***Official*** South Africa in England

[zaremba]

Yes I wasn't having a go at you. I agree he's worth a run in the team, and a fair run (as Ambrose has rightly had). The criticism of him has been laughably overblown and comes mainly from people who've rarely actually seen the guy play.

He had a chance in the Test team, batted well and (in a couple of Tests) kept poorly. He went back to county cricket where he has absolutely delivered with bat and gloves. This has not been seen by those who shout loudest against him.

I'd like to make one thing clear: I don't particularly like the guy. And I don't think he's the best keeper, or keeper/batsman, at Sussex. But he is a fine batsman.

 

[fredfertang]

It is certainly open to question whether in the long term Prior is good enough at International level but what I dont think can be questioned is that this season he has earned another crack at it.

Quite apart from which although young Hodd is a decent player anything that weakens Sussex in the Championship run in suits me - now the series is over as a contest I reckon Freddie and the Burnley Express both need a rest too - Stuart Broad style

 

[Goughy]

Prior has had 22 ODI innings. After 22 Test innings, Steve Waugh averaged less than 28. You have no idea whether Matt Prior will succeed in the long term. He's being selected not on his (ODI) record but on his ability, which is, or should be, patently obvious to those who have watched him play.

Id wager ever single penny of my wifes income that Waugh didnt average well under 30 in domestic cricket at the time of his Test failure.

The comparison doesnt stand. Ok, Waugh was a failure therefore any old player can be Steve Waugh?

Prior fails because his domestic cricket record suggests he will fail. This isnt a Hick or Ramps style scenario but an other example of a poor domestic OD player being a poor International OD player.

If you look at a lot of the supposed 'suprise' failure in ODIs (Vaughan, Botham, Prior etc) they all have poor domestic records.

I actually dont mind his selection too much as I think he is as good as anything else we have but Im not holding my breath waiting for him to be a consistent ODI player.

 

[zaremba]

Ok, Waugh was a failure therefore any old player can be Steve Waugh?

Come on, Goughy, your standard of debate is usually higher than that. I'm not suggesting he's Steve Waugh or that "any old player" can be Steve Waugh - as you well know. I was merely illustrating the point that early performance in international cricket can be misleading, and that you can't read too much into his 22 appearances so far.

All the more so in Prior's case because he's yet to have a proper run in the team and he's been pushed into the opener's role (both by England and Sussex) which doesn't necessarily suit him.

 

[Smith108]

It is certainly open to question whether in the long term Prior is good enough at International level but what I dont think can be questioned is that this season he has earned another crack at it.

Since the selections of Jones, Read and Prior the only one who's done enough to impress the selectors again with good form is Prior. His wicketkeeping abilities might be questionable, but his batting's been superb.

 

[Ikki]

Come on, Goughy, your standard of debate is usually higher than that. I'm not suggesting he's Steve Waugh or that "any old player" can be Steve Waugh - as you well know. I was merely illustrating the point that early performance in international cricket can be misleading, and that you can't read too much into his 22 appearances so far.

All the more so in Prior's case because he's yet to have a proper run in the team and he's been pushed into the opener's role (both by England and Sussex) which doesn't necessarily suit him.

Your comparison is a little wayward though. Steve Waugh's legacy is that he wasn't a world-class batsman in the beginning but turned into arguably the best batsman in the 90s through sheer effort. It's not about playing a certain amount of Tests to see a player's real ability, as if the sample is not large enough.

 

[zaremba]

It is certainly open to question whether in the long term Prior is good enough at International level but what I dont think can be questioned is that this season he has earned another crack at it.

Quite apart from which although young Hodd is a decent player anything that weakens Sussex in the Championship run in suits me - now the series is over as a contest I reckon Freddie and the Burnley Express both need a rest too - Stuart Broad style

I think the Burnley Express was last seen careering into the sea at Southport. That said, I bear no ill will against your meteorologically-challenged team. After all, without runners-up there would be no winners.

 

[zaremba]

Your comparison is a little wayward though. Steve Waugh's legacy is that he wasn't a world-class batsman in the beginning but turned into arguably the best batsman in the 90s through sheer effort.

So two contradictory views have been expressed against me: (1) Steve Waugh was (already) a better batsman than his early Test scores indicated (Goughy's theory); (2) Steve Waugh wasn't a particularly good player but became one later (your theory).

If I were you I wouldn't allow myself to be too distracted by the Steve Waugh analogy which isn't exact and wasn't intended to be.

The simple point is that to write someone off after 22 international innings, played in less-than-ideal circumstances, is overly simplistic. What you should look for in a budding player is class - and Prior, as a batsman, has that.

It's not about playing a certain amount of Tests to see a player's real ability, as if the sample is not large enough.

Well if we're talking about Test performances, an average of over 40 is perfectly acceptable in my book...

