• 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.

Central Contracts

Rich2001

International Captain
Now while all the talk around the cricketing world has been over the inculsion of the likes of Mcgrath in the latest England team, I was thinking are these Central Contracts a good idea?

Ok my opinion is it's a game that you send your best side possible to play and all that.

So why is it every selection it's always just all the Contracts + 2/3 extra ready to do the drinks ;) ... I understand that when the contracts were issued they might have been the best players at the time, but form changes and why don't the sqauds?

While you all complain McGrath is in the sqaud, iam sitting here thinking how the hell is Hoggard still even considered???? he had an avg summer, he then toured Australia that couldn't have been any further from Anderson's fairy tale, in about 5 months Hoggard managed only about 6 wickets in all the games he played, for an opening bowler you must admit that's poor and the trouble with Hoggard is he is very much a confidence bowler so by the end of the tour his confidence would be in tatters, also he relys heavily on conditions to help his swing.

The build-up to this season was hampered by a stomach injury, but until the current round of matches he had claimed only one wicket in the Championship at a cost of 140 runs.

Yet is rewarded with a place amoung our elite and will spearhead our attack in the comming weeks.

I Understand Contracts were bought in to protect the players from burn out and allow the ECB more control over there whereabouts but should it always mean automatic selection regardless of form?
 

Langeveldt

Soutie
I see your point with Hoggard, although prior to this winter he has been succesful at home, and had a good tour of NZ if i remember rightly.. He is accurate and moves the ball at good pace. They could do much worse than pick Hoggard
 

Langeveldt

Soutie
Central contracts are a good idea, but England treat them completely wrong...

The central contracts should consist of fast bowlers who need to be wrapped in cotton wool, and maybe a few batsmen...
They shouldnt consist of the eleven you want to play necessarily
 

Rich2001

International Captain
Langeveldt said:
Central contracts are a good idea, but England treat them completely wrong...

The central contracts should consist of fast bowlers who need to be wrapped in cotton wool, and maybe a few batsmen...
They shouldnt consist of the eleven you want to play necessarily
Yep I agree with you there
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I disagree. Central contracts should include the best 17-20 players; this ensures you pick the guys most likely to play in the Test team and gives you the ability to monitor and encourage those who may be on the fringe.

Realistically, considering the length of an English FC and OD season, the main centrally contracted players (i.e. the Test players) should play no more than 50% of the season. And even then that's pushing it.
 

Rich2001

International Captain
Top_Cat said:
Realistically, considering the length of an English FC and OD season, the main centrally contracted players (i.e. the Test players) should play no more than 50% of the season. And even then that's pushing it.
50% :O

A county can consider themselves very lucky to more than 5-6 games out of a Central Contracted player.
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
The problem with the central contracts is that England treat the batsmen and bowlers exactly the same. Now bowlers need some practise to get into rythem so pick them for a game before a Test, but not much more in case they get injured. But batsmen need as much practise in game situations as possible so let the counties pick them more often. England just tend to not let the counties play their England stars other than during OD games, or 3-4 CC ones.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
I think it's more a case of trail and error at this stage - don't forget they've not been around that long yet.

There's also the fact to consider that what's good for one isn't necessarily good for all.

Take the enigma that is Andy Caddick for example. If he has a spell off from bowling of even a week or so, his bowling deteriorates rapidly. He thrives on bowling all the time. This was obvious last summer when the first couple of Tests after his injury, he struggled, but he gradually improved towards the end of the summer.

On the other hand we have the likes of Jones, Gough and Flintoff, who all need recovery time.
 

Top