Will the West Indies ever rise again?

[Jamee999]

What an odd thing to say.

 

[Trumpers_Ghost]

My theory on West Indies is that what has done them in is Professionalism.

In amateur days the natural athleticism would shine through, but now the full time pro status of cricket in other parts has raised the level to a standard that west indies, despite their athleticism they can not match due to low population x general brokeness. Factor in the the pro appeal of other sports such as football, basketball, athletics which all have greater opportunities for the individual and cricket misses out.

The IPL may be the saviour. A shift towards a predominantly club based pro league structure for cricket, with internationals rarer (and hence of more interest) would provide more proffesional opportunities for prospective cricketers.

My opinion only, but I see it as essential to crickets survival in the future as a pro sport (and not just in windies)

cheers

 

[aussie]

Nope. All they have developed since the SA tour in 07 is more of a back-bone & are no longer pushovers of between PAK 97 to ENG 07.

 

[sammy2]

I think WI will be ranked number one in a few years, im going to cry when chanderpaul is gone but I pray he stay around long enough to see WI rise to the top. The team will most likely be considered the best before the icc ranks it number one.
Alot of people don't realize whats taking place with the WI team, they are all learning their skills on the international level. Aussies will put up a lil fight for now, but their backs have already been broken - twice. WI proved its capable of beating SA, its just India who hasn't played a stronger WI team.
The craziest aspect about this WI team is the fact in the last year or so the team was never at full strenght. No bravo before, better bowlers watch as powell convince selectors he shouldn't be in the team. Today taylor is carrying a injury but Eng is still fighting to stay alive. WI currently has the best elements available in world cricket, they just need the right formula. Benn or Russian ? etc etc ... How does this under gayle's leadership move forward ? It will be very interesting,

 

[Athlai]

I think WI have a shot at hitting number 1 in ODI's in upcoming years, Gayle, Sarwan and Chanderpaul have easily been some of the top limited overs batsman in recent times. While Edwards and Taylor are the beginnings of a good attack. Bravo also reinforces the team quite well.

In Tests I think we should see them fighting for the number 4 spot along with teams like Sri Lanka, England, Pakistan (if they ever play again) and Jesse Ryder's New Zealand.

 

[Richard]

What an odd thing to say.

Not really.

 

[oitoitoi]

No chance will WI ever be no.1 again in any form of the game. The best they can hope for is to win consistently at home and to compete abroad. They just don't have the resources or population.

 

[Richard]

My theory on West Indies is that what has done them in is Professionalism.

In amateur days the natural athleticism would shine through, but now the full time pro status of cricket in other parts has raised the level to a standard that west indies, despite their athleticism they can not match due to low population x general brokeness. Factor in the the pro appeal of other sports such as football, basketball, athletics which all have greater opportunities for the individual and cricket misses out.

Cricket was fully professional and had been for years in some parts of the cricket World in the 1970s and 1980s. What's done West Indies in is that, when the stream of supreme talent that ran so astonishingly for so long finally dried-up, the lack of professionalism there cost them as it had not cost more professional others.

Professionalism, that is, in the sense of attention-to-detail, as the game in West Indies has been fully paid for quite a while now and the effect has been negligable.

Also if there's a lack of talent, no amount of being paid well will neccessarily improve "professionalism" in the sense of attention-to-detail. English cricket in the second half of the 1980s - the blackest time in England Test history - was in a truly shambolic state, and that was because of both lack of talent and the diabolical way the game was approached by most county players.

County cricket now is unrecogniseable for county cricket in the 1980s - and you think, there's still much that could be done better with it.

 

[Richard]

No chance will WI ever be no.1 again in any form of the game. The best they can hope for is to win consistently at home and to compete abroad. They just don't have the resources or population.

Nor did they have such a thing between 1976 and 1986, but they were still almost untouchable for that entire decade.

West Indies could perfectly easily be number-one again at some point, it just depends on the talent that comes through, and how well it's managed. Recently, there has been an abundance of neither of those, but there is absolutely no good reason why such a thing cannot eventually happen.

"Ever" is a hell of a long time.

 

[sammy2]

Nor did they have such a thing between 1976 and 1986, but they were still almost untouchable for that entire decade.

West Indies could perfectly easily be number-one again at some point, it just depends on the talent that comes through, and how well it's managed. Recently, there has been an abundance of neither of those, but there is absolutely no good reason why such a thing cannot eventually happen.

"Ever" is a hell of a long time.

Haha ... We will see

 

[Neil Pickup]

I think it's now safe to say that England are exceedingly unlikely to ever "rise again".

What an odd thing to say.

Not really.

"Ever" is a hell of a long time.

 

[Richard]

You know, there's a saying in physics that once you pass a certain distance, something becomes (in terms of a lens) infinity.

The same can be applied to England ever being a dominant team the way they were in most of the Golden Age and the 19th-century. I just think it's been too long to really make it likely to happen again. West Indies, on the other hand, have been the best side around for more than not of the last 60 years. To suggest it's not likely again for them is rather different to suggesting it's not likely for England.

 

[zaremba]

You know, there's a saying in physics that once you pass a certain distance, something becomes (in terms of a lens) infinity.

The same can be applied to England ever being a dominant team the way they were in most of the Golden Age and the 19th-century. I just think it's been too long to really make it likely to happen again. West Indies, on the other hand, have been the best side around for more than not of the last 60 years. To suggest it's not likely again for them is rather different to suggesting it's not likely for England.

Welcome back Richard.

Not sure I follow your logic on this one mate but hey.

