*Official* NatWest Series: ENG v SA v ZIM

[PY]

So your telling me that only R.Key is silly enough to go after a juicy full ball about a foot and a half outside your off stump, that is just asking to be punished?

If he left it, he would have no doubt be condemed that he missed out on an easy 4 :rolleyes:

It was so wide, it would have been called a WIDE. Should have left it. But it is too early to criticise, if his average is the same at the end of the series then we can call for his head to be chopped off and sent back to Kent to be eaten by the locals :P

 

[marc71178]

Key has 11 runs at 5.5 in the 2 innings he's played, and he's managed to score them at strike rate of 35. Agreed he came in with the match basically won but still, trying a shot like that to your 1st ball is just asking for trouble. McGrath's got 49 runs at 12.25 in 5 games and 4 innings and 33 of them came in his 1st innings. He's got a strike rate of 36 and 1 wicket at 111.00, suddenly Clarke's 27 runs at 9.00 and 3 wickets at 37.66 look...well...bad but not as bad as they should look.

McGrath's strike rate is due to the majority of his batting thus far being in a game when he had to bat the overs rather than attack - having witnessed it, he did do the exact job needed at that time.

Clarke then came in and tried to sweep his second ball...

Also, I expect McGrath's been a bit tighter than Clarke.

 

[chris.hinton]

Key is useless and someone told me he only playing becasue he was at public school. McGrath is poor not a international player but you give him more chances at Test level. Rikki Clarke plays for Surrey but might be a great player and Ashley Giles is crap he taken 2 wickets in 5 matches and bowled in excess of at least 45 overs. Giles is lucky but in the next two years we will see a better spin bowler, Hopefully leg-spin (I hear Marc saying the Conditions the Conditions) i hopeing it will be in the bnext 2 years and the are several in mind.

Great Century by Solanki and Worcester Youth has well

Team i would play is

Trescothick
Solanki
Vaughan
Thorpe
Flintoff
Troughton
Read
Kabir Ali
Gough
Anderson
Brown/ Johnson

 

[Rich2001]

Team i would play is

Trescothick
Solanki
Vaughan
Thorpe
Flintoff
Troughton
Read
Kabir Ali
Gough
Anderson
Brown/ Johnson

The fact that D Fletcher spoke out recently and when asked about Thrope he stated that basically he wouldn't be recalled unless ulterly nessacy and that after the youth have been given a long chance in the side... So I wouldn't hold your breath on him returning if not ever, not for a long long time.

 

[Neil Pickup]

1) Key is useless and someone told me he only playing becasue he was at public school.

2) McGrath is poor not a international player but you give him more chances at Test level.

3) Rikki Clarke plays for Surrey but might be a great player

4) Ashley Giles is crap he taken 2 wickets in 5 matches and bowled in excess of at least 45 overs. Giles is lucky but in the next two years we will see a better spin bowler, Hopefully leg-spin (I hear Marc saying the Conditions the Conditions) i hopeing it will be in the bnext 2 years and the are several in mind.

1) You won't find someone more diametrically opposed to "independent" education than me, but that's rubbish. Who told you that. I expect that - as Marc said was the case with Harmison - Key's in the ODI squad to keep him with the English National coaching team.

2) You're contradicting yourself.

3) Do you want to be taken seriously or not? How many times do you want to change your mind about that waste of space? I've seen better shot selection from my Under 13s. There are many cricketers in the UK who might be a great player, there's an Under 9 at my club who's taken a 7-fer this season, why don't we play him?

4) Giles is not used to take wickets. He can match any other spinner in the country when used in an attacking role (do you remember his five-fer at Delhi to rip the heart out of India in our 2-run win?) I couldn't care less which way he turns it, as long as he has control he'll succeed. Oh, we've got an 11-year-old leggie who took 6/15 the other day. Shall we pick him as well? Then we'll answer your desires for youth players.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I must say that I find Chris' split personality quite amusing.

 

[chris.hinton]

1) You won't find someone more diametrically opposed to "independent" education than me, but that's rubbish. Who told you that. I expect that - as Marc said was the case with Harmison - Key's in the ODI squad to keep him with the English National coaching team.

2) You're contradicting yourself.

3) Do you want to be taken seriously or not? How many times do you want to change your mind about that waste of space? I've seen better shot selection from my Under 13s. There are many cricketers in the UK who might be a great player, there's an Under 9 at my club who's taken a 7-fer this season, why don't we play him?

4) Giles is not used to take wickets. He can match any other spinner in the country when used in an attacking role (do you remember his five-fer at Delhi to rip the heart out of India in our 2-run win?) I couldn't care less which way he turns it, as long as he has control he'll succeed. Oh, we've got an 11-year-old leggie who took 6/15 the other day. Shall we pick him as well? Then we'll answer your desires for youth players.

