Sidebottom returns in some style!

[Woodster]

The rise of county bowler to world class performer.


http://www.cricketweb.net/blog/features/19.php

 

[Pup Clarke]

Good read, just goes to show that if the likes of Glen Chapple, Martin Saggers and Jon Lewis to name a very few were selected at the peak of their careers after a good few years of CC this could just of easily been them. But England's persistence in picking bowlers of the inexperience of Plunkett and Mahmood now must be realised by Fletcher as a grave mistake when there were bowlers who were doing the job at County level out there.

I'm not for a minute suggesting these players would have been successes but surely they would have had a better chance as they've been playing for far longer and are proven better bowlers. It's also interesting to know that these performers aren't bracketed as "quick".

 

[BoyBrumby]

Yeah, good stuff. Some belated vindication for the dear old county championship, which was largely ignored if not actively disdained by the previous regime.

One can't help but wonder if Ramprakash will be given a chance to further state the case for the domestic FC game in tests.

 

[Richard]

Ramprakash and Sidebottom are hardly analogous situations really, are they?

 

[BoyBrumby]

Ramprakash and Sidebottom are hardly analogous situations really, are they?

Both are/have making/made cases for international recognition by their domestic exploits; domestic form having been largely disregarded by our previous regime. It's not rocket science.

 

[Jono]

But... but Brumby, one's a bowler and one's a batsman

 

[Richard]

Both are/have making/made cases for international recognition by their domestic exploits; domestic form having been largely disregarded by our previous regime. It's not rocket science.

Nah, Ramprakash has been making a case for international recognition for 2 decades now, during which time there've been at least 3 different England regimes. He's got it too, from the whole lot of 'em - just unfortunately in the first 4-and-a-half years he completely messed it up, averaging just 16. He was better later on, averaging 37, but sadly that wasn't enough - after such an awful, and prolonged, start, he couldn't really afford so much as a bad series. And on both occasions he had one, he was ditched, and there wasn't that much in the way of dissent at the decisions, certainly not the latter one.

Sidebottom has only been making his case for perhaps 4 years at best, and was only ignored by 1 regime, and that ignoration was only unjustifiable for perhaps 2 years at best.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Nah, Ramprakash has been making a case for international recognition for 2 decades now, during which time there've been at least 3 different England regimes. He's got it too, from the whole lot of 'em - just unfortunately in the first 4-and-a-half years he completely messed it up, averaging just 16. He was better later on, averaging 37, but sadly that wasn't enough - after such an awful, and prolonged, start, he couldn't really afford so much as a bad series. And on both occasions he had one, he was ditched, and there wasn't that much in the way of dissent at the decisions, certainly not the latter one.

Sidebottom has only been making his case for perhaps 4 years at best, and was only ignored by 1 regime, and that ignoration was only unjustifiable for perhaps 2 years at best.

Ok, whatever.

How any of that relates to what I said is not immediately apparent tho.

One can't help but wonder if Ramprakash will be given a chance to further state the case for the domestic FC game in tests.

 

[Manee]

I remember hearing Sky Sports make note of Sidebottom saying that the reason that he bowled at 75-80mph in FC cricket was simply due to the amount of cricket being played meaning that a bowler cannot bowl flat out. Perhaps that this is something that the ECB could look more at; it is not as if FC cricket is a big money maker - but it is crucial for the development of future international stars. Who knows how many bowlers there are of Sidebottom's calibre who are forced to bowl at just 80mph due to the quantity of cricket.

Whether selectors or fans admit it or not, a bowler who is bowling 85mph simply seems more talented than one bowling at 80mph, at first glance - but reducing the schedule could help people realise whether this is an issue of talent, or just stamina. The Schofield Report noted that better conversion from County to International cricket is required and reducing the quantity of matches could be a way of doing this.

 

[Richard]

Reducing the number of games is one of the oldest chestnuts on county cricket's tree. It's long been agreed that there's too much, and vitally also too much travel resulting from too many competitions.

Reducing the number of games, in favour of more practice time, would indeed be nice. The amount of time spent saying it'd be a good idea while nothing happens, though, suggests it's something far easier said than done.

 

[Richard]

Ok, whatever.

How any of that relates to what I said is not immediately apparent tho.

Because if Ramprakash were to be recalled and succeed, it'd not really be anything of a furthering for the cause of the domestic game. Ramprakash indeed has long been used by those ignoramuses who argue that the domestic game is not something which should be taken note of in interntional selections.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Because if Ramprakash were to be recalled and succeed, it'd not really be anything of a furthering for the cause of the domestic game. Ramprakash indeed has long been used by those ignoramuses who argue that the domestic game is not something which should be taken note of in interntional selections.

Ok, so to summerise, a bloke who has had an unprecented run of domestic first-class form transferring that form to the test arena isn't indicatative of the value of selecting players who've performed well domestically?

You can see why I'm struggling to discern the logic in your argument here...

