Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

sussexpob wrote:Jack leach. This record suggests he's miles better than anyone else....

But they didn't fancy him to India, and invented he was a chucked as soon as they got criticised for it

Thank you for the information.

yes, if someone is chucking there is no point in selecting him. Now the anti chucking rule is getting severed, so better to solve the action first, then see whether he is as effective in dometic matches and then pick.

Saeed Ajmal and Senanayake were harmless after they started bowling with clean action.

Adi wrote:

Gingerfinch wrote:I'm pretty sure Warne's first class record wasn't anything special before he played test cricket. If the selectors think he's good enough then fair enough.

But i doubt (haven't checked stats though) that Warnie had bad record than non specialist spinners during his time in their domestic tourneys.

It wouldn't surprise me if he did (I'm not going to check )

Gingerfinch wrote:I'm pretty sure Warne's first class record wasn't anything special before he played test cricket. If the selectors think he's good enough then fair enough.

Warne had a fc average of 22 per wicket, but hadn't played a lot at all. He was fast tracked into the A side where he bowled well against Zimbabwe and the windies, and went straight to the test side.

Very much confused really. So i would declare Moeen as best specialist spin bowler available as he has better average than all spin bowlers and avoid all this confusion that i have

Adi wrote:

sussexpob wrote:Jack leach. This record suggests he's miles better than anyone else....

But they didn't fancy him to India, and invented he was a chucked as soon as they got criticised for it

Thank you for the information.

yes, if someone is chucking there is no point in selecting him. Now the anti chucking rule is getting severed, so better to solve the action first, then see whether he is as effective in dometic matches and then pick.

Saeed Ajmal and Senanayake were harmless after they started bowling with clean action.

He averaged 25 last year with a remodelled action. Although it's whether you believe he was a chicken in the first place, the only person who mentioned it in his career was taking heat for not picking him, then seemingly messed up all the dates of what happened, when flower said he could go to India but then said he tested as a chicken after the squad was picked....hmmmm

My phone is changed chucker to chicken. I'm.not suggesting Jack is a coward

Looking into it, I'd suggest Mason crane scored highly on Andy's "name the root vegetable" test, and was fast tracked in

sussexpob wrote:

Adi wrote:

sussexpob wrote:Jack leach. This record suggests he's miles better than anyone else....

But they didn't fancy him to India, and invented he was a chucked as soon as they got criticised for it

Thank you for the information.

yes, if someone is chucking there is no point in selecting him. Now the anti chucking rule is getting severed, so better to solve the action first, then see whether he is as effective in dometic matches and then pick.

Saeed Ajmal and Senanayake were harmless after they started bowling with clean action.

He averaged 25 last year with a remodelled action. Although it's whether you believe he was a chicken in the first place, the only person who mentioned it in his career was taking heat for not picking him, then seemingly messed up all the dates of what happened, when flower said he could go to India but then said he tested as a chicken after the squad was picked....hmmmm

That is crazy. Selecting someone first and then saying he is a chucker. So on what basis was he selected.

More shocking is if he was chucking why did they not ban him and make him go under action correction process. These things should be identified at that time itself. Too much negligence if he is called as chucker after being picked. Crazy. Mumbai Cricket Association banned at least 10 bowlers who had dicey action in a very low level domestic format.

sussexpob wrote:

bigfluffylemon wrote:Fun facts: Barring 2016's washout v the West Indies, the winning team (or in the one draw, both teams) has scored 430+ in 8 of the last 10 first innings here (2013 was an exception, where Australia only scored 330 in the first innings and went on to win due to England having no stomach for the fight against Mitch1 any more, and 2010 v Pakistan, where Australia scored 127 in the first innings and went on to win. Australia were 257-8 in the second innings only 55 ahead, yet managed to score 381 all out thanks to a 120 run 9th wicket partnership between Hussey and Siddle, and then bowled Pakistan out for 139 in pursuit of 176. Later than year of course three of the Pakistan line-up were banned for spot fixing. If that 2010 game at the SCG wasn't dodgy I'll eat my hat).

That SCG test and was played on a green top wicket that did everything early on, both teams struggled, but the pitch flattened out in the second innings and became easier to bat on. Was a pretty good test match to watch to be honest, not even with hindsight did it feel Pakistan threw it away on purpose.