1) it been mensioned a few times by people and i just picked it up, Besides Key is crap

2) no i am not i mean McGrath has done well in Tests and should perhaps play against South Africa BUT he does not have any Longitity in the side IMO a player with Limited Ability

3) Rikki Clarke has the Potenial to be a Great Player i would stick with him in the squad for the next 5 years to see if he improves.... Give youngsters more Chances

4) Giles is not used for wickets NEIL WHAT PLANET ARE YOU ON? Spinners are wicket takers not Containers that they words of Terry Jenner you know the guy who coached the best spinner ever? You have a typical early 20th century English Attulate towards the Spinners, they Attack not Defend
Giles is poor one 5 for Justifys him being in the England team? PISH oh course you got to have Control but the English Coaches are more happy with these figures

10-1-18-0 and not created a chance

Whilst Warne and a few other would like this

10-0-56-4 ( And Created loads of chances)


Neil Pickup which would you like to have as figures

 

[Rik]

I think the problem we have is that Giles is neither taking wickets or keeping it tight, with an econ of 5.5 it hardly warrents his use as a "tie up" bowler. At the moment he's easy runs to the opposition that we can't afford to give away.

 

[Neil Pickup]

1) it been mensioned a few times by people and i just picked it up, Besides Key is crap

2) no i am not i mean McGrath has done well in Tests and should perhaps play against South Africa BUT he does not have any Longitity in the side IMO a player with Limited Ability

3) Rikki Clarke has the Potenial to be a Great Player i would stick with him in the squad for the next 5 years to see if he improves.... Give youngsters more Chances

4) Giles is not used for wickets NEIL WHAT PLANET ARE YOU ON? Spinners are wicket takers not Containers that they words of Terry Jenner you know the guy who coached the best spinner ever? You have a typical early 20th century English Attulate towards the Spinners, they Attack not Defend
Giles is poor one 5 for Justifys him being in the England team? PISH oh course you got to have Control but the English Coaches are more happy with these figures

10-1-18-0 and not created a chance

Whilst Warne and a few other would like this

10-0-56-4 ( And Created loads of chances)


Neil Pickup which would you like to have as figures

1) Get me a reliable source and I might believe you. Until then, you will find Alastair Campbell's attitude towards the BBC is marginally better than mine. Maybe several seasons of excellent performances in county cricket and a good spell at the Academy are more accurate reasons?

2) Fair enough, you just didn't make yourself clear, though don't judge him until the end of the SA Series.

3) Five years? And you can state categorically that McGrath's not up to it after five ODIs? You haven't explained why you decided that "Rikki Clarke needs to be dropped because he cannot cut it and has no sign of cutting it either" after the Pakistan match. Or why he could be great - as I pointed out last time, there are several other English players who have as much potential...

4) Do you want to actually read what I wrote, and respond to that, rather than launch off at a complete tangent with the usual diatribe? I said that Giles is not used to take wickets. Left-arm spin bowled over the wicket is never going to take wickets. Not once did I say that he ought to be used like that, in fact if you had read my report on the SA game at Lord's, I said, "Ashley Giles - STILL going over the wicket and creating as much danger for the batsman as Rikki Clarke would to Glenn McGrath's bowling average - proceeded to give South Africa the initiative back on a silver plate with all the trimmings, and several desserts". Giles' performances are more than adequate for the roles that he is told to play by the selectors, and the field placings he is given - with so many fielders back, it's very hard to go at less than a run-a-ball in ODIs.

And I would quite like to know what an attulate is. A bowler can only bowl as instructed by the captain/management - when Giles is (rarely) used in an attacking role, he justifies it, and I'd love to see it more often.

As for 0/18 or 4/56, personally I'd kill several times over for either of those figures. The problem is that most spinners in this country would end up with 0/56 as they bowl far, far, far too much crap to be useful as attacking weapons so for every 4/20 you get, you'll have as many 0/80 or worse.

So, next time you have an argument, answer the points I raise and not the ones that you wanted me to raise, and you might get somewhere.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

4) Giles is not used for wickets NEIL WHAT PLANET ARE YOU ON? Spinners are wicket takers not Containers

IMO, in ODI cricket a spinner can do either and be effective. Look at Brad Hogg...
With a bowling lineup of Gough, Anderson , Johnson (or co.) and Flintoff, I would love to have a sure 10 overs for 38 and no wicket. My point is that not all bowlers on a team have to be wicket-takers in ODI cricket and Giles is surrounded by a few decent wicket-takers already. It is limited overs after all, and whether a team gets 222/1 or 222 all out, you still have to chase 222.

Terry Jenner you know the guy who coached the best spinner ever?

He coached Murali?

 

[marc71178]

10-1-18-0 and not created a chance

Whilst Warne and a few other would like this

10-0-56-4 ( And Created loads of chances)


Neil Pickup which would you like to have as figures

Any bowler good enough to take wickets wouldn't concede 56 runs in the spell, or if he did it would more than likely indicate the wickets fell to poor shots rather than good bowling.

