England v West Indies, 3rd Test, Edgbaston, 7-11 June, 2012

Brass Monkey wrote:

Dello wrote: Good thinking: knacker out the probable replacements too.

Knacker out? KNACKER OUT??? 139 overs this season, that Graham Onions has bowled. Stevie Finn? 94. Overs.

In a month and a half.

What is wrong with you?

Don't come crying to me when Graham "brokey back" Onions misses the next Test with a dose of the brokey backs.

Our seamers were struggling with back-to-back Tests - now we've sent the possible replacements out to potentially play back-to-back FC/Tests.

It make-ah no sense-ah to me-ah. Which is Italian for "que?"

No other team plays as many tests as England, so it was inevitable that with all these World T20s and such that they were going to start resting bowlers from tests. Strauss was already brewing up excuses for Anderson in the post match interviews at Nottingham, saying he had a "niggle" which will no doubt be enough to "force" him out of this test. Broad will likely play but miss the ODIs that follow. Jimmy will probably also miss the three Wndies ODIs but then return for the 5 match series against Aus. Remember that? Five ODIs ridiculously sandwiched in to the schedule when they could have played a fourth test against South Africa instead. Crazy.

Roach has hurt his shin. Going home.

Is Tino going to get a game? Awesome.

Mind the windows...

Dello wrote:
Don't come crying to me when Graham "brokey back" Onions misses the next Test with a dose of the brokey backs.

Our seamers were struggling with back-to-back Tests - now we've sent the possible replacements out to potentially play back-to-back FC/Tests.

It make-ah no sense-ah to me-ah. Which is Italian for "que?"

Aye, if a bowler plays regularly he breaks. Fast bowlers in the CC play only five FC games a season. Why the f*ck aren't the selectors treating these poor Faberge eggs with kid gloves??? Anybody would think that regular bowling helps rhythm and hence form, but alas no.

"Rhythm is a dancer" - Snap. Like a brokey back might snap.

They were trying to warn us. From the early 1990s.

More fool you for not heeding their warnings.

That ' it's a passion, ohhh oh' bit in that song wasn't a quasi-soulful space-filling euphoria-generator - it was her shrieking out in agony at her back breaking. Shit, what people will do for their art. I've a newfound respect for those Germans.

Dello wrote:Roach has hurt his shin. Going home.

Jonny B did him with his Slazenger

We had the revolving door with keepers a few years back, now it looks like it might be the number 6 slot... the trouble is that should be about the easiest slot to fill in a decent Test side, batting 6 allows you to establish yourself without the pressure of being higher up the order, in the knowledge that you won't be walking out at 40-4 too often (except in the subcontinent perhaps!)

If batsmen are struggling to slot into that position, where are the successors to the current top five going to come from?

Bairstow wouldn't be the first test batsman to look out of his depth after his first two tests.

The problem for England now is that he could quite easily get a ton in the third test - and make himself undroppable for the first test against SA only for his apparent weakness against the short-pitched ball to be ruthlessly exposed again.

beamer wrote:We had the revolving door with keepers a few years back, now it looks like it might be the number 6 slot... the trouble is that should be about the easiest slot to fill in a decent Test side, batting 6 allows you to establish yourself without the pressure of being higher up the order, in the knowledge that you won't be walking out at 40-4 too often (except in the subcontinent perhaps!)

If batsmen are struggling to slot into that position, where are the successors to the current top five going to come from?

It's a legitimate concern. I don't see Strauss continuing for much longer. And then Trott,KP and Bell fill finish about the same time.

Well, Strauss is 35 so probably only has another two or three years in him at most. The other three, KP turns 32 next month, Trott is 31 and Bell 30 - certainly not veterans compared to say the Indian line-up of recent years, but there's a risk of age catching up with a few of them at once, so we need some decent succession planning.

Trott emerged out of nowhere in his late 20s and there may be more whose careers follow that path, after we try youngsters who don't cut it. Most of our young prospects seem to be the explosive type who might be better suited to limited overs cricket. There's no obvious next cab off the rank for a top three batsman and that's been the case for a while.

We should bascially start preparing for a repeat of the crap produced between 1985-2000 in about 2018 then...

We actually had some decent batsmen in that era. Gooch, Gower, Atherton, Stewart, Robin Smith etc... The problems were the lack of any consistent leader of the attack (I don't think anyone took 200 Test wickets for us between Botham and Gough/Caddick) and a revolving door selection policy. Lack of batting talent wasn't the major issue, in particular we always had at least one more than decent opener.

Oh we weren't without talent, but I remember Keith Fletcher saying during his time as coach we had 3-4 test class players and the rest were just very good county players. I'd agree with that, a heck of a lot of dross was picked for England allied to the aforementioned abysmal selection policy.

I think in the late 1970's English cricket just stood still and got complacent, the result of which was 1989.

