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 24th February 2016, 17:28   #221
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin Music View Post
If it were stats related, would you then be looking away from a worthwhile spinning option?
In principle, if the ODI game is looked at in isolation, it would be fine to have an all-seam attack if that were the best way to concede fewest runs. My impression, though, is that on most ODI surfaces the spinners usually go for fewer runs than the seamers, so I don't think you'd be likely to find a statistical warrant for dropping our spinners. There may be various possible explanations: spinners are harder to hit full stop, and/or the batsmen don't want to take risks against them, and/or they are only asked to bowl at periods in the game during which the batsmen have low ambitions and are just trying to run the ball around a bit and keep wickets in hand, etc. It's hard to tell, especially as captains have generally settled into a fixed formula, so there isn't much comparative data for e.g. spinners bowling from both ends with the new balls, or at the death, or seamers bowling from both ends in overs 25--30. There's also the fact that almost all ODIs are largely irrelevant, and as such they may tend to be used as a way for coaches to try out potential test players in various ways; so it may be that one of the reasons why Rashid is in the ODI team is to test him out alongside and in comparison to Moeen, not just as a potential replacement for him in the test side, but also because with Stokes in the test side there's a more realistic possibility of playing a second spinner than there would be with just a four-man attack.
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th February 2016, 17:40   #222
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Notts Exile View Post
... Do we have a better spinner? Maybe not but let's not exaggerate Moeen's abilities. As a batsman he plays pretty cameos mostly, quite often when that's not needed too. He's in the side because the cupboard is empty, full stop. Nothing more.
I think it's fairly clear that Tredwell's a better bowler. His ODI bowling stats certainly trump Ali's, and his test bowling stats, although only drawn from 2 tests, are superior as well (Tredwell 5.5 wkts per match, ave 29.2, econ. 2.45; Ali 2.8 wkts per match, ave 39.8, econ. 3.69). Ali's test strike rate is superior (64.5 to Tredwell's 71.4), but I suspect it's largely because he can't hold down an end and so never gets the graveyard shift. The cupboard isn't really empty; it's just that the selectors aren't interested in any spinner who isn't also a batsman.
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th February 2016, 17:44   #223
Notts Exile
International Cricketer
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Berkshire
Team(s): Notts and Forest
Posts: 2,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanskritsimon View Post
I think it's fairly clear that Tredwell's a better bowler.
Maybe he was but is he still? He seems to have gone down hill over the last couple of seasons.
Notts Exile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th February 2016, 17:53   #224
Sir Virgs and Zamora
Posting God
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 21,577
Quote:
Originally Posted by Notts Exile View Post
You tell us he has. His only Test ton didn't win a game, it didn't even save one (although I am being cruel there). His only ODI ton against a Test playing nation was in defeat too. In his last 27 innings (in different positions, to be fair) he has only topped 40 twice and 30 three times. Maybe he's not suited to any position other than opening? But is he in the best two at opening?

Trying to find other "match-winning innings". Are you thinking Cardiff ad Edgbaston? When Root outscored him on both occasions? Not sure you can call any of his innings' "match-winning".

Do we have a better spinner? Maybe not but let's not exaggerate Moeen's abilities. As a batsman he plays pretty cameos mostly, quite often when that's not needed too. He's in the side because the cupboard is empty, full stop. Nothing more.
Dismissing his ashes match winning knocks because someone else top scored is odd. In Cardiff and edgbasten moeen's innings created a match winning position. To argue anything else is odd imho. On that basis Michael bevan rarely won ODIs for oz because although he came in and finished the game someone else often got more runs. I suppose I could have said match defining because someone might score the biggest score of the match and it not be match winning.

I do however agree that he plays as the cupboard is bare.
Sir Virgs and Zamora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th February 2016, 18:37   #225
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Notts Exile View Post
Maybe he was but is he still? He seems to have gone down hill over the last couple of seasons.
Who knows ... I'm not best placed to comment.
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2016, 11:17   #226
Jock McTuffnel v3
World Class
 
Jock McTuffnel v3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cambridge
Team(s): England
Posts: 6,996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Notts Exile View Post

Do we have a better spinner? Maybe not but let's not exaggerate Moeen's abilities. As a batsman he plays pretty cameos mostly, quite often when that's not needed too. He's in the side because the cupboard is empty, full stop. Nothing more.
I find the "cupboard is bare" stuff baffling - Samit going to UAE, no 2nd spinner on SA tour, Rash given 3 tests then dropped whilst Moeen plods on with deteriorating returns.

