There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

What's buzzing in the world of cricket....

Re: There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

Postby andy » Fri May 18, 2018 8:11 pm

I have issues with this squad....

The openers: Let's be honest, Cook and Stoneman, pick themselves as no other openers banging door down, so see how they go, stoneman has got starts time for him to kick on...Cook i think he will retire very soon particuarly if he has a bad summer..

Middle order: I would have put Malan at 3, with Root 4, Bairstow 5, Stokes 6, Foakes 7 (wk) I don't see the point of Buttler being there....shocking selection, so many better options to go there IMO.... Poor from Smith, and a real step backwards :( Even Buttler must have been stunned with that selection

Spinner: Not much choice given the injury list, but i would have gone with Virdi

Seamers: Pretty standard, not sure how effective a bowler Wood will be in tests these days...but give him a go... I hope Ball hasn't slipped too far down the radar made a excellent start to season as well

Given injuries etc i would have gone with

Cook
Stoneman
Malan
Root
Bairstow
Stokes
Foakes (wk)
Woakes
Broad
Anderson
Virdi
2012 - ENG vs SA ODI series winner
2013 - US Open golf winner, WI vs PAK winner , ENG vs OZ ODI and T20 winner
2015- Open golf championship winner
2017 - OZ vs Pak odi'S, AUS vs NZ ODI, NZ vs SA Tests , WI vs PAK tests
2018 - NZ vs Pak t20 FL winner2018 - SA vs Ind test match fl winner US open golf FL [color=#0000FF] - [color=#FF0000]Open golf FL winner



Essex CCC county champions
andy
 
Posts: 19210
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 2:25 pm
Location: Essex
Team(s) Supported: Essex CCC
West ham united
Sunrisers Hyderberad
England

Re: There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

Postby ianp1970 » Fri May 18, 2018 9:20 pm

Have we forgotten the shenanigans in the early 90s trying to get an all-rounder into the side - post Beefy?

Capel, de Freitas, Lewis, Reeve et al were all tried, before the hierarchy realised they already had one in Alec Stewart, the wicket-keeper!

The current team is even better placed with Ben Stokes as a fulcrum, so why they would consider trying to shoe-horn a second glove-man into the side is quite beyond me :d'oh:
Last edited by ianp1970 on Fri May 18, 2018 9:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sports broadcasting media nut miscast as a hard-working family man. Or should that be the other way around?

2020 Women's T20 World Cup
2019 New Zealand v Bangladesh Tests, Vitality Blast & County Championship Division 1 6 Nations Rugby, Wimbledon Tennis & US Open Tennis
2018 New Zealand v West Indies Combined, Afghanistan v Bangladesh T20s, England v Pakistan Tests, England v India T20s+ODIs, Sri Lanka v England Tests, Mzansi Super League & Bangladesh v West Indies Combined Australian Open Tennis, 6 Nations Rugby, Masters Golf, Premier League Football & French Open Tennis
2017 Premier League Football, French Open Tennis & Wimbledon Tennis
2016 South Africa v England ODIs, England v Sri Lanka Tests, County Championship Division 2 & Australia v New Zealand ODIs Australian Open Tennis, 6 Nations Rugby, Masters Golf, Premier League Football, Players Golf, US PGA Golf & US Open Tennis
2015 Indian Premier League, The Ashes & England v Australia ODIs Masters Golf, Premier League Football & US PGA Golf
2014 Australia v England ODIs 6 Nations Rugby, Premier League Football, Players Golf, Wimbledon Tennis, Open Golf & US Open Tennis
2013 Players Golf, Premier League Football, French Open Tennis, Open Golf & US PGA Golf
2012 New Zealand v Zimbabwe ODIs, Sri Lanka v England Tests Betting & WI vs NZ ODIs US Open Golf & Open Golf
2011 India v England ODIs & Bangladesh v Pakistan Combined Wimbledon Tennis
User avatar
ianp1970
 
Posts: 6426
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:54 pm
Team(s) Supported: England
Warwickshire
Rugby
Market Deeping

Re: There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

Postby ianp1970 » Fri May 18, 2018 9:24 pm

m@tt wrote:
ianp1970 wrote:Has any great test side - or a good or decent one for that matter - ever had a specialist bat at 7?