 

[Richard]

As I've said elsewhere, Ramprakash has done nothing in the previous 2 seasons that he hasn't done before. He's simply taken something he's always done (dominance of the domestic scene) to a new level.

The fact that he can change good to very good at one level doesn't neccessarily have any impact on whether he can change poor to good at a higher.

Ramprakash has already been a Test failure. Should he become a success this summer, his case would do more for a "can elevate one's mental aptitude and should never, ever be written-off and always given more chances" pontification than a "pick players who perform at domestic level" one.

Ramprakash's outstanding domestic form won't matter one iyota on his chances of Test success. His Test success or otherwise depends on the disposal of what has previously held him back, and what has previously held him back has nothing to do with the domestic level.

 

[Jono]

Richard, one thing I've always been curious about, what is your actual contention with regards to picking players for tests (or ODIs while we're at it) based on their domestic records? Would Badrinath have made your Indian test team ahead of Yuvraj (and Kaif) for example?

 

[BoyBrumby]

As I've said elsewhere, Ramprakash has done nothing in the previous 2 seasons that he hasn't done before. He's simply taken something he's always done (dominance of the domestic scene) to a new level.

Well, as your sentence acknowledges, by doing something that's unprecedented he has done something that he (& by definition anyone else) hasn't done before.

The fact that he can change good to very good at one level doesn't neccessarily have any impact on whether he can change poor to good at a higher.

Ramprakash has already been a Test failure. Should he become a success this summer, his case would do more for a "can elevate one's mental aptitude and should never, ever be written-off and always given more chances" pontification than a "pick players who perform at domestic level" one.

Ramprakash's outstanding domestic form won't matter one iyota on his chances of Test success. His Test success or otherwise depends on the disposal of what has previously held him back, and what has previously held him back has nothing to do with the domestic level.

*sigh*

It can't be just me, can it?

Look, if Ramprakash hadn't scored runs in the county championship he wouldn't even be in the frame for a recall.

 

[Richard]

Well, as your sentence acknowledges, by doing something that's unprecedented he has done something that he (& by definition anyone else) hasn't done before.

The fact that he's taken his dominance to ridiculous levels is irrelevant - what matters is that he has always dominated. His domination is nothing new, it's just been at a higher level the last 2 seasons than ever before.

*sigh*

It can't be just me, can it?

Look, if Ramprakash hadn't scored runs in the county championship he wouldn't even be in the frame for a recall.

No-one who hasn't scored runs in the Championship should ever be in the frame for a call or recall.

 

[BoyBrumby]

The fact that he's taken his dominance to ridiculous levels is irrelevant - what matters is that he has always dominated. His domination is nothing new, it's just been at a higher level the last 2 seasons than ever before.

No, that's just your opinion.

No-one who hasn't scored runs in the Championship should ever be in the frame for a call or recall.

Again, your opinion. The fact is players who haven't been scoring runs have been called up, as you yourself acknowledged in another thread only today:

Until 1999 (sure enough, the season after which he was selected) Vaughan had always demanded attention and had always been talked of as a potential Test batsman.

The only odd thing in Vaughan's case is that he was selected after his worst season. Before that season, he'd done well - his average for Yorkshire, in 91 games over 6 seasons, was 37.24. He'd had a couple of shocking A-tours which dragged his career First-Class average down, but in 1998/99 he had a much better one. And had he had even a decent 1999 his Test selection would have made perfect sense.

The odd thing was not lack of performance over a career, but lack of form immediately prior to selection. Fortunately, it didn't especially hurt his chances, though his first two seasons in Test cricket were hardly distinguished, promising though they were and containing a couple of excellent innings though they did.

 

[Richard]

No, that's just your opinion.

It really isn't. I can't see how anyone could possibly insinuate that Ramprakash had not dominated at domestic level from 2005 backwards.

Again, your opinion. The fact is players who haven't been scoring runs have been called up, as you yourself acknowledged in another thread only today:

I know that's not how it's always happened, but yes, I am and always have been of the opinion that no-one who has not performed in the Championship should be selected for Tests.

FWIW, I wasn't terribly happy about Vaughan's selection in 1999/2000. But fortunately it didn't turn-out too bad there.

 

[BoyBrumby]

It really isn't. I can't see how anyone could possibly insinuate that Ramprakash had not dominated at domestic level from 2005 backwards.

I'm not insinuating anything of the kind; now please try to understand before one of us dies: doing something that's unprecedented (that word again) is, by definition, doing something that no-one else has. That's a fact.

Now look at his season-by-season figures: from CricketArchieve

Last 2 seasons stand out, yes? Over 25 runs better than he's managed before?

 

[Pup Clarke]

It really isn't. I can't see how anyone could possibly insinuate that Ramprakash had not dominated at domestic level from 2005 backwards.

The word "dominating" doesn't come to my mind when talking about someone who has averaged over 100 for the past two seasons over 16 games. It seems weird that you insist on saying today's bowling is not in the same class in the 90s and yet you still say that Ramprakash doesn't deserve a call up, contradiction much.