Players most kindly treated by selectors

[Arjun]

Id have Parthiv Patel in the test side 10 out of 10 times ahead of Dhoni to be honest. His keeping was not very good but it was far from shocking especially for someone who wasnt even 20 years old when he got dropped. In batting terms he was probably the best wicket keeper Batsman india has seen in god knows how many years.

What great thing has Parthiv ever done with the bat? For someone picked ahead of the far superior (with gloves) Nayan Mongia, he should have done a lot more. Frankly, they were afraid of playing him higher than Number 7 and he didn't even get too many ODI's– they had to have Rahul Dravid behind the stumps more often than not. He wouldn't fit into a top six for India even in one's wildest imagination.

except for scoring mountains of runs for leicestershire? Certainly why on earth he has never played a test match is beyond me.

He can't play spin, he's hopeless against serious pace and has never looked Test standard. His form for Leicester has been something out of the ordinary, rather than the norm.

Who would you have picked ahead of Das then? Certainly very few openers since have shown anywhere near as good a technique as Das did in his short career. Das failed in terms of temperment.

Ganguly and Tendulkar at the top would be far better than these two. Agreed, that would be Test cricket, but they've scored runs against Test standard bowling in ODI's. It's a question of adaptability, and we've seen other teams do just fine, so these two should have opened. The Indian team management missed a trick, and how, by not having them play as Test openers or stock bowlers.

Compared to say, Hamish Marshall? No. Vincent has been shifted up and down the batting order like a yo-yo and is usually the first casualty.

They picked Peter Fulton and were never too hesitant to drop him. Compare that to how often Vincent has been recalled, then he's done well, then fallen in a slump. While the constant shuffle up and down the batting order has been a problem, given how often he's been recalled, it's not enough. While my comments on the 'favourite' Kiwis (also Windies) are a little off the mark (at times way off), it's worth a thought, given how often they've been recalled or rotated, and yet the performance of the team at that time has been so bad. Sinclair got a 70 against Australia, but the Kiwis were crushed in that series, and he's not as consistent as expected. As for their bowlers, I have to ask– would you back a Kiwi attack without Bond and Cairns as much as you would back one with them?

 

[wpdavid]

Theres no way anyone could claim that fletcher has been anything other than ordinary when it comes to selecting players in the side. His policy of selecting bowlers purely based on pace and height is not only illogical but stupid when he continues to pick bowlers that cant bowl to save their lives in county cricket. Plunkett has been an absolute disaster for Durham, almost every other bowler in the durham side was performing better than him. Yet he gets picked to play for the national side ahead of the likes of Anderson- who was actually throwing in consistent performances in domestic cricket just before the winter tours. Now despite being injured he gets a free ride to Australia in the squad as reward for the tripe he bowled all summer. Similarly dropping Jones for Anderson in SA when Jones pretty much won the first test match for England in the series was absolutely ridiculous. This is why i question whether Fletcher/ Graveney have any clue when it comes to judging talent? Players like Liam Plunkett and Geraint Jones get extended runs in the side while a player who actually had potential like Simon Jones was always one bad game away from being dropped before he turned Ashes winner(which of course in the 'Duncan' dictionary translates to no matter how rubbish, you get 10 free tests before we reconsider your place in the side). At least lately in the batting department they've started to pick players that are actually scoring runs in county cricket, but there were times not long ago, i mean anthony Mcgrath and Rikki Clarke in the test side, where you really have to wonder what on earth they were thinking. Usmaan Afzaal playing tests when it was blatantly obvious to anyone who watched him bat that his technique would be found out. And i think the less said about Shaun Udal and Ian Blackwell the better.

Yeah, but the 5 guys mentioned in your final 3 sentences played about 15 tests between them, so we're still not talking about extended runs or anything like. As I said before, with the nature of our CC there's going to be duff picks from time to time, and anyone who's been around for a while would recognise that the selection process is miles better than what we've seen previously.

Simon Jones is actually a case in point. No CC track record to speak of, but thrown in and actually he was stuck with, apart from the 4th test in SA (I think he was injured at home to WI for a couple of tests in 2004?). I don't really know where you got the idea where he was one game away from being dropped, because he was actually given a regular place in the side, apart from the ill-conceived "horses-for-courses" drop for one test in SA. But it was one test mate! The bigger picture is that they'd spotted him in the first place and given him time to establish himself as a test player when there was next to nothing in his county performances to suggest that he should play.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

saw him in Australia last year and against India this year. cant say he was anything other than very poor in either series.

Australia last year is irrelevant. But it's hard to believe that anyone, bar you or Richard I suppose, could say he hasn't bowled very well this year. He's played 16 ODIs this year and really only bowled poorly in 4 of them. In Tests he bowled really well in New Zealand except for one innings, and then played one Test against India before being injured. In that one Test he looked quite potent too, despite only taking 2-60odd.

