Well this has been an excellent waste of everybody's time.
Well this has been an excellent waste of everybody's time.
368-4 on Day 2 and lose by an innings... amazing
Just for future reference, and further to any shit opinions you may read on Cricket Twitter, this is the root and branch review that should happen (you won't read this anywhere else):
- A lot of people, including the influential ISM crew of Vaughan, Bumble, Buttler etc, seem to want to cut the number of county games because of 'quality over quantity'. This is the most wrong-headed shite going. If you cut the number of counties or games, you are reducing the amount of cricket and cricketers. Why would that be a good thing?
It is the thinking of jock idiots who have cruised from school to county to England to the commentary box on the back of God-given talent - yes, they worked hard but they wouldn't get there without the talent. They don't think about the game and therefore cannot see that to find good players you have to INCREASE the size of the pool of cricketers you are looking at and INCREASE the number of games they are playing in so that their worth can be properly assessed. How many people have been lost to the system because retarded coaches at county academies think they are 'soft', or don't 'rate' their bowling action, or think they are too short/fat/quiet/have a dubious lifestyle, or because they happened to nick off in two important games when they were 18?
We need to have just as much county cricket, if not more, and we also need to beef up minor counties cricket and the top end of club cricket. To find great players you need to take cricket to all of the people and INCREASE the amount played and highlight its importance. It's simple numbers. Australia's great strength is the grade cricket system, and in particular its relationship with the states, but you never hear about that in these end of disaster shakedowns, because no one prominent in cricket here understands how or why it works because they have never been involved in the grass roots and have no interest in it.
- I see Steven Finn has taken to the airwaves saying that the 'county grind' hinders pace bowling. What a load of tosh. The last people you should ask about cricket are professional cricketers - they generally don't understand the game and if they do, their interest is in making a living out of it. Generally that means, like the rest of us, they want to be paid a lot more money to do a lot less work.
The most overs bowled by a seamer in the County Championship this year was Kyle Abbott's 415.3 overs, which is 70 overs a month, which is 2-3 overs a day. Most bowl much less. That is not a 'grind'.
- The 'England setup' is a load of absolute wank and has to go. By the 'England setup' I refer to the idea that certain players are 'England cricketers', and others are not. Increasingly, these players seem to be earmarked almost while sucking on their mother's tit, with the 'Lions' and the 'Young Lions' and all this bullshit. Some of them, inevitably, will succeed but what it has developed on the side is a whole pack of tried and tested failures that make up the edges of the Test side - once again we are picking from a tiny pool which has been selected on dubious grounds, grounds that will very rarely have included actual results. There is no room for late developers and there is no chance for those in the pool to go away and improve without it seeming like they have been cast out into the wilderness.
- When it comes to fast bowling, look no further than this: the ECB Fast Bowling Directives. Again this is never brought up because commentators have either never heard of it, or think it is a good idea based on the above bullshit logic. What the Fast Bowling Directives do is basically limit the amount of overs that can be bowled in a spell/day as you're growing up. Currently it is 7 overs in a spell until you're 19, and that drops as you go down the ages until 4 overs at age 13. In theory this is to prevent back injuries but it has zero effect on that as people can still bowl as much as they like in the nets, so what it does in practice is stop young fast bowlers from bowling enough overs in games. I know, right?
- The ECB are megalomaniacs. I say that in the nicest possible way. As an organisation, their mission is to take control of all cricket and particularly the marketing of all cricket. Running a cricket club, I can rarely do anything without having to pass a number of ECB checks and sign ECB forms, and follow ECB regulations, which are often for things well outside their jurisdiction. All cricket in this country exists under the ECB's iron fist and worse still, they've decided that the best way to run things is to pack it with Australians, from the England coach, to the marketing people, to the participation manager and many more. Why? Because we have a massive inferiority complex about Australia.
- Which brings me back to Australia. Australia should not be copied. Australia has six states, five large population centres with bustling sporting culture in each, and other than that it's a load of flies, bush fires and pokies. England, on the other hand, is a green land with very even population spread and football is the game of the cities - cricket is the game of the innumerable towns and villages. Just look at the most recent winners of the national club titles: Wanstead & Snaresbrook, South Northumberland, Blackheath, Sandiacre Town, Kibworth. The ECB refuse to acknowledge this because they are all marketing men and marketing orthodoxy tells you that there is more money to be made in cities. They should really be ploughing money into the towns and villages (in both first class and minor counties), creating uniformly great cricket facilities, training up coaches etc and then they will have a huge population of cricket people wanting to part with their cash. Until they get this right, and they won't, I'm afraid we'll keep on being shit.
Jim's cricket rants.
I don't know enough about it all to be able to agree or disagree with all of it but the bits I do understand I do agree. That sentence is a riot but you know what I know. "The England setup" in particular.
Does every Ashes defeat provoke an existential MELTDOWN, or is there something especially shit about this? Weren't we setting ourselves up to dominate a few years ago? Why is the bloke who invented the clockwork radio coaching them?
