3rd Test: India v England at Mohali on Nov 26-30

[hopeforthebest]

Vic Marks in the Guardian:

"Let us hope that when Jennings, who at least had a prolific season for Durham even if he does not have a reputation of being particularly adept against spin, arrives someone is at hand to point him out to Trevor Bayliss since first impressions are important in any relationship. Bayliss’s knowledge of England’s cricketers extends only to those he has been sent by the selectors over the last 15 months. The team’s coach cannot have a significant input in the selection of new players in the squad – for the simple reason that he has never seen them play nor does he have a trusted network to consult within English domestic cricket. This may be an unavoidable problem but, to use a phrase that has been trotted out all too frequently on this tour, “it is not ideal”.

I could have written that myself, only unavoidable because he baggers off to Oz when a full time coach would have time to watch the early weeks of the CC.

[hopeforthebest]

The arrival of Jennings into the squad may well provide the missing ingredient, a South African born player, the Zimbabwean Ballance proved to be no substitute. I wonder if a statistical study of teams with or without a SA cricketer would show how important they've been to England's success over the years. Hick and Robin Smith were I think both from Southern Rhodesia before it became Zimbabwe.

[Gingerfinch]

The Smith brothers were from South Africa.

[Dr Cricket]

if that the case, england quite lucky at the moment considering the issues in SA at present times means quite a lot are moving abroad especially with SA going downhill as a country.
at the moment it is quite rare for a white SA african to say in the set up, can't blame them either considering the issues SA face as a country.

[hopeforthebest]

The Smith brothers were from South Africa.

Good news for my theory. Was Alan Lamb SA or Rhodesian?

[sussexpob]

The Smith brothers were from South Africa.

Good news for my theory. Was Alan Lamb SA or Rhodesian?

Saffer. I think hes from the Western Cape

[sussexpob]

To wade back into the "personality tests" discussion that was made above, I once read a few articles from Jacques Crevoisier, a very famous French sports psychologist that had worked with the French World Cup winning team as younger players, and was (he may still be, but these articles are old) with Arsenal as appointed by Wenger.

He explained that the idea behind the tests is to work with a coach to highlight areas of improvement that both the tests and the coach agree is an issue. He explains that the important thing is the tests themselves only really work alongside physical observations, as a players self perception can lead to certain discrepancies. So a player might percieve they are a demon passer, but the coach sees he is not. And then the test results turn round and says "X player is lacking concentration, which means when he should be visualising the space on the pitch he can pass to as the ball is rolling into his feet, he is not anticipating the next movement, so he loses 2-3 cruical seconds to control the ball and make a decision". So rather than being a bad passer, its simply the thought process for the decision is not being made early enough. He said that the idea was to identify areas of mentality that each individual would dedicate 10 intense minutes per training session to correct. So the bad passer with low concentration is given a skills drill which he can only excel in when he starts to think 2-3 seconds ahead.

Crevosier also seemed to indicate that the tests are used to see if a player has the ability to improve, and that if a player in the situation above is unable to adapt to the new drills over and over again, it does indicate that the player is simply not the type that learns well, and never will. So he concludes that a player needs to have a certain level of sporting intelligence or aptitude in order to improve, but this is not academic. He used the example of Nicholas Anelka who he tested at 15, as a person who couldnt hardly read, write, was stupid, but his footballing intelligence and ability to exercise on key improvement factors was the best he ever seen. Told he couldnt concentrate, he would instantly turn on and concentrate.

Interestingly, it would seem that confidence or self belief is not an inherent personality problem. While confidence effects performance, Crovosier indicates that confidence is too temporary to mark a player on his future destiny. He makes an interesting point that French players are far less aggressive, motivated and have less professional characteristics than English players, but that they are far more confident about their ability. He says this is because they get more opportunity than anything inherently cultural. Using an example, he said that Wilshere and Walcott at Arsenal had similar ratings on potential ability to learn as Anelka, but Theo's confidence ratings were pretty low, Jack's were higher but not French levels.

[sussexpob]

I guess to bring it into context, the idea of these types of tests are simply used off hand to judge a persons latent inabilities seems to be wrong. The coach should be cross-referencing these to actual problems that he notices, or has noticed, in live situations. They are therefore an improvement and maintainence tool and not something that should be used to simply scratch names of lists.The tests themselves are not accurate enough adequately judge issues in isolation. They can only be used in combination to show practical trends, and from that test the improvement levels on that particular problem.

