• 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.

Selectors

gibbsnsmith

State Vice-Captain
has anyone else found that selectorsw for some countries are a bunch of strange ****?

i mean, i dont umnderstand on what basis the english ones choose their players, itd be easy to assume that they pick the best people from the county cricket but ius that really so, after years of consistent great performances by wagh and knight [warwicks openers] they have barely got a look in the test side and on the other side people like trescothick, hussain never broillainat but went on to the english side[albeit were succeses]

and the case of bicknell is just downright stupid, i mean when gough and caddick were at their prime some years ago they never gave anyone else a chance i.e. saggers and bicknell and recently out of nowhere pacemen i.e jones, anderson have been picked just after a few solid games and results.


and how the hell do india adn pakistan choose theirs, i mean the ranji trophy has no meaning to thge indian selectors, so how did they fingd kaif and sehwag and yuvraj etc...and on what basis did they select tendulkar when he was 16, the same goes with pakistan for raza and afridi...

i mean they were taking some big chances on unleashing afridi and tendu;lkar on the world at sucha young age..
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
I agree that the selectors are wierd, but some selections gave come off. The England selectors are just below the Pakistani ones in terms of totally confusing selections.
 

Tim

Cricketer Of The Year
I'd have to say that the Pakistan selectors take the cake..they are brutal if you don't perform after 2 matches.
At the moment I recall some opening batsmen called Athar playing in the Sri Lanka tri-series and the Vodafone Challenge in England, but now he's nowhere to be seen.
They never seem to pick the same squad consistently.

The England & NZ Selectors are probably the next who seem to make strange decisions at times.
 

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
Faisal Athar is, I think, injured - so that's a defence of the selectors there.

I think the West Indies are right up there as well. Dave Bernard, Jerome Taylor, Fidel Edwards..
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
gibbsnsmith said:
after years of consistent great performances by wagh and knight [warwicks openers] they have barely got a look in the test side and on the other side people like trescothick, hussain never broillainat but went on to the english side[albeit were succeses]
Right so for not giving Knight countless goes and picking Trescothick who proceeds to average over 40, they've gone wrong have they?

As for mentioning Hussain at the same time, he isn't even an opener!

FWIW, I'm a big Warwickshire fan, but I wouldn't ever expect to see Knight in there again since he's been tried and failed at the longer form of the game.

Oh, and by the way Wagh isn't an opener, has been in the Academy once, but is never likely to be anything more than a good county player.



gibbsnsmith said:
and the case of bicknell is just downright stupid, i mean when gough and caddick were at their prime some years ago they never gave anyone else a chance
Gough and Caddick were in their prime and an awesome pairing, so that's why they weren't broken up.

Why fix something that clearly wasn't broken?



gibbsnsmith said:
recently out of nowhere pacemen i.e jones, anderson have been picked just after a few solid games and results.
Presumably they didn't see the point in selecting a 34 year old when they were trying to build a side for the future?
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
Re: Re: Selectors

marc71178 said:
Presumably they didn't see the point in selecting a 34 year old when they were trying to build a side for the future?
He wasn't 34 then, he was 30-31...
 

masterblaster

International Captain
Sehwag was averaging 45-ish in domestic cricket with the bat when he was selected in 1998.

He was dropped and selected in 2001 when he was averaging 58 with the bat, and 35-ish with the ball for Delhi, and was continously winning games for Delhi.

As for Yuvraj and Kaif, they had extraoridinary U-19 World Cups. Kaif was the winning captain of the U-19 team, while Yuvraj was India's MVP.

Kaif and Yuvraj too had great records in the domestic game, and averaged about 45 with the bat in domestic cricket at the time.

Indian selectors are more traditional, in the sense that they look for youth, and people who are "statistically" better than the rest.

Batsman who have been tried out in recent years:

V Kambli - FC Average: 68 --> Little Success More Failure in Internationals

VVS Laxman - FC Average: 60 --> Semi-Success

S Sriram - FC Average: 60 odd --> Failure

H Badani - FC Average: 45 --> Semi-Success

S Ramesh - FC Average: 45-ish --> Semi-Success

Yuvraj Singh - FC Average: 43-45 --> Success

Mohammad Kaif - FC Average: 43-45 --> Success

Reetinder Sodhi - FC Average: 45-46 --> Failure

Hrishikesh Kanitkar - FC Average: 58 --> Failure

Vijay Bharadwaj - FC Average: 45 --> Failure

Gautam Gambhir - FC Average: 58-60 --> Semi-Sucess

Virender Sehwag - FC Average: 56-58 --> Sucess

Wasim Jaffer - FC Average: 55-56 --> Failure

Comparing to england, where batsman like Vaughan and Trescothick are selected on the basis that Duncan Fletcher has seen them and the fact that they are more 'natural talent' rather than averages.