That was the game Kamran Akmal kept with a pair of cymbals. It was the phoniest game I've seen. he had the chance to run out Hussey and actually threw the ball in the opposite direction from the stumps.

I see the flat wicket indicator is flashing- Khawaja is nearing a hundred. Pretty poor that no England bat could get three figures.

Adi,

When England last toured India, they picked Dawson, Ansari (who ended up injured and retired) and Rashid, the first two being highly controversial over leech.

When England started to get pounded on pitches that were suitable for spinners, questions were thrown around about the absence of leech. As the last test approached, the ECB were getting massacred and leaked to the press that leach had failed a routine bowling test before the series, which was flagged on computers and had been something no one had suspected or questioned. As the matter was highlighted outside of competition, there was no sanctions. Leach remodelled his action almost as quickly as the question was raised, but apparently they couldn't retest him in UAE and sidelined him for the winter until the A tour to Sri Lanka......wonder why they didn't send him on a plane back to England where the equipment was?

If you trace all that's said, originally (subsequently corrected) reported comments said leach was informed after the squad and series were underway in India, then it was changed to him being called in October before.

Essentially, it all sounds dodgy, and while leach isn't in the position to criticise a system for fear of his career, some of his county mates have been clear in their opinion of it being a stitch up to cover England's dumb selection

Arthur Crabtree wrote:

sussexpob wrote:

bigfluffylemon wrote:Fun facts: Barring 2016's washout v the West Indies, the winning team (or in the one draw, both teams) has scored 430+ in 8 of the last 10 first innings here (2013 was an exception, where Australia only scored 330 in the first innings and went on to win due to England having no stomach for the fight against Mitch1 any more, and 2010 v Pakistan, where Australia scored 127 in the first innings and went on to win. Australia were 257-8 in the second innings only 55 ahead, yet managed to score 381 all out thanks to a 120 run 9th wicket partnership between Hussey and Siddle, and then bowled Pakistan out for 139 in pursuit of 176. Later than year of course three of the Pakistan line-up were banned for spot fixing. If that 2010 game at the SCG wasn't dodgy I'll eat my hat).

That SCG test and was played on a green top wicket that did everything early on, both teams struggled, but the pitch flattened out in the second innings and became easier to bat on. Was a pretty good test match to watch to be honest, not even with hindsight did it feel Pakistan threw it away on purpose.

That was the game Kamran Akmal kept with a pair of cymbals. It was the phoniest game I've seen. he had the chance to run out Hussey and actually threw the ball in the opposite direction from the stumps.

If you're highlighting akmal mistakes, then every single game he has played is thrown. Did he ever take a catch? This was standard. He dropped everything

And Vic Marks.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:And Vic Marks.

?

Arthur Crabtree wrote:

sussexpob wrote:

bigfluffylemon wrote:Fun facts: Barring 2016's washout v the West Indies, the winning team (or in the one draw, both teams) has scored 430+ in 8 of the last 10 first innings here (2013 was an exception, where Australia only scored 330 in the first innings and went on to win due to England having no stomach for the fight against Mitch1 any more, and 2010 v Pakistan, where Australia scored 127 in the first innings and went on to win. Australia were 257-8 in the second innings only 55 ahead, yet managed to score 381 all out thanks to a 120 run 9th wicket partnership between Hussey and Siddle, and then bowled Pakistan out for 139 in pursuit of 176. Later than year of course three of the Pakistan line-up were banned for spot fixing. If that 2010 game at the SCG wasn't dodgy I'll eat my hat).

That SCG test and was played on a green top wicket that did everything early on, both teams struggled, but the pitch flattened out in the second innings and became easier to bat on. Was a pretty good test match to watch to be honest, not even with hindsight did it feel Pakistan threw it away on purpose.

That was the game Kamran Akmal kept with a pair of cymbals. It was the phoniest game I've seen. he had the chance to run out Hussey and actually threw the ball in the opposite direction from the stumps.

Kami is one player who is always doubtful. And he was under suspicion etc etc in many matches. Recently he scored a 200. He tonks the domestic bowlers a lot. Was top most or in top 3 scorers in their domestic in last to last year i suppose. This is how he makes comeback to international level and flops. Goes back, same tonking process and so on.