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... e=allround

That's a list of runs made at #7 when not keeping wicket. As you can see, most are all-rounders.

I would suggest Clive Lloyd who had 700+ runs with 1 century at #7. He did bowl but it was occasional medium, resulting in just 10 wickets from 110 Tests.


Matt,

Is it possible to run this with 2 'keepers' in the same side?

Off the top of my head only the great Kumar would justify inclusion as a batsman alone :dunno
Sports broadcasting media nut miscast as a hard-working family man. Or should that be the other way around?

2020 Women's T20 World Cup
2019 New Zealand v Bangladesh Tests, Vitality Blast & County Championship Division 1 6 Nations Rugby, Wimbledon Tennis & US Open Tennis
2018 New Zealand v West Indies Combined, Afghanistan v Bangladesh T20s, England v Pakistan Tests, England v India T20s+ODIs, Sri Lanka v England Tests, Mzansi Super League & Bangladesh v West Indies Combined Australian Open Tennis, 6 Nations Rugby, Masters Golf, Premier League Football & French Open Tennis
2017 Premier League Football, French Open Tennis & Wimbledon Tennis
2016 South Africa v England ODIs, England v Sri Lanka Tests, County Championship Division 2 & Australia v New Zealand ODIs Australian Open Tennis, 6 Nations Rugby, Masters Golf, Premier League Football, Players Golf, US PGA Golf & US Open Tennis
2015 Indian Premier League, The Ashes & England v Australia ODIs Masters Golf, Premier League Football & US PGA Golf
2014 Australia v England ODIs 6 Nations Rugby, Premier League Football, Players Golf, Wimbledon Tennis, Open Golf & US Open Tennis
2013 Players Golf, Premier League Football, French Open Tennis, Open Golf & US PGA Golf
2012 New Zealand v Zimbabwe ODIs, Sri Lanka v England Tests Betting & WI vs NZ ODIs US Open Golf & Open Golf
2011 India v England ODIs & Bangladesh v Pakistan Combined Wimbledon Tennis
User avatar
ianp1970
 
Posts: 6426
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:54 pm
Team(s) Supported: England
Warwickshire
Rugby
Market Deeping

Re: There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

Postby sussexpob » Fri May 18, 2018 11:13 pm

ianp1970 wrote: Off the top of my head only the great Kumar would justify inclusion as a batsman alone :dunno


Kumar wasnt even close to being the first wicket keeper-bat to play for Sri Lanka, who would then transform to a batting specialist worthy of continued selection.

Asanka Gurusinha was arguably Sri Lanka's best bat before their 1996 World Cup win, and he was picked originally as a wicket keeper before giving up the gloves (and even more bizarrely, retiring at 29 straight after the World Cup win) . He won the World Cup with Hashan Tilkeratane, another specialist keeper who's batting talent at 6-7 meant he was persuaded to drop the gloves and focus on batting, and he went on to average 45 over the next decade. The person who replaced him with the gloves in around 1994, Kaluwitharana, is credited with creating the pinch hitting top order tactic that won Sri Lanka that tournament (and pretty much changed ODI forever), so Id say he justified his slot as opener.

After that, Dilshan was a specialist keeper who ended up being a specialist bat. He got his debut in Zimbabwe in 1999-2000, I cant remember if it was injury, or my guess most likely with the venue of the tour and timing being that people refused to tour (it must have been 98 to 2000 period when South Africa toured and reported the utter chaos on arrival, after which other teams started to pull out)..... either way, he was one of three keepers that batted as specialists after basically most of the line up went missing. He smashed a big score in one of the 2 tests, and he became a batsman, but he has kept for Sri Lanka in all formats.