Your perception of "very poor" is horrific.

 

[tooextracool]

What great thing has Parthiv ever done with the bat? For someone picked ahead of the far superior (with gloves) Nayan Mongia, he should have done a lot more. Frankly, they were afraid of playing him higher than Number 7 and he didn't even get too many ODI's– they had to have Rahul Dravid behind the stumps more often than not. He wouldn't fit into a top six for India even in one's wildest imagination.

Im not referring to ODIs, im talking about tests. He may have been picked ahead of Nayan Mongia but Mongias career had already been tainted with match fixing charges and what not and his career was more or less finished a long long time before Parthiv was picked. Id like to hear about how many Indian wicket keepers in the history of cricket averaged more than Parthiv Patel did with the bat, because the odds are there would be very few if any who averaged over 30. For any player to average over 30 with the bat whilst being less than 20 years old is a major accomplishment, let alone for one that was a wicket keeper batsman.

He can't play spin, he's hopeless against serious pace and has never looked Test standard. His form for Leicester has been something out of the ordinary, rather than the norm.

I havent seen enough of him to be able to claim otherwise, but i find it incredibly odd that someone can score prolifically in India and England and be hopeless against pace and spin. For mine if he hasnt been given a shot in the test side, its quite hard to write him off.

Ganguly and Tendulkar at the top would be far better than these two. Agreed, that would be Test cricket, but they've scored runs against Test standard bowling in ODI's. It's a question of adaptability, and we've seen other teams do just fine, so these two should have opened. The Indian team management missed a trick, and how, by not having them play as Test openers or stock bowlers.

Ganguly and Tendulkar? Firstly opening in ODIs is completely different from opening in tests, and a lot of players have found that out the hard way. Secondly both Tendulkar and Ganguly have never shown any comittment to opening the batting despite being senior batsmen in the side and its always come down to Dravid to fill in that position and hes failed spectacularly in all of his attempts. Ganguly wouldnt have had a prayer to succeed opening the batting in tests anyways, not with his technique. The fact that you have to use middle order players as the only replacement for Das shows that he wasnt too bad a pick ITFP.

 

[tooextracool]

Yeah, but the 5 guys mentioned in your final 3 sentences played about 15 tests between them, so we're still not talking about extended runs or anything like. As I said before, with the nature of our CC there's going to be duff picks from time to time, and anyone who's been around for a while would recognise that the selection process is miles better than what we've seen previously.

Whether or not they actually got 'extended runs' or not is rather irrelevant. The fact is that they all played far more tests than they should have had to, and that was the point i was trying to make. Yes so the selection process now is a lot better than it used to be but guess what, bad maybe better than worse but it still doesnt deserve the plaudits for it.

Simon Jones is actually a case in point. No CC track record to speak of, but thrown in and actually he was stuck with, apart from the 4th test in SA (I think he was injured at home to WI for a couple of tests in 2004?). I don't really know where you got the idea where he was one game away from being dropped, because he was actually given a regular place in the side, apart from the ill-conceived "horses-for-courses" drop for one test in SA. But it was one test mate! The bigger picture is that they'd spotted him in the first place and given him time to establish himself as a test player when there was next to nothing in his county performances to suggest that he should play.

Actually going by reports Simon Jones was one of the most impressive bowlers when he went to the Australian Academy, and he was already destroying sides with reverse swing. When he was picked to play for England he had also had a relatively good season of domestic cricket and there was definetly a case for his selection given that he always showed potential. Even when he made his comeback to the England side in the WI he actually had to earn his place in the England side by bowling well on the A tour to India. However as most people remember, both Harmison and Jones were handpicked by Duncan Fletcher solely for the reason that they could bowl 90+ mph. Luckily for Fletcher, in Jones' case he actually had some talent other than just bowling it fast. Compare that with liam Plunkett who it seems is guaranteed a spot in the illustrous Ashes side despite being rubbish in everything hes ever done.

 

[tooextracool]

Australia last year is irrelevant. But it's hard to believe that anyone, bar you or Richard I suppose, could say he hasn't bowled very well this year. He's played 16 ODIs this year and really only bowled poorly in 4 of them. In Tests he bowled really well in New Zealand except for one innings, and then played one Test against India before being injured. In that one Test he looked quite potent too, despite only taking 2-60odd.

Your perception of "very poor" is horrific.

Why is Australia irrelevant? it wasnt even a year ago. Like i said if you reduce the sample to a very small one, you could always find one or 2 odd games where Edwards bowls well, because at his pace and with his action when hes on target he can be quite menacing. Unfortunately theres no way he can maintain the consistency or accuracy with the same action as well, which is why he'll probably never be a certainity in the side.