Re: West Indies v England, 4th Test, Bridgetown - Feb 26-Mar 2

by beamer Mon 02 Mar 2009, 23:01

Dello wrote:As most international cricket in this day and age is played on good batting tracks under brilliant sunshine, with a ball that stops swinging (if it ever starts) after eight overs, the sensible thing to do would be to pick bowlers not based on some random hope that all the stars will align and conditions will suit them to a tee, but from the initial assumption that the wicket is going to be a belter, the weather's going to be great and you're going to need a bowling attack with the attributes to take 20 wickets in those circumstances, which is usually considered to be real pace through the air, natural bounce and hostility, some miserly bastard squeezing the life out of the batsmen - attacking by defending - and "mystery" spin off the straight. They're fashionable skills whatever the weather.

OK, so what we need is a combination of bowlers like, say... Allan Donald, Curtly Ambrose, Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne. As they were at the peak of their powers.

There must be four bowlers like that in England somewhere. Blame the selectors for not being able to find them, along with that English Gilchrist we've been looking for over the last 10 years or so...

by beamer Mon 02 Mar 2009, 23:07

Dello wrote:And Duncan Fletcher was somewhat mocked for his "obsession" with 90 mph bowlers - even if they had shitehouse FC records like Simon Jones and Sajid Mahmood.

He valued the attribute over the "stats". Which makes more sense than selecting a bowler who is at the top of the FC averages and gets to bowl at, say, Headingley (although it doesn't have the same snakes in the pitch as it used to) on nice, juicy, bowler-loving wickets, over the bloke who is, say, fifth in the averages and bowls every week on the Somerset Highway.

While Fletcher perhaps went too far that way in his selections, he had a point in that you need at least one bowler of genuine pace in your line-up. A bowler who may not come off every time but will have days when he can blow the opposition away, and offer a wicket-taking threat when the pitch doesn't help swing, seam and orthodox spin.

It doesn't mean writing off those who are of lesser pace, as you need variety in your attack unless you have 4 world-class 90mph bowlers and only the West Indies of the 70s and 80s ever had that.

by JKLever Mon 02 Mar 2009, 23:10

Pace for paces sake is no good though if its going to be sprayed all over the shop.

Infact what you get is Tino Best.

Where Simon Jones excelled was that he developed that nice inswing and then got the one that held its line and nipped the other way going. And he was skiddy.

Saj Mahmood looks capable of doing it but IMO isn't cricket smart enough.

Who else could do it?

We seem to get bowlers who lose the plot totally. Take Harmison - in 2004-5 he achieved his success IMO, because he was accurate for the most part. I'm probably talking bull but I wonder if his RPO has significantly increased since then. And if it hasn't I bet his accuracy has decreased.

by LeFromage Mon 02 Mar 2009, 23:15

beamer wrote:
Dello wrote:As most international cricket in this day and age is played on good batting tracks under brilliant sunshine, with a ball that stops swinging (if it ever starts) after eight overs, the sensible thing to do would be to pick bowlers not based on some random hope that all the stars will align and conditions will suit them to a tee, but from the initial assumption that the wicket is going to be a belter, the weather's going to be great and you're going to need a bowling attack with the attributes to take 20 wickets in those circumstances, which is usually considered to be real pace through the air, natural bounce and hostility, some miserly bastard squeezing the life out of the batsmen - attacking by defending - and "mystery" spin off the straight. They're fashionable skills whatever the weather.
OK, so what we need is a combination of bowlers like, say... Allan Donald, Curtly Ambrose, Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne. As they were at the peak of their powers.

There must be four bowlers like that in England somewhere. Blame the selectors for not being able to find them, along with that English Gilchrist we've been looking for over the last 10 years or so...

Yes, that would be lovely.

Obviously we don't have any players of comparable quality, but do we not have bowlers of comparable attributes? Stuart Clark is no Glenn McGrath, but he's found plenty of success in Test cricket by rocking up and doing his best Hawaii impression.

We've already got a wrist-spinner in the squad - just because he's not Shane Warne doesn't invalidate his own ability to beat the bat on both sides, turning the ball off the straight. Attributionally, that makes him a useful guy to have in a whatever-the-conditions attack. Certainly in comparison to a finger spinner who really needs some day four and five rough to join the party.

by horace Mon 02 Mar 2009, 23:19

Shah has really staked his claim

by PeterCS Mon 02 Mar 2009, 23:22

He needs to claim his steak IMHO, and put some more beef in his play.

by Eric Air Emu Mon 02 Mar 2009, 23:25

Dello wrote:
JKLever wrote:You can't really be too harsh on any of our bowlers either. Well you can... a few are positively average but not sure we can draw too many conclusions.

Would still like to see Sidders on a pitch with a little life in it, but I guess he'll be dropped for the ever consistent GBH.

I'm a bit sick of hearing about pitches, though. That's always England's first line of excuse: not their kind of wicket.

The trouble with picking "conditions" bowlers - as England always do - is that you're totally screwed if you don't get the conditions you were budgeting for. You end up with these one-dimensional bowlers who are both clueless and toothless if Plan A isn't a goer.

As most international cricket in this day and age is played on good batting tracks under brilliant sunshine, with a ball that stops swinging (if it ever starts) after eight overs, the sensible thing to do would be to pick bowlers not based on some random hope that all the stars will align and conditions will suit them to a tee, but from the initial assumption that the wicket is going to be a belter, the weather's going to be great and you're going to need a bowling attack with the attributes to take 20 wickets in those circumstances, which is usually considered to be real pace through the air, natural bounce and hostility, some miserly bastard squeezing the life out of the batsmen - attacking by defending - and "mystery" spin off the straight. They're fashionable skills whatever the weather.

