Page 11 of 12

Re: First Test: New Zealand v England. 22-26 March.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 9:06 am
by meninblue
Haseeb Hameed averages 43 but he is on bench. :hmmm Players averaging less than him (27, 34 ) are in playing 11. Vice-versa places they are in.

Don't see anything wrong with Jonny's avg. of 38. There are much lesser perfromers than him, so he is safe. But ideally he should be looking to end up with career average into 40's. It also helps he is in lower middle order because he can face the second new ball as he is used to opening against brand new ball in ODI even though it is different one. Always helps to have a middle order player who is used ot face the new ball in some other format. Can survive himself the second ball as well as protect the tail by making the second ball old.

Re: First Test: New Zealand v England. 22-26 March.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 10:27 am
by sussexpob
Adi wrote:Is that because Footbal is now number 1 sport in your country ? that the Cricket loss and horrible batting averages of specialist batters are getting ignored. I can't imagine what Indian cricketers with average of 23, 27 and 33 will have to go through if he is selected even in squad, lest the playing 11. :lol:


The whole England setup is about justifying its large salary's than making honest and tough decisions. At some point, Ali was picked left field to bowl spin and that decision is still trying to be justified as he trotts out every game, while Leech is overcoming all kinds of obstacles, but climbs a mountain to find another one staring at his face.

Flower made a decision that Leech wasnt good enough. So we now have to wait 2-4 years for there to be a soft cover up of that decision, and for it to be presented not as a failure of Flower's eye, but for Flower to be responsibile for all his positive maturity in the game. So with every passing county season, Lions tour etc, Flower will throw a soundbite about Leech "really improving", when his county average is steady. Once enough water is under the bridge the decision will be reversed and repacked as a Flower masterstroke. Flower created him in his lab. And while that process is going on, England will pick an inferior spinner to save face. Thats what its become.

Most probably, Leech will get picked after Crane has another 10 caps to fail. Then the accompanying narrative of Mason "not really being capable of learning those lessons he was taught" will be leaked to the press, and Leech will get a chance.

And so it goes.....

Remember when Hameed had every England fan talking about him like they were witnessing a 16 year old Sachin? For all the development speeches we get from Herr Director, about player pathways etc, I wonder what part says pick a teenager, let him go to the toughest away tour to the planet and average 40 while showing mental application in a disaster series, then never pick him again after he fails in a few county games.

England are like a cancer patient that reject chemotherapy, and instead double down on heavy drinking and 40 a day smoking habit.

Re: First Test: New Zealand v England. 22-26 March.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 11:31 am
by meninblue
sussexpob wrote:
Adi wrote:Is that because Footbal is now number 1 sport in your country ? that the Cricket loss and horrible batting averages of specialist batters are getting ignored. I can't imagine what Indian cricketers with average of 23, 27 and 33 will have to go through if he is selected even in squad, lest the playing 11. :lol:


The whole England setup is about justifying its large salary's than making honest and tough decisions. At some point, Ali was picked left field to bowl spin and that decision is still trying to be justified as he trotts out every game, while Leech is overcoming all kinds of obstacles, but climbs a mountain to find another one staring at his face.

Flower made a decision that Leech wasnt good enough. So we now have to wait 2-4 years for there to be a soft cover up of that decision, and for it to be presented not as a failure of Flower's eye, but for Flower to be responsibile for all his positive maturity in the game. So with every passing county season, Lions tour etc, Flower will throw a soundbite about Leech "really improving", when his county average is steady. Once enough water is under the bridge the decision will be reversed and repacked as a Flower masterstroke. Flower created him in his lab. And while that process is going on, England will pick an inferior spinner to save face. Thats what its become.

Most probably, Leech will get picked after Crane has another 10 caps to fail. Then the accompanying narrative of Mason "not really being capable of learning those lessons he was taught" will be leaked to the press, and Leech will get a chance.

And so it goes.....

Remember when Hameed had every England fan talking about him like they were witnessing a 16 year old Sachin? For all the development speeches we get from Herr Director, about player pathways etc, I wonder what part says pick a teenager, let him go to the toughest away tour to the planet and average 40 while showing mental application in a disaster series, then never pick him again after he fails in a few county games.

England are like a cancer patient that reject chemotherapy, and instead double down on heavy drinking and 40 a day smoking habit.