And to be honest, they've had more succes then some of the Indian batsman tried out in recent years
 

luckyeddie

Cricket Web Staff Member
Re: Re: Re: Selectors

Rik said:
He wasn't 34 then, he was 30-31...
Not when they started picking Jones and Anderson, he wasn't.

3 or 4 years ago, the England seam attack tended to be Gough, Caddick, Chalky, Corky (perm 3 from 4, throw in anyone else)
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
Re: Re: Re: Re: Selectors

luckyeddie said:
Not when they started picking Jones and Anderson, he wasn't.

3 or 4 years ago, the England seam attack tended to be Gough, Caddick, Chalky, Corky (perm 3 from 4, throw in anyone else)
I was talking about when Gough and Caddick were in their prime, ie 1999-2001
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Re: Re: Re: Selectors

Rik said:
He wasn't 34 then, he was 30-31...
What, when Jones and Anderson were called up?

In that case he's aged 3-4 years in the past 6-12 months - at that rate he'll be 37 in the winter! :P
 

Craig

World Traveller
luckyeddie said:
He would have been a fine addition then, true (as replacement for White.:D )
What is wrong with White? He can reverse swing, get conventional swing etc.
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
Re: Re: Re: Re: Selectors

marc71178 said:
What, when Jones and Anderson were called up?

In that case he's aged 3-4 years in the past 6-12 months - at that rate he'll be 37 in the winter! :P
Marc, I already explained what I ment to Eddie, in the posts above, and he understood. I ment when Gough and Caddick were in their prime but for some reason the quote came out wrong. Surely when it's been discussed in the posts just above, even you can get the drift? ;)
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Selectors

Rik said:
Marc, I already explained what I ment to Eddie, in the posts above, and he understood. I ment when Gough and Caddick were in their prime but for some reason the quote came out wrong. Surely when it's been discussed in the posts just above, even you can get the drift? ;)
I reply as I go through the thread in order, so therefore hadn't read the entire thread by the time I replied to you.

Still if you're going to try and have a go when you're wrong yourself (undeniably so since it's not a question of opinion) then it needs to be pointed out.
 

Bazza

International 12th Man
gibbsnsmith said:
has anyone else found that selectorsw for some countries are a bunch of strange ****?

i mean, i dont umnderstand on what basis the english ones choose their players, itd be easy to assume that they pick the best people from the county cricket but ius that really so, after years of consistent great performances by wagh and knight [warwicks openers] they have barely got a look in the test side and on the other side people like trescothick, hussain never broillainat but went on to the english side[albeit were succeses]
Is this the same Nick Knight who played 17 tests and averaged 23?

And is this the same Mark Wagh whose consistent great performances have over the last 5 years consisted of:

26, 21, 45, 58, 26.

I wouldn't exactly call that great, and certainly not consistent!
 

Langeveldt

Soutie
Ill sum up a few of my opinions on countries selection policy :)


Australia - one can hardly go wrong with their pool of players, from the other side of the world they seem to be logical picks..

Bangladesh - apparently have an appaling talent identification system, therefore the selectors cant pick the best XI at all..

England - Huge pool of players, some brilliant finds (Tres, Vaughan) but some downright weird ones. Used to ditch players immediately if they werent up to scratch (Lathwell) Now i get the impression they er towards the other end of the scale..

India, Pakistan, SL - think this has been summed up.. IMO pick talent at a very young age.. Sometimes it pays off incredibly, sometimes it doesnt..

West Indies - I think they have a very solid selection policy.. Have found some talented batsman, along with guys like Banks, Lawson.. And they appear to stick with them.. The selection of Edwards was simply unbeleiveable, and I think it might pay them huge dividends in the future

South Africa - Seem to be relaxing on the quota system, and are developing a winning and more "racially appropriate" team. Bit of infighting and politics, but I think the spotting and selection of guys like Smith and Rudolph has been class.. Not happy with the sacking of SP though.

Zimbabwe - Who knows what is going on here, quota system seems to be enforced more than in SA.. However they keep faith with guys rather than dropping them immediately.. I think they work well with such a small pool of players however..
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Jacques Rudolph said:
England - Huge pool of players, some brilliant finds (Tres, Vaughan) but some downright weird ones. Used to ditch players immediately if they werent up to scratch (Lathwell) Now i get the impression they er towards the other end of the scale..
Elaborate on that...
 

Top