Is there nobody in the Lions who could be blooded in tour games or via ODI cricket ??
__________________
Jock McTuffnel v3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2016, 11:24   #227
Chin Music
Administrator
 
Chin Music's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: la sala de opinion equivocada
Team(s): ****
Posts: 24,431
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jock McTuffnel v3 View Post
I find the "cupboard is bare" stuff baffling - Samit going to UAE, no 2nd spinner on SA tour, Rash given 3 tests then dropped whilst Moeen plods on with deteriorating returns.

Is there nobody in the Lions who could be blooded in tour games or via ODI cricket ??
Who would you pick then if not Ali? Rashid was mucked about last year when he should have played in the West Indies and that playing Pakistan in their (sort of) backyard is a pretty tough gig for a rookie test spinner to take up but even so his lack of consistency in tests was evident. Mo too was poor there but he did contribute to the first test victory in SA when bowled well.

I'm afraid the spinner debate almost seems like the Read v Jones debate in that it goes round and round in circles.
Chin Music is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2016, 11:28   #228
CDogg16
Established International
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 4,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Virgs and Zamora View Post
Dismissing his ashes match winning knocks because someone else top scored is odd. In Cardiff and edgbasten moeen's innings created a match winning position. To argue anything else is odd imho. On that basis Michael bevan rarely won ODIs for oz because although he came in and finished the game someone else often got more runs. I suppose I could have said match defining because someone might score the biggest score of the match and it not be match winning.

I do however agree that he plays as the cupboard is bare.
This myth about Moeen winning the Ashes is getting ridiculous. Hundreds win matches. Fivefers win matches. A breezy 30 at the back end of an innings cannot be called a match winning contribution. Taking a couple of wickets in an innings cannot be called a match wining contribution.

As his form with the ball has detoriated, you seemed to have invented a scenario which simply don't happen. If somebody read what you said and hadn't seen the Ashes, they would probably think England were 50-6 every time he came to the crease and he alone stood up to the Australian bowlers. He also picked up a couple of wickets in a few innings but he never produced a spell like Broad did. That was a match winning performance.
CDogg16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2016, 11:32   #229
Jock McTuffnel v3
World Class
 
Jock McTuffnel v3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cambridge
Team(s): England
Posts: 6,996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin Music View Post
Who would you pick then if not Ali? Rashid was mucked about last year when he should have played in the West Indies and that playing Pakistan in their (sort of) backyard is a pretty tough gig for a rookie test spinner to take up but even so his lack of consistency in tests was evident. Mo too was poor there but he did contribute to the first test victory in SA when bowled well.

I'm afraid the spinner debate almost seems like the Read v Jones debate in that it goes round and round in circles.
Ignoring the personalities, I'm suggesting there doesn't appear to be a succession path - as there has been with batsmen and even fast bowlers where they are brought in to the squad and given a decent extended chance to impress and stake their claim. Samit gets a recall. Rash gets thrown in and straight out after the toughest away series of all -where he nearly won a test with a 5 fer.
__________________
Jock McTuffnel v3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2016, 11:48   #230
D/L
Legendary
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 8,999
Something that seems to have been missed in the debate are each player's approach to batting. Both are quite talented batsmen, talented enough for this to be taken into account when it comes to selection, but Rashid has demonstrated a tenacity at the crease when needed, as we saw in the UAE.

Ali seems to have but a single approach to all situations.
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2016, 11:52   #231
Sir Virgs and Zamora
Posting God
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 21,577
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDogg16 View Post
This myth about Moeen winning the Ashes is getting ridiculous. Hundreds win matches. Fivefers win matches. A breezy 30 at the back end of an innings cannot be called a match winning contribution. Taking a couple of wickets in an innings cannot be called a match wining contribution.

As his form with the ball has detoriated, you seemed to have invented a scenario which simply don't happen. If somebody read what you said and hadn't seen the Ashes, they would probably think England were 50-6 every time he came to the crease and he alone stood up to the Australian bowlers. He also picked up a couple of wickets in a few innings but he never produced a spell like Broad did. That was a match winning performance.
What?

First test.

Moeen comes to the crease at 293 for 6 after England had lost root and stokes in very quick succession. Buttler was out shortly before the close to leave us 343 for 7. In the 24 overs moeen batted we got to 419 for 9. We scored 126 off 24 overs. Moeen got 77 of those off 88 balls. How can anyone say that his innings was not match turning?

