From a personal point of view, I don't think England's batting is the biggest problem. We lack serious bite in the bowling so I wanted to ask what people thought of the England fast bowling in Oz and if they can do themselves justice. Darren Gough when he was fit was easily England's best bowler and about number 10 in the world. Can England prosper without him??
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
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, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Can England prosper without Gough?
- Thread starter jf2001
- Start date
Paid The Umpire
All Time Legend
NO. :baddevil:
Tim
Cricketer Of The Year
Good Question.
From what I saw of the English attack, its unlikely to bowl out Australia for less than 300 at the moment.
Caddick just has to step up now that Gough has been ruled out. Hoggard as I thought when he toured NZ can be very good in ideal conditions swing otherwise he's just an ordinary stock bowler & Giles isn't bowling too badly. Craig White is ok, but you get the feeling he's one of those all-rounders who will bat well in a test match & then bowl badly and then vice-versa in the next test.
I think they've got to hit Australia with a bit of pace, they should probably play Caddick, Silverwood, Harmison, Flintoff & Giles in the next test if all mentioned are fit. Silverwood could just be the key, as we know that last season Bond emerged as the 3rd choice bowler after NZ had a bad run of injuries at Brisbane.
From what I saw of the English attack, its unlikely to bowl out Australia for less than 300 at the moment.
Caddick just has to step up now that Gough has been ruled out. Hoggard as I thought when he toured NZ can be very good in ideal conditions swing otherwise he's just an ordinary stock bowler & Giles isn't bowling too badly. Craig White is ok, but you get the feeling he's one of those all-rounders who will bat well in a test match & then bowl badly and then vice-versa in the next test.
I think they've got to hit Australia with a bit of pace, they should probably play Caddick, Silverwood, Harmison, Flintoff & Giles in the next test if all mentioned are fit. Silverwood could just be the key, as we know that last season Bond emerged as the 3rd choice bowler after NZ had a bad run of injuries at Brisbane.
Gotchya
State Vice-Captain
The form of fitness the english languish is infuriating to me. I mean what use is an International side or player if he's lying down in the shades for half of the season and when he does go out there its off season ? What i am questioning here is, how does an International outfit let its premier players get injured so often and at crucial times? they go off for county duties for money right ? to make a living ? give em that extra cent and keep em away from senseless drudge. Makes sense to me.
Rik
Cricketer Of The Year
Have you worked out how many games the average English county player will play in a season? Even though England players miss quite a few of them they still play 15+ games a season, then have to play even more in the winter...its the schedual rather than anyone which is at fault.
Neil Pickup
Cricket Web Moderator
Not putting the player first too often (rushed comebacks/going on too long when injured) is too frequently the cause
*cough* FLINTOFF *cough*
re: Gough. All teams are going to lose their stars. We'll get there in the end, there's never any reason to be negative...
*cough* FLINTOFF *cough*
re: Gough. All teams are going to lose their stars. We'll get there in the end, there's never any reason to be negative...
warrioryohannan
U19 Cricketer
England had only one match winning bowler and that was Darren Gough, without him English bowling attack is of club level.
Jones though was an exciting prospect, too bad that he too ended up getting injured, something which English players are very familiar with!
Jones though was an exciting prospect, too bad that he too ended up getting injured, something which English players are very familiar with!
age_master
Hall of Fame Member
a better question would be Can england prosper????
ajaagarkarajaaja
Banned
age_master
Hall of Fame Member
lol, ive been saying for 2 years that he should be dropped, well that proves that how good aus are, they canm carry steve waugh as well 
Rik
Cricketer Of The Year
Lets see...how would Australia do if McGrath (Gough) was injured...Gillespie (Caddick) couldn't lead an attack...and Lee (Jones) knackered his knee...then you would understand what England are going through. Well I suppose you make your own luck, I'm just sitting here thinking how shocked you Aussies will be when England win against you...whenever that is...its what happens when you all have huge egos I'm afraid...
What you have to remember is that England have decided to bring younger players in rather than turn back to the older guys (Ramps etc). Whereas Australia haven't bought any younger players in...you have them but not willing to develop them, even when the ideal time comes with Waugh being sacked you still turn to a 30 something to fill the gap...So the time will come when England's younsters will all have International experiance and Australia will be forced to replace nearly the whole team in one go. Then my friends England WILL dominate the world once again (you think I am joking, you just wait)
(you think I am joking, you just wait)
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Errr, that was exactly his point. He's saying that the reason a player might play for their county a lot is for money. Well if you offset the money issue by limiting the matches they play and compensating them for it, you might have less injuries, particularly as most injuries to English players tend to be wear-and-tear injuries. I mean, can't the ECB see a freakin' pattern here??