Every one does, but the last three away defeats have all been absolutely shambolic. That said, the Aussies haven't won here in the last four attempts either.
We were last properly good in summer 2011. Then we went to 'Pakistan', got annihilated and have been varying between shit and alright ever since.
Can we archive individual posts? This one needs to be. Absolute quality.Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
I should add that the para about player development is fuelled by having quite a detailed knowledge of what goes on in my county's academy - which players are retained and let go at what ages, the rationale behind these decisions and the nature of the individuals who are put into coaching positions and who are making these decisions. And that is at Surrey, a rich, successful county - christ knows what goes on at the likes of Derbyshire, and christ knows what happens in minor counties.
Just last month I was told about a 16 year old keeper/bat who scored the most runs for three years but was let go at the end of the season because he was too fat.
Too fat
Have a quick glance down the all time run scorers and you see Inzi, Mohammad Yousuf, Tendulkar, Kallis even. Not too many six packs there
Samit Patel probably should have played 30+ Tests and a lot of ODIs. Oh well.
And my Justice for Cozza campaign is still running.
Here's a question.
If Steve Smith was English, would he have made it through, and into, the England Setup?
Bizarre technique, really struggled early in his career (I'm sure Bumble said something about him being picket for the quality of his chat), bit of a chubster . . .
I'm inclined to think it's (at least) arguable he wouldn't have.
James Taylor should have played way more too, I'm sure he was discarded for long enough because he was too short. Definitely agreed on Samit Patel also, I've always been a fan of his.
Dan Lawrence is the acid test for that. Plays everything wristily to leg side (even more so than Westley), has excellent first class numbers at a very young age, let's see how we waste him. I've already heard at least one adverse whisper from some insider idiot along the lines of 'well Westley failed, so that technique doesn't work at Test level'.
Smith, for all his early career oddities, was always scoring heavily in the Shield I think and that is the best indicator of whether you're going to hack it in Tests, in spite of how many times people use Hick and Ramprakash to try and say that domestic cricket is irrelevant.
I think we discarded Westley too soon anyway. There are people who deserve an 'extended run in the side', like Hick and Ramprakash, if they have excellent background evidence that they can score heavily but for whatever reason aren't getting it together at the top level or need more experience. James Vince, on the other hand, regardless of his punchy 50s where no one bats around him, clearly doesn't have it and there is nothing to suggest that he does, other than somebody rubbing one out over a cover drive in the nets.
Have you thought about writing a proper report?
He's a bit of a tragic case isn't he? It's as if he's got Stockholm syndrome.
I could do that and become a well-known crank, but I'm too busy running an actual club, with a budget of zero, which takes about a billion hours a year. That said I've been blocked by Michael Vaughan on twitter for several years now, so I have all the MAVERICK credentials I need.
How did that happen?
I presume it was because I once replied to him CALLING HIM OUT on dishing out unsolicited praise for Chris Wilder, then Northampton manager, because the two share a management company. Vaughan is famous for using his columns and media gigs to big up other sportsmen in the ISM stable (of which he is a shareholder) without declaring his interest.
It's a bit of a shame the 2005 Ashes happened to him, because he's a gigantic cunt.
That's about the most cricket scandal imaginable.
Might just add it to my initial Jimrage posts saved from the old board.Can we archive individual posts? This one needs to be. Absolute quality.
Hoping for a full player-by-player rant at the end of the series too.
This is still one of my favourite things:
one day cricket is about big, swinging testicles and unfortunately Ronald's have to be hoovered out of his ginger perineum every morning.
The one above is cold, hard truth, there's no rage in it. Another couple of disasters may trip the alarm although in truth we haven't been as bad as in 13/14.
Also we've only used 12 bloody players.
Quality stuff from Liew in the Indy on Bayliss.
Might as well have a plant pot in charge.Trevor Bayliss’s press conference, on the other hand, was slightly different. For one thing, it was almost devoid of emotion. Perhaps the England coach is the sort of guy who likes to keep his feelings locked up tight. But then, so is Root under normal circumstances. If Root was the shattered reality show contestant struggling to keep things together on live television, then Bayliss was the British Airways operative telling you that they didn’t personally lose your luggage, and would you please fill out this form and go to the back of the queue.
Any changes for Melbourne? “Haven't given it any thought whatsoever.”
Would Ben Stokes have made any difference to the series? “Hard to say.” Why had so many senior players failed to produce their best cricket at the same time? “I wish I knew. You'd have to ask them.” Why does England struggle to produce express pace bowlers? “I haven't got the answers.”
Whilst the hands-off, big sun hat, let the lads get on with it approach has definitely helped unlock potential in our limited overs cricket. Weve gone backwards in Tests. Need someone who is more plugged in to the domestic game for a start.
