Re: Is Prior worth it?

by Rachel Thu 20 Dec 2007, 17:48

Spoiler:

by eowyn Thu 20 Dec 2007, 17:52

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

by eowyn Thu 20 Dec 2007, 17:54

Rachel wrote:
Spoiler:

Spoiler:

by DJ_Smerk Thu 20 Dec 2007, 17:56

Will Prior take a catch?

Don't spoil the surprise for me!

by eowyn Thu 20 Dec 2007, 18:10

What?

by Basil Thu 20 Dec 2007, 18:17

Is Prior worth (sh)it?

No effing way!

I'd pick Foster. Not sure what he's done wrong really - not bald enough? doesn't sledge enough?

It's too early for Davies - he had a poor season with the bat this year, a few decent knocks towards the end of the campaign can't disguise that. He would be found out at test level until his footwork improves.

by Eric Air Emu Thu 20 Dec 2007, 18:31

As Dello has intimated Mustard's a ridiculous slogger at the moment- he'll make us pine for Prior.

Prior actually did really well in the first two tests- but 3 drops in an innings on top of all the drops in the summer makes you suspect he just doesn't have the basic keeping ability. Bit like a Parthiv Patel or Deep Dasgupta really.

Pick Jon Batty, you'll be pleasantly surprised.

by JKLever Thu 20 Dec 2007, 20:43

Eric Air Emu wrote:

Pick Jon Batty, you'll be pleasantly surprised.

Too slurrey.

by Chivalry Augustus Sun 23 Dec 2007, 16:35

The Times have a little article on Prior today. He has cost 350 runs thus far with his drops. The net from runs scored - runs cost is 212, from seventeen innings.

It means our average gain from our keeper per innings is 12.47 runs. Prior's batting average is currently 40.

by Gary 111 Sun 23 Dec 2007, 19:38

Oh dear,

How many catches has Prior been dropping now?

For me Prior should be nowhere near the team. With our current lack of strike bowlers (Flintoff and Jones injured, Harmison unfortunately fit) it means we have to take every chance that comes our way - as the next one doesn't usually come for a while.

by Guest Sun 23 Dec 2007, 21:52

Eric Air Emu wrote:

Pick Jon Batty, you'll be pleasantly surprised.

I have long wondered why Batty didn't get a go.

by JKLever Sun 23 Dec 2007, 22:08

He may as well, at this rate everybodys going to get a go

by horace Mon 24 Dec 2007, 00:54

why not give the gloves to slaw...he's nastier than prior, more likely to take a catch and make a few runs...

by Zat Tue 25 Dec 2007, 08:41

Hey Prior, you're crap!

by Eric Air Emu Wed 26 Dec 2007, 12:33

In fairness Batty's a huge crab opening the batting for Surrey- which would be no bad thing for England on the face of things. At county level though if you can't dominate attacks from time to time you probably just don't have the range of shots or general class to play test cricket. I think Batty could be just a runless stonewaller given the chance and so I'll have to withdraw his name from the 'reckoning'.

by The One Wed 26 Dec 2007, 13:51

Augustus wrote:The Times have a little article on Prior today. He has cost 350 runs thus far with his drops. The net from runs scored - runs cost is 212, from seventeen innings.

It means our average gain from our keeper per innings is 12.47 runs. Prior's batting average is currently 40.

that would be negative without the series against the windies one would imagine

by Basil Wed 26 Dec 2007, 23:00

Augustus wrote:The Times have a little article on Prior today. He has cost 350 runs thus far with his drops. The net from runs scored - runs cost is 212, from seventeen innings.

It means our average gain from our keeper per innings is 12.47 runs. Prior's batting average is currently 40.

If proof were needed...............

by lardbucket Fri 14 Nov 2008, 11:51

England's selectors way behind the FB crew on this issue.

Spoiler:

by taipan Fri 14 Nov 2008, 11:55

lardbucket wrote:England's selectors way behind the FB crew on this issue.

Spoiler:

Aren't all selectors?

by Big_Bad_Bob Sat 15 Nov 2008, 12:36

Prior is a hopeless keeper, an over-rated batsman and, from what I've observed, of decidedly dubious character.