If it turns out to be an overcast day on a green top, your bowling attack won't lose any effectiveness through being non-specialist "conditions" bowlers - if you've got the attributes to take wickets on batting pitches, you're going to have a blast in bowler-friendly conditions.

But picking a bowling attack specifically engineered towards taking wickets on a green-top, and turning up and finding a big, beige road - there's nowhere to go from there.

I fear I've explained that quite badly. To put it another way, which of England's bowlers on this tour would you back to give batsmen a hard time whatever the conditions? Flintoff. Pace, hostility, bounce - he's got the all-weather game.

But he's the only one. (And he's made of bone china.)

Nails are getting hit on the head there - just wish knew where these bowlers are coming from. I'd suggest taking all promising 6ft plus bowlers, steroiding them up to within an inch of their lives and unleash these muscles bound speed demons with shrunken testicles on the to the world. Let's get all soviet block on our ex-colonies I say.

And the mystery spinners- let's just buy them off Sri Lanka. I'm sure they're for sale if the price is right.

by Eric Air Emu Mon 02 Mar 2009, 23:26

horace wrote:Shah has really staked his claim

Leave him alone you old b*tch.

by holcs Mon 02 Mar 2009, 23:34

Its all because our bowlers are bought up on slow low ones, or wet sticky ones playing club and county cricket.

So instead of running themselves into the ground they bowl trundle and rely on the conditions.

Or we could just do what Tom says. Especially the buying bit, has worked for India alot, buying world cricket power.....

by Eric Air Emu Mon 02 Mar 2009, 23:39

And even at my level short-pitching wannabee pace merchants get carnaged on slow pitches while slow dibbly dobbly piitch-it up merchants cash in obscenely.

by PeterCS Mon 02 Mar 2009, 23:42

Pimping in the pavilion?

by holcs Mon 02 Mar 2009, 23:44

Eric Air Emu wrote:And even at my level short-pitching wannabee pace merchants get carnaged on slow pitches while slow dibbly dobbly piitch-it up merchants cash in obscenely.

Thats the problem...

I say blame the groundsman. As an example only one deck in Surrey is a decent deck with enough pace and bounce for a decent quick to get something out of it, that I can think of. The rest are slow and low, or wet and green.

by LeFromage Mon 02 Mar 2009, 23:49

holcs wrote:
Eric Air Emu wrote:And even at my level short-pitching wannabee pace merchants get carnaged on slow pitches while slow dibbly dobbly piitch-it up merchants cash in obscenely.

Thats the problem...

I say blame the groundsman. As an example only one deck in Surrey is a decent deck with enough pace and bounce for a decent quick to get something out of it, that I can think of. The rest are slow and low, or wet and green.

Perhaps we just need to face up to our reality: we're New Zealand. But the less good at rugby version.

by holcs Mon 02 Mar 2009, 23:51

Dello wrote:
holcs wrote:
Eric Air Emu wrote:And even at my level short-pitching wannabee pace merchants get carnaged on slow pitches while slow dibbly dobbly piitch-it up merchants cash in obscenely.

Thats the problem...

I say blame the groundsman. As an example only one deck in Surrey is a decent deck with enough pace and bounce for a decent quick to get something out of it, that I can think of. The rest are slow and low, or wet and green.

Perhaps we just need to face up to our reality: we're New Zealand. But the less good at rugby version.

Nail on head at the moment!! Oh and we have an obesity problem as well.

We are dooomed!

by PeterCS Mon 02 Mar 2009, 23:52

Rugby?

Union - always there or thereabouts.

League - world champions

Did you mean New Zealand beach volleyball men?

by horace Tue 03 Mar 2009, 00:13

the more irksome the english performance - the more prolix the posts

by PeterCS Tue 03 Mar 2009, 00:56

It's the relief at not going belly-up for 50.

by horace Tue 03 Mar 2009, 01:08

PeterCS wrote:It's the relief at not going belly-up for 50.

...slaps head as I finally get it Very Happy

by DJ_Smerk Tue 03 Mar 2009, 01:43

Well, what more can you say. The Pitch beats both teams once again. You can't say Cook has found form on a flat deck. Similar as Bopara's maiden ton was cheapened due to the state of the strip.

One bowler (Fidel Edwards) was really the only person to find any decent pace and bounce on the wicket.

Fingers crossed for the 5th Test.

by Henry Tue 03 Mar 2009, 01:52

The pitch for the fifth test will be anther road. You can be guaranteed. Why would the Windies prepare a lively strip when they are 1 up?

by DJ_Smerk Tue 03 Mar 2009, 02:05

Henry wrote:The pitch for the fifth test will be anther road. You can be guaranteed. Why would the Windies prepare a lively strip when they are 1 up?

Because I recall the England bowlers being quite useless even on pitches with a bit of help. Re: 1st Test in Kingston.

Toothless is not even the word. It's like the Gummybowl Rally in Englands bowling stocks, not a clue at the minute.

by kkf Tue 03 Mar 2009, 05:01

Henry wrote:The pitch for the fifth test will be anther road. You can be guaranteed. Why would the Windies prepare a lively strip when they are 1 up?

Don't be certain about that. Trinidad usually has something for bowlers. Pitches have held fairly true to form Jamaica had a lot for bowlers. Antigua was a road and Barbados was batsman was batsman friendly (probably more of a road than usual but it could possibly be that both attacks were pretty weak). I would not be surprised if Trinidad has something in it for bowlers, it usually does. The last 10 matches there has had results and only 1 draw since 1993. But wickets in the Caribbean has been getting flatter and slower so who knows.