Haseeb Hameed did his job in India well imo, even though it was his first international tour here. He has ability to stay till the ball gets old enough to say that the opener has survived it till it got old enough for middle order batsmen. His technique was good. He also had second line of defense for some deliveries. Temperament was there to see. Yes he did not punish couple of full tosses but so what. He has not yet stayed on wicket like Cook or Chet or Virat or Rahul or Sachin but he has shown he can be least bothered about being bored of following the monotonous pattern of keeping an eye on ball, judging the line and length, leaving it. Only in cases it was a rank bad ball he punished it, which is what Chet does. To me he showed the test match requisites. I know his SR was also like that of Chet. One has to remember that the whole Indian dressing room smiled and joked when Chet took the first run against SA in recent test series after playing 54 dot balls in 3rd test. Team India knows how valuable it is even though at times he has been asked to score fast in test matches since Virat became captain. There is nothing wrong to waste 9 overs if a batsman like Chet or Cook or Haseeb Hameed scores nothing in those. When such players get set they will make opponent bowl 180 overs. The middle order can still milk most of the 180 overs against a tired pace attack and old ball. With the flashy expansive batsmen like Mark, James, Ben, Jonny, Dawid there has to be someone in team around which an innings has to built. Someone who can stay for 400 or more balls on his day. At least one such batsman is required. England need that. India have Chet and Virat. SA had Amla for most part of his career and now Elgar is trying to be the sticky batsman. Aussies had Clarke and now Smith. England need someone once Cook stops staying 400+ balls. I am in no way saying Haseeb is next Chet,Virat,Sachin,Amla,Cook ,Clarke type long inning player. But he imo is surely the player with immense temperament with a huge value on his wicket. I don't see James, Dawid, Ben, Jonny survive for 400 balls or so. But Haseeb shows that he has temperament and can be one player who can stay not out for a day or more.He might not actually do it but still the average of 43 that too in home of India and Team India's peak was an achievement. Surely he did better than what other have. I would like to see him play again. Drop him if he flops , that is understandable. But a selector really drops someone with an average of 43 on his first tour that too given the adverse conditions and a home team at it peak. And if that 43 is not good how suddenly 24, 27, 34 is acceptable ?

India Series:
Test 1: 31 and 82 runs (82 and 177 balls)
Test 2: 13 and 25 but he did see new ball enough. (50 and 144 balls)
Test 3: 9 and 59 ( 31 and 156 balls)

Clearly it says he is not a walking wicket or is prone to get out even if new to the crease. My question to England selectors is how many modern day batsmen tcan be said to possess such a quality. Please name them even from all cricketing teams. Okay it was just one series but still it was a successful one. Apart from that, runs were also there at average of 43. Where he failed given the debut series and other factors. :dunno Even the sky high confidence after a good debut series will plummet southwards given the way he was treated.

As for Jack Leach i did not see him bowl so i will not comment on his subjective bowling skills. But from discussion here few months back i do remember he was the highest wicket taking spinner in domestic season. Moeen Ali is not a specialist spinner. He has to work in nets on his batting as well as bowling. Have some specialist spinner who only has to concentrate on bowling and fielding in nets and someone who can take five fers like Swann and Monty. Not Moeen's fault that he does not runs through sides. he isn't a specialist bowler. In this case the selectors are expecting an all rounder to bowl like a specialist bowler. Only rare allrounders could do this and Moeen is surely not of those types/class.

England are like a cancer patient that reject chemotherapy, and instead double down on heavy drinking and 40 a day smoking habit
============
I agree to this analogy, doing totally opposite things. Need better averaging player and have one but dump him and continue to play someone averaging very lesser.

Re: First Test: New Zealand v England. 22-26 March.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 1:18 pm
by sussexpob
Its a point I have worn out to death, but you can have all the scouts, data, coaches, academies etc in the world, but if you do not have a consistent expectation on players to outline how they get opportunities, then you have very big problems. I look at Hameed and think, what is asked of him? He averaged huge in county cricket as a teenager, with a rare talent for toughness and patience. He stepped up to the test team and did well in a disaster tour. As far as I am concerned, everything he has done so far to the point he was dropped, was to make him the ultimate case of a player who deserves lots of time and opportunity to develop. Yet, he was dropped after a few bad county games.

So, what does that mean? If Root fails in 3 consecutive games for Yorkshire, does he get dropped? Of course not, so why does a lad become invisible at his age when he does? He was 19-20 at the time, if anyone deserves a chance to fail a few times and get those bad patches ignored, its someone like Hameed.

So we take from Hameed that county performances matter. So Sam Robson went back to county cricket, scored runs? Stoneman has done worse than Robson, no 100, gets more tests. Compton scored 2 x 100 in the time Stoneman has had, and got dropped. What is the criteria? Why are some players picked with inferior performances? Why does county form matter in some case, and not in others?

Take Woakes. Not picked in the summer because he hadnt played enough after his injury. Stokes cracks someones skull and walks in after 20 overs of cricket in New Zealand.

