch is far more damaging for the game than an extreme seamer \ extreme turner. If one should receive censure (and neither should BTW) then it should be the former and not the latter.

 

[Richard]

Bond is an oustanding bowler, such a shame he is not available for international cricket. Some may say he made his choice, although there was an element of backtracking from the NZ cricket board.

He'd already made his choice to retire from Test cricket before he went the ICL route though, that's the thing so many people seem to gloss-over. It is a bit of a shame he's not been playing ODIs for the past year-and-a-bit, but even so, it doesn't bother me massively, as he'd have been very unlikely to have played in the 2010/11 World Cup.

Hampshire were probably surprised as to the extent of Imran Tahir's performances last season. They could not have imagined for as much success as he brought. Has had a pretty decent season for Titans in the SuperSport series so far also.

Oh, no-one would've been saying that Imran should've been signed from the start of the season - I just bet they wish they had done. There is no conceivable circumstance under which they might, though, save a complete and totally random punt.