Cricket 24/7  

Welcome to the Cricket 24/7.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. There are also more forums available to members, such as the Lounge - where members chat about just about anything under the sun except cricket!

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   Cricket 24/7 > Cricket Discussion Forums > England
Register FAQDonate Members List Calendar Casino Articles Terms of Use Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 14th August 2013, 17:47   #61
Summer of '77
Legendary
 
Summer of '77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London-Essex
Team(s): Kent, Essex, Surrey Stars
Posts: 9,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali TT View Post
Yes but the Windies were only bowled out 6 times in the whole series...
Still had to bowl 160 overs per Test at England, though, which is more than England are presently having to bowl at Australia. History records that series as a West Indies blitzkrieg but there were passages of resistance from the home team. It was in the following home series against WI in 1988, after drawing the opening Test, that England were more comprehensively blown away.
Summer of '77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2013, 18:21   #62
Summer of '77
Legendary
 
Summer of '77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London-Essex
Team(s): Kent, Essex, Surrey Stars
Posts: 9,314
Just to bring this back to somewhere like the original topic, I'm reminded of Michael Holding's presence in that 1984 series. He'd long ceased to be the quicksilver speed merchant of eight years previously, having surrendered the new ball to Marshall a couple of years earlier. Up until the final Test at The Oval, he'd put in around 90 overs (30 per Test) at medium-fast, chipping in with wickets here and there but nothing like the contribution of Garner and Marshall. Well, England finished their first innings not far short of WI's score and were set around 370 to win. At 75-1, they'd made a decent start. And then Holding did something he'd not done all summer...he came off his long run, stepped his pace up several notches and blew away Broad, Gower and Lamb in the space of 15 runs. England fell 170 runs short, Holding 5-43. The old boy had juice left in the tank, he hadn't had to put the hard yards in as there were others to share the load. Next week, is it likely that Jimmy (42 overs per Test thus far) will be able to recover his zip and spark in quite the same way? Some are even talking of resting him as he looks pooped.

Good nostalgia-tinged discussion, wish I could continue it but I have now to repair to Old Camden Town for some dirty celtic punk.
Summer of '77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2013, 00:52   #63
Silly Deep Cover
Returning Officer
 
Silly Deep Cover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Leafy West London
Team(s): Wales
Posts: 22,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summer of '77 View Post
Just to bring this back to somewhere like the original topic, I'm reminded of Michael Holding's presence in that 1984 series. He'd long ceased to be the quicksilver speed merchant of eight years previously, having surrendered the new ball to Marshall a couple of years earlier. Up until the final Test at The Oval, he'd put in around 90 overs (30 per Test) at medium-fast, chipping in with wickets here and there but nothing like the contribution of Garner and Marshall. Well, England finished their first innings not far short of WI's score and were set around 370 to win. At 75-1, they'd made a decent start. And then Holding did something he'd not done all summer...he came off his long run, stepped his pace up several notches and blew away Broad, Gower and Lamb in the space of 15 runs. England fell 170 runs short, Holding 5-43. The old boy had juice left in the tank, he hadn't had to put the hard yards in as there were others to share the load.
Ooh, yes, I remember that Test. I also remember that, despite being miserable that we were being 'blackwashed' I was quite pleased for Holding.
__________________
"Do I contradict myself? Very well, then, I contradict myself. I am large, I contain multitudes." (Walt Whitman)
Silly Deep Cover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2013, 01:03   #64
geoff_boycotts_grandmother
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 28,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summer of '77 View Post
Do what? During that 1984 series, Harper got through the third highest number of overs of the West Indian bowlers.
Holding bowled 6.2 overs fewer, but only because he missed a test.

Harper basically bowled the same amount as Eldine Baptiste, with the 4th and 5th bowlers bowling considerably less than Garner, Holding and Marshall per test. Marshall only played 4 tests (was that his broken arm?) but still bowled 40 overs more than Harper.