There isnt a plan.

Re: First Test: New Zealand v England. 22-26 March.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 5:06 pm
by Making_Splinters
Hameed didn’t fail in a few county games, he failed for an entire season and for the Lions. I don’t quite see how a player who can’t buy a run against any attack should suddenly come good again at Test Level. As a Lancastrian it was somewhat puzzling how he didn’t get dropped last season.

Re: First Test: New Zealand v England. 22-26 March.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 5:26 pm
by sussexpob
Making_Splinters wrote:Hameed didn’t fail in a few county games, he failed for an entire season and for the Lions. I don’t quite see how a player who can’t buy a run against any attack should suddenly come good again at Test Level. As a Lancastrian it was somewhat puzzling how he didn’t get dropped last season.


How many matches did he play between the squad being selected for the south Africa games and leaving India?

Re: First Test: New Zealand v England. 22-26 March.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 7:35 pm
by Durhamfootman
and I thought he'd originally lost his place because of an injury (perhaps surgery) and then couldn't re-discover his form at county level afterwards.

Re: First Test: New Zealand v England. 22-26 March.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2018 3:08 am
by Alviro Patterson
Adi wrote:Is that because Footbal is now number 1 sport in your country ? that the Cricket loss and horrible batting averages of specialist batters are getting ignored.

I can't imagine what Indian cricketers with average of 23, 27 and 33 will have to go through if he is selected even in squad, lest the playing 11. :lol:


Football was always the national sport in England

Problem is there are lack of English qualified players performing well in County Cricket. Next in line is probably Livingstone and Gubbins, afterwards it becomes worrying unless if other players step up.

The irony of selecting Hameed is Bayliss wanting an England top 3 to be more aggressive in their stroke play, particularly when Compton got dropped despite a respectable performances in South Africa.

Domestic batsmen get little opportunity to play red ball cricket in July and August when the weather is at it's most reliable, pitches have firmed up and become more conducive to spin. Batsmen getting chance to either bat big or bat out a draw rarely exists.

Re: First Test: New Zealand v England. 22-26 March.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:47 am
by meninblue
Alviro Patterson wrote:
Adi wrote:Is that because Footbal is now number 1 sport in your country ? that the Cricket loss and horrible batting averages of specialist batters are getting ignored.

I can't imagine what Indian cricketers with average of 23, 27 and 33 will have to go through if he is selected even in squad, lest the playing 11. :lol:


Football was always the national sport in England

Problem is there are lack of English qualified players performing well in County Cricket. Next in line is probably Livingstone and Gubbins, afterwards it becomes worrying unless if other players step up.

The irony of selecting Hameed is Bayliss wanting an England top 3 to be more aggressive in their stroke play, particularly when Compton got dropped despite a respectable performances in South Africa.

Domestic batsmen get little opportunity to play red ball cricket in July and August when the weather is at it's most reliable, pitches have firmed up and become more conducive to spin. Batsmen getting chance to either bat big or bat out a draw rarely exists.



When people like Virat Kohli, Rahul ,Sangakkara, Sachin and many other legend batters of other teams go to England to play county cricket, the system must be in decent enough shape at least. Can we expect legendary batters to go to Afghanistan to play in their domestic system. No way. So certainly the county is valued by modern greats. Which then raise a question in my mind - if the system is good and hence valued, why is the local output not good. There are certified coaches so i don't see a problem with that as well. International bowlers liek Philly and Morkel bowling, Zak bowling so the batters of England are also getting nice tough batting practice. I think it must be lack of talent because other considerations for output are well in place.


The second point you made about not enough chance to bat long : Last year similar voices were raised by Pakistani domestic players. Many pak international current and ex players also felt they do not have long term batsman for 400 ball innings is that the Quaid -E-Azam (will refer to QEA henceforth because its long). There the groundsmen get only 2 days to prepare a wicket. But naturally wickets were falling very easily last year in QEA. Batsmen started raising voices. The Pak management said they had to cram the domestic trophy for various reasons. Actually the current Pak administrator are the best which they had in previous tenures. Najam Sethi is much better than Taquir Zia, nasim Ashraf, Shahryar Khan , Ijaz Butt and Zaka Ashraf.

But say if Pak and England domestic format have roads will it start to produce Cook, Amla, Clarke, Rahul, Sachin, Chet, Virat etc. How will they fare on other wickets then which help even little bit of swing. Will they then start producing bad bowlers because bowlers will not get help. So how true is the thought that lack of flat wickets is not helping to develop marathon innings batsmen. I wonder.

Re: First Test: New Zealand v England. 22-26 March.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:58 am
by bigfluffylemon
Word is that Leach is likely to come in for Moeen at the very least. That needed to happen.

