*Official* West Indies In Australia

[Prince EWS]

I never noticed before what an interesting action Voges has .....

He's changed it as well; used to be even more interesting.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Happy to see Pollard and Deonarine get some runs. Pleasantly surprised to see Dwayne Smith having played what appears to be a mature, restrained innings. Fell asleep shortly after the start of the innings though.

 

[Uppercut]

Mature and restrained my ****ing arse. He plays like a complete clown for a 70-game career then when he comes across a situation where he actually needs to score his runs really, really quickly, he decides he'd rather practice his forward defensive a bit. With maybe the odd six in between, as long as it's not enough to give your side an actual chance.

Alright, it was always a long shot by the time he got to the crease, but that's no excuse not to even try to reach the target. He didn't even get to his career strike rate!

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Tbh, in a lost cause, I'd prefer to see Dwayne Smith prove that he actually can play with some restraint, than hit a couple of sixes and fall going for a third.

 

[Uppercut]

Ah, I like my players to actually try to win a cricket match instead. That's where we differ.

 

[Beamer]

Pollard and Smith are going to be awesome for us once we get a few people who can actually bat in the order above them.

Btw I thought Windies fielding performance was absolutely outstanding. Athleticism at it's finest and throws being fired in over the stumps from the boundary riders. It's a shame that the bowling attack and middle order batting in this series is so shocking as I can see a pretty decent ODI side being slowly built.

Dowlin and Simmons have to go and Ramdin can't be far behind if he keeps getting bowled off the inside edge. Sort it out Denesh! This is my team to face the Zimbabweans:

Gayle
Fletcher (wk)
Sarwan
Shiv
Deonarine
Bravo
Pollard
Smith
Miller
Taylor
Roach

That side could be incredibly effective with the likes of Adrian Barath, Darren Bravo, Wavell Hinds and Ravi Rampaul in reserve. Certainly it would push Australia to the limit rather than capitulate meekly like this current bunch of incompetents.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Fletcher?! He's not half the gloveman that Ramdin is, and is at very best equivalent with the bat. That would be as bad as when Baugh came in for Ramdin, which was a dark time. Fletcher may well score runs against the might of Zimbabwe, but I can't see him offering anything otherwise. Poor batsman, average wicketkeeper.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Ah, I like my players to actually try to win a cricket match instead. That's where we differ.

Well see that's where the "lost cause" qualification comes in. But hey, we differ.

 

[Uppercut]

Well see that's where the "lost cause" qualification comes in. But hey, we differ.

The cause wasn't lost, just highly unlikely. If you can hit one boundary, hitting enough boundaries to win the match is a case of being lucky enough to do so.

More to the point, what's the advantage of giving up? And why does Smith get credit for doing it? To me it's the most sickening thing a sportsman can do, under any circumstances. Even if you think the West Indies literally had a 0% chance of winning, I don't get at all what pleases you so to see your players giving up trying to prove you wrong.

 

[Beamer]

Fletcher?! He's not half the gloveman that Ramdin is, and is at very best equivalent with the bat. That would be as bad as when Baugh came in for Ramdin, which was a dark time. Fletcher may well score runs against the might of Zimbabwe, but I can't see him offering anything otherwise. Poor batsman, average wicketkeeper.

Ramdin averages 20 in ODI cricket with a strikerate of 81 after 71 matches. I am not willing to settle for a mediocre record like that. His keeping today was tres ordinary too. In Test cricket Ramdin is still way ahead of the others but in ODI's he has to go.

Fletcher has not had the best of starts but it is worth batting him at the top of the order for the balance of the side IMHO. A message has to be sent to Ramdin that his performances have been unacceptable.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

The cause wasn't lost, just highly unlikely. If you can hit one boundary, hitting enough boundaries to win the match is a case of being lucky enough to do so.

More to the point, what's the advantage of giving up? And why does Smith get credit for doing it? To me it's the most sickening thing a sportsman can do, under any circumstances. Even if you think the West Indies literally had a 0% chance of winning, I don't get at all what pleases you so to see your players giving up trying to prove you wrong.

