***Official** West Indies in England***

[Bob Bamber]

I don't get all the hype around Bopara. Sure hes a good young player. But did he actually do that much in the World Cup. The stand out innings was the Sri Lanka match. A match that one , I thought Nixon played a better innings in , and two Bopara failed to do the job , didn't put away the last ball.

As for Yardy. Oh my God what a poor batsman in One Day internationals. he doesn't fill me with any confidence.

 

[wpdavid]

I don't get all the hype around Bopara. Sure hes a good young player. But did he actually do that much in the World Cup. The stand out innings was the Sri Lanka match. A match that one , I thought Nixon played a better innings in , and two Bopara failed to do the job , didn't put away the last ball.

As for Yardy. Oh my God what a poor batsman in One Day internationals. he doesn't fill me with any confidence.

I know players' reputations can be enhanced in their absence, but I think 'hype' is too strong regarding Bopara. For me, I reckon he's talented, has a bit of character, and I'd like a decent look at him: especially as since the WC, he's done as much as could be reasonably asked of him. And that's all - nobody's saying he's a world beater at this stage. And lets face it, we don't produce many of those anyway. I also think you're being a bit harsh on him regarding the SL game. He did roughly as much as Nixon to put us back in the game after the so-called big names had been and gone, but eventually fell for Fernando's gamesmanship. It happens, and it's a shame, but he still did well for youngster in that situation.

Yardy? I certainly wouldn't want to see him in the top 6, as I said before. Given the state of our lower order, I can sort of see the point of playing him there. It's kind of mandatory for England to play a slow bowler who is supposed to be able to bat but can't really at numer 8 in these games, isn't it? The only one who could, of course, was Giles.

Life will be much easier if Fred's ever fit again. It would also be easier if Bell & Pietersen worked on their bowling, so we could bat properly down to number 7 and not worry about finding a spinner who can bat.

 

[Richard]

Take Australia - Bracken (s/r 29.49) and Tait (s/r 26.46) take wickets and then you had McGrath (s/r 34.04) and Hogg (s/r 36.19) all taking wickets not including the others like Symonds, Clarke and Watson.

Take Sri Lanka - Vaas and Malinga, then Fernando and Murali with Jayasuriya as well all wicket takers.

I guess we will just have to hope to have more run outs

How many wickets to McGrath and Bracken really take in the middle, though? And how often to any of the aforementioned Lankans really even bowl there - all are people who've bowled often at the death.

As for Dilhara Fernando...

 

[Richard]

I hate it to say, but I'm almost certain it's due to the Twenty20 showings. From what I've heard, Trott was pretty much set to bat #3 in the ODIs with Bell at 5 or 6, but the performances of Shah and himself respectively int the Twenty20 games changed that. Ridiculous as it is, it seems like something selectors would do. And, to be fair, Shah has been good in the first two ODIs.

He was good in his first 2 ODIs, too. I just can't see him ever making a ODI-standard player, he's had too many chances now. Albeit his domestic record has improved the last 3 or 4 seasons, and he's only played 2 ODIs in that time.

 

[open365]

Of course other sides take more wickets in the middle overs than we do, i don't know about you but i can remember plenty of times Australia or South Africa or Sri Lanka have picked up wickets throughout the innings on a regular basis.

 

[Richard]

I'd have thought so. He was one of the few players to enhance his reputation in the WC, and he was making vast quantities of runs this season before getting crocked. I'm not sure that he & Yardy are competing for the same place in the side though. Admittedly that's only based on one innings, but I liked Bopara's one performance at number 3 until he ran himself out, and I'd like to see him given a run there against India. Yardy, otoh, was palpably out of his depth at number 4 in the ICC and you wouldn't want to see him in the top 6 again. He's not the worst 7 or 8 though.

Batsmen don't play at seven or eight in Tests, though. And I'm none too bothered about people looking poor in ODIs when considering them for Tests - as I say, Yardy looks every inch not a batsman, but looks can be deceiving.

 

[open365]

Batsmen don't play at seven or eight in Tests, though. And I'm none too bothered about people looking poor in ODIs when considering them for Tests - as I say, Yardy looks every inch not a batsman, but looks can be deceiving.

