Ramps to be recalled

Merlin wrote:It would be absolute cock if Ramps selection nudged Shah out of the SL tour.
Can't see it happening ... however, our esteemed selectors have been known to have skewed ideas in the past.

Giles for Panesar anyone?
TWICE ?

We wait with bated breath ....

Well, as difficult as it is to second guess what the England selectors are thinking, I'm 51% certain that they won't pick Giles to tour instead of Panesar.

I believe he would.

Its well know he is a much more relaxed figure. And who else has EVER done that in county cricket?

No one gets even close to him on current form.

And I would rather take a punt on him in Sl than and out of form Strauss or an unproven young player.

What isn't in doubt is that, if they do pick Rampraskash, he'd better be a whole lot better at coping with the expectation levels that come with international cricket than he was back in the day because the pressure on him not to fail this time around will be immense. Perhaps unbearable.

The media and the 'experts' will be sharpening their knives from the get go.

Your not wrong there Jay.

I just can't see england recalling a 38 year old bloke with a test average under 30.

I agree with the commentators above who think Shah should tour.

The point should be that there is room for both. To take an inferior team because you've signed certain folk up to ECB Contracts would be idiotic from a cricketing point of view.

Won't happen, though.

Like, I know it's his Test average... I know this, but why do people really think it has any relevance in any shape or form. I suppose it proves his then apparent weaker mentality couldn't hack it against much better bowlers on slightly worse pitches.

Agreed with most others however that he shouldn't be replacing Shah, he should be picked in conjunction although as Fello has mentioned, it's doubtful they wont not take the 6 contracted batsmen and they wont take 8 out-and-out batsmen.

It's just a wonder to me whether Colly could be a Test bowler and be an all-rounderish type.

If County Cricket is anything but a sick joke then Ramprakash is the best batsman in the world at the moment.

If a country choses not to play the best batsman in the world then it is insulting both the batsmen who do get picked and the opposition.

Alternatively, the ECB think that county cricket is a sick joke.

If County Cricket is anything but a sick joke then Ramprakash is the best batsman in the world at the moment.

It's official - County Cricket is a sick joke.

ten years after wrote:If County Cricket is anything but a sick joke then Ramprakash is the best batsman in the world at the moment.

If a country choses not to play the best batsman in the world then it is insulting both the batsmen who do get picked and the opposition.

Alternatively, the ECB think that county cricket is a sick joke.

Or perhaps Ramps is mentally not up to the higher level.

Wouldn't be the first time that a cricketer more blessed has been outperformed at the higher level by a tougher individual would it?

JKLever wrote:

ten years after wrote:If County Cricket is anything but a sick joke then Ramprakash is the best batsman in the world at the moment.

If a country choses not to play the best batsman in the world then it is insulting both the batsmen who do get picked and the opposition.

Alternatively, the ECB think that county cricket is a sick joke.

Or perhaps Ramps is mentally not up to the higher level.

Wouldn't be the first time that a cricketer more blessed has been outperformed at the higher level by a tougher individual would it?

Maybe he wasn't up to it. Maybe he is now. Wouldn't be the first time a player has developed late, would it?

He has scored 31 centuries in his last 87 completed innings. He has averaged over 100 in his last 30 matches. This is literally Bradmanesque. If it is not good enough to be picked for England it can only mean that county cricket is indeed a sick joke.

Not disagreeing with you over late developement. Gooch was at his best approaching 40

Not sure the county cricket is a sick joke theory sticks though.

Vaughan,Tresco & Collingwood made good test careers for themselves averaging about 38,35 & 31 in county cricket respectively.

Comparing "literally" Bradmanesque 99.99 in TESTS versus Ramps's 28 something in TESTS is a bit misleading, to put it mildly.

Presumably on that basis, Bradman would therefore have probably averaged 170 plus in CC ...

Doesn't stack up I'm afraid.

Merlin wrote:Comparing "literally" Bradmanesque 99.99 in TESTS versus Ramps's 28 something in TESTS is a bit misleading, to put it mildly.

Presumably on that basis, Bradman would therefore have probably averaged 170 plus in CC ...

Doesn't stack up I'm afraid.

Except Ramps hasn't played a test in 5 years. Ignoring the possibility that things may change is very unwise, especially when there is plenty of evidence to suggest that things have changed.

Unless, of course, county cricket really is crap.
.

doremi wrote:It's official - County Cricket is a sick joke.

I know he isn't the best batsman in the world, but come on - SRT averaged 46, Dravid 55 etc. It's a fine achievement to score 2000 runs @ 100+ for two seasons in a row. That's to go with his 76 average the year before, the 60+ the year before that. Immense overall. 10 tons last year.

Quite spesh.

If a player was brilliant for 10 years and poor for the last 5 everyone would (reasonably) be saying that he should be judged on present form and not on the past.

Why is this same philosophy not applied to Ramprakash?

ten years after wrote:If a player was brilliant for 10 years and poor for the last 5 everyone would (reasonably) be saying that he should be judged on present form and not on the past.

Why is this same philosophy not applied to Ramprakash?

Cos he has been given many tries and been found wanting maybe.

taipan wrote:

ten years after wrote:If a player was brilliant for 10 years and poor for the last 5 everyone would (reasonably) be saying that he should be judged on present form and not on the past.

Why is this same philosophy not applied to Ramprakash?

Cos he has been given many tries and been found wanting maybe.

How many of these tries have been in the past half decade?

Why is this same philosophy not applied to Ramprakash?

Because the management don't want to take the gamble of appearing to be absolute ar*ses by picking him (on CC form) only to then find he flops yet again in tests.

They would be flayed alive if that happened, and IMO, rightly so.

No guarantees I'm afraid ... the odds are stacked against him, and it's a safer bet for the selectors to omit him from the touring party.

A leopard doesn't change his spots . . .　Ramps is a gutless sook and will only be embarrassed again at international level.　Save him the shame, FFS!

Will be interesting to see what happens either way.

We'll see how reliable Bumbles inside info really is, or if as we suspect he's just a complete loon

tac wrote:A leopard doesn't change his spots . . .　Ramps is a gutless sook and will only be embarrassed again at international level.　Save him the shame, FFS!

A gutless sook who averages over 100 per innings since 2005 with 18 centuries in 30 matches.

The 2009 Ashes are approaching. If there is a possibility that Ramprakash really has changed his spots and is now the best batsman in the world then it would be a very good idea to find out now.

ten years after wrote:

tac wrote:A leopard doesn't change his spots . . .　Ramps is a gutless sook and will only be embarrassed again at international level.　Save him the shame, FFS!

A gutless sook who averages over 100 per innings since 2005 with 18 centuries in 30 matches.

The 2009 Ashes are approaching. If there is a possibility that Ramprakash really has changed his spots and is now the best batsman in the world then it would be a very good idea to find out now.

You just can't compare county cricket (especially on the flatest track in the country) to Test cricket. Michael Bevan was special as an ODI player and scored shedloads of runs for NSW and Tassie, but he failed in tests with a lot fewer chances than Ramps.

Go on, give him a go. Would love for him to be in the pom team come 2009!

Ironically he averages 43 against Oz

JKLever wrote:Ironically he averages 43 against Oz

Yep, and his 1 century against them came at the Oval on an absolute road in reply to Australia 4/600+