West Indies v England, 2nd Test, Grenada, 21-25 April, 2015

IT does seem to be the end for Shiv. I think he wants to go past Lara as most runs for WI but that's still 100 runs away.

Henry wrote:Anderson and Broad need to go. They've been given enough chances, and they're just not pulling their weight anymore. Subconsciously or otherwise, they've become complacent as f*ck, and seem to be either incapable, or too stubborn, to adjust and bowl the right length.

Sack them.

My work here is done.

Lindsay no.2 wrote:Moving away from the horror that is Cook and Ballance tossing the salad, but keeping up the tenuous foodie reference vibe I think it's time to drop Shiv (or better still to have a private word with him and allow him the honour of retiring immediately as he is a true legend) as his mince pies seem to have finally gone. This series and the last against SA suggest that time is up for the great sideways crabmaster.

Hopefully the Windies give him a farewell Test.

It's a poor run. Maybe they could replace him with Tagenarine.

The Windies would surely be loathe to acknowledge that Shiv is no longer one of their best six batsmen. He still isn't. Probably just needs to get through his first 30 balls and he will have built a wall again.

It's always easy to write off an old aged batsman - usually writing their eyes off. From what I've seen, he's playing at balls he'd usually leave alone. Whether that's the eyes or not, I don't know. If it's not, then I wouldn't dispense with him - the only batsmen doing better in the regional 4-day are a couple playing in this Test and some keepers with modest career records.

He did well in the County Championship last year, he topped the averages at home last year and had a spate of exceptional Tests. He's had a run of 5 bad Tests. That's hardly earth-shattering is it? Especially if you consider the calibre of attack he faced in 3 of those Tests. I could name many current English batsmen who've had longer periods of shitness.

Not like you to pay a "life in the old dog yet" tribute, D. It's usually "yeah, he's so shit, it's a wonder he can even drag himself out of the toilet any more. so fock him off because we're all focked off" sort of style. You can approach Henry sometimes, with the vehemence of your sendoffs.

You're right, of course. (To be serious.) And not just a question of some sort of misguided "for old times' sake, have respect", or "maybe, just maybe he might have one more good innings left in him".

PeterCS wrote:Not like you to pay a "life in the old dog yet" tribute, D. It's usually "yeah, he's so shit, it's a wonder he can even drag himself out of the toilet any more" sort of style.

You're right, of course. And not just a question of some sort of misguided "for old times' sake, have respect", or "maybe, just maybe he might have one more good innings left in him".

Don't worry Dan will (reassuringly) be the first to give the corpse a good munging when Shiv's gone for good.

If you say so, gents. I judge on a case by case basis. If you reckon I'd write a tried and tested player off after a 5-Test bad run, then you haven't been reading my posts. Which you don't have to - but if you don't read my posts, then don't cast aspersions on what judgements I'd make. We can't all look at Cricinfo and make judgements out of thin air... or rely on other people's opinions to tell us how it is.

Brass Monkey wrote:If you say so, gents. I judge on a case by case basis. If you reckon I'd writer a tried and tested player off after a 5-Test bad run, then you haven't been reading my posts. Which you don't have to - but if you don't read my posts, then don't cast aspersions on what judgements I'd make. We can't all look at Cricinfo and make judgements out of thin air... or rely on other people's opinions to tell us how it is.

Aye, I was a bit surprised. I have always known you to take an individualistic POV on any specific case.

But maybe we are suffering from NSR.

Was meant more light-hearted/tongue-in-cheek than as sarcasm, in fact.

Light-hearted remarks can allow a certain amount of earnestness in a point. Whereas sarcasm is often a bit more more mallet or acid than ambiguity or twinkle.

If you spot the jokeyness of the toilet metaphor ... or the change of tone from my first to second paragraph ... those were signs.

But maybe the best clue was in the words "to be serious", in the second paragraph. Lardy started his response quoting my original post, after I'd already edited it (a few seconds later - notice there's no "edited" sign at the bottom of my post), so as to make even clearer there was a heavy dose of there, without having to brandish the (maybe overused?) signpost of a  

So anyway: congratulations to the England team!

