jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Jun 24, 2020 9:50:10 GMT
"This will have a diluting affect on the % shareholding held by the Supporters Club. However, I want to make it clear that despite this, it doesn’t change anything in terms of their entitlement to have a Director on the Board should they wish to nominate a *suitable* candidate." Not that I am overly fussed, but aren't the SC entitled to two full directors?
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Jun 20, 2020 10:38:46 GMT
Calm down a bit. This means nothing unless we are much better run the debts will soon rack up again. From memory, in round terms, £7m became £20m in 5 years with no structural plan to address that problem. Fair play for doing whatever he's agreed to clear those numbers down, but let's keep an eye on the future here. Edit. I hope that Tom has found his place at the FC, he always looked like 1 person trying to do 3 jobs to me. Good luck to him in his new position. Bambi may be a bit over provocative and contentious here. But he is right. Unless we stop losing millions per year, the club is not sustainable without a Sugar Daddy. And that is NEVER going to happen at the Memorial Stadium in it's current configuration , it just can't pay for itself. Just imagine if upfront The Al Qadis had splashed out £30m on tangible ground improvements and buying in quality like whassisname did to buy Blackburn in to the Premier league. In ten years time we could be where Blackburn are (what do you mean bankrupt and relegated twice. then bought up by a Indian big pharma and food firm?) I hear what you're saying but I think cautious optimism is ok here. The debt was around £20m of which a good chunk was built up by previous regimes. Even if they'd spent £13m in year one, it's probably not enough to transform the club. It might have got us a new stand though I'll grant you. I think yesterday's announcement makes it more likely that we'll be able to finance some kind of ground redevelopment or a new stadium. A mortgage is a decent analogy. If you are trying to secure a loan from the bank to fund an extension you are much more likely to be approved if you have paid off your mortgage than you are if you have equity of 10%. We're a more attractive borrower after yesterday's announcement. I also think there has been a shift towards a more sustainable model with an emphasis placed on developing young players with a sell on value. Whether we've got the right manager to succeed is questionable but it's a start.
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Jun 10, 2020 16:31:48 GMT
I definitely remain sceptical, but assuming the hypothesis outlined above is correct, then I think capital expenditure with a view to increasing our long term sustainability is a sensible option. What are the alternatives? Use any increased cash reserves to maintain the status quo and lose millions whilst continuing to try and find a buyer or fritter it away on the first team whilst keeping our fingers crossed that it brings success on the pitch and that something else turns up when the cash runs out. I guess the question is whether the training ground will give us a decent return on investment? Does it mean we significantly reduce costs (at a wildly speculative guess, maintenance and upkeep is probably not that different to rental costs) or will it help us develop our own players and sell them on at a profit? Basically, is it a step towards sustainability or are we just spending money because we've got a bit at the moment? Don't really understand the highlighted bit. If the owner of the facility was covering maintenance and upkeep he would have nothing left from the rental income, if the renter is paying those costs then his outlay is (in round terms) doubled. Or are you saying that we are paying the same now as we will in future, if we own the site then it has a rental / sale value, you can't just ignore that. Can you clarify whatever point you are trying to make there please? Simply that it will cost us roughly the same to maintain our own facility (maintain the pitches and the gym, clean the facilities etc) as it cost us to rent Cribbs, especially as the set up at Cribbs seemed to be fairly basic. This assumption is completely baseless though.
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Jun 10, 2020 13:09:16 GMT
This is the conclusion I came to... And I would have to say, it's very welcome news - so well done Wael Al-Qadi. OK I see how it might get some things moving and certainly it is good news on the training ground front. But;
1. Go back a few months and there seemed a general consensus that Wael was basically well intentioned but quite incompetent and a little bit prone to self-delusion. Now he has money to spend are we revising that judgement? Because it could be argued that the only thing worse than an incompetent owner would be an incompetent owner throwing money around like confetti.
2. If this is the correct interpretation of events (and I agree it makes quite a lot of sense as to why the spending taps have suddenly been turned on) does it not mean that our ownership is considerably less wealthy than it was? So while Rovers may have access to more cash, Wael is obviously not as wealthy as the AQ family overall suggesting perhaps more underlying insecurity. In other words the big stuff might well remain off the table absent investment. Given that it has been suggested that the main barrier to investment is Wael's determination to cling on to his role this problem might have just become even more intractable.
