*Official* England in West Indies

[TT Boy]

Monty is worse then Kaneria when it comes to appealing. WTF was that all about?

 

[TT Boy]

Seriously, Monty has grown balls since he was dropped, he didn't so much as look at the batsmen before did he? Now he's laying into Simmons, and last night he was having words with Powell. WAG.

Wow, big man! Tucking into a clown and a newbie. If he gave Gayle chat, Gayle would just hit him into the ocean.

 

[wpdavid]

Okay, Monty's appeals can be a bit OTT. But I don't think Cozier needs to get so uppity about them being 'intimidating'.

Aye. I can only presume that he never saw Warne in action.

 

[ozone]

Wow, big man! Tucking into a clown and a newbie. If he gave Gayle chat, Gayle would just hit him into the ocean.

Well its a start TBH. Would rather see him having words with a clown and a newbie than just stand there and bowl **** all day. And actually, I think he did 'have a chat' with Gayle last night.

 

[GIMH]

Swann's gonna run through the middle order, you heard it here first

 

[Richard]

Don't be so quick to judge. Early on, he was rated as having plenty of potential, his ton in Melbourne against the Aussies in 1992 for example. His career took a fairly quick turn for the worst when he was flattened by Sid Lawrence in England. Some players just aren't the same after a nasty hit.

EDIT: Not saying he was the second coming of Greenidge as many were at the time, just that he had the potential to be pretty decent at least.

He may have had potential, I can't really comment on that. But it wasn't remotely close to being realised, and in the end he was utterly awful.

Not sure what that sickening whack on the head in '88 has to do with anything though really - he was 25 years old and had been playing First-Class cricket for just 5 years when it happened. His Test career was still 3 years from starting in earnest!

 

[Richard]

If he gave Gayle chat, Gayle would just hit him into the ocean.

Debateable. Gayle hasn't made a habit of hitting the ball very far when it's turning properly.

 

[roseboy64]

Swann's gonna run through the middle order, you heard it here first

No.

 

[GIMH]

Yes.

 

[roseboy64]

Knowing the spin playing capabilities of the WI batsmen in the middle order I'd disagree. Chanderpaul is a doubt with his injury and Hinds if he's settled will be fine against him.

 

[garage flower]

I've been impressed with Simmons so far. Seems to play pretty straight and is happy to use his feet. The slight concern about occasionally hiding his bat behind his pad notwithstanding, he's looked far more comfortable against spin than most of the other "non-established" Windies batsmen (e.g. Hinds, Smith, Marshall).

May also suffer from that not uncommon West Indian complaint: "rush of blood syndrome". His returns this season though, suggest that he has it largely under control.

How did Baker bowl yesterday (I'm fishing for positives to offset the travesty of West Indies' dismally negative approach to this test match)?

 

[Prince EWS]

Knowing the spin playing capabilities of the WI batsmen in the middle order I'd disagree. Chanderpaul is a doubt with his injury and Hinds if he's settled will be fine against him.

Hinds has really struggled against Swann all series. I think he's looked pretty sound defensively against the quicks but he doesn't seem to pick up Swann's variations in pace.

 

[Jigga988]

I've been impressed with Simmons so far. Seems to play pretty straight and is happy to use his feet. The slight concern about occasionally hiding his bat behind his pad notwithstanding, he's looked far more comfortable against spin than most of the other "non-established" Windies batsmen (e.g. Hinds, Smith, Marshall).

May also suffer from that not uncommon West Indian complaint: "rush of blood syndrome". His returns this season though, suggest that he has it largely under control.

How did Baker bowl yesterday (I'm fishing for positives to offset the travesty of West Indies' dismally negative approach to this test match)?

Relatively untheatening throughout, though did a job and was probobly underbowled, he was accurate enough and got Collingwood in the first over of one of his spells with a straight ball that Colly just missed, the second wicket he took was a sacrificial one in Broad's case who went trying to up the run rate...

 

[Jigga988]

Like to comment on the very educated Trini crowd... loved the way they was berating Simmons when he had that rush of blood against Monty and the way they've been chearing some solid defensive shots, they've really got behind their home town boy here and are making some decent noise...

 

[roseboy64]

Hinds has really struggled against Swann all series. I think he's looked pretty sound defensively against the quicks but he doesn't seem to pick up Swann's variations in pace.

Aye. Depending on how confident the selectors are in some of the youngsters making runs his spot is in definite trouble barring runs here.

 

[Uppercut]

Most captains dont know how to handle bowlers properly.

Experienced bowlers know where they get hit, or leak runs, or where their edges go, far more than a captain.

A captain can tell me what he wants ie attack, defend, balanced etc and I will set the field. Unless the captain says "I know this guys and he does xyz and I think we need this field" and then he can have a big input.

If a captain tried to set a field for me then I would throw him the ball and tell him if he wants that field then he will have to bowl to the ****er.

The hardest thing for a captain with fast bowlers is to massage the ego, appreciate the effort and pain they are going through whilst at the same time demanding that they almost kill themselves and spare no effort.

A soft batsman that is captain will struggle to control his quicks as he will never get respect. He must encourage and support but be very firm and demanding.

I thought of this post when I saw Swann fuming at Strauss's field placing, specifically lack of a second slip costing him a wicket. Why was Strauss setting a field for Swann?

 

[Richard]

WoW, never seen that post before. Sums-up the situation beautifully.

I always set my own field, even though mostly it's fairly stereotypical.

 

[TT Boy]

I thought of this post when I saw Swann fuming at Strauss's field placing, specifically lack of a second slip costing him a wicket. Why was Strauss setting a field for Swann?

Because Strauss is the captain and Swann isn't Murali and bowls to field he is given?

 

[Richard]

I've been impressed with Simmons so far. Seems to play pretty straight and is happy to use his feet. The slight concern about occasionally hiding his bat behind his pad notwithstanding, he's looked far more comfortable against spin than most of the other "non-established" Windies batsmen (e.g. Hinds, Smith, Marshall).

I think Simmons has played beautifully so far. Of course, it's relatively easy playing beautifully over 50-odd deliveries, but he's at least done that, which is more than Xavier Marshall ever has and more than either Devon Smith or Ryan Hinds have for a long time.

 

[Richard]

Because Strauss is the captain and Swann isn't Murali and bowls to field he is given?

So? Any bowler who has a clue what he's doing (and what the batsman is doing) should set his own field. You don't have to be SF Barnes or Murali to know how you want to bowl.

The captain is there to get the best out of the team. Denying the bowler the field he wants emphatically does not do that.