Andy Flower vs Alan Knott

[capt_Luffy]

That is weirdly cheap. That's normal cable, not something like IPTV? I pay a similar amount for IPTV, but I think cable is usually in the 50 dollar range in most countries I've lived in.

Nope that's for the cable. I pay around 800 for Internet and tv combined.

 

[Bolo.]

Nope that's for the cable. I pay around 800 for Internet and tv combined.

Noice.

I knew you get good deals on phone and internet, but am surprised by the cable prices.

For reference, Malawi is the poorest coumtry I have lived in. Something like 20% of the GDP per capita of India, and full cable costs around 7 times that amount.

 

[peterhrt]

Really beginning to see this as either a generational or regional / cultural divide.

This is exactly right.

England and South Africa generally picked their best wicket-keeper until the 1960s (when John Murray and Dennis Gamsy lost out to better batsmen). Australia held out longer until 1970. West Indies and Pakistan had been more sympathetic to the batsman-keeper than India, New Zealand or Ceylon. In 1972 Wisden stated that top wicket-keepers were born not made. For some time afterwards the MCC Coaching Manual counselled always to pick your best keeper as missed chances were unlikely to be compensated by extra runs.

By the turn of the twenty-first century, with more uniform pitches and less spin, the wheel had turned full circle. Duncan Fletcher and Nasser Hussain reckoned that with a bit of practice virtually anyone could become a Test wicket-keeper. They identified Marcus Trescothick, trying him out in five ODIs before abandoning the idea when he averaged 12 with the bat. Fletcher believed all international cricketers should be two-dimensional, contributing in more than one area. He predicted that late-order runs would decide most close series. Bob Willis countered that those series were more likely to be decided by dropped catches, fuming at the selection of Geraint Jones and later Matt Prior.

One can imagine what Willis would have made of Jamie Smith keeping wicket for England while reserve to Foakes at Surrey. Soon after Smith's costly dropped sitter in Multan last week, it was no surprise to hear Hussain change the subject to say how much better Smith was than Foakes at batting with the tail.

 

[capt_Luffy]

This is exactly right.

England and South Africa generally picked their best wicket-keeper until the 1960s (when John Murray and Dennis Gamsy lost out to better batsmen). Australia held out longer until 1970. West Indies and Pakistan had been more sympathetic to the batsman-keeper than India, New Zealand or Ceylon. In 1972 Wisden stated that top wicket-keepers were born not made. For some time afterwards the MCC Coaching Manual counselled always to pick your best keeper as missed chances were unlikely to be compensated by extra runs.

By the turn of the twenty-first century, with more uniform pitches and less spin, the wheel had turned full circle. Duncan Fletcher and Nasser Hussain reckoned that with a bit of practice virtually anyone could become a Test wicket-keeper. They identified Marcus Trescothick, trying him out in five ODIs before abandoning the idea when he averaged 12 with the bat. Fletcher believed all international cricketers should be two-dimensional, contributing in more than one area. He predicted that late-order runs would decide most close series. Bob Willis countered that those series were more likely to be decided by dropped catches, fuming at the selection of Geraint Jones and later Matt Prior.

One can imagine what Willis would have made of Jamie Smith keeping wicket for England while reserve to Foakes at Surrey. Soon after Smith's costly dropped sitter in Multan last week, it was no surprise to hear Hussain change the subject and say how much better Smith was than Foakes at batting with the tail.

Will say though, I would also take Chris Read over Geraint Jones in almost all instances, not so much for Prior. As for Smith and Foakes, when Smith broke into the English team and scored 70 in his debut and a few other runs in his initial matches, the response was overbearingly positive, even here as well. I think if Smith plays a crucial knock in the next match win, most people will no longer be too mad at this drop. Like for instance, in the other India vs NZ match, Pant dropped a chance. But since he scored 99 in the 2nd innings, he hardly got it much hard. I think Smith really has to prove himself with the gloves, but think writing him off for one drop will be a little unfair.