• 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 Tour of West Indies 2019

Starfighter

Starfighter

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Seems like bits of your mind are poles apart in deciding what you're trying to say. And I have grasped your point, both when you've said it's your point and when you've said your point isn't your point even though it's your point.
 
Last edited:
Woodster

Woodster

International Captain
Starfighter said:
Seems like bits of your mind are poles apart in deciding what you're trying to say. And I have grasped your point, both when you've said it's your point and when you've said your point isn't your point even though it's your point.
Click to expand...
:laugh::laugh: Ok, we’ll agree to very much disagree.
 
Bijed

Bijed

International Regular
Maybe it's a particularly English thing, but it's pretty common over here to hear pundits (and people in and around the team set up) talk about, rightly or wrongly (mostly wrongly tbh) bringing in player x because they'd offer variety. Pundits are particularly bad for making a case for such players when they're nowhere near to being good enough.

Pretty sure all Woodster is getting at is if he had to select from a pool of players with very similar overall stats, he'd work in as much variety as he could because he'd expect it to make the team more than the sum of it's parts, which is an entirely reasonable position.

Similarly, I think all he's saying about Wood is if he's fully fit and bowling consistently as fast as he can, he'd back him to take enough wickets to be worth selecting even if he is expensive as the number of bowling options we've got mean he's somewhat covered on a bad day. He's explicitly said he'd prefer others to Wood if he's not at full fitness

Fwiw, I think a 'peak' Wood is too rare an occurrence (and I personally have low confidence in him to be consistent in ODIs even at full fitness) for him to be worth sticking with
 
Woodster

Woodster

International Captain
Bijed said:
Maybe it's a particularly English thing, but it's pretty common over here to hear pundits (and people in and around the team set up) talk about, rightly or wrongly (mostly wrongly tbh) bringing in player x because they'd offer variety. Pundits are particularly bad for making a case for such players when they're nowhere near to being good enough.

Pretty sure all Woodster is getting at is if he had to select from a pool of players with very similar overall stats, he'd work in as much variety as he could because he'd expect it to make the team more than the sum of it's parts, which is an entirely reasonable position.

Similarly, I think all he's saying about Wood is if he's fully fit and bowling consistently as fast as he can, he'd back him to take enough wickets to be worth selecting even if he is expensive as the number of bowling options we've got mean he's somewhat covered on a bad day. He's explicitly said he'd prefer others to Wood if he's not at full fitness

Fwiw, I think a 'peak' Wood is too rare an occurrence (and I personally have low confidence in him to be consistent in ODIs even at full fitness) for him to be worth sticking with
Click to expand...
I agree with all of that. A ‘peak’ Wood is indeed a rare beast, which is a shame. I think until recent times with the emergence of Olly Stone and the soon to be available Joffra Archer we have had very few options to fulfil the role of our out and out quick bowler and perhaps explains why Wood has been given so many chances to impress and make the spot his own. Whether you agree with having variety in the side or not, you can’t really argue that our attack has looked too ‘samey’ and ‘one-paced’ on more than the odd occasion, perhaps this stands out more so in Test cricket, but it still applies in ODI’s when our pace attack is predictable and if conditions aren’t conducive to that style of bowling we have no options.
 
FBU

FBU

International Debutant
Woodster said:
There cannot be a significant difference in ability, I’ve said this previously. If you are going to significantly weaken your side by opting for a player based purely on variety then obviously you don’t do it, just didn’t think that needed explaining in greater detail.

As for your roles within the team, if you think players roles are defined in such generic terms such as ‘a spinner’, ‘a middle order batsman’, then I’m not completely convinced I’m the silly one. We’re talking elite level cricket here, not an under 13’s game on a Sunday morning.

I’m not entirely sure what to make of your last point but from what I understand you think your best XI players should be selected regardless of any specific roles set out? What I agree with, is the best XI players for the relevant roles should be selected, I think Mark Wood is probably the best ‘fast’ bowler we have available right now for this series, if he’s bowling at mid 80’s he’s not the best for that role.
Click to expand...
:-O

It's not about bowling 95mph, but having lots of variations. Not noticed any from Wood. Curran has a strike rate of 27.5 like Boult, Starc, Coulter-Nile. Wood's is 53.8. Is he in the team just to frighten the opposition?
 
Woodster

Woodster

International Captain
FBU said:
:-O

It's not about bowling 95mph, but having lots of variations. Not noticed any from Wood. Curran has a strike rate of 27.5 like Boult, Starc, Coulter-Nile. Wood's is 53.8. Is he in the team just to frighten the opposition?
Click to expand...
See previous 30 posts!
 
Woodster

Woodster

International Captain
FBU said:
He will probably get a 5fer today now that I have said he shouldn't be in the team.
If West Indies go with the same bowling attack and England bat first there is a chance of a 500.
Click to expand...
Well I've made opinion fairly clear on this, and if certain other bowlers were available I'd agree.

Hope he does get a 5fer though!
 
Daemon

Daemon

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Never forget that time he defended 6 off the last over against Morris and Miller who were smashing it to all parts

Was a proper choke
 
Beamer

Beamer

International Vice-Captain
Missed the first ODI due to a work trip, looks like carnage! Our bowling is terrible and England's batting is awesome. Not a good combination.

Bishoo and Nurse appear to have been exposed yet again as ineffective yet are persisted with whilst Pooran gets one innings to prove himself. Awful.

Bringing in cotterell is a good move though.
 
Beamer

Beamer

International Vice-Captain
Carlos Braithwaite really does weaken our line up. Awful in this first and here he is batting at 7?

Awful selection. They are so far off with this ODI team bowling attack it's unreal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top