Needing to score 150 or so runs in <20 overs with all the onus on two batsmen? Yep, that's pretty much a lost cause. Not impossible, but extremely unlikely. And as someone who has not seen much to suggest that Smith is even capable of discipline - given how often he throws his wicket away under no pressure - I'm glad to see that he can actually bat. It's a big step up for him. We already know he can play big shots, but this innings showed that he can actually score runs.

See I was thrilled to see Barath score his hundred on debut, even though it was pretty much entirely in a lost cause. Because he proved that he can bat against good bowlers. Whether he can consistently is beside the point at this time.

You have to look at the positives in defeat, and seeing Smith score runs without throwing it away is a positive, for mine. If WI had a realistic chance, I'd think differently, of course.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Ramdin averages 20 in ODI cricket with a strikerate of 81 after 71 matches. I am not willing to settle for a mediocre record like that. His keeping today was tres ordinary too. In Test cricket Ramdin is still way ahead of the others but in ODI's he has to go.

Fletcher has not had the best of starts but it is worth batting him at the top of the order for the balance of the side IMHO. A message has to be sent to Ramdin that his performances have been unacceptable.

And Fletcher averages 19 at a much lower level of one-day cricket. Why replace mediocrity with sub-mediocrity? Especially when you're sacrificing quality glovework. You don't weaken an already weak team just to send a message to one player.

 

[Beamer]

But that team wouldn't be weak at all IMHO, even with Ramdin in it. Granted taking Ramdin out of this current tour wouldn't be sensible given the lack of experience. But when Sars, Shiv and Bravo come back it will be time to give Ramdin the boot, especially if he plays against Zimbabwe and doesn't absolutely dominate.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

In the larger scheme of world cricket, West Indies is quite weak. That's why Ramdin's had to bat in 53 of 65 ODIs (with a result) he's played in. And though Ramdin is a poor OD batsman, Fletcher has done nothing to suggest that he's anything but worse. So you take out a poor player for a worse player and you obviously weaken the team. I can't see Fletcher doing any better against Zimbabwe than Ramdin would do. So there's no point there either.

If Fletcher had scored runs he'd have a case. But he definitely has not.

 

[Johnners]

Trying to figure out why Pollard is only coming in at 7?

 

[GotSpin]

In the larger scheme of world cricket, West Indies is quite weak. That's why Ramdin's had to bat in 53 of 65 ODIs (with a result) he's played in. And though Ramdin is a poor OD batsman, Fletcher has done nothing to suggest that he's anything but worse. So you take out a poor player for a worse player and you obviously weaken the team. I can't see Fletcher doing any better against Zimbabwe than Ramdin would do. So there's no point there either.

If Fletcher had scored runs he'd have a case. But he definitely has not.

Agree with this and the above. Ramdin is a far better keeper and hopefully once everyone from the West Indies islands stop being injured he can be pushed down the order further.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Fletcher is certainly doing well with the bat in the current domestic season, he's scored 294 runs thus far and will be batting on 50 not out when Leewards vs Winwards resumes later today, is he that bad with the gloves though? he's only 22 so i'd like to think there's a chance he could improve in that department, as everyone knows i'm a believer in looking at different options and i'd certainly wouldn't have aproblem with Fletcher playing against Zimbabwe, Ramdin just does my head in, yes he's ok with the gloves but his batting is a lost cause imo, he tries to be "technical" as if he's Barath but he just hasn't got it, i wouldn't call Fletcher a genius with the bat either but at least he can hit big strokes and plays with the intent of making runs, the day the likes of Ramdin, Gayle, Chanders, Benn etc have serious competition breathing down their necks the better WI cricket will be.

 

[Burgey]

Trying to figure out why Pollard is only coming in at 7?

Especially chasing 320 ffs. Get him in at 5 - game's up by the time he gets a hit.

Dire. Reckon he's the real deal tbh. Looks a very canny young cricketer, especially with the ball, has bowled some good stuff.

 

[GotSpin]

I'm always of firm belief that it should be keeping first, not additional batting skills, that should determine whether a keeper should be retained or dropped, even in ODIs.

