***Official*** West Indies in England

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by andruid

Because back then at least the West Indies could be arsed to make an effort and actually play some good cricket. Consider England had just played the Windies and unlike the Banglas, most of them had other thing they would rather have been doing (see IPL). Its been widely acknowledged that this series exists mainl;y cos the ECB has a quota home tests it has to fulfil with BSkyB and therefore when the original guests (Zimbabwe) could not make the trip (for obviuos reasons) they shoe-horned in the West Indies and a replaceament, after Sri Lanka were unable to commit due to their own senior player's IPL commitments. Consider the attitude of some of the West Indies senior players (Chris Gayle especially) on this tour and how distracted and disinterested they have looked on the field. Consider that even then their best all rounder Dwayne Bravo has still to turn up at all.

Now given Bangladesh unlike Sri Lanka and West Indies have only one senior player in the IPl (who has only played one game), and that they hardly get to play any meaningful cricket with anyone at all you would expect that they would grab the opportunity with both hands and even if we wound up with the same innings defeats that we have found ourselves looking at now that the Windies have sort tuirned up and wasted 6 days of test cricket with these rather abysmal efforts. Sarwan's ton aside none of the players can be accused of trying very hard

Personally I would rather have weaker opposition put 100% in and lose that a strong team make a mockery of the game with such a poor attitude.

I know this isn't what you meant at all, but i find the implication that the West Indies lost because they weren't trying a tad annoying. They were comprehensively outclassed in all three of batting, bowling and fielding by a much better (although still not great) side. They just are nowhere near good enough to compete with these sides away from home. They maybe could have run faster in the field or tried to bowl a little faster but the fact is, they were ****e. That's all there is to it.

[Manee]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

There's not a bowler under the sun who can "run through" lineups of that quality "consistently".

Except Boyd Rankin.

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by Manee

Except Boyd Rankin.

Obv.

[aussie]

Originally Posted by Beamer

Chris Gayle (c)
Adrian Barath
Ramnaresh Sarwan
Dwayne Bravo
Shivnarine Chanderpaul
Brendan Nash
Denesh Ramdin
Jerome Taylor
Suliemann Benn
Ravi Rampaul
Fidel Edwards

Reserves:

Lendl Simmons
Andrew Richardson

Two major problem with this XI is that Ramdin aint a test #7 & Bravo to date in test cricket aint good enough to bat in the top 6 consistently. So pushing him up to 4 won't solve the problem really, i saw work with Simmonds he won't face English conditions everyday

Barath/Richards should open with Gayle no doubt, its definately about time Smith is banised. It all depends on if the selectors want to blood the youth or see what the elder bajan bloke has to offer..

Gayle
Barath/Richards
Sarwan
Simmons
C'Paul
Nash
Bravo
Ramdin
Taylor
Rampaul
Edwards

Harsh on Benn but for balance sake once all are fit, he would have to be dropped

[rivera213]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

There's not a bowler under the sun who can "run through" lineups of that quality "consistently".

* Batting line-ups.

I call a quality spinner someone who will trouble the best batsmen in the world. He wont trouble the top batsmen with his current repertoire of deliveries.

But with a doosra in his locker, I think he could take 3 of the top 6 batsmen of the Indian (in India especially), South African & Australian batsmen when the conditions allow for spin.

Negotiating off spin in itself isn't all that difficult for the Ponting, G.Smith, Hussey, Tendulkar, Dravid, Gambhir's etc of the world, but with one which goes the other way anyone will be troubled, even the best players of spin.

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by rivera213

* Batting line-ups.

I call a quality spinner someone who will trouble the best batsmen in the world. He wont trouble the top batsmen with his current repertoire of deliveries.

But with a doosra in his locker, I think he could take 3 of the top 6 batsmen of the Indian (in India especially), South African & Australian batsmen when the conditions allow for spin.

Negotiating off spin in itself isn't all that difficult for the Ponting, G.Smith, Hussey, Tendulkar, Dravid, Gambhir's etc of the world, but with one which goes the other way anyone will be troubled, even the best players of spin.

I think that's a fallacy. Shane Warne only barely had a delivery that went the other way, and it was about as subtle as his chat-up technique. Swann can threaten quality players of spin provided the pitch is giving him some turn. He won't do it that often, but one reason the spinner is in the side is specifically for such circumstances. He can dominate poor players of spin like Devon Smith regardless of conditions.

If the ball's not turning, it's not going to turn the other way either. A doosra would make him a better bowler, but it's certainly not a necessity.

[andruid]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

I know this isn't what you meant at all, but i find the implication that the West Indies lost because they weren't trying a tad annoying. They were comprehensively outclassed in all three of batting, bowling and fielding by a much better (although still not great) side. They just are nowhere near good enough to compete with these sides away from home. They maybe could have run faster in the field or tried to bowl a little faster but the fact is, they were ****e. That's all there is to it.

Actually as much as the west Indies are no of England standard they are better than being run over by innings defeats within 6 days of cricket played.

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by andruid

Actually as much as the west Indies are no of England standard they are better than being run over by innings defeats within 6 days of cricket played.

That's your opinion, but that they weren't any better than that is a fact.

[GIMH]

England's efficiency has done the coffers no good in this series!

Nice to get a good win going into the Ashes, Jimmy is in wonderful form, Broad & Onions look in decent shape, Swann had a quiet game but didn't really need to be involved, and the batsmen played well. IIRC this is the first home series in which Pietersen has failed to score a century since he first joined the side, mad.

[Goughy]

Any legit highlights of todays play onlne?

[superkingdave]

Originally Posted by Goughy

Any legit highlights of todays play onlne?

Not yet for today's play but the mirror seems to have a short highlights reel for each session up Here which goes up to day 4 so they might have day 5 up at some point

[Goughy]

Originally Posted by superkingdave

Not yet for today's play but the mirror seems to have a short highlights reel for each session up Here which goes up to day 4 so they might have day 5 up at some point

Bugger, not allowed access from Bulgaria.

[oitoitoi]

Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero

Jimmy is in wonderful form

Jimmy always seems to be in wonderful form at this time of year, then the sun comes out and the opposition get better...

[GIMH]

He bowled great against South Africa last summer, though. I know his figures don't necessarily back this up, but everyone who watched the series thought he was bloody brilliant.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero

England's efficiency has done the coffers no good in this series!

Nice to get a good win going into the Ashes, Jimmy is in wonderful form, Broad & Onions look in decent shape, Swann had a quiet game but didn't really need to be involved, and the batsmen played well. IIRC this is the first home series in which Pietersen has failed to score a century since he first joined the side, mad.

Obviously

On a serious note, Anderson looks to me the biggest single stumbling block between Australia and the Ashes.