 

[fredfertang]

I think the Burnley Express was last seen careering into the sea at Southport. That said, I bear no ill will against your meteorologically-challenged team. After all, without runners-up there would be no winners.

I can only interpret that comment as an acknowledgment that were it not for the inclement Mancunian weather that Lancashire would win the title year in year out

Fair play to you My Learned Friend - you have great insight and clarity of vision and surely deserve that seat on the High Court bench that is being kept warm for you

 

[howardj]

haha Bopara averages 8 in Tests and 39 in FC cricket.

This is a joke.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Come on, Goughy, your standard of debate is usually higher than that. I'm not suggesting he's Steve Waugh or that "any old player" can be Steve Waugh - as you well know. I was merely illustrating the point that early performance in international cricket can be misleading, and that you can't read too much into his 22 appearances so far.

All the more so in Prior's case because he's yet to have a proper run in the team and he's been pushed into the opener's role (both by England and Sussex) which doesn't necessarily suit him.

You're missing Kev's point, which is that Steve Waugh was never as poor a player at domestic level as Matt Prior has consistently been in List-A cricket. Matt Prior is a good first-class batsman who can score briskly, but that has little to no bearing on his ability in one-day cricket. Aside from short runs of form, Matt Prior has never looked good enough to play OD cricket as a batsman. He's just poor in that form. He shouldn't be, all things considered, but for whatever reasons, he is.

 

[tooextracool]

Prior's back , interesting decision, better for ODI's than Ambrose.

Im trying to understand the logic behind this decision. So Prior is not good enough to keep in tests and yet hes good enough to do so in ODIs? Its really a merry-go-round with the keepers at the moment and you have to wonder whether they have some sort of lottery hat that they use to pick which keeper is going to play for England. I dont think Prior's batting is good enough for ODIs let alone his keeping.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

haha Bopara averages 8 in Tests and 39 in FC cricket.

This is a joke.

In fairness, he's been exceptional more often than not over the last couple of seasons.

2007 - 960 runs at 60.00
2008 - 976 runs at 51.36

 

[SpaceMonkey]

haha Bopara averages 8 in Tests and 39 in FC cricket.

This is a joke.

From only 3 Tests. He had 3 Ducks (1 a run out) in a row which didnt help. He's also averaged over 60 in the last 2 seasons. Give the guy a ****ing chance?

 

[tooextracool]

Yep. Bopara. Oh FFS. I wonder who Owais Shah slept with? Geoff Miller's wife perhaps?

I cannot fathom how Bopara can play ahead of Shah. I can understand Key being picekd to play ahead of Shah considering that they need someone to bat at 3, but Bopara looked out of his depth during the winter and he hasnt even played a full season since. Its nearly impossible for him to make that kind of improvement so soon.

 

[tooextracool]

In fairness, he's been exceptional more often than not over the last couple of seasons.

2007 - 960 runs at 60.00
2008 - 976 runs at 51.36

What has changed since the last time he played test cricket? Im sorry but you dont drop a player and pick him again when absolutely nothing has changed. I havent read any reports about technical improvements that he has made this season and as I said earlier, a poor player doesnt change into a good one overnight.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I cannot fathom how Bopara can play ahead of Shah. I can understand Key being picekd to play ahead of Shah considering that they need someone to bat at 3, but Bopara looked out of his depth during the winter and he hasnt even played a full season since. Its nearly impossible for him to make that kind of improvement so soon.

Owais Shah has been knocking on the door for long enough to suggest that he deserves a proper shot at Test cricket, but he's had a very mediocre season. There is some logic behind the Bopara decision, in that he's comfortably outscored Shah in CC this season, and he can bat too. I don't really agree with the decision, but there is some semblance of logic there.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

What has changed since the last time he played test cricket? Im sorry but you dont drop a player and pick him again when absolutely nothing has changed. I havent read any reports about technical improvements that he has made this season and as I said earlier, a poor player doesnt change into a good one overnight.

I wasn't defending Bopara's ability to play high level cricket. Just stating that his overall average is not a reflection of his domestic performance of late.

 

[superkingdave]

Problem with Bopara is he's not really a no 6 or a no 3, he wants to be batting 4 or 5 at the lowest which messes with the team balance. Should have put shah in at 3

 

[tooextracool]

From only 3 Tests. He had 3 Ducks (1 a run out) in a row which didnt help. He's also averaged over 60 in the last 2 seasons. Give the guy a ****ing chance?

His selection smacks of the same ineptitude that has resulted in England's downfall since the Ashes in 2005. Couldnt care less if hes good enough to play for England, he never merited a chance to play for England over Shah, he got it and failed miserably and it looks like they still havent learnt their lesson. The question here should really be What has Bopara done to merit selection over Shah?
His record for England A is almost as poor as his record for England and thats saying something.