And if you had Marshall, Holding and Garner why would you chuck the ball to Eldine Baptiste or Roger Harper?

ps Baptiste averaged more than Desmond Haynes with the bat!
geoff_boycotts_grandmother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2013, 01:36   #65
Summer of '77
Legendary
 
Summer of '77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London-Essex
Team(s): Kent, Essex, Surrey Stars
Posts: 9,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother View Post

And if you had Marshall, Holding and Garner why would you chuck the ball to Eldine Baptiste or Roger Harper?
As I suggested, to give the main men a breather, keeping them at their optimum standard and ensuring you win the series 5-0.

But, in the case of Harper, it's understandable that Lloyd might want a different angle of attack when an opponent was proving difficult to dislodge. In the opening Test, Harper took just one wicket in each innings, in both cases England's top scorer, Botham after a two and a half hour stay and Downton after a vigil lasting more than 4 hours. He repeated the dose at Leeds, removing Broad for 32, Lamb for 100 and Gower for 43. Those wickets tended to come early in Harper's spells and there's every likelihood that, with the removal of pace from the attack, England's batsmen relaxed and succumbed - which only reaffirms the handy tactical ace Lloyd was keen to keep up his sleeve (and one for which he is seldom remembered).

I think with Baptiste, West Indies were also considering their future options. Holding and Garner had both turned thirty and they didn't yet seem convinced about Walsh or the sometimes erratic Davis (Patterson had barely played f-c cricket by then and Ambrose had yet to emerge).

Last edited by Summer of '77 : 15th August 2013 at 08:45.
Summer of '77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2013, 01:02   #66
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summer of '77 View Post
... I'm not advocating 5 bowlers come what may but I just feel there are times when a tweak to England's rigid plans might bear fruit. An extra specialist spinner at OT, say. So, he might have gone for 90 from 20 overs but what if he'd manage to hustle out Clarke and/or Smith? Even if he'd had a mare and had to be removed from the attack quite quickly, that's probably not a bad gamble set against the measly quota of runs England would have missed from the sixth batsman. ...
So at the Ove would you go with something like
1Cook
2Root
3Trott
4KP
5His Bellship
6Priory
7Broad
8Tremlett
9Swann
10Finn
11Kerrigan
?
sanskritsimon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2013, 08:22   #67
Hector
Established International
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Southampton
Team(s): Deportivo Finance, Hampshire, Berkshire
Age: 39
Posts: 3,052
Either pick a 5th bowler or give James Taylor a match as i'm not convinced Bairstow has it, long-term.
Hector is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2013, 12:10   #68
Summer of '77
Legendary
 
Summer of '77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London-Essex
Team(s): Kent, Essex, Surrey Stars
Posts: 9,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanskritsimon View Post
So at the Ove would you go with something like
1Cook
2Root
3Trott
4KP
5His Bellship
6Priory
7Broad
8Tremlett
9Swann
10Finn
11Kerrigan
?
It certainly looks a bit barer, given Prior's lack of productivity with the willow of late (hence why I say I wouldn't set a rigid template featuring 5 bowlers). But, yeah, what the hell, the series has been emphatically secured and there are future battles to be planned so I'd be happy to go in with a raft of bowlers and see how they fare. If Kerrigan is deemed the next quality slow left armer off the rank, then I'd like to see him in (have England really only played two different spinners in the last 6 years? They played about three times as many as that when they had Lock and Laker!). One less batsmen might even inspire the top order to better things too.
Summer of '77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2013, 13:03   #69
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summer of '77 View Post
It certainly looks a bit barer, given Prior's lack of productivity with the willow of late (hence why I say I wouldn't set a rigid template featuring 5 bowlers). But, yeah, what the hell, the series has been emphatically secured and there are future battles to be planned so I'd be happy to go in with a raft of bowlers and see how they fare. If Kerrigan is deemed the next quality slow left armer off the rank, then I'd like to see him in (have England really only played two different spinners in the last 6 years? They played about three times as many as that when they had Lock and Laker!). One less batsmen might even inspire the top order to better things too.
I think I agree. Why not take the chance to get as close to 5-0 as possible?

