***Official*** West Indies in England

[roseboy64]

I know Hinds looked pretty dire in the home series, but he'd add more options to a squad than Dave Bernard, surely - particularly when Sammy is already there.

The selectors stated that there were some problems re: Hinds' commitment to WI cricket.

 

[Richard]

A rare chance to win back a lost trophy just about instantaneously.

Anyway, I said it when the tour was scheduled for SL, and it still applies now - I wonder when the last time a tour was penned with more First-Class tour-games than Tests? I'd bet it hasn't happened since 2000.

 

[The Sean]

Didn't realise this was only going to be a two-Test series - even with the Ashes following I thought England v WI would always be at least best-of-three. I understand that some would call eight Tests in one summer overkill (personally I'd happily give up every ODI and T20 game to fit them in), but a series as traditionally prestigious as the Wisden Trophy being reduced to a two-Test sideshow just seems wrong.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Not having a go at you, but I vaguely remember myself for calling out Bernard's selection, and you pulled me up on it, suggesting that he was identified as being talented and was picked on that, implying I was wrong, but here you are suggesting Bernard should be nowhere near the team. That I'm not doubting you, you follow it more then what I do.

If I ever championed Bernard it was a massive misjudgment on my part, because as far as I remember I've been opposed to his selection and thought his Test cap v Australia was pretty much worthless. He was never much of a batsman or bowler, and barely bowled in that Test match anyway iirc. I can't think of why I would have defended his selection.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Can't really back the decision to include Bernard. They probably feel his style of bowling will be helped in English conditions though, plus his batting. Maybe a replacement for Bravo.

The way I see it Bravo >>>>> Sammy > Bernard. They must be thinking Sammy + Bernard = Bravo, but that's not how Maths works really.

Not sure Pascal will be likely to play any Tests. Deonarine could force his way in ahead of Simmons based on how they go in the warmups. Smith v Richards as well. A four pronged pace attack of Edwards, Taylor, Richardson/Baker and one of Bernard/Sammy is what I expect.

Deonarine would probably have to outscore Simmons comfortably to get into the team for the first Test. Consistency of selection seems the go for Dyson-Gayle.

Given that Baker played the first Test on the NZ tour, I wouldn't be surprised if Pascal plays one of the Tests. I really rate Richardson, far higher than Baker from what I've seen. That said, it's documented how little I rate Baker.

Will Taylor be fit? Let's hope so for some good cricket.

 

[Slifer]

Didn't realise this was only going to be a two-Test series - even with the Ashes following I thought England v WI would always be at least best-of-three. I understand that some would call eight Tests in one summer overkill (personally I'd happily give up every ODI and T20 game to fit them in), but a series as traditionally prestigious as the Wisden Trophy being reduced to a two-Test sideshow just seems wrong.

I agree but i blame the WICB for accepting this shortened series in the first place. Then again its not like the WI have the leverage (like say India or Australia) to negotiate ne way. I dont think this 2 tests series should be for the Wisden trophy though.

 

[Richard]

Didn't realise this was only going to be a two-Test series - even with the Ashes following I thought England v WI would always be at least best-of-three. I understand that some would call eight Tests in one summer overkill (personally I'd happily give up every ODI and T20 game to fit them in), but a series as traditionally prestigious as the Wisden Trophy being reduced to a two-Test sideshow just seems wrong.

It's less a case of it being reduced to a sideshow and more one of it being reduced to a replacement.

If West Indies were of the power of the 1976-1986 or even 1986-1997 period, there is absolutely no way the ECB would have asked them to step in when Zimbabwe were debarred and Sri Lanka pulled-out.

 

[Richard]

I agree but i blame the WICB for accepting this shortened series in the first place. Then again its not like the WI have the leverage (like say India or Australia) to negotiate ne way. I dont think this 2 tests series should be for the Wisden trophy though.

Yeah, that's certainly a valid POV.

When England (and West Indies as a matter of fact) were called in to give C9 a big first summer of Test cricket in 1979/80, the TCCB refused to put up The Ashes (the Worrell Trophy was indeed competed for), and that was quite right as the series did not fit within the standard Ashes schedule. Nor does this fit within the standard Wisden Trophy one. I question considerably whether said Trophy should be up-for-grabs.

 

[GIMH]

Hmm, I always feel icky about the fact we never lost the Ashes in that series

 

[Magrat Garlick]

I dont think this 2 tests series should be for the Wisden trophy though.

Yep, agree. Very poor form. England and Australia have played non-Ashes Tests, so not like there isn't a precedent.

 

[Richard]

Hmm, I always feel icky about the fact we never lost the Ashes in that series

Icky?

 

[roseboy64]

I know Hinds looked pretty dire in the home series, but he'd add more options to a squad than Dave Bernard, surely - particularly when Sammy is already there.

The selectors stated that there were some problems re: Hinds' commitment to WI cricket.

Apparently he was on shaky ground with the selectors and decided to rest for a FC game against the Leewards after the Tests after he was warned or something like that. Only himself to blame from reports.

 

[shivfan]

Well, if Hinds couldn't score runs on the batsmen-friendly pitches in the Caribbean, then he certainly won't score runs at Lords or Chester-le-street, so I support that omission....

Good to see Simmons back in, along with Deonarine, who made runs regionally, and Richards, who deserves a chance. IMHO, Smith was lucky to get back in ahead of Barath, who could at least improve his cricketing education by playing in the three county games.

I also don't like the idea of the inclusion of Bernard. If you have Sammy, why bring along Bernard? I would've prefered to see Rampaul in the squad instead....

 

[Craig]

So Dave Bernard = poor man's Dwayne Smith?

 

[superkingdave]

With the continued inexplicable abscence of Dave Mohammed, I will be cheering Dave Bernard on this tour.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

In the absence of greatness, celebrate sub-mediocrity?

 

[BoyBrumby]

In the absence of greatness, celebrate sub-mediocrity?

Dav's an Oldham fan, tbf, so has form in that area.

MPV back in at 3? Unless he makes an absolute Horlicks of the Loins game I reckon it's a goer. If Shah's the answer we're obviously asking the wrong question.

My guess:

Strauss*
Cook
Vaughan
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff
Prior+
Broad
Swann (assuming recovery)
Harmison
Anderson

Unless he's at full gallop Sid is a passenger, Amjad had his radar fitted by the same engineer as Saj so think Harmy is the default pick.

 

[GIMH]

Anderson, Flintoff, Broad, Swann fine. It is the other position that I worry about, and as you say unless Sidebottom can bowl as he was about 12, 13 months ago, then we look short on options

 

[Goughy]

Harmison to play the first game and then be dropped or be excluded and then recalled.

 

[GIMH]

What the **** are you basing that on? Crazy prediction