Dinesh Chandimal was picked as a keeper originally. Could even say for a 4 year period Prasanna held his own with the bat, either side of a career that started and fell away badly. Could even argue in the limited format, that someone like Perera is currently justifying his T20 pick without the gloves, and maybe given time and his talent, might prove to be a good test batsman.
2010 French Open fantasy league guru 2010 Wimbledon fantasy league guru 2014 Masters golf fantasy guru 2015 Players Championship FL Guru 2016 Masters Golf Fantasy Guru

And a hat and bra to you too, my good sirs!
sussexpob
 
Posts: 35322
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:14 pm
Location: Asker, Norway
Team(s) Supported: Sussex and England Cricket, Vålerenga Fotball/FC Barcelona/Seagulls! ....
England and Norway at everything else

Re: There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

Postby sussexpob » Fri May 18, 2018 11:26 pm

Other than that, Alec Stewart is the main one I can think of, who would have played with various other keepers. ABDV and Quinton de Kock are both keepers who have manned behind the stumps in international cricket, and both have justified being picked together. Did Dhoni give up the gloves vs South Africa in 2010 when Saha came in? Other than that, Tom Latham was retained as a batsman when Watling came to take the gloves from him. Couldnt name you an Aussie, unless you count Handscomb taking over in a few ODIs.

The only other two I could name were Younis Khan and Jimmy Adams, both I am sure were keepers before getting international caps, but both were picked as specialists.

Umar Akmal was a keeper too. Could say he justified his pick as a specialist, but his brother certainly didnt justify his pick behind the stumps.
2010 French Open fantasy league guru 2010 Wimbledon fantasy league guru 2014 Masters golf fantasy guru 2015 Players Championship FL Guru 2016 Masters Golf Fantasy Guru

And a hat and bra to you too, my good sirs!
sussexpob
 
Posts: 35322
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:14 pm
Location: Asker, Norway
Team(s) Supported: Sussex and England Cricket, Vålerenga Fotball/FC Barcelona/Seagulls! ....
England and Norway at everything else

Re: There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

Postby Arthur Crabtree » Sat May 19, 2018 12:16 am

Brendon McCullum.
I always say that everybody's right.
User avatar
Arthur Crabtree
 
Posts: 80417
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 12:52 pm
Location: Nottingham
Team(s) Supported: Yorkshire.

Re: There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

Postby sussexpob » Sat May 19, 2018 10:14 am

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Brendon McCullum.


A very obvious one, but for some reason I remember him keeping a lot more. Apparently played 52 games as a specialist bat, average 42!
2010 French Open fantasy league guru 2010 Wimbledon fantasy league guru 2014 Masters golf fantasy guru 2015 Players Championship FL Guru 2016 Masters Golf Fantasy Guru

And a hat and bra to you too, my good sirs!
sussexpob
 
Posts: 35322
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:14 pm
Location: Asker, Norway
Team(s) Supported: Sussex and England Cricket, Vålerenga Fotball/FC Barcelona/Seagulls! ....
England and Norway at everything else

Re: There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

Postby Dr Cricket » Sat May 19, 2018 10:22 am

Might be wrong but arn't most of these names players that didn't want to keep anymore.

1 Cricket Major
2019 IPL Season.


Dr Cricket
 
Posts: 9403
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 9:46 am
Location: UK London
Team(s) Supported: India

Re: There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

Postby m@tt » Sat May 19, 2018 10:00 pm

ianp1970 wrote:
m@tt wrote:
ianp1970 wrote:Has any great test side - or a good or decent one for that matter - ever had a specialist bat at 7?


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... e=allround

That's a list of runs made at #7 when not keeping wicket. As you can see, most are all-rounders.

I would suggest Clive Lloyd who had 700+ runs with 1 century at #7. He did bowl but it was occasional medium, resulting in just 10 wickets from 110 Tests.


Matt,

Is it possible to run this with 2 'keepers' in the same side?

Off the top of my head only the great Kumar would justify inclusion as a batsman alone :dunno


Not as a direct query, however I can do a lookup of keeper-only stats versus batsman-only stats. There's obviously a lot of the latter, so I've only taken those who have scored 1000+ runs.

Sangakkara, Stewart and McCullum are indeed the best examples of players who did better as a batsman. ABdV does better with the gloves. There are various examples of players who kept very occasionally, pretty much all did worse with the gloves.

Image
Andy Flower wrote:This is going to test my coaching expertise. This is the worst case I've ever seen.
User avatar
m@tt
 
Posts: 1305
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:20 pm
Team(s) Supported: .
England and Warwickshire.

Also tend to follow any former/current/prospective England players.