3. Are we happy to drop notions of sustainability because someone is prepared to throw money at the club?
I've maintained a 'what have you done for me lately?' attitude to our ownership for a long time because I see no reason to view the modern day relationship between owners and fans as anything other than purely transactional -Higgs was primarily responsible for that shift at Rovers. So it's good to see that for the first time in a while they are actually meeting that test and, even if we dislike the current results, the change of recruitment strategy under Garner does at least hint at some kind of longer term plan for the club. But I think a certain healthy scepticism is still necessary.
I definitely remain sceptical, but assuming the hypothesis outlined above is correct, then I think capital expenditure with a view to increasing our long term sustainability is a sensible option. What are the alternatives? Use any increased cash reserves to maintain the status quo and lose millions whilst continuing to try and find a buyer or fritter it away on the first team whilst keeping our fingers crossed that it brings success on the pitch and that something else turns up when the cash runs out. I guess the question is whether the training ground will give us a decent return on investment? Does it mean we significantly reduce costs (at a wildly speculative guess, maintenance and upkeep is probably not that different to rental costs) or will it help us develop our own players and sell them on at a profit? Basically, is it a step towards sustainability or are we just spending money because we've got a bit at the moment?
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Jun 4, 2020 16:29:05 GMT
I can relate to everything you say regarding umpires. There is a video here that you have probably seen. The clip at 31 seconds makes me smile every time I watch it. A few other things I can relate to as well unfortunately! I remember one incident in a beautiful setting in the Cotswolds at a ground next to a lovely old church. The other side of the boundary was a ditch. I was fielding at deep square leg and our opening bowler was fielding at long leg. The ball went in between us and I beat him to the ball, and as I was bending down to pick it up, the bowler, who obviously hadn't seen me kept running and I tripped over his outstretched leg, straight into the ditch Plunkett is unlucky. I guess the other way of looking at it is that, it is probably better in the long run that Plunkett's last game was the world cup final, rather than a low key, behind closed doors affair. Surrey do have a massive catchment area but so do Middlesex and players like Higgins have had to leave to get regular cricket. I think Stewart deserves some credit, but perhaps you are right. Maybe he doesn't fancy the job. I remember him saying publicly that he didn't think he should have to apply and that if the ECB wanted him they would have to make an approach. Not sure I'd get too far if I took that approach when it comes to job hunting, but I guess life is different at the top! Interesting comment regarding cricket in Nottingham. What is lacking at grass routes level? I think to get that level of balance, perhaps you need a journalist which does not describe any of the new TMS pundits. The ABC employed Peter Roebuck for years in this role. The equivalent here is Vic Marks I guess but he is a bit to congenial to be outspoken on the radio. Mike Selvey used to do a good job of being forthright but he was also really dour! I think Agnew often does a good job of providing balance and is usually fair and without agenda, but he is compromised when it comes to the Hundred because he is employed by the BBC who obviously hold the rights.