Yeh but could you ever imagine Yardy playing test cricket?

 

[Richard]

Of course other sides take more wickets in the middle overs than we do, i don't know about you but i can remember plenty of times Australia or South Africa or Sri Lanka have picked up wickets throughout the innings on a regular basis.

I can remember plenty when we have, too. Taking wickets in the middle is darn difficult to do, the ball rarely lasts long enough to swing conventionally beyond the 20th over or so (at best) and is rarely old enough to reverse-swing by then.

The only way to get wickets in the middle, usually, is when batsmen gift their wickets due to the tightness of the bowling, not because wicket-taking deliveries are bowled. Therefore, you don't need a "wicket-taking" bowler bowling there, you need 2 or 3 tight ones.

 

[Richard]

Yeh but could you ever imagine Yardy playing test cricket?

No. But then again I could never imagine Mike Watkinson playing, either.

 

[Richard]

Yardy? I certainly wouldn't want to see him in the top 6, as I said before. Given the state of our lower order, I can sort of see the point of playing him there. It's kind of mandatory for England to play a slow bowler who is supposed to be able to bat but can't really at numer 8 in these games, isn't it?

Thing is, Yardy's the opposite of that. He's a batsman (not a very good one in the short game) who's supposed to be able to bowl spin, but I've rarely seen anyone look less like a spinner.

 

[open365]

But he does somehow have an economy rate of 3.2

 

[Richard]

Circumstances and pitches conspiring in his favour. When not on ridiculously spin-friendly pitches (he himself said he turned the ball more than he ever had before, speaking after his opening ODI) and not defending tiny totals on deathly slow pitches, he's got the treatment (that so far numbers, what, 10 overs).

 

[wpdavid]

Batsmen don't play at seven or eight in Tests, though. And I'm none too bothered about people looking poor in ODIs when considering them for Tests - as I say, Yardy looks every inch not a batsman, but looks can be deceiving.

Now I'm confused, as I thought we were discussing the oneday side. Ah well, back to the marking.

 

[open365]

Lets hope you're right

 

[Richard]

Now I'm confused, as I thought we were discussing the oneday side. Ah well, back to the marking.

It sort of drifted off at a slight tangent when PF mentioned Yardy's FC record, TBH.

 

[FBU]

I can remember plenty when we have, too. Taking wickets in the middle is darn difficult to do, the ball rarely lasts long enough to swing conventionally beyond the 20th over or so (at best) and is rarely old enough to reverse-swing by then.

The only way to get wickets in the middle, usually, is when batsmen gift their wickets due to the tightness of the bowling, not because wicket-taking deliveries are bowled. Therefore, you don't need a "wicket-taking" bowler bowling there, you need 2 or 3 tight ones.

Well it seems that with our economical bowlers we can't get wickets but other teams can.
I have been looking at the World Cup bowling and it is usually 4 bowlers taking nearly all the wickets roughly the same amount of wickets for each bowler. For instance Oram who comes in the middle overs takes almost the same as Bond. Hogg, almost the same as Tait. Hall and Langeveldt are not opening bowlers and they take just as many as the openers.
Aus McGrath 26, Tait 23, Bracken 16, Hogg 21
SL Murali 23, Malinga 18, Vaas 13 Fernando/Maharoof 14
NZ Vettori 16, Bond 13, Franklin 11, Oram 10
SA Hall 14, Langeveldt 14, Nel 12 Pollock/Ntini 14
(Ntini and Fernando didn't play in all the games)

 

[Pup Clarke]

Anyone else been really impressed by Daren Powell's bowling in recent times?.

 

[Richard]

Well WI keep the same team again, England go back to the one used in the First ODI. How odd.

 

[stumpski]

He's been alright, may turn out to be more of a OD than a Test bowler.

West Indies won the toss and are batting first. Chances of getting Chanderpaul out for under 50?

 

[stumpski]

Well WI keep the same team again, England go back to the one used in the First ODI. How odd.

Not that odd that they recalled Panesar, and as that weakened the batting, Sidebottom gave way to resident No. 8 Plunkett.

Nick Knight said he thought Broad might be able to do a job there.