• 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.

Gough to train with england in WI

Swervy

International Captain
Darren Gough has been invited to training sessions with England ahead of the West Indies tour. England have two vacancies for pace bowlers i the squad. Do you think England would be making the right move to include Goughy in the ODI series in April?
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
Definately! The England ODI squad has been crying out for Gough since he was left out of the early winter tours. He was man of the match in the Natwest Final so why on earth he was dropped beats me.
 

Swervy

International Captain
i agree..put Goughy in there and all of a sudden it looks like a fairly good one day attack again
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
It also takes a lot of pressure off Anderson. Whilst Gough keeps the pressure on Anderson can search for wickets, a la the World Cup.
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I certainly don't want Mr. Gough to be in England colours in April, or June or July. After that, by all means.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
What was the point dropping him if they were going to recall him later?
Either they believe him that he's going to be around in 2007 or they don't!
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
Richard said:
What was the point dropping him if they were going to recall him later?
Either they believe him that he's going to be around in 2007 or they don't!
Very good point! But I don't care if Gough is or isn't there in 2007. Between now and the WC we need someone to give the attack some stability, someone to keep it tight. What is the point in going all-out for youth if it means your more likely to loose? What you need is the young core players and build them into a strong team and keep finding new players, make it a gradual process. Loosing every game doesn't help anyone, especially not young players and their confidence, even if they themselves are doing pretty well. It doesn't really matter if Gough isn't there in a year's time, as long as we find someone who definately will be there for the WC and can do the same job just as well.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
The one problem with that is it can give a false indication of a young player's ability.
You see, I think England did far better in the summer than the team merited. Had Gough not been there (being the best bowler of the ODIs) I think South Africa would have done better.
The last thing you want is to get 2 years down the line with England being quite successful and then Goughie to retire and suddenly you find-out all these other bowlers aren't anywhere near as good as he helped them look.
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
Richard said:
The one problem with that is it can give a false indication of a young player's ability.
You see, I think England did far better in the summer than the team merited. Had Gough not been there (being the best bowler of the ODIs) I think South Africa would have done better.
The last thing you want is to get 2 years down the line with England being quite successful and then Goughie to retire and suddenly you find-out all these other bowlers aren't anywhere near as good as he helped them look.
Well do you expect Anderson to take over Gough's role immediately? Not a chance, we need need to build the team up gradually.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Richard said:
What was the point dropping him if they were going to recall him later?
Either they believe him that he's going to be around in 2007 or they don't!

Why think of 2007, although if he can impart knowledge onto the young bowlers who will definitely be fit to play in 2007, that's a fair idea.

For me, they realised he's needed in there, an experienced head, and if he hadn't come back so soon, he'd be on the Test tour IMO
 

twctopcat

International Regular
Richard said:
The one problem with that is it can give a false indication of a young player's ability.
You see, I think England did far better in the summer than the team merited. Had Gough not been there (being the best bowler of the ODIs) I think South Africa would have done better.
The last thing you want is to get 2 years down the line with England being quite successful and then Goughie to retire and suddenly you find-out all these other bowlers aren't anywhere near as good as he helped them look.
Kind of goes without saying, like saying india wouldn't have got as far as they did in the WC without tendulkar, called being a key player.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
You see I think they would - because the rest of their team is packed with class players too:
Ganguly
Sehwag
Dravid
Yuvraj Singh
Kaif (he is talented, really)
Srinath
And Khan and Nehra did pretty well for most of the tourno too.
Whereas with England, this was their bowlers:
Johnson (List A record very, very poor); Anderson (we all know about him); Harmison (equally, we all know how poor his domestic and international limited-overs record is); Flintoff (we all know how good his one-day records are); Giles (for most of the tournament he looked even worse than normal); then part-timers like McGrath and Vaughan.
I don't, personally, see much that suggests "immidiate international success" there. Gough's influence, IMO, was enormous. I was delighted for him, of course, that he made such a succesful return, but sadly I think it made other bowlers look a little better than they actually are.
 

twctopcat

International Regular
Richard said:
You see I think they would - because the rest of their team is packed with class players too:
Ganguly
Sehwag
Dravid
Yuvraj Singh
Kaif (he is talented, really)
Srinath
And Khan and Nehra did pretty well for most of the tourno too.
Whereas with England, this was their bowlers:
Johnson (List A record very, very poor); Anderson (we all know about him); Harmison (equally, we all know how poor his domestic and international limited-overs record is); Flintoff (we all know how good his one-day records are); Giles (for most of the tournament he looked even worse than normal); then part-timers like McGrath and Vaughan.
I don't, personally, see much that suggests "immidiate international success" there. Gough's influence, IMO, was enormous. I was delighted for him, of course, that he made such a succesful return, but sadly I think it made other bowlers look a little better than they actually are.
I was just pointing out that i don't think they could have done without his 600+ runs, cannot guarantee that the other batsmen would have made up for his absence, you never can with a player of his magnitude.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
And they'll only appear when Anderson, Johnson, Giles and co. play without Gough.
So far, that's happened in one meaningful game, and in that game a total of 70 was being chased.
 

Swervy

International Captain
Richard..please tell me why you think Goughs presence makes the other bowlers look better than they really are?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Fairly simple - Goughie bowls well, he a) gets some good batsmen out and b) restricts the scoring meaning more risks are likely against other bowlers.
Without his economy and wickets, there would be more opposition batsmen, and more run-scoring potential, and also it would be easier to wait for the slightly poorer delivery from the lesser bowler instead of having to go after poor and less poor balls from him.
If someone of lesser ability plays with the already lesser-ability bowlers there already, more batsmen are likely to score more runs. Hence, the lesser bowlers are likely to go for more runs and get fewer wickets.
IMO Anderson and Johnson owe a huge amount of their success last summer to Gough.
 

Top