Chris Gayle willing to quit West Indies captaincy

[Shri]

Originally Posted by shivfan

The English media - and cricinfo - are obsessed with burning at the stake anyone who dares to question the divinity of Test cricket....

Gayle has just raised an issue that is widely held by a lot of non-English cricketers around the world, as this article by former WICB media officer Imran Khan explains:

CaribbeanCricket.com - The Independent Voice of West Indies Cricket

So, maybe some folks should climb down from their high horses....

Very well written. I can definitely see some of those mentioned things happening in a few years.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by shivfan

The English media - and cricinfo - are obsessed with burning at the stake anyone who dares to question the divinity of Test cricket....

As I say, it's certainly not confined to them. And most sensible-minded people are willing to criticise the opinion without denying the holder's right to hold it.

[Briony]

Originally Posted by shivfan

Why? Because he said he personally prefers 20/20 cricket to test cricket?

Personally, I think he was right to give precedence to the IPL over this ridiculous, truncated tour. There's no way the idiots in the WICB should've allowed the ECB to give up the 2010 tour for this nonsensical one.

It is international cricket with the test format as its primacy which has afforded Gayle his career. Now that there's more money in another format expedience becomes the order of the day. Someone like Gayle also has a responsibility to support the sport which has nourished him, not create the impression that its showcase form is ailing and undesired.

[shivfan]

Originally Posted by Briony

It is international cricket with the test format as its primacy which has afforded Gayle his career. Now that there's more money in another format expedience becomes the order of the day. Someone like Gayle also has a responsibility to support the sport which has nourished him, not create the impression that its showcase form is ailing and undesired.

Gayle does not create that impression. Did you watch the interview posted by roseboy?

Gayle said he prefers 20/20 cricket, but acknowledges that Test cricket is the ultimate test, and maintains that Test cricket will never disappear, and will always be around.

What do you want from him? A sacrifcial lamb burnt as offering at Lords?

[Prince EWS]

Originally Posted by shivfan

Gayle does not create that impression. Did you watch the interview posted by roseboy?

Gayle said he prefers 20/20 cricket, but acknowledges that Test cricket is the ultimate test, and maintains that Test cricket will never disappear, and will always be around.

What do you want from him? A sacrifcial lamb burnt as offering at Lords?

Gayle to be the lamb IMO.

[Nnanden]

Chris Gayle != Mr. Echo

[Smith]

Gayle, love him. He had the balls to speak out what 90% of cricketers think deep inside. Strauss is being completely facetious and playing to the gallery by spouting from the testament. He, like Gaylee said, had no business commenting on WI's preparations. I can't wait for the Ashes.

[rivera213]

Originally Posted by Smith

Gayle, love him. He had the balls to speak out what 90% of cricketers think deep inside. Strauss is being completely facetious and playing to the gallery by spouting from the testament. He, like Gaylee said, had no business commenting on WI's preparations. I can't wait for the Ashes.

90%?

Doubt it.

Twenty-20 is a form of the game were absolute hack sloggers can have a career in.

Test cricket sorts out the men from the boys. Gayle, in this respect, is a boy.

He averages 36 or lower (and 45 is the new 40 when you take into account the general batsmen-friendly wickets prepared across the world) against Us, Australia, Sri Lanka, India & Pakistan. His only notable average is against South Africa, but I'm sure next series around (if he's still playing test cricket) he will be pwned by Steyn, Morkel and co.

I'm not surprised he isn't a fan of test cricket- he's a poor test batsman, whereas (along with other batsmen who can't play a cricket shot for love nor money such as Afridi, Yuvraj, Dhoni, McCullum etc) he can be a star in T-20.

Strauss however realizes that your quality is judged on how good a test match player you are.

[Athlai]

Originally Posted by rivera213

90%?

Doubt it.

Twenty-20 is a form of the game were absolute hack sloggers can have a career in.

Test cricket sorts out the men from the boys. Gayle, in this respect, is a boy.