Prior is a funny one though. If he's lost his touch with the bat then he has to be replaced sooner or later, because almost any replacement would be better in both disciplines. He still makes regular keeping mistakes. I'd stick with him for this test, but if he doesn't score runs here then England should think hard about picking Foster for the winter tour.
sanskritsimon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2013, 13:12   #70
Sir Virgs and Zamora
Posting God
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 21,903
Have we struggled to score enough runs? Yes

Have we struggled to bowl out oz? No

To me this is not screaming out for five bowlers.

Is woakes injured? Isn't he more a like for like than Chris "I average more than forty at the oval this season" tremlett

Woakes has 26 wickets at 22 this season. (43 with bat too)
Tremlett averages 40 for his 19 wickets.

I don't quite buy the theory that tremlett will get out better batsmen for fewer runs than he does in county cricket.

If want five bowlers then it could be stokes at 6 but he is batting badly in champ although has 32 wickets at 25
Sir Virgs and Zamora is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2013, 14:34   #71
Summer of '77
Legendary
 
Summer of '77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London-Essex
Team(s): Kent, Essex, Surrey Stars
Posts: 9,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Virgs and Zamora View Post
Have we struggled to score enough runs? Yes

Have we struggled to bowl out oz? No

To me this is not screaming out for five bowlers.
I do agree and it would be lovely to have a Tom Graveney or John Edrich to bring back into the side, somebody of proven quality who might feasibly hit a hundred on recall. All I'm saying is that if the selectors are going to keep faith with somebody averaging below 30 and looking perpetually vulnerable, wouldn't it be better to change tack and say "We can't score enough runs so let's make sure we don't have to" and bolster the bowling. I know this is gonna sound harsh but I do believe Australia have been allowed to score more runs this series than they should have.
Summer of '77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2013, 14:41   #72
martin201002
County Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Hartlepool
Team(s): Notts Liverpoolfc england
Posts: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanskritsimon View Post
I think I agree. Why not take the chance to get as close to 5-0 as possible?

Prior is a funny one though. If he's lost his touch with the bat then he has to be replaced sooner or later, because almost any replacement would be better in both disciplines. He still makes regular keeping mistakes. I'd stick with him for this test, but if he doesn't score runs here then England should think hard about picking Foster for the winter tour.
You have got to be joking right? He has one bad series and you reckon we should replace him with foster? Don't think that'll be happening.
martin201002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2013, 15:39   #73
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by martin201002 View Post
You have got to be joking right? He has one bad series and you reckon we should replace him with foster? Don't think that'll be happening.
No, I'm not joking. And I didn't say that, I said England should think hard about it. But I don't think it'll be happening either. Mind you, he's not just had a bad series, it's been really awful. How long would you continue with a keeper picked for his batting who regularly makes wicketkeeping errors but doesn't produce runs? It looks particularly odd when there's another wicketkeeper in the side who's doing much better with the bat but is on the verge of being dropped for not scoring enough runs.
sanskritsimon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2013, 15:46   #74
martin201002
County Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Hartlepool
Team(s): Notts Liverpoolfc england
Posts: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanskritsimon View Post
No, I'm not joking. And I didn't say that, I said England should think hard about it. But I don't think it'll be happening either. Mind you, he's not just had a bad series, it's been really awful. How long would you continue with a keeper picked for his batting who regularly makes wicketkeeping errors but doesn't produce runs? It looks particularly odd when there's another wicketkeeper in the side who's doing much better with the bat but is on the verge of being dropped for not scoring enough runs.
I would stick with prior for the 5th test take him to Aus we have a tour game against new south wales if prior doesn't perform it that fixture consider replacing him. If he does get replaced I would rather it be a younger player than James Foster. So who are our young decent wicket-keeping options?