I think they're consciously prioritising that in order to be on-brand for 2019, to be honest. I also believe that's why they strongly backed the 10-team bollocks, so we don't get knocked out by Papua New Guinea.
After 2019 they should offer Nasser Hussain whatever it takes and just give him the keys. Not convinced Strauss knows what he's doing.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/...-ashes-failure
More fire from Dobell.
Why does no one else write stuff like that? Is it because their editors are all taken out for a spiffing lunch by Giles Clarke every so often?
That's easy, they're all just reporters rather than actual journalists or writers.
Any of the columnists in papers could write it, albeit most of them are ghosted celebrity things by Boycott, Bumble etc.
The best thing is when football writers like Martin Samuel or Ollie Holt get a rare cricket brief and spout absolute bobbins for 1,000 words.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/42401187
That's the spirit, Mark.
Shield cricket has always been the most reliable way to pick test players. I am 100% in favour of Shield form being the most important thing.Smith, for all his early career oddities, was always scoring heavily in the Shield I think and that is the best indicator of whether you're going to hack it in Tests, in spite of how many times people use Hick and Ramprakash to try and say that domestic cricket is irrelevant.
I remember the days when basically everyone in Queensland was on the verge of the national team, so you'd have state matches with Matthew Hayden, Martin Love, Jimmy Maher, Andrew Symonds, Andy Bichel, Michael Kasparowicz, and Ashley Noffke all rolling around wiping the floor with the other states. I once had a chat with Kasper on the boundary rope during a match against South Australia.
So Mason Crane is in line for Melbourne it seems.
A quote:
Bantz."Jos Buttler, the captain, came up and I ask him 'where do I bowl?' He said 'I dunno!' I felt under pressure there, but I came through it, and that's an experience I can use."
For who, Moeen? What we really need is a shorter batting lineup.
God I dislike Buttler. It might be irrational but then on the other hand, it might not.
Overton (injured).
Unless the Boxing Day Test has been moved to Chennai, that doesn't make sense, but then nothing since the day they selected the squad has made sense.
I suppose they could be converting Moeen into a part timer, and going with the four man attack. Geniuses to a man.
Is this going to be another Kerrigan situation?
From what I've seen of Crane, he's very good and has a great deal of potential, but I've no idea what he's doing here. He's taken 75 at 44 in first class cricket.
I don't think it'll be a Kerrigan in terms of mental breakdown, but they could easily load him for 6+ an over if they get on top, without him necessarily doing a lot wrong.
I get that we all like Moeen (he is great), but he's been a total waste of space on this tour so far. That said, if you picked a real spinner in the lineup (although Mason Crane probably isn't that spinner), you could get away with him as a bits-and-pieces player if there's nobody else in the squad pressing for a batting spot.
It reminds me of when we went to India with Steve Smith and Cameron White as our spin bowling options. We got pumped 4-0 in the least surprising result ever.
Excellent drama there. Warner spoons an easy catch on 99 to give Curran his first test wicket. But then it turned out that Curran overstepped, and Warner gets his hundred off the next ball.
Watching the day-night Test between South Africa and Zimbabwe as an antidote to the horrors elsewhere in the southern hemisphere. It's been decent stuff and not as one sided as it could have been. Zimbabwe have got Taylor and Jarvis back, and the latter looks a legitimately decent Test match opening bowler. Cremer's leg spinners also looked potent. Aiden Markram scored a nice hundred and he looks to be the solution to SA's opening problem. Quinton de Kock looks well out of nick but still there at the moment.
The problem is that Zimbabwe, Ireland and Afghanistan aren't going to be in the new Championship so Christ knows where they go from here, but nice to see them getting a decent game here anyway.
Much better.
Root will fall for 78 in the morning and the batting will collapse to 320 all out though.
It's always brilliant watching the backtracking from pundits when Chef ends his droughts, particularly in this age of Kevin Pietersen being allowed to have terrible opinions.
'England in command' from the BBC though - have they learned nothing in the last 70 years?
We haven't really offered much in the way of inspiring play this test. I wouldn't expect a massive turnaround any time soon.
Zimbabwe though.
Facing Morkel and Philander with the pink ball in the evening session at a coastal ground, no ta.
Lovely score to wake up to but as long as we are behind, there is minimal guarantee that we will go in front. Nice to see Cook "prove his doubters wrong" with a hundred though. Root out for 56.
Cook and Root will be gone inside 5 overs.
I'm feeling generous.
Answered his critics and back to his best etc
I love all the stuff flooding twitter about 'Didn't do it when it mattered', etc. You can guarantee the same people would not have been saying it was a meaningless innings if he had nicked off for 5.
His mission in life should be to overtake Tendulkar's run total and we should keep picking him until he's 50 if necessary to achieve that aim (Kapil Dev did that to get the wicket record, so they can't complain).
Great to see Cook score big. Wasn't too far off with Root either, he just hates three figures.
It's probably difficult to lose this one now but you never know.
We're BACK.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