I think the main reason for this is, as said above, self perception. A person may be introvert but consider themselves out going. I know people of very low intelligence from extremely low intelligence families, who consider themselves geniuses on a relative basis. Some people who are not funny think they are.... or good looking, or confident in their abililty etc etc.

The best example I have ever read (which was actually the reason I ended up reading about the French guy above) was that Nicholas Bendtner, a terrible former Arsenal striker who couldnt buy a goal, essentially once broke a psychological test he undertook because the creators of the test hadnt actually considered the scientific possibility that someone could ever had a level of self-belief that Nicholas Bendtner had. On a scale of 0-9, Bentdner got 10-11 on confidence, which was seen as impossible. It apparently demonstrated that Bendtner actually, 100%, thought that if he stabbed someone for no reason, he wasnt at fault. If he dribbled past his own defence with no opposition around him, and lashed in an own goal, it was not his fault. And he apparently actually believed this, the tests were made to be less obvious than your average genius would be able to fudge it, and he passed other tests to confirm it. He was actually a man with such levels of self belief, he thought he was perfect. That he could never be wrong.

Another important consideration from that is, how much confidence is too much? How much self belief is too little? How much of other factors?

Well the answer was explained above. The test isnt rating that, its simply asking to cross reference it to very specific and noticable applications. If a player doesnt concentrate, test concentration. He is improves, then it doesnt matter how intelligent he is or what he scores on a test. The very improvement he has made shows that the overall psychological picture is good enough.

So Dawson might be able to improve on averaging 43 per wicket in the county championship, Leach may not..... but 21 per wicket every year needs no improvement, and 43 needs a LOT to prove international class. So the question should be, even if Leach cant improve based on these tests, is he good enough?

I dont think judging on what I know, Andy Flower does this. It seems that he is hellbent on the potential to improve, and not judging players on the level they are already. I think is because he sees a learner as being a bottomless pit rather than settling for someone who might merely be useful. He wants to strive for producing World Class legends on an hit ratio of a 1000:1, then picking people who are reliable straight away, but will never be world class.

And for the record, I got INTP -T/-J.....

[Arthur Crabtree]

Apart from Bhaves we're a boardful of introverts. Like KP.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Another thing... are leaked assessments made on the basis of the extraneous work that they do, like visiting war memorials and bivvying with the army, because I can do my job reasonably well, but on being marked on that kind of activity I'd be sacked. If a young player had his resting bitchface on during rifle assembly sessions, or during an inspiring speech from Major Tim or Alan Sugar, is that a reason why he might be judged not of the right stuff?

[sussexpob]

Another thing... are leaked assessments made on the basis of the extraneous work that they do, like visiting war memorials and bivvying with the army, because I can do my job reasonably well, but on being marked on that kind of activity I'd be sacked. If a young player had his resting bitchface on during rifle assembly sessions, or during an inspiring speech from Major Tim or Alan Sugar, is that a reason why he might be judged not of the right stuff?

Of course, but then some boffin would argue that you were an introverted sociopath who didnt fit in, and would never fit in. And this is probably why people of this type in the team, the KPs and Trotts of this world, were seen as weak or problematic.

I think I would have a nervous breakdown within 10 minutes if someone made me eat the dinners from that Ashes recipe book. Especially if dinner was followed by a visit to the hospital, or served as part of bootcamp.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Then it would be the coach's job to get the best out of that player, of course, and not waste the talent. Rather than pick eleven Bertie Vogts.

[sussexpob]

Then it would be the coach's job to get the best out of that player and not waste the talent. Rather than pick eleven Bertie Vogts.

In this situation the coach believes that those who dont conform, have no talent. Conformity in itself is the mark of the man that has the ability. In its absence, there is nothing to be lost.

[sussexpob]

One thing that all these tests probably ignore, and personally I think this is the key, is that cricket is a game based on instinct more than anything. Assessing how a batter thinks his way into a game is pretty much largely irrelevant, when the bowler hurls down an 90mph delivery, I dont think the batter has enough time to actually form a thought and enact it. To a certain degree his judgements are sub-concious and reactionary, build from a more latent ability that cant be defined. The only exception is when the batter is using a pre-emptive approach, to say that he will attack a certain ball, or that he will setup with the first thought of blocking. I dont think you can test that on paper. You can practice skills that hone your reactions or engrain certain qualities, but its still instinctive. You mind is still operating as an almost third party to the whole occasion, functioning on auto pilot.

[Arthur Crabtree]

So many seem to be superstitious, which doesn't seem a proactive, can-do mentality. See Strauss' wristbands.