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Jun 3, 2020 14:21:27 GMT
During my (middling standard) cricketing career non-playing umpires were a luxury. Unless you mean literally no umpire, in which case about 20% of my dismissals would have disappeared overnight as I assume you are effectively playing without LBWs? I suppose that might have been offset by the chance that a keeper might actually have held on to the odd catch if he wasn't stood up to the stumps! You are right about left arm seamers, but I think that unwillingness has changed over the last few years. Sam Curran and David Willey have both played a good number of games and Reece Topley is in the squad. You are right - left arm quick bowling is enough of a rarity that most right handers do hate facing it. Makes you wonder why almost no right hand fast bowlers go round the wicket to right hand batsemn. The other guy who must feel a bit miffed to be left out is Steve Finn. Somewhere there is a parallel universe in which the umpires told Grahame Smith to get on with the game back in 2012 and the no ball rule was not changed. Steve Finn is still bowling 90mph+ and has taken 400 wickets, including a significant number in Australia. I think Moeen still gets into our best test team. If the squads weren't spit this summer then I would have him in both the ODI team and test team. I am sure he will play in India this winter. I am not so sure that Bairstow's issue was fatigue. I think in order to improve his white ball game he started staying legside of the ball. It's revolutionised his white ball game, but it has coincided with a downturn in his test form. I think he needs to tighten up his technique. If we move on from Buttler in the test team then I think Foakes gets a chance next. It is a difficult to see Bairstow getting the gloves back. I would not want to go back to picking Bairstow as a specialist batsman at 6. I like using this position to blood a youngster. So that means, if he is going to get back in the side, he might have to look at the number 3 spot. I am not sure his technique is tight enough. I'm quite fortunate in that for some reason Greater Manchester has a lot of umpires. So we get neutral umpires even for 2nd and 3rd XI games. It's really odd. I've not come across that anywhere else. There was an incident in a 2nd team game I was skippering 2 years ago where there was a mess up of the scheduling and the umpires didn't turn up. The opposition genuinely wanted to call off the game because of this. We had to have 2 crisis meetings before agreeing to just umpire ourselves, something which to me was completely normal. It was bright sunny day in August with 22 players in position and we almost didn't because some people weren't that there were no proper umpires. It was bizarre but they don't realise how spoiled they are up here with that. I don't think anything has been agreed yet but I'd expect to see a number of odd rule alterations to make it happen.
I'm always surprised bowlers at the top level don't switch sides of the wicket more often. You'd think it would at least keep the batsmen guessing - almost like a bowling change. It must be to do with what bowlers are comfortable with. Most spinners are used to switching but seamers aren't.
Finn is a really strange case. Do you think it was really that moment that did for him? Or was it injuries maybe? Listening to him on the commentary in the winter he sounded pretty resigned to not playing for England again at this point. He seemed to go from extremely promising prospect to slightly washed up journeyman almost overnight. A bit peculiar. It's been a bit done to death but I think Liam Plunkett has been harshly dealt with. Even if you didn't think he could get to the next World Cup, he was our best bowler in the last one and surely would be at least in the frame for the T20 World Cup. Plus his story is quite inspiring and you'd think it would be a good example to everyone that it's never too late and you should keep plugging away. Sidelining him at this stage seems unnecessarily brutal to me.
I can imagine Bairstow being quite bitter about the turn of events that have occurred. He always did have a slighty unorthodox technique and it seems to me that he gets bowled too often for a top level international batsmen. But I think I would be prepared to go back to him as the Test Keeper. Foakes is the best keeper but his batting has been a bit overhyped I feel. I'm a bit suspicious of the hype machine around Surrey and Yorkshire players given their high ranking advocates in the media - am I the only person who thinks it's a disgrace that Alec Stewart is used as a pundit when he is also a player agent for most of the promising Surrey players? If I was Buttler though I would be constantly in the ear of England management that I wanted to play Test cricket this summer not the ODI's because I think if he doesn't then he's probably out for good.
