**Official** England in The West Indies

[garage flower]

It's as ridiculous to go into a match with Ryan Hinds as a specialist spinner as to go in with Banks in that role. Hinds is not a good enough bowler to displace Sanford even. With the current 13, I'd prefer to see Sanford there and, has Smith not scored that hundred in the semis, I'd have wanted Hinds in for him.

He wouldn't be playing as a specialist spinner, he'd be a batting all-rounder. Sanford doesn't appear to be up to scratch as a bowler, is completely shotless (though a competent blocker) with the bat and is a strong contender for worst fielder in the world.

Hinds can bat, is a very good fielder by all accounts and can send down a few overs.

The team you're suggesting would have an unproven no. 6, an out of form no. 7 and 3 no 11s in the bottom 4.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

The team you're suggesting would have an unproven no. 6, an out of form no. 7 and 3 no 11s in the bottom 4.

Rather than an unproven no.6, out of form 7, unproven 8 and 3 no.11s?

You pick bowlers to bowl, not to bat and Hinds is not worth being the fourth bowler in the team. Neither is Smith. As I've said, I wouldn't have picked Sanford, but he's the better option than Hinds IMO. Let the batsmen do the bulk runscoring and let the bowlers do their job.

 

[garage flower]

You pick bowlers to bowl, not to bat

Point taken, but effectively we'd be using the same strategy that beat Australia at Antigua (Banks - statistically if not theoretically - was a batting all-rounder).

This isn't a question of Hinds' bowling ability or lack thereof, it's about Sanford. I'm just not sure that his potential contribution with the ball is significant enough to balance the loss we'd suffer in batting/fielding by excluding Hinds or Powell.

Still, my selection is obviously pretty negative and I suppose we ought to be more positive, playing at home to a fairly average team.

 

[Craig]

The West Indies have cut their 16 man squad to 13.

All pace attack from them, Baugh, Mohammed and Washington are out.

13 left:

Lara
Gayle
Smith
Smith
Chanderpaul
Hinds
Sarwan
Powell
Jacobs
Sanford
Best
Collymore
Edwards

Which 2 will miss out?

Probably Hinds and Powell/Sandford.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I can tell you now - Dwayne Smith will play if fit. There's no way he's missing out on the starting XI from my angle.

 

[Craig]

Is Dwayne Smith under any injury cloud or are you accounting for the unexpected?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

You can never expect these things with the Windies team.

 

[Richard]

Vaughan has scored 9 centuries(and 5 fifties) in 50 innings that he has opened the batting at an average of almost 52.

Some of his great performances whilst opening:

vs Sri Lanka at lords 64 (out of 275) and 115

vs India at Lords 100 in 141 balls in 50 overs going for quick runs

vs India at trent Bridge 197 from 285 balls in 81 overs

vs India at the oval 195 from 279 balls in 93 overs

vs Australia at Adelaide 177 from 306 balls (an england score of 342, when he was out the score was 4/295)

vs Australia at melbourne 145 in 218 balls (out of 236 scored whilst he was batting)

vs Australia at Sydney 183 in 278 balls

vs South Africa at Edgbaston 156 in 286 balls

vs Bangladesh 81* in 115 balls (ok it was only vs Bangladesh but who cares)

vs Sri Lanka at kandy 52 and 105 to help save the game.

Dont care about his first chance scores, that is a phenominal record as an opening bat vs some top class opposition

So you don't care about let-offs.
So, in short, you would still be saying that was a phenominal record if every chance had been taken? Let me show you how those scores you just listed would read:
64
50
19
195
19
145
183
156
81* (it was only Bangladesh, and anyone with any sense would care - because it is as easy to make runs against Bangladesh as it is in the Championship, and Vaughan's lately proven highly adept at that. Hence it is not part of any pattern of Test-cricket)
52 and 105
This list in itself still looks pretty impressive. When taken along with the rest of the innings around then, it's far less so.