Personally I think most captains would take the first one.

 

[marc71178]

I think the problem we have is that Giles is neither taking wickets or keeping it tight, with an econ of 5.5 it hardly warrents his use as a "tie up" bowler. At the moment he's easy runs to the opposition that we can't afford to give away.

Where does this 5.5 come from out of interest?

This summer in 5 games, he's bowled 41 overs for 174 runs - an eco rate of 4.24. Yes, he's only taken 1 wicket, but he's not been used to attack, and compare it with the economy of the team as a whole in those games (4.47) and what exactly is the problem with his bowling?

 

[Eclipse]

Any bowler good enough to take wickets wouldn't concede 56 runs in the spell, or if he did it would more than likely indicate the wickets fell to poor shots rather than good bowling.

Personally I think most captains would take the first one.

Thats compleat Bull**** any good captain would take the 4-56.
I dont think you will find many people actulay support your view there marc.

Who cares how you get the wicket Warne got alot of wickets when batsman tryed to hit him.

56 runs in 10 overs is not overly expensive at all half of those runs could come in 1-2 overs.

 

[chris.hinton]

Any bowler good enough to take wickets wouldn't concede 56 runs in the spell, or if he did it would more than likely indicate the wickets fell to poor shots rather than good bowling.

Personally I think most captains would take the first one.

Rubbish marc and you know it, i asked 10 youngsters what figures that like and all said 4-56 because it is wickets


Marc it is 2003 not 1960s grow up a bit

 

[Bazza]

Hmmm, good one Chris.

You asked youngsters and they would prefer four wickets over none. No surprise there, but I think Marc is a bit more 'grown up' than them. (Don't hold me to this! )

Anyway, I would like to see Snape or Croft getting another chance, but on the assumption it ain't gonna happen, I'm gonna say I want Ray Price as my spinner in the England team. Ok seriously we could have worse than Giles (Salisbury, Dawson), but if he can bowl 10-0-40-1 consistently then I will be happy, assuming we play four other proper bowlers who can take wickets (Gough, Anderson, Johnson, Flintoff).

As for these comments:

1. "Should be more than enough if England insist on Troughton, Key and McGrath though!"

2. "This is the most uninspiring England side I think I have seen... In fact the poorest side in international cricket, bar Zimbabwe and Bangladesh of course..."

Well, what can I say? Firstly we didn't need them, and seondly, you forgot South Africa!

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Rubbish marc and you know it, i asked 10 youngsters what figures that like and all said 4-56 because it is wickets


Marc it is 2003 not 1960s grow up a bit

This holds no relevance to the point at hand and I agree with Marc's perspective.

 

[marc71178]

Rubbish marc and you know it, i asked 10 youngsters what figures that like and all said 4-56 because it is wickets

This is one day cricket. If a bowler concedes so few runs, the pressure is on the batsmen to try and score quickly, making them more risky against the other bowlers.

If a bowler went at 5.6 per over, it is poor bowling, and the "chances" created will be in the main from poor batting rather than good bowling.

Marc it is 2003 not 1960s grow up a bit

Ooh personal insults - great.

I won't dignify this with a response of any sort, except to say Rik and I may disagree on a lot of things, but we don't resort to that sort of post.

 

[marc71178]

Who cares how you get the wicket Warne got alot of wickets when batsman tryed to hit him.

But with Warne, he doesn't go at that many runs per over because he's bowling tightly.

4-56 suggests the bowling is loose and batsmen are cashing in.

Either that or the spinnner's bowled 4 good balls and 56 poor ones, but since he "created chances" that doesn't appear to be the case.

4-56 is inconsistent bowling.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

This is one day cricket. If a bowler concedes so few runs, the pressure is on the batsmen to try and score quickly, making them more risky against the other bowlers.

Exactly. It's only 50 overs that each team has available and, as I said earlier, 220/2 is the same target as 220 all out.

 

[marc71178]

Rikki Clarke has the Potenial to be a Great Player i would stick with him in the squad for the next 5 years to see if he improves.... Give youngsters more Chances

How will you give youngsters more chances when 1 spot is now inked in for 5 years?

Giles is not used for wickets NEIL WHAT PLANET ARE YOU ON? Spinners are wicket takers not Containers that they words of Terry Jenner you know the guy who coached the best spinner ever?

Why do spinners have to be wicket-takers in One Day Cricket? Why not containers.

If a pace bowler bowls tightly but doesn't take many wickets (similar to what Flintoff has done in the last 6 months) he's praised, so why not if a spinner does the same?

You have a typical early 20th century English Attulate towards the Spinners, they Attack not Defend

Early 20th Century attitude? Why do they have to attack not defend?