That is comical. When I was in my early teens we played in the Stroud Premier which fed into the Gloucestershire League, the top of which feeds into the WEPL. It was a really average standard of cricket, primarily played by men that didn't want to travel too far on a Saturday. It was also 40 overs a side so started at 2 and was usually done just after 7. All very family friendly. The league had a number of neutral umpires and we used to get at least one most weeks. Then we got promoted into the Gloucestershire League and that stopped. Even at the top of the County League and bottom division of the WEPL, the best we'd get is an umpire that was a non playing member of the club. As a bowler, the best you could hope for is that they liked to get too involved in the game! With regard to bowlers changing the angle of attack, I guess the away swinger to the right hander is the more natural delivery for a right arm bowler; it certainly was for me. If you don't have the inswinger, going around the wicket takes LBW out of the game. Not sure why professionals with the skill to move the ball away from a left hander from around the wicket don't try that line of attack more often to a right hander though. Injuries definitely played their part with Finn, but as a result of him continually kicking the stumps over, he cut his run up in half didn't he? I wonder whether that contributed to his injury problems. When Archer was bowling to Smith at Lords last year, Sky showed a list of the top 20 odd spells in terms of pace delivered since 2000 ish. Finn's name appeared on that list a few times. Just goes to show how important it is that we look after Archer. I think how we replace Plunkett is one of the big questions facing the ODI side but that is not to say that it isn't right that we look to move on. I think in the build up to the World Cup his pace dropped and he looked less effective. It's why Wood came in for him at the start of the tournament. I think his effectiveness was in part due to the difficult pitches we played on. I am not sure he'd have had the same impact on good batting tracks. With regard to Foakes, yes he is probably a better player out of the side than in it. What I like though is that his approach compliments our middle order. He's a bit more of a traditional test batsman. The rest of the middle order (with the exception of Stokes who has developed his game) are dashers. You are right with regard to Buttler, but I wonder what he wants? I don't think he could complain if the selectors took things out his hands either. I had a real problem when Stewart was a player agent and worked for TMS. Less of an issue now he is effectively Surrey's Director of Cricket. The BBC and Sky have used Paul Farbrace recently too, who holds a similar role at Warwickshire. At least he actually watches some First Class cricket in order to form an opinion. Michael Vaughan was championing Zac Crawley before the winter tours off the back of his mate Rob Key's recommendation! You also have to say that most of the time, over the last couple of years at least, the players he has really put forward for England recognition, namely Pope, Burns, Foakes and the Currans have all done pretty well. I don't remember him being quite as vocal when they picked Stoneman or when everyone was clamoring for Borthwick to come in and bat 3 and he was happy to call them out when they picked Pope and batted him at 4. To me, Stewart seemed much more qualified for the Head of England cricket role than Ashley Giles. Surrey were a bit of a mess when he rejoined them and in recent years they have done a good job of balancing young English talent, journeymen and World class players. Given the budget they have, it would be easy to have the journeymen and the overseas superstars and forget the home grown talent (I am looking at you Notts)
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Jun 3, 2020 10:23:26 GMT
During my (middling standard) cricketing career non-playing umpires were a luxury. Unless you mean literally no umpire, in which case about 20% of my dismissals would have disappeared overnight as I assume you are effectively playing without LBWs? I suppose that might have been offset by the chance that a keeper might actually have held on to the odd catch if he wasn't stood up to the stumps!
You are right about left arm seamers, but I think that unwillingness has changed over the last few years. Sam Curran and David Willey have both played a good number of games and Reece Topley is in the squad. You are right - left arm quick bowling is enough of a rarity that most right handers do hate facing it. Makes you wonder why almost no right hand fast bowlers go round the wicket to right hand batsemn.
The other guy who must feel a bit miffed to be left out is Steve Finn. Somewhere there is a parallel universe in which the umpires told Grahame Smith to get on with the game back in 2012 and the no ball rule was not changed. Steve Finn is still bowling 90mph+ and has taken 400 wickets, including a significant number in Australia.
I think Moeen still gets into our best test team. If the squads weren't spit this summer then I would have him in both the ODI team and test team. I am sure he will play in India this winter. I am not so sure that Bairstow's issue was fatigue. I think in order to improve his white ball game he started staying legside of the ball. It's revolutionised his white ball game, but it has coincided with a downturn in his test form. I think he needs to tighten up his technique. If we move on from Buttler in the test team then I think Foakes gets a chance next. It is a difficult to see Bairstow getting the gloves back. I would not want to go back to picking Bairstow as a specialist batsman at 6. I like using this position to blood a youngster. So that means, if he is going to get back in the side, he might have to look at the number 3 spot. I am not sure his technique is tight enough.