606 Username: matt_h88

Re: There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

Postby sussexpob » Wed May 23, 2018 9:17 am

Well we now have had the scouts named that will work with the new system. I say new, Strauss essentially stated last night that this was simply formalising an existing partnership with these scouts who had worked with the ECB in the past. A bit like claiming you revamp a department in a business by giving permanent contracts to your temp staff. Not much of a refit at all.

The new masterplan we were told would be for no county bias to be allowed in the system. Newell and Fraser had to quit roles at their counties to be considered, we didnt want any suggestion that selections would be based on favoritism. On that note, we have got:-

Tresco - Contracted to Somerset as a player.
Richard Dawson - Gloucestershire Head Coach.
Glen Chapple - Lancashire Head Coach.
James Taylor - I believe he was appointed by Northants as a OD batting consultant coach fairly recently

Definitely no questions of impartiality here. The only two people who are not currently connected to a county are Steve Rhodes and Chris Read.

Steve Rhodes was sacked in the winter and stood down from his development team touring roles for the ECB, after it became known that he had covered up the fact that one of his players, Alex Hepburn, had been charged with a double rape. Rhodes covered that fact up it seems for a whole winter and playing season as Hepburn was involved with the team, with the club only knowing of the issue when it became obvious the lad would be in court to set a trial date and have bail conditions set, which the employer may have had to react to. A baffling appointment quite frankly.

And Chris Read took up the role of Uppingham School coach/director this year. I wonder how many county matches he will be seeing, considering they have about 15 teams, a few of which play a lot of games, but in combination basically fill the calendar for the summer. When they announced Read in the role, it was justified on the basis that he would be working with all levels of students, all teams, all ages and sexes and not just managing the firsts or key prospects, so id have to assume the only stuff he is judging on will be a day night match with a beer in hand. Ironically though, it has been said that these scouts will work "through the player pathway"...... so essentially, even Read working at Uppingham School throws up a huge case of bias towards his own students.

The mixed messages dont end there though. He was keen to point out these scouts will not be working in data or analytics. Oh no, thats a bad word. Its all about pure cricket assessments, and what not. Although when we were told we needed to increase the scouting network, we were told it would tie in with development and player pathways, and that the development message was clearly lead by analytics. We then offered the top job to a person with no previous qualifications (who happened to be a mate) on the basis he was a data genius, who was keen to point out when putting together his squad that he hadnt used any of that data rubbish either. And to top it all off, the Lions and the Academy, who are putting together the player pathways, should you be so inclined to read their strategic approach, will list in great detail how much emphasis is placed on analytics. Mohammed Bobat, the Head of Player Identification, is another man who spends all of his public speaking time endorsing analytics.

So what the hell is going on here?

The scouts are to head a new system that has no bias..... but have been appointed from an existing system, with all but one who was recently sacked for gravely unethical behaviour having some form of bias to a team. They were meant to be producing data, but now we are being told they are not.

The National Selectors appointment was solely justified on his analytics ability, but his first squad announcement was keen to seperate itself from that nonsense.

Meanwhile, the England Team Director has waltzed off and left his job in the hands of the Player Pathway manager, who is Mr Data Analytics personified. His academy and staff are all about data, data, data.......

At every opportunity we are spun some contradictory grand plan. One has to conclude, there is no plan. Nothing is new. There are no ideas, just a practical application of brainstorming, going on.
2010 French Open fantasy league guru 2010 Wimbledon fantasy league guru 2014 Masters golf fantasy guru 2015 Players Championship FL Guru 2016 Masters Golf Fantasy Guru

And a hat and bra to you too, my good sirs!
sussexpob
 
Posts: 35322
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:14 pm
Location: Asker, Norway
Team(s) Supported: Sussex and England Cricket, Vålerenga Fotball/FC Barcelona/Seagulls! ....
England and Norway at everything else

Re: There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

Postby m@tt » Wed May 23, 2018 11:02 pm

None of the scout positions are full-time, so all of them will have other jobs and commitments. If you only want scouts with no club connections then you'll be massively restricting your options, plus even if they have no current connection you can't avoid the possibility of bias towards old clubs and teammates. If the scouts chosen are unsuitable because of their connections, then who should be recruited?