On another note, you (WindieWeathers - In another thread but while I'm here) previously mentioned the somewhat 'promising' performances, arguable in itself, of up and coming West Indian players and how you expressed a wish for them to be fast tracked into the test team. Though I cannot exactly comment on the talent possessed by these young upcoming players, I think it would be more beneficial if they spent a couple seasons scoring prolific runs or taking bundles of wickets on the first class scene.

There's nothing worse than rushing a young player onto the international stage where not only are his technical flaws somewhat exposed due to a lack of refinement which comes from playing a lot of matches at first class level but that he lacks the experience or even the self-belief in his own ability that he can score those big centuries. While not perfect, I think a lesson can be learned from Australian selection policy, with many players not considered until their mid 20's for test selection, giving them many seasons to rack up as many runs and wickets as possible, further guaranteeing a translation of talent into results at test level. Michael Hussey is an obvious candidate to such an idea that players need time to carve up at a lower level and establish confidence in their own abilities which can further be translated onto the international scene.

Discovering a true complete talent at a young age is exceptionally rare. Take Adrian Barath for instance. His century on debt was outstanding and could be a great find by BCL. However, its clear already that Barath flays at the ball outside the off-stump far too often when the ball could otherwise be left. Rather than the possibility of suffering prolonged slumps at the international stage due a leak in his attitude and perhaps naivety, this problem could be solved at a first class level where he will be given many more chances to correct a simple technical issue rather than being dropped from test level and being discarded among the rubbish heap that is the early 21st century of failed West Indian batsmen.

 

[WindieWeathers]

I'm always of firm belief that it should be keeping first, not additional batting skills, that should determine whether a keeper should be retained or dropped, even in ODIs.

On another note, you (WindieWeathers - In another thread but while I'm here) previously mentioned the somewhat 'promising' performances, arguable in itself, of up and coming West Indian players and how you expressed a wish for them to be fast tracked into the test team. Though I cannot exactly comment on the talent possessed by these young upcoming players, I think it would be more beneficial if they spent a couple seasons scoring prolific runs or taking bundles of wickets on the first class scene.

There's nothing worse than rushing a young player onto the international stage where not only are his technical flaws somewhat exposed due to a lack of refinement which comes from playing a lot of matches at first class level but that he lacks the experience or even the self-belief in his own ability that he can score those big centuries. While not perfect, I think a lesson can be learned from Australian selection policy, with many players not considered until their mid 20's for test selection, giving them many seasons to rack up as many runs and wickets as possible, further guaranteeing a translation of talent into results at test level. Michael Hussey is an obvious candidate to such an idea that players need time to carve up at a lower level and establish confidence in their own abilities which can further be translated onto the international scene.

Discovering a true complete talent at a young age is exceptionally rare. Take Adrian Barath for instance. His century on debt was outstanding and could be a great find by BCL. However, its clear already that Barath flays at the ball outside the off-stump far too often when the ball could otherwise be left. Rather than the possibility of suffering prolonged slumps at the international stage due a leak in his attitude and perhaps naivety, this problem could be solved at a first class level where he will be given many more chances to correct a simple technical issue rather than being dropped from test level and being discarded among the rubbish heap that is the early 21st century of failed West Indian batsmen.

You've articulated your argument well, and i do understand that rushing young talent can have an adverse effect, but i guess the difference between us and Australia is that they are actually winning games so they don't really need to rush their players through, if they were losing all the time like us do you think their fans would have patience? i doubt it, Barath might have a few things to work on but if we're being honest who doesn't? Kevin Pieterson can hardly make a run these days and he's meant to be one of the best batsman in the game, so clearly even he has to work on a few things.

I think me calling for some youngsters to be included has been born out of frustration, there's only so much a fan can take when you see "stars" who either don't give a sh/t anymore (Gayle) or keep making the same mistakes over and over again (Ramdin playing the same "chop" shot that's cost him his wicket a million times), so in my frustration i search for a shining light somewhere and the shining light happens to be the number of talented youngsters we've got in the ranks right now, i believe we've got the best bunch coming through out of any nation today, would i play them in our next tests against South Africa? no, but if we bring them through at a steady pace i'm hopeful that within two years we'll be a major force again.