He did enough to suggest that there had been enough of an improvement in his keeping at the end of the last English summer to earn a run in the side though, as his fragile batting still seems beyond question.

It's just a question of which aspect of his game completely implodes first for me though - and how soon after the other follows if he's still in the side by then.

by Chivalry Augustus Sat 15 Nov 2008, 12:53

I hate the guy absolutely but it's not as if there are brilliant options out there for England. We ought really to have gone with Steven Davies and backed him to be our keeper for a dozen years in all forms of the game. Instead we went with knobber-boy Peter Sussex's love-child number one. Thankfully, we've seen a bit of progress as love-child number two was finally discarded yesterday.

by Big_Bad_Bob Sat 15 Nov 2008, 13:00

Not sure about Davies, but aye, they certainly find themselves backed themselves into another corner now with the keeping situation.

Fark knows where they will go next, as they will surely have to sooner rather than later IMO.

Amen to your final point though.

by Chivalry Augustus Sat 15 Nov 2008, 13:24

It goes to show that England's selectors have no identifiable strategy in any situation.

Australia's ethos revolves strongly around promoting mental strength, allowing players of potential to experience a tough apprenticeship in Shield cricket. Often, they'll drop players and tell them to get better. In contrast, England drop players and bring them back later when they have played no cricket on the assumption that simply being dropped alone will do them the world of good. See Andrew Strauss as a prime example.

Then if you look at India, they're constantly bringing young players into the ODI side, exposing them to international cricket and giving them the experience to grow as cricketers. England just throw players in at the deep end, drop them mysteriously if they don't fit in with the team whilst letting other players who have achieved considerably less swan around knowing their places are under no scrutiny.

As you say, the wicket-keeper problem is one created by Graveney and Miller in the past, and now Miller having usurped Graveney deserves the problem. We're certainly not helped by a media who will accept nothing less than an Adam Gilchrist - a once in a generation cricketer.

Only one England wicket-keeper since Stewart has played with the knowledge that his position is safe, and that it was Geraint Jones who was persevered with amongst all the other candidates is an indictment of England's policy in itself.

by Basil Sat 15 Nov 2008, 14:32

Big_Bad_Bob wrote:Not sure about Davies, but aye, they certainly find themselves backed themselves into another corner now with the keeping situation.

Fark knows where they will go next, as they will surely have to sooner rather than later IMO.

Amen to your final point though.

Foster is head and shoulders above the competition as wicketkeeper, and should be given an extended run in both the ODI and test sides.

Davies's turn will come but only if he scores consistently for a whole season rather than just the second half which is his wont. His keeping is sound enough.

by Yorkie Jill Sat 15 Nov 2008, 14:56

Big_Bad_Bob wrote:Prior is a hopeless keeper, an over-rated batsman and, from what I've observed, of decidedly dubious character.

He did enough to suggest that there had been enough of an improvement in his keeping at the end of the last English summer to earn a run in the side though, as his fragile batting still seems beyond question.

It's just a question of which aspect of his game completely implodes first for me though - and how soon after the other follows if he's still in the side by then.

But he's from SUSSEX. So it doesn't MATTER.

Now, I don't know the *answer* 'cause there probably isn't one, but hey, Geraint Jones, Paul Nixon, Chris Read, Matt Prior, Tim Ambrose, Phil Mustard - remember him not doing terribly that few times? - have all had a good go at keeping since Stewart retired, with mixed results. Who is left? Well, there are another 12 counties so maybe only 11 to go now before Foster has a chance? Davies looks ok but
Foster hasn't had a darn look in since what, Melbourne 2002 when Stewart had a bruised hand? I thought he was rubbish then, what with him dropping skyers and not appealing and generally not being Alec Stewart, but he deserves a try, a chance. Fair enough if Fletcher didn't rate him, he's farked off to Sussex's cousin now and it matters not. But for Sussex Moores to not even consider him, when he's clearly the most outstanding county selection is one eyedness of the greatest degree. I don't know who is 'the one' or if there will be another 'one' - surely there has to be at some point, but they'll never know if they persevere with substandard players*.

It's frankly a shame that Geraint faded after a decent couple of years, but when are things ever that easy?

*by substandard i mean 'gash' and 'matt prior'

by Sponsored content