Could everyone please read this quote and stop prattling on about Matthew Sinclair!? Lovely.Mr Mxyzptlk said:No. The Matthew Sinclair who represented Jamaica is Jamaican, a wicketkeeper and nowhere near as good a batsman.
devon smith picks himself?from what i saw of him against australia i thought he was pretty ordinary and his technique looked horrible even on those west indian pitches.garage flower said:Any thoughts on starting XIs for the 1st test. My Windies side would be as follows:
Gayle
Devon Smith
Sarwan
Lara
Chanderpaul
Dwayne Smith
Jacobs
Mohammed
Best
Collymore
Washington
The top 7 pretty much pick themselves, with Dwayne Smith's selection now pretty much certain after his performance in the Carib Beer Semi (century and 3 or 4 wkts).
Not sure about Mohammed being the 1st choice spinner, but I think a spinner should be included. Sanford was the one really bad selection in the 16 in my opinion and from what I've read about Washington I'd chuck him in ahead of Edwards, who needs to improve his accuracy significantly from the SA series before he returns.
Given the squad I would pick Washington and Mohammed, but I was never a fan of the named 16.garage flower said:Presumably you'd go for Sanford and Fidel then, from the 16 selected?
only pick Giles if conditions suittooextracool said:wow from 78/2 vice chancellors XI stumbled to 119 all out. harmison took 4 wickets, good to see hes finally proved himself, while jones took 3 although all he did was just clean up the tail.
quite a dilemma over which 4 bowlers are gonna make the starting line up against the WI.
id say hoggard,harmison,jones, giles with flintoff as all rounder
And England have come undone plenty of times when Giles has played.SpaceMonkey said:Everytime england go into a game without a spinner even on the most bowler friendly pitches we've come undone. Giles has to play, and probably Anderson to miss out.
WRT this whole thing: Innes replaced Kirtley last season, without question. Innes' first season with Sussex was 2002, and his maiden century was made in 2003. I remember with certainty, b'coz I thought "how on Earth did a rubbish player like Innes score a century?"marc71178 said:I remembered it was a debut ton, but not who got it
Good point with Fleming, that probably settles it once and for all - it wasn't last season!
Harmison, "finally proved himself"?tooextracool said:wow from 78/2 vice chancellors XI stumbled to 119 all out. harmison took 4 wickets, good to see hes finally proved himself, while jones took 3 although all he did was just clean up the tail.
quite a dilemma over which 4 bowlers are gonna make the starting line up against the WI.
id say hoggard,harmison,jones, giles with flintoff as all rounder
What a positive person you are.Richard said:Basically, this amounts to two proven Test-batsman, two everyone would love to think are proven, one supposed all-rounder who has basically had one good series with the bat, one totally unproven wicketkeeper with the bat, and no proven bowlers unless the conditions suit spin.
I'd hate to think what you'd make of the west indies team :ORichard said:
Basically, this amounts to two proven Test-batsman, two everyone would love to think are proven, one supposed all-rounder who has basically had one good series with the bat, one totally unproven wicketkeeper with the bat, and no proven bowlers unless the conditions suit spin.
"Basically, this amounts to two proven Test-batsman, two who have taken big strides toward being proven, one all-time great batsman, no genuine all-rounder , one proven gritty wicketkeeper with the bat and solid with the gloves, and no proven bowlers."SpaceMonkey said:I'd hate to think what you'd make of the west indies team :O
i see three proven batsmen, hussain,vaughan and thorpe.Richard said:Basically, this amounts to two proven Test-batsman, two everyone would love to think are proven, one supposed all-rounder who has basically had one good series with the bat, one totally unproven wicketkeeper with the bat, and no proven bowlers unless the conditions suit spin.
chris read has never proven himself with the bat at the international level so i dont see why u call him a "proven gritty keeper""Basically, this amounts to two proven Test-batsman, two who have taken big strides toward being proven, one all-time great batsman, no genuine all-rounder , one proven gritty wicketkeeper with the bat and solid with the gloves, and no proven bowlers."
No. But would you agree Ridley Jacobs is? I believe Liam was talking about his dear West Indies.tooextracool said:chris read has never proven himself with the bat at the international level so i dont see why u call him a "proven gritty keeper"