English Seamers

[marc71178]

Hollioake would've been a backward step. They had Vaughan in mind for Test Captain, and therefore made him ODI captain first.

 

[gibbsnsmith]

ECB Selectors, sane?RIGHT?

ermm....why not just give saggers a couple of games WHILE harmison and/or Anderson gets a rest

 

[Craig]

Why not Johnson, Hoggard, Cork etc.?

 

[Rik]

Well, in that case, why have't the selectors picked him then?

Only one reason, they don't think he's good enough, and since they're the ones who make the choices and have to live or die by them, they know best.

Only one reason? Marc don't make me laugh. Do you really think they have left him out on ability? If so how do you explain bringing Clarke into both England Squads this winter? Does that strike you as the work of a selection pannel who know what they are doing?

 

[marc71178]

Only one reason? Marc don't make me laugh. Do you really think they have left him out on ability? If so how do you explain bringing Clarke into both England Squads this winter? Does that strike you as the work of a selection pannel who know what they are doing?

Well, they know a hell of a lot more than you or I do, and since they go around watching these players, they know a lot more about them then someone who doesn't watch them.

I think that they've left him out because (like a lot of county bowlers) they are not up to bowling to International class players.

Clarke I disagree with, but again, he's one the selectors have been watching, so they must have seen something in him.

 

[Rik]

Well, they know a hell of a lot more than you or I do, and since they go around watching these players, they know a lot more about them then someone who doesn't watch them.

I think that they've left him out because (like a lot of county bowlers) they are not up to bowling to International class players.

Clarke I disagree with, but again, he's one the selectors have been watching, so they must have seen something in him.

If only that were true.

All I can think of at the moment is "sheep"

One follows the other without question.

 

[marc71178]

So you are claiming to know more about County Cricket and cricketers than a group of people who are paid to watch the game and evaluate players.

Right.

 

[Rik]

Well, they know a hell of a lot more than you or I do, and since they go around watching these players, they know a lot more about them then someone who doesn't watch them.

They might know a lot more, but their selections don't show this. Also they don't watch them, they get people to watch them instead, like Tord Grip in the England football setup.

I think that they've left him out because (like a lot of county bowlers) they are not up to bowling to International class players.

One could easily argue that Harmison isn't. Is that the best you could come up with? I'm sorry but I don't see how someone who is taking wickets for fun can be a worse bowler than someone who hasn't been able to take wickets cheaply in either Tests or the "so weak it doesn't mean anything any more" CC.

Clarke I disagree with, but again, he's one the selectors have been watching, so they must have seen something in him.

They call him an "all-rounder" when he barely takes any wickets, and he plays for Surrey. I'm sure you are familier with the "Surrey Effect", in fact, weren't you one of the people who discovered it?

 

[Craig]

Excuse my ignorance, but what is the "Surrey Effect"?

 

[Rik]

Excuse my ignorance, but what is the "Surrey Effect"?

A player gets picked because he plays for Surrey. Clarke has not played as much this year because Surrey have had Azhar Mahmood all season, yet he's an automatic selection for both squads. Also he hardly impressed in the ODIs in the summer. Doesn't really make sense.

 

[Craig]

And his Surrey List A record is not good enough.

 

[Rik]

So you are claiming to know more about County Cricket and cricketers than a group of people who are paid to watch the game and evaluate players.

Right.

No, I'm not. I'm just saying that a monkey could make better selections. And so the arguement turns full circle and we are back at the beginning again.

 

[marc71178]

No, I'm not. I'm just saying that a monkey could make better selections. And so the arguement turns full circle and we are back at the beginning again.

So what did you mean by "if only that were true" when I said:

Well, they know a hell of a lot more than you or I do, and since they go around watching these players, they know a lot more about them then someone who doesn't watch them.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I think that they've left him out because (like a lot of county bowlers) they are not up to bowling to International class players.

How can they possibly be able to tell that if they haven't seen him play against International class players?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

So you are claiming to know more about County Cricket and cricketers than a group of people who are paid to watch the game and evaluate players.

Right.

Because they are paid to do so means that they're the best qualified?

 

[marc71178]

How can they possibly be able to tell that if they haven't seen him play against International class players?

You can see how he bowls or bats, and work out if it would work against top players (fromjust watching them)

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

You can see how he bowls or bats, and work out if it would work against top players (fromjust watching them)

I disagree completely. If this were the case, alot more teams would be alot stronger and there would be alot less flops.

 

[Langeveldt]

Well, I watched Rikki Clarke today (glamorgan v surrey)... He got hideously tied down by Alex Wharf (of all people) before playing a slog and getting his off stump uprooted for four.. It typifies what I have come to expect...

Although I probably have not seen enough of him, I havent even seen much evidence of talent, let alone class... Hopefully the more capable Collingwood and Flintoff will snuf him out...

 

[Rik]

So what did you mean by "if only that were true" when I said:

Well, they know a hell of a lot more than you or I do, and since they go around watching these players, they know a lot more about them then someone who doesn't watch them.

Because I cannot believe that they are leaving out a bowler who can't stop taking wickets "because he isn't bowling in a way which would be effective in International Cricket"

Rubbish, the same rules apply whatever level of the game you play, bowl it on or just outside off stump consistantly. From what I've seen that's what he does, and I can't really think of current England bowler who can. Pollock and McGrath do it and they are the best in the world, co-incidently.

 

[marc71178]

Howeverm having not seen him as much as the selctors, how do you know he does that?