Third test
We bowl out the Australians for 136. We are cruising at 132 for 2 but then bosh we are 190 for 7 and in danger of missing out on a substantial first innings lead. Moeen puts on 88 with numbers 9 and 10 and hits Mitch Johnson out of the attack with an assault that saw him ruined for the rest of the series after he hammered us at lord's. Moeen got out 9th and we had a first innings lead of 145 which set up our demolition of the Aussies. Grant root scored 4 runs more but this was not when the Aussie bowler smelt blood and had their tails up. We won that match without making a century. How anyone can argue moeen did not turn that match is beyond me.

Fourth test
We were already ahead in the game but coming in at 320 for 7 and scoring 38 off 24 balls was demoralising for oz and rubbed their noses in it. Not match defining like his other two but still more than useful.

This centuries win matches thing is bull. First test vs saffers. They had a century and five fer. We had neither and we won.
Sir Virgs and Zamora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2016, 11:57   #232
Sir Virgs and Zamora
Posting God
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 21,577
Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
Something that seems to have been missed in the debate are each player's approach to batting. Both are quite talented batsmen, talented enough for this to be taken into account when it comes to selection, but Rashid has demonstrated a tenacity at the crease when needed, as we saw in the UAE.

Ali seems to have but a single approach to all situations.
Was it his tenacity that saw him slog one in the air with arguably the worst dismissal of the tour?
Sir Virgs and Zamora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2016, 12:13   #233
CDogg16
Established International
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 4,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Virgs and Zamora View Post
What?

First test.

Moeen comes to the crease at 293 for 6 after England had lost root and stokes in very quick succession. Buttler was out shortly before the close to leave us 343 for 7. In the 24 overs moeen batted we got to 419 for 9. We scored 126 off 24 overs. Moeen got 77 of those off 88 balls. How can anyone say that his innings was not match turning?

Third test
We bowl out the Australians for 136. We are cruising at 132 for 2 but then bosh we are 190 for 7 and in danger of missing out on a substantial first innings lead. Moeen puts on 88 with numbers 9 and 10 and hits Mitch Johnson out of the attack with an assault that saw him ruined for the rest of the series after he hammered us at lord's. Moeen got out 9th and we had a first innings lead of 145 which set up our demolition of the Aussies. Grant root scored 4 runs more but this was not when the Aussie bowler smelt blood and had their tails up. We won that match without making a century. How anyone can argue moeen did not turn that match is beyond me.

Fourth test
We were already ahead in the game but coming in at 320 for 7 and scoring 38 off 24 balls was demoralising for oz and rubbed their noses in it. Not match defining like his other two but still more than useful.

This centuries win matches thing is bull. First test vs saffers. They had a century and five fer. We had neither and we won.
The fourth Test I imagine you have put in because you suddenly realised that Moeen didn't have the impact you thought he had. 38 off 24 balls and 'rubbing their noses in it' is not significant in the match situation, so we can agree that played no major role in the fourth Test. That leaves us with two matches he played a pivotal role in.

In the first Test he batted well, but Wood and abroad deserve just as much credit for sticking around and partnering him. You make no comment, about his bowling in this match which he is in the side to do. Wood and abroad are no mugs with the bat. It wasn't like he was having to face five balls an over. He did play in well in his knock however.

Moeen hit Johnson out of the attack in an assault that ruined him for the rest of the series? Not entirely true. Johnson was still a threat for the rest of the series and I have lost count over the amount of times Moeen has been hit out of an attack.

Basically you saying Moeen won the series by putting on runs with Broad and Wood in two of the five Tests. And seeing as England won these games comfortably, not by a handful of runs, your argument that Ali won the Ashes cannot be taken seriously. He contributed, as did most other members of the team, but was not a crucial player for England.
CDogg16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2016, 12:27   #234
Sir Virgs and Zamora
Posting God
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 21,577
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDogg16 View Post
The fourth Test I imagine you have put in because you suddenly realised that Moeen didn't have the impact you thought he had. 38 off 24 balls and 'rubbing their noses in it' is not significant in the match situation, so we can agree that played no major role in the fourth Test. That leaves us with two matches he played a pivotal role in.