Re: First Test: New Zealand v England. 22-26 March.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2018 1:22 pm
by andy
bigfluffylemon wrote:Word is that Leach is likely to come in for Moeen at the very least. That needed to happen.



For me both, leach and livingstone should be there

Re: First Test: New Zealand v England. 22-26 March.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:54 pm
by m@tt
sussexpob wrote:
Making_Splinters wrote:Hameed didn’t fail in a few county games, he failed for an entire season and for the Lions. I don’t quite see how a player who can’t buy a run against any attack should suddenly come good again at Test Level. As a Lancastrian it was somewhat puzzling how he didn’t get dropped last season.


How many matches did he play between the squad being selected for the south Africa games and leaving India?


Due to the Champions Trophy pushing back the start of the South Africa series, the squad was picked on 1st July. At this point, Lancashire had played 8 games, Hameed playing 7 of them.

His scores, in order, were 47 & 45, 0, 0 & 7, 0, 9 & 10, 18 & 38*, 17 & 23. That's 214 runs at 19.

England would have loved to have picked him. But his game was in a complete mess and it was decided, wisely in my opinion, that it wouldn't be helpful to pit him against Rabada, Philander and Morkel in such form.

Re: First Test: New Zealand v England. 22-26 March.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:02 pm
by m@tt
bigfluffylemon wrote:Word is that Leach is likely to come in for Moeen at the very least. That needed to happen.

Word is certainly that Moeen will be dropped. Who comes in seems to be undecided. There appear to be three options being considered:

1) Leach in for Ali as a straight swap. Tail lengthens.
01 Cook // 02 Stoneman // 03 Root // 04 Malan // 05 Stokes // 06 Bairstow // 07 Woakes // 08 Broad // 09 Overton/Wood // 10 Leach // 11 Anderson

2) Leach in for Ali, a batsman in for Overton. No-one is mentioning Vince, but I presume he's still in contention. I'd much rather Livingstone play though.
01 Cook // 02 Stoneman // 03 Root // 04 Malan // 05 Livingstone/Vince // 06 Stokes // 07 Bairstow // 08 Woakes // 09 Broad // 10 Leach // 11 Anderson

3) Drop Ali for a batsman and rely on part-time spin
01 Cook // 02 Stoneman // 03 Root // 04 Malan // 05 Livingstone/Vince // 06 Stokes // 07 Bairstow // 08 Woakes // 09 Overton/Wood // 10 Broad // 11 Anderson

I'd be tempted to go with the second option. Yes it means 3 seam options, but Anderson, Broad and Woakes are experienced enough to do the work - it's not like we're giving Overton, Wood or Curran that burden. And it may be that Stokes can bowl a couple of short spells, even if at a lower pace and run-up.

Re: First Test: New Zealand v England. 22-26 March.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:05 pm
by m@tt
Btw, Hameed scored a pre-season century for Lancs today. Hopefully a sign of things to come?

Re: First Test: New Zealand v England. 22-26 March.

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2018 11:23 am
by Alviro Patterson
Adi wrote:
The second point you made about not enough chance to bat long : Last year similar voices were raised by Pakistani domestic players. Many pak international current and ex players also felt they do not have long term batsman for 400 ball innings is that the Quaid -E-Azam (will refer to QEA henceforth because its long). There the groundsmen get only 2 days to prepare a wicket. But naturally wickets were falling very easily last year in QEA. Batsmen started raising voices. The Pak management said they had to cram the domestic trophy for various reasons. Actually the current Pak administrator are the best which they had in previous tenures. Najam Sethi is much better than Taquir Zia, nasim Ashraf, Shahryar Khan , Ijaz Butt and Zaka Ashraf.

But say if Pak and England domestic format have roads will it start to produce Cook, Amla, Clarke, Rahul, Sachin, Chet, Virat etc. How will they fare on other wickets then which help even little bit of swing. Will they then start producing bad bowlers because bowlers will not get help. So how true is the thought that lack of flat wickets is not helping to develop marathon innings batsmen. I wonder.


9 of the 14 County Championship matches are going to be played in April/Early May and September. Pitches in April are greener and softer, whilst the weather is unsettled making it difficult for top 4 batsmen to build an innings of any sort as the ball zips round. Pitches in September are more slow and worn, but no bad thing with the upcoming tour of Sri Lanka.

There are only 3 County Championship matches in July and August where the weather is at it's finest. Batsmen need a block of matches where they know they can bat at length, also pace bowlers need to be tested for their endurance in bowling 20 over days under summer weather rather than take cheap early season 5-fers.