We ruined some promising careers with all the chopping and changing. Some players were dropped and recalled again and again, we'd lose a few Tests, reach the bottom of the barrel and pick some county journeyman who happened to have got a few runs or wickets recently, give him a couple of Tests then go back to Hick/Ramprakash/Crawley/Malcolm/DeFreitas/Tufnell (delete as appropriate). That player would return in the knowledge that he may well be dropped yet again after a couple of games if they didn't perform!

There seemed to be a poor team culture where newcomers found it hard to settle, and also county cricket was lacking in toughness under the old format of one division and contrived results, despite some real quality overseas players.

I seem to recall that Hick and Ramps played quite a few tests.

taipan wrote:I seem to recall that Hick and Ramps played quite a few tests.

They did, but that was my point, the number of times they were dropped and recalled must have run into double figures. And often it was a case of dropping them without much idea of an alternative... stick a pin into Playfair 1995, oh yeah, he hasn't had a go yet... then said county nobody predictably fails and they recall Hick etc. yet again!

beamer wrote:

taipan wrote:I seem to recall that Hick and Ramps played quite a few tests.

They did, but that was my point, the number of times they were dropped and recalled must have run into double figures. And often it was a case of dropping them without much idea of an alternative... stick a pin into Playfair 1995, oh yeah, he hasn't had a go yet... then said county nobody predictably fails and they recall Hick etc. yet again!

Would have to check the dates but recall I was in England for the 1985 Ashes and clearly remember England thrashing the Aussies all over the park. Gower and Robinson getting big runs.

It's worth noting that the whole ethos of English cricket has changed a lot since I first started watching it.

There's no way Botham would have been retained after 1987 under the current regime. It was a bit of a disgrace he added to his test caps between then and 1992.

You know Goochie was also ahead of his time really, he got a load of sh!t over the dumping of Gower but would the Gower/Morris bi-plane incident happen today? I doubt it.

Call me biased but I think Nasser changed a lot of the thinking in our game, changing the dressing room from one where individuals were competing to hold onto a place to making it all about the team.

Yeah, so thanks Essex. The saviours of English cricket. Cheers.

Where did I refer to 1985? That was well before Hick and Ramprakash's time... though it was in between the two Blackwashes, despite the fact that we stuffed a poor Aussie side. First series I watched, setting expectations of us always beating Australia...

taipan wrote:
Would have to check the dates but recall I was in England for the 1985 Ashes and clearly remember England thrashing the Aussies all over the park. Gower and Robinson getting big runs.

Series between 2 poor sides, we'd have both been ranked 7th or 8th today. That ashes win was sandwiched inbetween two 0-5 drubbings versus the WI. England then lost to NZ & India at home in 1986, Pakistan in 1987, WI 0-4 in 1988 and Aus 0-4 a year later.

A woeful time.

beamer wrote:Where did I refer to 1985? That was well before Hick and Ramprakash's time... though it was in between the two Blackwashes, despite the fact that we stuffed a poor Aussie side. First series I watched, setting expectations of us always beating Australia...

Nah, Lever did.

As a Saffie I was starved of test cricket but was easily misled. Touring England wasn't easy in those days due to the shitty lincense laws. I can recall driving for a long part of the the day and then reaching a hotel jus as the pubs closed so had to watch TV I the hotel room, which mainly consisted of Gower flogging the Aussie attack. 732@81 wasn't bad.

JKLever wrote:

taipan wrote:
Would have to check the dates but recall I was in England for the 1985 Ashes and clearly remember England thrashing the Aussies all over the park. Gower and Robinson getting big runs.

Series between 2 poor sides, we'd have both been ranked 7th or 8th today. That ashes win was sandwiched inbetween two 0-5 drubbings versus the WI. England then lost to NZ & India at home in 1986, Pakistan in 1987, WI 0-4 in 1988 and Aus 0-4 a year later.

A woeful time.

While the 90s weren't great either on the whole, and losing to a crappy Snoozer side at home in 1999 is a candidate for lowest point, I don't think anything has matched that late 80s spell in terms of sustained crapulosity. Australia and a then-minnow Sri Lanka were the only ones we could beat, then even the Aussies got good. Then we went to the Caribbean expecting another hammering, and out of nowhere we actually competed.

Remarkable as well that WI haven't won here since that 1988 series. Two hard fought draws in the 90s when they were past their peak but still a real force, then the real changing of the guard in 2000 around when Ambrose and Walsh, the last two of the great West Indies fast bowlers, exited the international stage.

beamer wrote:
Remarkable as well that WI haven't won here since that 1988 series. Two hard fought draws in the 90s when they were past their peak but still a real force, then the real changing of the guard in 2000 around when Ambrose and Walsh, the last two of the great West Indies fast bowlers, exited the international stage.

They gave us some awful times when we were in their backyard, though. More than made up for the draws over here.