The scouts are not the ones making the decisions, they are there to provide input (in a more formalised way). The important thing is that the ones making the decisions are full-time and independent, unlikely at present with Newell and Fraser - and tbh the problem there was more them being part-time, as their club commitments restricted what they and who they could see, the independence thing was more theoretical.

A couple of points in agreement - I think it is too soon to be working with Rhodes. He has long been well thought of, but when you get sacked for that kind of thing, it's probably best you leave it a few years. And I'm also unsure if Read has the required time given his school role is full-time.

Btw, Strauss is taking time off to be with his wife who is undergoing cancer treatment and whose condition has, apparently, worsened in recent weeks. I share some of your frustrations with decisions he and the ECB are making, but to say he has "waltzed off" is a little uncalled for.
Andy Flower wrote:This is going to test my coaching expertise. This is the worst case I've ever seen.
User avatar
m@tt
 
Posts: 1305
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:20 pm
Team(s) Supported: .
England and Warwickshire.

Also tend to follow any former/current/prospective England players.

606 Username: matt_h88

Re: There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

Postby sussexpob » Fri May 25, 2018 8:39 am

None of the scout positions are full-time, so all of them will have other jobs and commitments. If you only want scouts with no club connections then you'll be massively restricting your options, plus even if they have no current connection you can't avoid the possibility of bias towards old clubs and teammates. If the scouts chosen are unsuitable because of their connections, then who should be recruited?


Of course, I accept that. My central point is not concerned with bias being a problem, it seems one that has been invented as a way to sell a new approach as inherently better. I am merely highlighting the fact that this is once again a contradiction coming from the administrators of the game who seem to not understand that people can see through their bullsh*t. Before the season, Strauss was telling Beefy to shut his mouth about bias in selection when the issue of Coughlin leaving to Notts was raised by the latter. He specifically took time to explain why it didnt matter. Then not long after he was telling us in a press conference about his new revamped system which would be designed bias free, with independant scouts and selectors. Within a month, he had hired someone disgraced for a serious ethical breach, and a load of other people with affiliations to sides, while telling us that the fact they could be bias wont be an issue.

So in a short space of time it went from taking time to specifically comment and defending it as a non issue, to being a central issue in a revamped system, to that system being implemented completely the opposite of how he said it would a few weeks later, and he was back to explaining why it wasnt an issue.

Does this seem like healthy guidance in the hands of people who know what they are doing.
2010 French Open fantasy league guru 2010 Wimbledon fantasy league guru 2014 Masters golf fantasy guru 2015 Players Championship FL Guru 2016 Masters Golf Fantasy Guru

And a hat and bra to you too, my good sirs!
sussexpob
 
Posts: 35322
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:14 pm
Location: Asker, Norway
Team(s) Supported: Sussex and England Cricket, Vålerenga Fotball/FC Barcelona/Seagulls! ....
England and Norway at everything else

Re: There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

Postby sussexpob » Fri May 25, 2018 10:33 am

This isnt isolated though. It seems this whole revamp is nothing but a false flag operation by Strauss and his superiors as a way to make it seem a lot more is going into the system than appears on the face of it. I have pretty much no doubt reading everything these people say on these matters, that they are hiding behind an elaborate deceit of making their job sound scientific and far more worthy that it actually is. It seems that, rather than put systems in place that work, we are consistently embedding bad practices simply to take away accountability from those people who administer the system. One only has to look at all the player pathway nonsense that Downton and Flower created, and which we were told Ed Smith was some once in a generation genius with, to see that.

I follow a lot of American Sports, and have read quite a few books on analytics and Sabremetrics, and I could pretty confidently say that it was never designed as a system in order to improve players. Flower particularly seems wrapped in this endless data capturing to define how players will react, their ability to learn and all this stuff, while Mo Bobat is obsessed with filtering in American practices in order to facilitate it. But these systems were introduced to take away from this type of approach. Analytics isnt really a coaching model, it is a GM model for putting together teams with the most efficiency. Ie, you arent measuring what a player CAN have, but DOES have, and how to fit that into creating a team.

