Oh yeah, but I meant when he was still playing cricket here.To be fair, Nash did outperform North with the bat in the recent Test series Down Under....
i thought Pedro was out of the picture?
He was a Kolpak for Surrey, but he's been released, so he's now available for WI duties, as far as I know....
I'm not a fan of Baker. I don't think he has the pace to make it at test level. And unlike Collins, doesn't offer much else....
When you consider how difficult it is for pacers to get wickets on Caribbean pitches these days, it's not that bad....
500 Test wickets IMO. At least.
Your notion that "no players from the A-team can't get into the side to face South Africa" is extremely dated Mike, we play Zimbabwe next month do you really think if someone impresses that Gibson won't consider them? especially a pacer?That's a cop-out, Windie....
The indications seem to be that the A team squad has been selected for all three tours, which includes England in May. That would mean that A team players would not be available for selection for the main team against South Africa, barring some serious injuries, of course.
The four-day domestic tournament has been completed, and Gibson is already organising a camp in barbados for players he expects to be involved in the world 20/20 champs and the Test tour by South Africa. He already has his Test squad in mind, IMHO....
So, basically you're saying that you're not sure who you want to see in the Test team for the first Test against South Africa?
incase you didn't know Mike Gibson was schooled in the English system, the same English system that called up Alister Cook to make his debut against India despite the fact that he was already touring with the England A-team.
the players i'd definitely have in the side right now are.. 
.
He'll be better than Hazlewood that's for sure!!
, btw Prince the kid is 18 years old and is starting to make a name for himself, it's not like i'm hailing him as "the new Dale Steyn".....YET!!.
.
You win Test matches with bowling not batting. And he's not the most in form batsman either way.Yeah lets leave our most in form batsman (Deonarine) out of the side!!!.. brilliant idea!!
So we should just give South Africa a load of crap to bowl out and rely on our bowling attack to save us?
lets get real man, we need to be strong in both departments, the only way we're gonna have a chance of winning is if our batsman give them something to think about, imo Deo has done himself justice since he came into the side in Australia, he got an 80 in the tests, he done well in a few of the ODi's too against the Aussies and then basically won us the series against Zimbabwe, so yes i'd say he's certainly our most in form batsman, Gayle spoiled his form after his shocking performances in the one dayers and t20's in Australia.
It's Tim Southee all over again barring the domestic success. Southee took a bucket load of wickets against a strong Indian under 19 team during their tour to New Zealand, he was then named player of the tournament at the 2008 under 19 world cup, he also took a bucket load of domestic wickets that season and made the test team a month later. Barring his game against England he's been inconsistant and in and out of the team for two years.
) and will keep that promising pacer in the squad for the tours of Bangladesh and England. Players like Holder need quite a bit more FC experience before they're subjected to run-making machines like Smith and Kallis. There's a significant difference between bowling at Smith, Kallis and deVilliers on one hand, and Mazakadza, Mahmudullah and Denly on the other....
Yeah, Shiv and Nash are both certain to play in the first Test....