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Jun 2, 2020 9:16:14 GMT
I know there are far more important things in the World than cricket right now, but I must admit, I am really looking forward to watching a bit of cricket later in the summer (although I have enjoyed some of the re-runs on BBC radio this spring - good background noise whilst working). I have heard that players will either be in the one day squad or the test squad, which will make for some interesting decisions with regard to our multi format players. I had a go at trying to write down two teams for both test and ODIs. I think you can name two really strong sides, which shows two things. Firstly, we have some decent strength in depth, and secondly, formats are diverging. I came up with this for the test side:
Burns Sibley Crawley Root Stokes Pope Foakes Sam Curran Leach Broad Anderson
Reserves: Bess, Wood, Denely, Jennings, Virdi, Craig Overton, Jamie Overton, Stone, Bracey(!), Brookes, Carse, Dawson, Gleeson, Helm, Lawrence, Robinson
and for the one day side:
Roy Bairstow Hain Morgan Banton Buttler Moeen Woakes - Jordan (T20I) Tom Curran (ODI) Archer Rashid
Reserves: Billings, Mahmood, Parkinson, Brown, Gregory, Vince, Duckett, Evans, Malan, Jacks, Kohler-Cadmore, Livingstone, Salt, Topley, Wiley
Firstly, with regard to the uber squads, what a kick in the teeth for Jamie Porter and Sam Northeast. Two of the stand out performers in County Cricket over the last 5 years and the selectors have decided they aren't even in the best 60 odd cricketers in the country. I think Harry Gurney will feel aggrieved too. Secondly, here are some words I thought perhaps I may never type again, congratulations to Gloucestershire cricketer, James Bracey, for his call up to the England squad!
Some of the names in the squad that are exciting are Carse (who I must admit, I have seen very little of, but an all-rounder that can bowl close to 90mph is always an exciting prospect. I also like Brookes and Helm. Brookes is quicker but every time I have seen Helm, he has been the stand out bowler in a very good Middlesex attack. I'd compare him to Stuart Broad. Same kind of height and pace and he is more likely to get movement off the seam than swing it. He doesn't seem to bowl many bad balls. I also like Lawrence although he is another middle order player when what we really need is a number 3.
I put Archer in the one day side because I am not sure you can pick Anderson, Broad, Leach and Archer in the same eleven. I know Archer can bat, but it just makes our tail a bit long. If we need a bit of pace in the side then Wood can come in. I would imagine that between them Wood, Anderson and Broad can be rotated across the 6 tests. I'd be surprised if they managed to stay fit for all of them. If the selectors go with Archer in the test team then I'd probably pick Bess ahead of Leach. Denley is probably unlucky to move on, but it just feels like a good time to try and find a longer term answer at number 3.
Sam Hain is probably the only surprise in my ODI team, but he has a phenomenal record in list A cricket. I really think he deserves a chance.
Famous last words, because the Windies always have the propensity to self combust, but I think they are a team on the up. They often seem to raise their game against England, they have a quality bowling attack and I am looking forward to seeing whether the likes of Hope and Hetmyer have progressed. I am not quite so clued up with regard to Pakistan Irish but their bowlers usually do well in the UK.
I quite like the idea of a regional County Championship with a playoff to decide the overall winner. I know this isn't a popular view, but I do support moving to a three division Championship. I actually think, given the extra competition, and the desire to play some first class cricket in the high season, it is inevitable at some point. I guess the drawback to a regional structure is that you lose that competitive edge with regard to promotion and relegation. The fixed camera from both ends synced with the BBC commentary has been gaining traction in the last few years. I think Somerset especially have reported very strong viewing figures. I would imagine, the issue with having more than one fixed camera at each end is that the cost ramps up quite quickly. You start to need camera men and a director. I do think it's something the ECB could fund at one game in each round though. You could even make highlights available once a week on terrestrial TV. Sky holding the rights to Championship cricket and showing one game a season is a real frustration of mine, but I guess they have decided that the cost is prohibitive. Sky are either all or nothing though. The full 27 HD cameras and a - list broadcasters or nothing. Half a dozen cameras and syncing with the BBC commentary would be a good deal cheaper I would think.
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on May 18, 2020 15:23:25 GMT
it's starting. Apparently talks of League Two and conference merging to a League Two North/South I think there is a case for combining the Conference and League Two, but is regionalisation going to solve anything? What percentage of expenditure for clubs at that level is spent on away travel? If costs reduced, what is to stop the reduction being frittered away on agent fees and player wages? If the aim is to ensure clubs remain solvent then salary caps would seem a much more effective measure. Rich owners, like the backer at Salford have would still be able to make capital investments in infrastructure with a view to increasing turnover (and the amount a club can spend on wages) but obviously this growth would be sustainable. The other issue I have with a geographical split is that it's not always easy to ensure a fair split. Gloucester City were in the Conference North for a number of years and they are only 25 miles North of Bristol. I would guess there would be a number of clubs just south of the midlands who could find themselves with a long trip every week.
