***Official*** West Indies in England

[GIMH]

Nah, what he means is that people let the bad years cloud the judgement of how good he was in his early career

 

[zaremba]

Nah, what he means is that people let the bad years cloud the judgement of how good he was in his early career

Ah I'm with you (and him).

Botham was a great player (in the tiresomely strict sense adopted by tiresomely pompous pundits) in his early years. No amount of overweight bleach-mulleted 75mph bouncers, laddish self-justificatory commentary or wretched formulaic autobiographies will ever take that away from him.

 

[Goughy]

Ah I'm with you (and him).

Botham was a great player (in the tiresomely strict sense adopted by tiresomely pompous pundits) in his early years. No amount of overweight bleach-mulleted 75mph bouncers, laddish self-justificatory commentary or wretched formulaic autobiographies will ever take that away from him.

After 25 Tests he had a batting average of 40+ (with the same number of 100s as Imran had in his entire career, 6) and a bowling average of <20 (with 14 5 wicket hauls)
Just insane numbers.

He then had the melt down/captaincy, loss of form and the injuries and was never the same. Even then, his most dramitic and amazing days were still to come that noone else has been able to replicate.

This obviously isnt just stastistical success. Anyone that saw him could see he was a rare cricketer and athlete that could change games like few others ever could.

The decline was a shame and awkward to watch, but greatness doesnt tarnish that easily.

 

[zaremba]

After 25 Tests he had a batting average of 40+ (with the same number of 100s as Imran had in his entire career, 6) and a bowling average of <20 (with 14 5 wicket hauls)
Just insane numbers.

He then had the melt down/captaincy, loss of form and the injuries and was never the same. Even then, his most dramitic and amazing days were still to come that noone else has been able to replicate.

This obviously isnt just stastistical success. Anyone that saw him could see he was a rare cricketer and athlete that could change games like few others ever could.

The decline was a shame and awkward to watch, but greatness doesnt tarnish that easily.

All very true. FTR my last post wasn't being ironic (I see that it might be read that way). The young Botham was more or less the best cricketer from my lifetime. And it infuriates me that, today, he feels he can show off about the means by which he managed to piss away all that incredible talent.

 

[Richard]

Not sure what you mean by "overestimating the bad" (ie over-rating him, or under-rating him?).

If you mean that Botham wasn't as bad a player in his latter years as some people think, well, call me a dunderhead, but I disagree: he really was that bad.

Botham between '89 and '92 was terrible. Make no mistake. But Botham between '84 and '87 (and with the ball if not bat between '82/83 and '83/84) was terrible only by the standards of what he should have been doing. He was still a just-about-Test-class all-rounder.

The way some would have you believe it he was brilliant for a very short time and useless for a very long time. This is complete nonsense. He was brilliant - absolutely sensational - for a time; moderate for an equal length of time; and, briefly, utterly terrible. The great shame is that he didn't give-up international cricket before he turned so terrible.

 

[Richard]

Nah, what he means is that people let the bad years cloud the judgement of how good he was in his early career

And I certainly mean that as well.

The C_Cs of this World are prone to use the mantra that Botham '78-'82 wasn't really all that good - he was just, so to speak, waiting to get worked-out. This is obviously absolute nonsense.

No amount of what happened after '82/83 - as Mr z mentions - will ever change so much as a single thing that happened before. Virtually no cricketer has ever had the impact he had in those few years.

 

[Richard]

What about the other 6?

Which other 6?

 

[Furball]

Of what, 5 games? No point isolating little periods. Zaheer Khan averaged 16 with the ball during his "golden spell". Samaraweera averages 100+ during his "golden spell". Hell, Gilchrist averaged 56+ during his golden spell, so Flintoff loses again. See what I mean?

Boy it is tiring to rebut arguments concerning Flintoff and Botham; players who had like 2 good years and 8 bad ones, and people still judge them based on those 2 (mostly because it's so rare that England win the Ashes). If only everyone was as kind with other players.

I've said that Flintoff is best suited to the lower order Gilchrist-style hitter role, it was pointed out that Gilchrist's average was 47, I've merely pointed out Flintoff's good average at 7 in his golden period.

Granted, the statistical sample is far greater for Gilchrist, therefore it's impossible to make a direct comparison - my point was merely that Flintoff's numbers at 7 aren't terribly far off Gilchrist's career average, and if Flintoff was to regain a bit of form with the bat (admittedly a huge "if" right now) then it's a role that a) he's well suited to and b) has had success in the past.

edit: Flintoff's golden spell with the bat was a little longer than 5 games. Statsguru isn't working for me at the minute, but iirc in 37 Tests between the start of the 2003 South Africa series and the end of the 2005/06 India series, Flintoff scored c. 2500 runs at c. 41 - averaging 43 at 7 and a shade under 40 at 6, with series averages of over 50 vs South Africa (h), West Indies (a) and India (a), with a home series vs Australia averaging over 40.

 

[superkingdave]

Completely missed Alistair Cook fracturing his finger, surprised its not been in the news more. Any one know how his recovery is going?

 

[Jigga988]

I'm not really following the IPL, so I'm not totally clear who's in and who's out, and why....

But, suffice to say, I'm quite pleased Shiv won't be playing in the IPL again, and will now be touring England. That means, only Gayle and Edwards will miss the three warm-up games.

The fact that Gayle and Edwards don't get warm up matches is pretty annoying, both could have done with getting used to swinging conditions, the only times when it was swinging in Windies Gayle looked all at sea, especially against the likes of Jimmy. Edwards was pretty deadly in the two tests he had against England last time he went there, think he could cause some trouble.