That's an awful lot of conditionals in your argument and the net result is that it's pretty weak. Gillespie could comfortably lead the bowling attack and in the past, when Glenn McGrath has been injured, Australia have still won, as evidenced by their results against NZ and South Africa in 1997/98 season at home. As for backup, Australia have read-made replacements such as Michael Kasprowicz, Andy Bichel and Damien Fleming with Test experience and seasoned regulars like Brad Williams, Ashley Noffke and Nathan Bracken if they want to be a little adventurous.
Personally, I think the English system destroys really explosive players like Alex Tudor well before they hit their prime due to the demands of playing day-in and day-out in the county grind. Someone like Tudor should have been in the original touring party and should DEFINATELY be playing less day-to-day cricket.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
The the Australian team does things has ALWAYS been that way and it seems to work for them. All of the English young players seem burnt out by the time they reach their mid-20's.What you have to remember is that England have decided to bring younger players in rather than turn back to the older guys (Ramps etc). Whereas Australia haven't bought any younger players in...you have them but not willing to develop them, even when the ideal time comes with Waugh being sacked you still turn to a 30 something to fill the gap...So the time will come when England's younsters will all have International experiance and Australia will be forced to replace nearly the whole team in one go. Then my friends England WILL dominate the world once again
Picking someone like Michael Clarke would just place too much pressure on him to perform at this stage. Also, other than Steve Waugh's place, who would you drop??
Rik
Cricketer Of The Year
Tudor keeps getting injured and for all his promise, continues to dissapoint. I mean the guy took his average down to 24 this season then by the end of it it had jumped back over 30...
We'll see how Australia cope when they are shorn of all their 30something current players...
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
And again, Australia HAVE been missing many key players at various times in the past and have STILL either won or at least not capitulated.
The 1995 tour of the WI is a case in point: Australia, before the Test series even started, lost Damien Fleming and Craig McDermott, two of their senior bowlers at the time just off successful series for each of them against England a few weeks before. Did the entire touring side drop its bundle? No. The remaining bowlers took it upon themselves to do the job and they did and beat the WI for the first time in many years.
I'm sorry but blaming injuries is coming across as excuses for poor performance from a team which probably didn't have the gumption or confidence to do well anyway, but guess what? Now they have something to blame.............
Trawling through the annals of cricket history, I discovered an amazing fact which may come as a surprise to some English players and supporters alike; PLAYERS HAVE BEEN INJURED BEFORE.
:O
Let's face it; the players probably didn't believe they could win and with subsequent injuries, that initial problem in attitude is masked by the injury excuse. If you don't believe you can win, then you simply won't. There is the heart of the problem in my opinion, NOT the injuries.
Plus, the lack of foresight in selection of this English team is unbelievable. Are we to believe that they picked a fast bowler who has suddenly developed shin splits? Rubbish. Shin splits takes time to develop and if the English physios had been doing their job, it would have been picked up and Harmison probably wouldn't have come, been forced to play and aggravated the injury. He needs REST. Take it from someone who's had shin splits.
Picking Jones was probably a good idea as has potential. Picking him in at least another year would probably have been better. Throwing him to the wolves as the great hope for England was putting too much pressure on such a young guy so soon.
Hoggard...........another guy who probably had potential but has been reduced to a little above medium-pace by the County grind. He just isn't up to Test standard anymore. Either bowls too short or on the pads.
Picking John Crawley, a guy with an exceptionally poor record against Australia wasn't the most inspired selection and I don't care how remarkable it is that Alec Stewart is supposedly able to still play Test cricket at 39 years of age; he isn't up to Test standard anymore and keeping him in the side is keeping a more agile performer out.
Picking Gough injured was REALLY stupid. Now that he's predictably gone home injured, it gives the Aussies a confidence boost because the English selectors appeared desperate in picking an obviously injured player. Picking Silverwood or Tudor right from the start would have been a less apparently desperate move or at least someone who's not injured!
In short; don't blame the injuries. The attitude of players and administrators alike is the problem here. Blaming the injuries AGAIN just masks the real problem.
[Edited on 12/11/2002 by Top_Cat]