However I will admit Foster is a bloody fantastic wicket-keeper, especially when he is standing up to the stumps.
martin201002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2013, 16:15   #75
DoStopItAggers
County Pro
 
DoStopItAggers's Avatar
Black Dog Stopping Play!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 899
Oh sweet Lord let's not start down this road, the Chris Read Fanclub will be sharpening their pitchforks and lighting their torches.

In all seriousness it is a tough one as Prior is such a crucial part of the set-up and brings balance to the side if scoring runs. But the England management have been richly rewarded for persevering with players long after most fans had called for them to be dropped - Collingwood, Cook & Broad all recent beneficiaries of that, and thankfully so too.
__________________
Members feel free to check out my "Black Dog Stopped Play" blog!!!
DoStopItAggers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2013, 16:32   #76
slowest_bowler
Established International
 
slowest_bowler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Notts, England
Posts: 3,713
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoStopItAggers View Post
Oh sweet Lord let's not start down this road, the Chris Read Fanclub will be sharpening their pitchforks and lighting their torches.
Sadly Read is in a huge trough of form at the moment and we are just hoping he'll get back to the exquisite performances of the previous four years or so. It would be just his luck to be chosen for England before that happens.
slowest_bowler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2013, 16:42   #77
martin201002
County Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Hartlepool
Team(s): Notts Liverpoolfc england
Posts: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowest_bowler View Post
Sadly Read is in a huge trough of form at the moment and we are just hoping he'll get back to the exquisite performances of the previous four years or so. It would be just his luck to be chosen for England before that happens.
Chris Read is 35, we need someone to be a wicket-keeper for a long time. Out of Bairstow, Buttler and Foakes who is the better long form wicketkeeper/batsman?

You know all this talk about prior needing replacing, more than likely in the next test he'll score a ton and pouch some magnificent catches .
martin201002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2013, 16:52   #78
Summer of '77
Legendary
 
Summer of '77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London-Essex
Team(s): Kent, Essex, Surrey Stars
Posts: 9,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by martin201002 View Post
Chris Read is 35, we need someone to be a wicket-keeper for a long time. Out of Bairstow, Buttler and Foakes who is the better long form wicketkeeper/batsman?

You know all this talk about prior needing replacing, more than likely in the next test he'll score a ton and pouch some magnificent catches .
I hope he does. I was initially highly sceptical when Prior was being touted up circa 2004. I saw him play some cracking knocks for Sussex but keep like a drain on occasions. He's one of those players who seems to have improved with the responsibility of playing at a higher level and he won me over.

Of other candidates, Adam Wheater now has an opportunity to press his claims as first choice at Hants. An explosive batsman but I've never seen him with the mitts on. Ironically, the kid he's usurped, Michael Bates, is widely rated as the best young technician in the country. There seems to be a surfeit of promising young batsmen-keepers around the shires; Kent's Sam Billings is another but, like Buttler and Wheater, he's struggled to get himself glove time.
Summer of '77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2013, 17:19   #79
Sir Virgs and Zamora
Posting God
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 21,903
Kieswetter is the best first class batsman. It would be very odd to pick jos who does not get gloves for us.

Craig has a very good first class record.

Prior will have a long time yet though.
Sir Virgs and Zamora is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2013, 17:33   #80
martin201002
County Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Hartlepool
Team(s): Notts Liverpoolfc england
Posts: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Virgs and Zamora View Post
Kieswetter is the best first class batsman. It would be very odd to pick jos who does not get gloves for us.

Craig has a very good first class record.

Prior will have a long time yet though.
Keiswetter would be the better choice he has done well in a number of England performance squad tours, buttler is likely to move at end of the season to find more glove time isn't he? Somerset are quite lucky to have two players of that quality.

Keiswetter is likely to get into the England t20 squad, at least he should done superb in the friends life.
martin201002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:03.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Cricket247.org