If Taylor can't play IPL, it's likely he wont play in the tests, and with no Bravo again, the big boys will really have to perform to give us a chance, and Gayle is taken out the equation somewhat with the swinging conditions...

Re. the pace bowlers would like to see Sammy in the side think he adds some control to the side that was lacking at times in the Windies series, and still has the ability to take wickets in English conditions...

 

[Jigga988]

Surprised to see all the England boys not wanting to see Shah anywhere near the side after calling for his selection for so long, tbh, dont think there's a chance he'll get dropped... if Cook is not fit for the test squad, though i'm pretty sure he will be as it would have been more heavily documented if he wasn't then Vaughan will open and Shah at 3.

 

[Richard]

Completely missed Alistair Cook fracturing his finger, surprised its not been in the news more. Any one know how his recovery is going?

WoW, missed that too, and no - usually about 3-4 weeks if it's not a bad break.

 

[Richard]

Surprised to see all the England boys not wanting to see Shah anywhere near the side after calling for his selection for so long, tbh, dont think there's a chance he'll get dropped... if Cook is not fit for the test squad, though i'm pretty sure he will be as it would have been more heavily documented if he wasn't then Vaughan will open and Shah at 3.

Generally those who wanted Shah picked for ages are different from those who are now calling for his exclusion.

Personally I'll be more than happy to see him given these couple of Tests - though if the IPL is his only preparation I'm not hopeful at all for his prospects of success.

BTW Vaughan opening is a recipe for disaster.

 

[Jigga988]

Generally those who wanted Shah picked for ages are different from those who are now calling for his exclusion.

Personally I'll be more than happy to see him given these couple of Tests - though if the IPL is his only preparation I'm not hopeful at all for his prospects of success.

BTW Vaughan opening is a recipe for disaster.

If Shah is to maintain his place at 3, which he most likely will do, then it's really the only opportunity for him to have a chance at getting an Ashes recall think it could work... This is all a bit redundant though as Cook will probobly be fit.

 

[Furball]

Generally those who wanted Shah picked for ages are different from those who are now calling for his exclusion.

Personally I'll be more than happy to see him given these couple of Tests - though if the IPL is his only preparation I'm not hopeful at all for his prospects of success.

BTW Vaughan opening is a recipe for disaster.

Interesting you'd think that, I always prefered Vaughan opening.

edit: Just looked at Statsguru from 1st July 2003 onwards (South Africa home series being when I really got into cricket) and he averages 35 opening and 41 at 3 - so I don't know what my preference for Vaughan opening was based on.

 

[shivfan]

The fact that Gayle and Edwards don't get warm up matches is pretty annoying, both could have done with getting used to swinging conditions, the only times when it was swinging in Windies Gayle looked all at sea, especially against the likes of Jimmy. Edwards was pretty deadly in the two tests he had against England last time he went there, think he could cause some trouble.

If Taylor can't play IPL, it's likely he wont play in the tests, and with no Bravo again, the big boys will really have to perform to give us a chance, and Gayle is taken out the equation somewhat with the swinging conditions...

Re. the pace bowlers would like to see Sammy in the side think he adds some control to the side that was lacking at times in the Windies series, and still has the ability to take wickets in English conditions...

Yeah, Gayle and Edwards in particular could use one of those three county games. Gayle doesn't play the swinging ball particularly well, and Edwards is not the best user of seaming conditions. Plus, bowling on the slope at Lords can be trying for novices. That's why Sammy has to play in the first Test, IMHO, because he knows the conditions at Lords better than any other WI player....

I see Shiv opted out of the IPL of his own accord - good on him!

It will be interesting to see who's in the team for the first warm-up against Leicestershire....

 

[Richard]

Interesting you'd think that, I always prefered Vaughan opening.

edit: Just looked at Statsguru from 1st July 2003 onwards (South Africa home series being when I really got into cricket) and he averages 35 opening and 41 at 3 - so I don't know what my preference for Vaughan opening was based on.

Vaughan the opener was only ever effective in 2002 and early-2003, when he had hundreds of let-offs. He has never, ever been good at opening the batting in Test cricket, and not surprisingly either. His typical method is to get to 20 or 30, quickly, and give a chance. Exactly, exactly what you don't want in an opener.

 

[The Masterplan]

I watched Ian Bell make 84* on wednesday, he looked different class. Then went on to get his 172. It was at Taunton mind, not a huge boundary by any stretch of the imagination, but he still looked impressive compared to the likes of Maddy, Trott etc.

 

[four_or_six]

Surprised to see all the England boys not wanting to see Shah anywhere near the side after calling for his selection for so long, tbh, dont think there's a chance he'll get dropped... if Cook is not fit for the test squad, though i'm pretty sure he will be as it would have been more heavily documented if he wasn't then Vaughan will open and Shah at 3.

I did want Shah in the side, preferably all four matches in WI rather than the three he got. But I didn't really realise how disasterous his running was until I watched those matches, plus I think it showed up how much of a better fielder Bell is (absolutely loads), and Shah's cramp incidents are getting worrying. Also, Shah seems to think the IPL is good preparation to keep his test spot. All these things are making me wonder about my initial thoughts about Shah in the test team.

 

[Furball]

Vaughan the opener was only ever effective in 2002 and early-2003, when he had hundreds of let-offs. He has never, ever been good at opening the batting in Test cricket, and not surprisingly either. His typical method is to get to 20 or 30, quickly, and give a chance. Exactly, exactly what you don't want in an opener.

Well, that's why my statistical analysis of Vaughan suprised me so much.

Had a topic been posted on CW a week ago about a potential return for Vaughan, I would have said "only as an opener." Yet the stats from the period 2003-2008 emphatically do not back up my opinion.