He averages 36 or lower (and 45 is the new 40 when you take into account the general batsmen-friendly wickets prepared across the world) against Us, Australia, Sri Lanka, India & Pakistan. His only notable average is against South Africa, but I'm sure next series around (if he's still playing test cricket) he will be pwned by Steyn, Morkel and co.

I'm not surprised he isn't a fan of test cricket- he's a poor test batsman, whereas (along with other batsmen who can't play a cricket shot for love nor money such as Afridi, Yuvraj, Dhoni, McCullum etc) he can be a star in T-20.

Strauss however realizes that your quality is judged on how good a test match player you are.

What?

[BoyBrumby]

From cricinfo.

Interesting read, as one would expect from Haigh. Makes a fair point too; even if one disagrees with what he said it's refreshing to hear a sportsman (and an international captain to boot) express an actual opinion that extends beyond the bland inanities we usually get. As Haigh puts it,

"Gayle's grumblings, meanwhile, obviously breached that quaint sporting omerta concerning comment about rivals. Last night after watching my Aussie Rules team, Geelong, annihilate its opponents, I saw our star midfielder Jimmy Bartel respond to the obvious statement from the television interviewer that it had been a one-sided affair. "No, they took the game right up to us," he insisted, failing utterly to strike a tone of sincerity, but participating obediently in the charade that every opponent is equally respected and every victory is a brand from the burning.

Frankly if the alternative is such phoniness, give me Gayle's candour every time. For that matter, give me Strauss's initial candour in chiding Gayle for his belated arrival, which probably coaxed his rival into a little tit-for-tattle. Test cricket looks dour enough at Riverside without honestly held opinion, even annoyance, being held back too."

[rivera213]

Originally Posted by Athlai

What?

What are you debating?

That Yuvraj, McCullum & Dhoni can play cricket shots?

They are sloggers, McCullum has a couple of decent shots but even those are brute force over timing. It's not a case of Viv Richards or Pietersen where they can play strokes but improvise and can also hit the ball hard, Dhoni, Yuvraj & McCullum can't play the shots to start with.

If you're debating whether they are stars in T20 or not then there's also no debate there either. They are top players in that format.

[Smith]

Originally Posted by rivera213

90%?

Doubt it.

Twenty-20 is a form of the game were absolute hack sloggers can have a career in.

Test cricket sorts out the men from the boys. Gayle, in this respect, is a boy.

He averages 36 or lower (and 45 is the new 40 when you take into account the general batsmen-friendly wickets prepared across the world) against Us, Australia, Sri Lanka, India & Pakistan. His only notable average is against South Africa, but I'm sure next series around (if he's still playing test cricket) he will be pwned by Steyn, Morkel and co.

I'm not surprised he isn't a fan of test cricket- he's a poor test batsman, whereas (along with other batsmen who can't play a cricket shot for love nor money such as Afridi, Yuvraj, Dhoni, McCullum etc) he can be a star in T-20.

Strauss however realizes that your quality is judged on how good a test match player you are.

The opposite argument also holds equally good.

Who in their sane wits these days other than a bunch of cricket addicts would pay to watch a Strauss or a Cook playing block block block the entire day from 11 till half past 6? When they get 50 times that entertainment from a mere bloc of 3.5 hours from T20s?

Don't get me wrong. I belong to the category mentioned above, but I am sadly in a ever dwindling minority.

For every Afridi (God forbid, he averages better than Ranatunga, Nasser Hussain etc in test cricket!), there exists a Chris Tavare or a Thilan Samaraweera, who are genetically programmed never to exceed a SR of 40 and guaranteed to act as human solutions for insomnia. Days of past, when there was ample time for rest and recreation as compared to today, tests were acceptable as a pastime to kill boring hours. But times have a changed. Everything except Boeing planes are getting smaller day by day, and why should cricket be an exception to it?

"Test cricket is what seperates men from boys". A motherhood statement, although one to which I secretly subscribe. "But when am getting the bucks, why should I care about such stuff?" , asks Gaylee. I cannot answer him convincingly.