 

[tooextracool]

So you don't care about let-offs.
So, in short, you would still be saying that was a phenominal record if every chance had been taken? Let me show you how those scores you just listed would read:
64
50
19
195
19
145
183
156
81* (it was only Bangladesh, and anyone with any sense would care - because it is as easy to make runs against Bangladesh as it is in the Championship, and Vaughan's lately proven highly adept at that. Hence it is not part of any pattern of Test-cricket)
52 and 105
This list in itself still looks pretty impressive. When taken along with the rest of the innings around then, it's far less so.

every player has let offs, but it is the great ones who capitalise on it. we all remember herschelle gibbs' dropped catch of steve waugh in the wc.....if he had taken that SA would have won that world cup!!but he didnt so would u say that australia werent deserving world champions in 99???
do u know how many let offs don bradman might have had??his average might only have been half of what it actually is if the fielding was sharper in those days. don bradman never got to play quality spin bowlers in the sub continent did he....who knows if we playing in the modern era he might have had problems in facing murali in sri lanka!!!so would u say that don bradman is not great??
to quote one of navjot singh sindhus "sidhuisms"......"if 'ifs' and 'and' were pots and pans there would be no tinkers"

 

[Swervy]

So you don't care about let-offs.
So, in short, you would still be saying that was a phenominal record if every chance had been taken? Let me show you how those scores you just listed would read:
64
50
19
195
19
145
183
156
81* (it was only Bangladesh, and anyone with any sense would care - because it is as easy to make runs against Bangladesh as it is in the Championship, and Vaughan's lately proven highly adept at that. Hence it is not part of any pattern of Test-cricket)
52 and 105
This list in itself still looks pretty impressive. When taken along with the rest of the innings around then, it's far less so.

but what about first chance figures for people like Tendulkar,Lara etc.

 

[V Reddy]

every player has let offs, but it is the great ones who capitalise on it. we all remember herschelle gibbs' dropped catch of steve waugh in the wc.....if he had taken that SA would have won that world cup!!but he didnt so would u say that australia werent deserving world champions in 99???
do u know how many let offs don bradman might have had??his average might only have been half of what it actually is if the fielding was sharper in those days. don bradman never got to play quality spin bowlers in the sub continent did he....who knows if we playing in the modern era he might have had problems in facing murali in sri lanka!!!so would u say that don bradman is not great??
to quote one of navjot singh sindhus "sidhuisms"......"if 'ifs' and 'and' were pots and pans there would be no tinkers"

very good post especially the last sentence

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

every player has let offs, but it is the great ones who capitalise on it. we all remember herschelle gibbs' dropped catch of steve waugh in the wc.....if he had taken that SA would have won that world cup!!

That's very much an assumption. There were still two more games to be played and in ODI cricket, the best team does not always emerge victorious.

Also, even if Waugh had been out then, who's to say that another player wouldn't have stepped up?

 

[marc71178]

I can tell you now - Dwayne Smith will play if fit. There's no way he's missing out on the starting XI from my angle.

Did you know he injured a finger in practise and is ruled out when you posted that Liam?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Did you know he injured a finger in practise and is ruled out when you posted that Liam?

Now I do. I haven't been on Caribbean Cricket.com in a while, but now I see.

This is perfect though, because it means that Ryan Hinds will (fingers crossed) make his return to Test cricket and add a decent spin option whilst batting at 6.

 

[Craig]

Liam what was Ryan Hinds stats during the Carib Beer Cup?

BTW who won it?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Barbados won the Carib Beer Cup having been on top of the point standings, but the final of the International Shield is The final is yet to be played, which is a bit unusual, because the semis were almost two weeks ago.

Ryan Hinds didn't get to the big ones this season, but he was very consistent in scoring regardless. He was the fifth highest scorer in the comp. with 481 runs @ 43.72, a highest of 83 and 5 fifties in his 12 innings.

 

[Craig]

What about with the ball?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

He didn't do very much bowling this season, as with Best, Collins, Bradshaw et al ripping through the innings, he wasn't really needed.

Still he sent down 83.2-21-176-9 throughout the tourney, which is an average of 19.55 and BB of 4/51.

 

[Craig]

Good enough for me. I would say he and Gayle to do the balk of the spinners job.

 

[garage flower]

Now I do. I haven't been on Caribbean Cricket.com in a while, but now I see.

This is perfect though, because it means that Ryan Hinds will (fingers crossed) make his return to Test cricket and add a decent spin option whilst batting at 6.

I woudl hardly describe yet another injury problem as being "perfect" and I think that if the 4 specialist seamers are selected, we need to concentrate on the best bastman for the no. 6 position.

Powell's improved form in the SA 1-dayers might give him the edge despite Hinds' more consistent showings in the Carib Beer Cup.