posted Jun 6, 2008

I have been watching and following cricket for 60 years now and I despair at what I see with the national team.
The selection methods used appear to bear no resemblance to the form of the player but to the obsession of keeping a settled squad.
The selection of any team surely must be made on current form. Not because 12 or 18 moths ago they happened to score runs or bowled well or because an individual is a “Good Captain”
The National squad should have more players in it and should always and only, be picked on form. When not picked the player should revert to county cricket and stay there until his form returns.
Why is it when a bowler fails to perform he is dropped almost immediately yet a batsman is allowed to go for months and not perform yet retain his place.

I don’t believe in the fact that some team member’s positions should be safe like Vaughan just because he is a good captain. Does in make us in some strange way become satisfied with the fact “We lost the last Ashes Series, but we had a good captain” I accept that occasionally he comes up with the goods, but his many failures at the top tend to set the trend for the rest of the innings.
I cannot think of any other sport where an out of form player is allowed to regain his form at International level only.
I think they should go back to the county scene and regain it there, not just after one good innings but over a period. Our problem appears that in building a tight squad of 12 or 13 players, a failure is absorbed and allowed to hide instead of allowing another player to come in who has performed consistently over recent matches, not during last season or the season before.
Strauss has proved that this is the way it should be done. If there is any criticism on his recent history it is that he was allowed to continue to fail for too long before going back to basics which he did with the results that are there for all to see.
I feel what has been good for Strauss should be good for Collingwood and Bell and even Vaughan come to that.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 6, 2008

Dear Trev

I could believe you that your opinion has been formed after lots of deep thought etc etc, or I could look at the evidence of your argument being rubbish and believe otherwise. As to the 'abuse', its a bit rich coming from the guy bringing up 'ignorance' and snide 'chill pills'. Glass houses spring to mind.

Likewise with your contention that I haven't replied to your points - I have, and you haven't replied to mine that Bell was one of our best players in NZ. Only a daft 90's style selection policy would drop him the series after.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 6, 2008

McCullum seems to have forgotten he's not wearing gloves.... drops a sitter off Broad at 2nd slip!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 6, 2008

Dear Count,
This is going nowhere. Lets just agree to disagree. I have no idea where your 1990's point comes from though. If its what it implies, I can only assume you have fallen into the trap of writing off any ideas from the past. How you are trying to pin me to your own notions of 1990's thinking is beyond me. Still, maybe you can explain that one in less than a 1000 words.
Still, we shall see. We obviously both rate Bell. Bells' technique isnt what it was and I dont know why it has deteriorated since NZ, but it has. The hundred you refer to was the last time he's looked any good. I want whats best for Bell and England as do you. We may have different ideas but at least we can agree that Bell is an important player in England's future.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 6, 2008

Well, that's my prediction of 199 all out gone out the window....

Good innings by Broad there! He seems to have cemented the number 8 position.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 6, 2008

Thanks to another IT delay @work, I can follow the score once more...
NZ are being embarrassed by Anderson and Broad, in particular - d'you reckon that he'll make his half-century?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 6, 2008

well played Anderson

whoever sent you ahead of Sidebottom and Panesar was a stroke of genius

partnership 76

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 6, 2008

This match is utterly gripping! New Zealand are being ground down here...

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 6, 2008

NZ are rubbish - i told you so

Broad is one of the worlds most deadliest and lethal batsman - i told you so - He will be in the Top 10 if not Top 5.

Vettori mad the wrong choice to bowl first - i told you so

England have won this match very easily and convincingly - i told you so.

I told ya but yall thought different.

NZ cannot get back in the match and will not mount a bid to rescue this match becos they gave it to England on a plate.

Have a good day/night

and

God Bless.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 6, 2008

If Anderson keeps on bowling like this next year, I CONFIDENTLY PREDICT THAT ENGLAND WILL WIN THE ASHES. IT IS TIME THUGS LIKE M SYMONDS,M HAYDEN THE HULK and OTHER GERIATRICS GET THEIR DUE DESSERTS.

And Panesar will certainly help, if he continues to get these inexplicable front foot LBWs.

add comment | complain about this comment