In the first Test he batted well, but Wood and abroad deserve just as much credit for sticking around and partnering him. You make no comment, about his bowling in this match which he is in the side to do. Wood and abroad are no mugs with the bat. It wasn't like he was having to face five balls an over. He did play in well in his knock however.

Moeen hit Johnson out of the attack in an assault that ruined him for the rest of the series? Not entirely true. Johnson was still a threat for the rest of the series and I have lost count over the amount of times Moeen has been hit out of an attack.

Basically you saying Moeen won the series by putting on runs with Broad and Wood in two of the five Tests. And seeing as England won these games comfortably, not by a handful of runs, your argument that Ali won the Ashes cannot be taken seriously. He contributed, as did most other members of the team, but was not a crucial player for England.
Oh ffs. Here are some newspaper headlines from the test.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cri...MBLE-TEST.html

http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/33463749 Note they talk about KEY wickets.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cri...-and-ball.html Oh look bat and ball

The Aussie view of it was that moeen starred with bat and ball http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2015-0...ay-two/6608846

All about moeen with bat and ball putting England noses in front. http://talksport.com/cricket/ashes-2...o-150709155686

Let's look at Birmingham.

Oh look. Moeen and Finn the stars to put England within grasp of victory. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/art...s-special.html

Who was it who seines the moment? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cri...sual-self.html

What? A paper pointed out that moeen battered Mitch? http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blo...ohnson-england


You accuse me of making a myth out of how moeen was crucial two two of our three wins.
Sir Virgs and Zamora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2016, 13:08   #235
sharky
Posting God
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sunny Sussex
Team(s): Sussex, England
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin Music View Post
Who would you pick then if not Ali? Rashid was mucked about last year when he should have played in the West Indies and that playing Pakistan in their (sort of) backyard is a pretty tough gig for a rookie test spinner to take up but even so his lack of consistency in tests was evident. Mo too was poor there but he did contribute to the first test victory in SA when bowled well.

I'm afraid the spinner debate almost seems like the Read v Jones debate in that it goes round and round in circles.
At the moment it's a choice of someone who does a fairly simple skill very badly in Moeen or someone who does an incredibly difficult skill pretty ordinarily in Rashid. Like you I think Rashid should have played earlier to settle in rather than play against the likes of Misbah and Younus in their 'backyard' but I suspect he will always be a bit too loose to rely upon. All I really ask for is a finger spinner who is accurate and will get some help from the DRS but I don't think they will get a chance until we go somewhere we need a second spinner, as Cook seems happy with Moeen's batting and ability to take wickets rather than someone who can bowl spells.
__________________
She was like a candle in the wind...Unreliable
sharky is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2016, 13:11   #236
Sir Virgs and Zamora
Posting God
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 21,577
Beauty of stokes there sharky. With five bowlers you don't need the long spells.
Sir Virgs and Zamora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2016, 14:00   #237
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Virgs and Zamora View Post
Beauty of stokes there sharky. With five bowlers you don't need the long spells.
I think that's the point, really. Calling it beauty is a bit much in my opinion, but it's certainly true that with four good seamers England can get away without playing a proper spinner. Meanwhile, specialist batsman batting at 8 in not always rubbish with the bat shocker. MoM at Trent Bridge was Joe Root, and at Edgbaston was Steve Finn (England already had a lead of almost 50 when Ali came in).
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2016, 14:12   #238
Sir Virgs and Zamora
Posting God
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 21,577
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanskritsimon View Post
I think that's the point, really. Calling it beauty is a bit much in my opinion, but it's certainly true that with four good seamers England can get away without playing a proper spinner. Meanwhile, specialist batsman batting at 8 in not always rubbish with the bat shocker. MoM at Trent Bridge was Joe Root, and at Edgbaston was Steve Finn (England already had a lead of almost 50 when Ali came in).
3rd highest run scorer for England in the ashes. How many times has a number 8 done that I wonder?
Sir Virgs and Zamora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2016, 14:19   #239
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 19,614
Yikes, talk about bald men fighting over a comb.
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2016, 14:20   #240
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Virgs and Zamora View Post
3rd highest run scorer for England in the ashes. How many times has a number 8 done that I wonder?
Goalposts. How often is a specialist batsman at no. 8? Anyway, I've no intention of attempting to engage you in meaningful debate on this matter. Suffice it to say that having a batsman as good as Ali as far down the order as that does certainly convey some advantages in terms of the team's batting; but that nonetheless, you may be liable to exaggerate them.
sanskritsimon 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 23:38.



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