I didn't notice who was MoM - Root? Both he and Anderson had an outstanding case, I'd say. The wicket was more batsman- than bowler-friendly, throughout five days. (That is, if batsmen were able to adjust their timing to a moribund pitch.) But Root set up the result with his resilience, technique, stamina and class. Whereas Jim made the decisive contributions on an unhelpful pitch, three top wickets, two catches and a star runout, that made the result very much odds-on.

The Windies have to move on from Chanderpaul sooner rather than later. The younger players have to stand up and be counted.

Brass Monkey wrote:It's always easy to write off an old aged batsman - usually writing their eyes off. From what I've seen, he's playing at balls he'd usually leave alone. Whether that's the eyes or not, I don't know. If it's not, then I wouldn't dispense with him - the only batsmen doing better in the regional 4-day are a couple playing in this Test and some keepers with modest career records.

He did well in the County Championship last year, he topped the averages at home last year and had a spate of exceptional Tests. He's had a run of 5 bad Tests. That's hardly earth-shattering is it? Especially if you consider the calibre of attack he faced in 3 of those Tests. I could name many current English batsmen who've had longer periods of shitness.

I totally agree with you that it is far too simple to write off the old boy - but (and I am an avowed Shiv supporter) physically he must be on the downward curve by now at the age of 40. How far down is not easy to know, so again you may well be right in that where he currently stands in terms of ability may be higher up than any potential replacement. So WI should therefore keep him if you look at it in those terms.

However, my counter to that is two-fold.

Firstly, I hate to see great players scratching around when their powers are apparently on the wane. I had a similar feeling watching Ponting toward the end - he just wasn't the colossal batsman he was in his prime and although it was nice to witness Australia losing I didn't take huge pleasure in seeing him looking so mortal. It's maybe similar to the prizefighter that goes on too long - it's kind of embarrassing to behold. Well, it is for me.

Secondly, whilst Shiv may be better than any other challenger at the moment, maybe WI should take the plunge and blood a newcomer against England's softer attack rather than in the upcoming Aus mini-series (is that their next test stuff - or do they have anythig softer ahead of that).

All that said I'd love Shiv to play in the next test and crab his way to a ton. Perhaps they should drop Darren Bravo for a test to blood a newcomer - thereby potentially jolting Bravo into a better mindset and allowing Shiv a swansong. He then can retire post this series and Bravo brought back to become the player he could be (but almost undoubtedly won't).

Looking to Barbados ....

I suppose it's highly likely the England management won't want to change a winning team. Taking consistency of selection arguably to extremes. 2) they might not want to jeopardise a series win by "rocking the boat". And 3) they might think that those performing below standards in bowling - even in batting? - at Grenada will buck up when they come to a better, rather more responsive pitch (Tony Cozier was saying Barbados is not "back" to its springy best, but will have far more life than Grenada.)


What do the FB faithful think?

Boycott, btw, was suggesting Plunkett and Rashid for Jordan and Stokes, "but it won't 'appen, the ECB, the selectors, thi won't chaaaange".

FWIW: I am not sure why, when Jon Trott has looked anything but a natural opener (not actually sure why he was thrust in there? - but that's another story) you'd not give Lyth the chance of establishing his credentials as England's next opener. Compton, possibly Robson, and certainly that chap ... errrm, Jordan, seem to be off the scene.

I suppose them's what out there can judge a lot better than me whether dropping Trott after two Tests and one decent score with a shaky start would be the final k.o. to his confidence, having picked him to open, and since there seems no berth for him at 3 or 5 at the moment.

Anyway, either Plunkett or Rashid (depending on conditions) for Stokes, cooling off period. I think it would be strange to drop Jordan on his zippier "home patch", unless of course it's felt to be a kryptonite factor, as Kev on his first return to SAfrica.

"It won't 'appen." Same XI.