I mean lets take an example. You might find that a crop of fast bowlers from the county game all have stand out performances and make the national development pool. For argument sake, they you have to pick 4 players out of 10, all from different counties. Almost certainly, Broad and Anderson are two of those bowlers, and almost certain to take the new ball. A sabremetrics type assessment would then try to look at the exact role of which the 3/4 bowler would have. Its about creating situational statistics and data that is relevant in order to assess exactly what you expect in a role specific model.

So, the next best county bowler averages lets say 20 a wicket. He gets picked as the third seamer. Yet, if you were to breakdown his county performances, you might find that he takes 50% of his wickets very cheap with the new ball. When asked to bowl after the 25 over mark, he averages 35. You have another who averages 34 per wicket over his career, but operates as a first change exclusively and bowls only with an old ball. Having created a new statistic to measure what you expect of the number 3 bowler, you actually find that the on paper hard case is that the presumed vastly inferior player is actually superior for the purpose. Yet, despite that data saying that, there seems to be this lack of understanding that the approach would not be to pick that guy who serves a better purpose, but to coach the first into being better. That is the England model. Its not used in American sports in this way. Its specifically focused on grouping skills at your disposal and running theoretical models to determine, when applying and creating data threads to work with, how to achieve maximum efficiency by applying actual metrics that have occurred. Not fantasy "could occurs".

Its pretty ironic, because England seem to be bizarrely committed to a system they dont understand the purpose for, but then also use contradictory principles to govern who they want to develop. Strauss the other day came out and said the new scouts will be looking for players who can bowl 90mp, spinners who rip it, bowlers who can reverse swing the ball, and look to bring these people into development setups.

Aside from the fact that its another obvious contradiction, because Strauss was keen to point out that its not all about data when elsewhere we are being told it pretty much is, this type of rating of potential stand out characteristics has been debated long in the world of baseball, but bizarrely a lack of understanding even in the professional game seems to sway many people back towards the traditional, old fashioned methods that analytics have largely started to disprove as being poor.

In baseball, the talk is always of the perfect "5 tool" prospect. Can he hit the ball, can he hit it hard, can he run fast, catch and have a powerful arm. A player who has all those prospects will guarantee himself a top billing in a draft, despite any contrary evidence of performance. Essentially, each player is given a score on these tools, and to be average or above average on all tools leaves you with a massive score. People still to this day grade prospects on those exclusively. Yet, people like Bill James will tell you (the man who ended the Red Sox 90 year wait to win a world series) that creating secondary assessments is of far more worth. If a player is terrible at hitting, but excellent at stealing bases, what does it matter that he cant hit? The net effect of a players worth only matters to how they perform, and any talents that contribute to that overall picture should be included. Traditional assessments like batting averages are argued to be defunct and way out of date.

As example, take three batters in cricket; Tendulkar, Vince and Jonty Rhodes. To give them a draft prospective, you would probably find that Vince would be best. A player with a crunching range of shots around the wicket, a better fielder and catcher than the great Indian, and rating as a "5 tool". Rhodes would probably score average batting and good fielding, Tendulkar in the above average but lacking 5 tools on his strength of arm and catching. Traditional batting averages would place Tendulkar on his own miles apart; so in draft terms, you might find Tendulkar and Vince coming up on scout assessments way into the higher picks at the top, with Rhodes being somewhere at the very bottom.

Yet, if you were to capture everything these people did on a cricket field and run it through a theoretical model on consistent performance, you might find that Jonty Rhodes was the most useful to a team. Tendulkar may score 15 runs per innings more, but travelling at speed past him more than a yard is going for runs, Rhodes is snaffling even aerial balls within a meter or two away from him. Tendulkar might drop a catch that should be taken, and cost his team a match losing score. Rhodes will pick something that had four written over it, and essentially act as a wicket taking fielder. Not that it might pan out that way, but I would have loved to see a secondary average rating for Jonty in his prime. You might find his mid 30s bat average translated to lower 50s when factoring just how many runs he was worth to a team.

So, it seems like very clouded thinking to use a hybrid approach. Whats the point of using analytics if the first filter is to essentially scrub those people out of the equation to whom analytics usage makes most sense? What you are doing is taking a very rough, non-performance based criteria which analytics itself would disprove as useful, then putting faith in the same system you disregard to tell you something about someone and their capacity to improve as to situations or occurrences where you might already have that skill set existing.