 

[Richard]

I just think we've seen enough evidence to suggest that England can never again stand astride The World like they did pre-WW1. West Indies, well, who knows, maybe they never will again either, but we've seen absolutely nowhere near enough evidence, with a mere 10 years (1997/98-2007), to discern this with any confidence at all.

Anyways, thanks for the welcome back post-connection-problems... for the 2nd time. Let's hope there's no 3rd.

 

[shivfan]

I see richard's point....

'Ever' could mean after you and I are dead and gone.

As for this time, I wish I could share sammy's enthusiasm. But I see this current team competing in mid-table with the likes of Pakistan, Sri Lanka and England, while India, Australia and South Africa contest number one status over the next couple of years.

 

[oitoitoi]

Nor did they have such a thing between 1976 and 1986, but they were still almost untouchable for that entire decade.

West Indies could perfectly easily be number-one again at some point, it just depends on the talent that comes through, and how well it's managed. Recently, there has been an abundance of neither of those, but there is absolutely no good reason why such a thing cannot eventually happen.

"Ever" is a hell of a long time.

Back then the level of gym work done my cricketers was considerably less than it is today so the West Indies' natural athleticism gave them a big advantage. In this age of protein shakes (god's gift to bodybuiliding) and personal trainers it's a much more even playing field. It then comes down to talent and technique, this is where the probabilities are against the Windies, they have such small numbers that although they produce a disproportionate amount of top level talent they'll always struggle. The lack of money for top class coaches and facilities also detracts from the ability of players to improve their techniques. I'm not saying the WI won't produce top class players, it just won't produce enough when compared to other countries such as India, Australia and South Africa to consistently win

That said I hope I'm wrong and that next week WI discover 4 6'7 angry men who like bowling 95mph+...

 

[Richard]

Back then the level of gym work done my cricketers was considerably less than it is today so the West Indies' natural athleticism gave them a big advantage. In this age of protein shakes (god's gift to bodybuiliding) and personal trainers it's a much more even playing field. It then comes down to talent and technique, this is where the probabilities are against the Windies, they have such small numbers that although they produce a disproportionate amount of top level talent they'll always struggle. The lack of money for top class coaches and facilities also detracts from the ability of players to improve their techniques.

You know, it's been observed many times that there are plenty of money-making opportunities in West Indian cricket - the board-officials' incompetence (successive ones, that is, not just those at the present time) have just prevented this from happening. There is absolutely no reason why this cannot happen at some point in future. So at some point, grass-roots coaching may indeed be pepped-up, considerably.

As for gym work done in the 1970s, well, I'm not entirely sure where your expertise on the matter comes from but there's no way cricketers did not use gyms in the 1970s. Absolutely no way at all. Nor train in other ways. Michael Holding may have been a natural athlete, but he ran several kilometres every day to supplement this. He was far from alone. Nutritionism may have advanced beyond recognition the last 15-20 years but fitness training has been in relatively good state - for those who are willing to work hard and repetetively - for a fair while now.

West Indies were supremely "professional" (in terms of attention-to-detail) in the 1970s and 1980s. There was also an unreal supply of remarkably talented players. Recently, this talent has either dried-up or been poached by other sports depending on who you listen to (most likely of course a combo of the two). This is the main reason West Indies struggled so badly 1997/98-2007. The board officials' continued incompetence - while other boards have gotten increasingly businesslike and world-wise in the meantime - has been another severely limiting factor, but don't get the idea that without one, the other wouldn't matter. Both need to be solved before West Indies will truly rise again, but if they do, they could easily produce more phenomenal teams.

 

[Redbacks]

They were just fortunate to have so many brilliant bowlers around for a sustained period. Perhaps 'exhaustion of the game in general' in the Windies was the reason they declined.

An absence from the summit might cause a regeneration for cricket.

We see it here in Aus:
a) The media attempt to put shame on the side for being ambitious.
b) A mass of Australian dreamers form around the game talking of how they enjoy seeing the team start losing more games, shame on a side of superior skill defeating an inferior one. Not seeking justice, but a tall poppy ****!
c) people begin to write: how you play >>>> winning (Hardly an australian view on sport)

 

[Richard]

They were just fortunate to have so many brilliant bowlers around for a sustained period.

A sustained period of 25 years? That suggests a bit more than good fortune to me. And don't forget there were previous periods where the exact same thing happened; Hall, Sobers and Gibbs (and Griffith, briefly); Ramadhin and Valentine; Constantine, Martindale, Francis and Griffith.

Anyway that's always the story for any outstanding team. They've become outstanding because of the fact that a group of outstanding players (not just bowlers, but you can have excellent batting and if the bowling's poor your team will still be poor; you can still have a good team with excellent bowling and poor batting) have emerged simualtaneously - in some cases, two or three generations of outstanding players have emerged simualtaneously. This (ie, several generations rather than just one) was certainly the case with West Indies '73-'97. And likewise with Australia '89-'06/07.

Without outstanding players, you have no outstanding team. If you have fewer outstanding players then you're going to have a lesser team, though if your domestic and grass-roots structure is good then you're going to be moderate rather than diabolical.

But every outstanding team in history has emerged purely because of the fact that a group of outstanding players have coincided.

 

[Redbacks]

I guess I am thinking: It just happened for a sustained period thus people began to become less and less concerned with the methods, just expecting more bowlers to emerge.

I wonder if these 'methods' actually exist or is it just implied that as the recent top side Australia 'believes' in it's strong domestic comp, winners tell the story. WI could return back to the top and Australia decline, leading to 'methods', 'domestic comp' falling into the background..?