Probably.

Should it 'appen?


On a separate issue, if I were a Yorkshire member, A'd feel reight aggrieved.

I would bring Rashid in either for Broad or Jordan. Stokes needs a run in the side at six. Dropping him will do nothing to mature him as a cricketer or a person.

On a similar tack - what do England do with Trott?

Is it unfair to cast him aside on the strength of this two test comeback, which he's done in an unfamiliar position for him? And as I've previously mentioned elsewhere if and when his dropping occurs that is going to be a very tough conversation to have with him, considering what he's been through.

Or do you look at him on these two tests and judge his innings as being those of someone past their best? And as such take the point of view of saying he's unlikely to improve as a player at this stage of his career (and we're about to play much tougher oppositions in much more bowler friendly conditions) so we need to move on and try Lyth, presumably.

I thought his footwork in the first innings was more decisive, but three failures out of four against one of the lesser bowling attacks in the game does not bode well. I'd give him this test and maybe the first one against NZ - then we'll know.

Lindsay no.2 wrote:
All that said I'd love Shiv to play in the next test and crab his way to a ton. Perhaps they should drop Darren Bravo for a test to blood a newcomer - thereby potentially jolting Bravo into a better mindset and allowing Shiv a swansong. He then can retire post this series and Bravo brought back to become the player he could be (but almost undoubtedly won't).

Or it could push Bravo into a path similar to his brother and become a freelancer. He is worth preserving in the team.

PeterCS wrote:Looking to Barbados ....

I suppose it's highly likely the England management won't want to change a winning team. Taking consistency of selection arguably to extremes. 2) they might not want to jeopardise a series win by "rocking the boat". And 3) they might think that those performing below standards in bowling - even in batting? - at Grenada will buck up when they come to a better, rather more responsive pitch (Tony Cozier was saying Barbados is not "back" to its springy best, but will have far more life than Grenada.)


What do the FB faithful think?

Boycott, btw, was suggesting Plunkett and Rashid for Jordan and Stokes, "but it won't 'appen, the ECB, the selectors, thi won't chaaaange".

FWIW: I am not sure why, when Jon Trott has looked anything but a natural opener (not actually sure why he was thrust in there? - but that's another story) you'd not give Lyth the chance of establishing his credentials as England's next opener. Compton, possibly Robson, and certainly that chap ... errrm, Jordan, seem to be off the scene.

I suppose them's what out there can judge a lot better than me whether dropping Trott after two Tests and one decent score with a shaky start would be the final k.o. to his confidence, having picked him to open, and since there seems no berth for him at 3 or 5 at the moment.

Anyway, either Plunkett or Rashid (depending on conditions) for Stokes, cooling off period. I think it would be strange to drop Jordan on his zippier "home patch", unless of course it's felt to be a kryptonite factor, as Kev on his first return to SAfrica.

"It won't 'appen." Same XI.

Probably.

Should it 'appen?


On a separate issue, if I were a Yorkshire member, A'd feel reight aggrieved.

I was writing about the Trott issue and then just saw that you've already brought up that point. Sorry for any repetition.

We won't change a winning team - have we ever?

I think it would be too tough to drop Trott whilst on tour. Not even the ECB are that heartless. Are they?

I guess the ECB hope he re-discovers his form at Barbados and they can feel satisfied he has the game to deliver against NZ, Aus and beyond. Or failing that, they hope that upon the return to England, Trott doesn't score in county cricket and they can then gently ease him aside before the NZ series.