The net effect is, we then get a squad selected that displays that. Buttler is a "tool" player. Analytics would tell you that while his tools mean he has capability to smash an attack for a 100, he will do it far less than his use is worth. Yet, England will then be looking at this system to try to find his efficiency, while some county batsman skimmed out the system is averaging a 100 every time he comes in at 7 before his team have scored 200 runs.

For someone who was touted as a master of data and got the job on that basis as head selector, Buttler's selection is stone cold proof that he hasnt a clue what he is talking about. He makes no sense on past performance, on all ranges of performance, and from analytics.

So what are we to conclude? As I said, I will conclude that the system of player development, the academy, the player pathway, the directors, the selectors........ they have all shown, at every opportunity, that they literally havent a clue what they are doing. They dont understand the science they hide behind, they dont understand the theoretical models they purport to use. They have consistently failed to produce results, have consistently failed to justify their measures, and consistently failed to make any technical sense. All they do is to keep rehashing the same contradictory nonsense that makes the average person think "sh*t, they really know what they are talking about", while really the opposite is the case.

Strauss is in a way very lucky that his personal situation makes him safe in his job. He should be marched out the door, along with Flower, along with all the coaching staff, and lets sack of this joke selector now, because in one squad he has shown us exactly what measure of knowledge and skill he has.....Basically guesswork. Call it cricketing knowledge, as Smith and Strauss did...I call it guesswork. Kind of amazing isnt it. For all the talk about development and work ethic to improve, form, whatever.....

In the end we pick batsman who havent scored a 100 in 4 years. Says it all.
2010 French Open fantasy league guru 2010 Wimbledon fantasy league guru 2014 Masters golf fantasy guru 2015 Players Championship FL Guru 2016 Masters Golf Fantasy Guru

And a hat and bra to you too, my good sirs!
sussexpob
 
Posts: 35322
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:14 pm
Location: Asker, Norway
Team(s) Supported: Sussex and England Cricket, Vålerenga Fotball/FC Barcelona/Seagulls! ....
England and Norway at everything else

Re: There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

Postby Durhamfootman » Fri May 25, 2018 10:00 pm

when you talked about 5 tools, I thought you were referring to Strauss, Flower, Graves, Harrison and Mark Nicholas
2024 Big Bash League FL
2023 County Championship D1 FL
2023 WI-SA combined FL
2023 Big Bash League FL
2022 County Championship D1 FL
2022 T20 Blast FL
2022 Ashes FL
2021 All Year Fantasy Competition
2021 ICC T20 World Cup FL
2021 Big Bash League FL
2020 SA-England combined FL
2020 Caribbean Premier League FL
2019 NZ-England test FL
2019 WI-India combined FL
2019 The Open Golf FL
2019 French Open Tennis FL
2019 Sheffield Shield FL
2019 Players Championship Golf FL
2019 Women's National Cricket League FL
2019 Women's Big Bash League FL
2018 All Year Fantasy Competition
2017 The Open Golf FL
2016 Australia-South Africa test FL
2016 County Championship D1 FL
2016 Indian Premier League FL
2015 County Fantasy Manager
2015 Big Bash League FL
2014 WI-England test and ODI FL
2014 County Championship D2 FL
2013 County Championship D2 FL
2012 Twenty20 Cup FL
Durhamfootman
 
Posts: 60364
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 11:53 pm
Location: Chester-le-Street
Team(s) Supported: Durham CCC

Re: There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

Postby sussexpob » Fri May 25, 2018 11:07 pm

Durhamfootman wrote:when you talked about 5 tools, I thought you were referring to Strauss, Flower, Graves, Harrison and Mark Nicholas


:lmao
2010 French Open fantasy league guru 2010 Wimbledon fantasy league guru 2014 Masters golf fantasy guru 2015 Players Championship FL Guru 2016 Masters Golf Fantasy Guru

And a hat and bra to you too, my good sirs!
sussexpob
 
Posts: 35322
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:14 pm
Location: Asker, Norway
Team(s) Supported: Sussex and England Cricket, Vålerenga Fotball/FC Barcelona/Seagulls! ....
England and Norway at everything else

PreviousNext

Return to International Cricket

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests

cron