Think it would be harsh to drop Stokes too. First test he batted well - at a pace and with a confidence that seemed beyond any of the other specialist batsmen. He also bowled OK. Second test - batting not so good and bowled OK first innings. ECB need to either commit to him or not - if he ends up being an in and out player then he'll never have the chance to develop as an international player. He seems a wholehearted guy to me - gives it his all, all of the time (unlike Broad, say, who can find fault in the pitch, the footmarks, the wrong clouds in the sky and then drop off accordingly). Likewise, whereas yesterday Broad went into sulky girl hands on hips mode when Stokes threw himself by the boundary in a vain attempt to cut off a four I recall seeing Stokes applaud (without sarcasm) one of our fielders, maybe it was Tredwell, in the first test when he made an effort to catch a ball but didn't quite make it.

tricycle wrote:

Lindsay no.2 wrote:
All that said I'd love Shiv to play in the next test and crab his way to a ton. Perhaps they should drop Darren Bravo for a test to blood a newcomer - thereby potentially jolting Bravo into a better mindset and allowing Shiv a swansong. He then can retire post this series and Bravo brought back to become the player he could be (but almost undoubtedly won't).

Or it could push Bravo into a path similar to his brother and become a freelancer. He is worth preserving in the team.

Potentially so. But is he flashy enough to be picked up by IPL/BBL? If they'd have come a calling already I'm sure he'd have been off like a shot.

If the management believe that Gary Ballance is the future then that should have been the end of Trott.

For far too long now England have been playing people out of position, picking them in the wrong formats and turning them into lesser players by getting them to concentrate on 'adding another string to their bow'.

Lindsay no.2 wrote:

tricycle wrote:

Lindsay no.2 wrote:
All that said I'd love Shiv to play in the next test and crab his way to a ton. Perhaps they should drop Darren Bravo for a test to blood a newcomer - thereby potentially jolting Bravo into a better mindset and allowing Shiv a swansong. He then can retire post this series and Bravo brought back to become the player he could be (but almost undoubtedly won't).

Or it could push Bravo into a path similar to his brother and become a freelancer. He is worth preserving in the team.

Potentially so. But is he flashy enough to be picked up by IPL/BBL? If they'd have come a calling already I'm sure he'd have been off like a shot.

He did have an IPL contract. Was unavailable when he chose to play for West Indies. He would get a contract in any league if he were to ensure availability for the full tourney.

Lindsay no.2 wrote:

I was writing about the Trott issue and then just saw that you've already brought up that point. Sorry for any repetition. [...]

On the contrary. Forums should not be places for mad possessiveness.

Whether everyone else thinks this or not (< I'd better use the emoticon ...) ..... I always tend to think "the more (views), the merrier".

Lindsay no.2 wrote:

I totally agree with you that it is far too simple to write off the old boy - but (and I am an avowed Shiv supporter) physically he must be on the downward curve by now at the age of 40. How far down is not easy to know, so again you may well be right in that where he currently stands in terms of ability may be higher up than any potential replacement. So WI should therefore keep him if you look at it in those terms.

However, my counter to that is two-fold.

Firstly, I hate to see great players scratching around when their powers are apparently on the wane. I had a similar feeling watching Ponting toward the end - he just wasn't the colossal batsman he was in his prime and although it was nice to witness Australia losing I didn't take huge pleasure in seeing him looking so mortal. It's maybe similar to the prizefighter that goes on too long - it's kind of embarrassing to behold. Well, it is for me.

Secondly, whilst Shiv may be better than any other challenger at the moment, maybe WI should take the plunge and blood a newcomer against England's softer attack rather than in the upcoming Aus mini-series (is that their next test stuff - or do they have anythig softer ahead of that).

All that said I'd love Shiv to play in the next test and crab his way to a ton. Perhaps they should drop Darren Bravo for a test to blood a newcomer - thereby potentially jolting Bravo into a better mindset and allowing Shiv a swansong. He then can retire post this series and Bravo brought back to become the player he could be (but almost undoubtedly won't).

My problem with blooding a newcomer is that there are already some in the side and the likelihood is that they'll drop Devon Smith before too long if he keeps throwing his wicket away when set. The fact that Bravo is doing similar things too is another problem. If you blood someone new, that leaves just Samuels as the stability. It's likely they'll be going back to the likes of Leon Johnson, who's okish but not quite ready. There's noone I've seen or heard of that's crying out as a replacement, although I'm not particularly in the know.