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Feb 19, 2020 21:36:00 GMT
I did see the T20s. Usually, I agree with Irish regarding international T20s but I guess with a couple of World Cups on the horizon, these were a bit more meaningful. I enjoyed it.
There is clearly one batting slot up for grabs. The death bowling looks good to me and I like the first choice spinners. Not sure about Parkinson as a backup yet (I think the lack of a googly is a real hindrance but that could develop)
I wonder whether we're a bit light bowling wise in the first 6 overs. Archer will come back and make a difference but is there a case for picking Sam Curran or even David Willey instead of Root / Banton / Malan / Denley? I think Moeen is very capable of batting at 6 and Curran is probably better suited to batting in the middle order than most of our batting options. It would give us a left arm option too. All of the bowlers barring Rashid and Wood have a strike rate up at 130 anyway. I'm just not sure we need an extra batsman.
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Jan 20, 2020 11:03:22 GMT
Well that was a terrific win. Really good to see us bat long and make a huge first innings score for the first time in eons. To score 500 without Root (or Cook) contributing is really pleasing.
Can they start to put that kind of score on the board regularly? The top 4 will all need to start converting 50s into big hundreds but there are certainly signs of encouragement on that front and I think the young players they have bought into the side all seem to be learning and improving quickly.
Just a quick word on Root's captaincy in this test. I thought the decision to bowl himself first up this morning was a poor one. I know he out - bowled Bess yesterday, but I think he had an opportunity to give Bess a real confidence boost this morning by bowling him first up. Instead Root bowled first, and bowled at the best end. If I was Bess now I would be worrying that England may consider leaving him out in the next test and playing an extra seamer. With young players, you have to make them feel valued and see the longer term picture, especially this morning when the test was all but won.
This tactic of asking Wood to bang the ball in short is so frustrating. I don't mind trying that for 3 overs if you have two well set batsmen but we seem to go to it so early. Wood said himself that it takes a lot out of a bowler. He also bowled 7 overs on the spin yesterday which is madness. He should be asked to bowl 3 or 4 over spells as fast as he can with only the odd short one.
I think this is where my point regarding Silverwood comes in. Root is not a good captain but we have no other options so someone needs to work with him to improve that facet of his game. Is anyone talking to him at the end of a match and helping him to realise that some of his decisions are poor? Was Silverwood part of the discussion this morning when they decided who would bowl first up? If he wasn't then he should have been, and if he was then I would question his tactical acumen.
I know it might seem churlish to be critical after a magnificent win, but I want the best for the England team and whilst some areas have shown signs of improvement, I think this side has the talent to be even better with the right support and management.
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Jan 17, 2020 17:03:54 GMT
There's a team 40 miles up the M5 who could use a decent spinner......
and another one another 50 miles up the M5 as well! He'd get in to every other county side other than Essex wouldn't he? I reckon he'll have his pick if he moves on when his contract expires at the end of the season. I think Yorkshire will be back in for him when his contract expires. Is Bess a good enough batsmen to play at 6 or 7? I remember a game at New Road a few years ago. Bess had just finished his spell in the England side and Leach was coming back from injury. Somerset picked Leach and left Bess out. I think Peter Trego played as a batsman and I remember thinking that off the back of a couple of 50s for England, they could have gone with Bess at 7 and left Trego out. I think it really knocked Bess's confidence too. He was certainly very frustrated on the outfield during the lunch break. I heard Swann say that he felt he really learnt how to bowl when he moved away from the turning tracks they used to produce at Wantage Road. I guess you have to put more revs on the ball and learn some more variations if you are playing on flatter, or even greener wickets.
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Jan 17, 2020 14:46:51 GMT
It’s a good point you make about Dom Bess jack. Perhaps in September but I can’t see him playing too much for Somerset if Jack L is available yet he has enormous potential and is still very young and he needs what JL got, 5/6 seasons of county cricket, learning his craft. Somerset have finally been fined for producing spin wickets so they may be very wary of producing pitches that warrant two England spinners bowling. Last year he spent time at Yorkshire, it may well be repeated this year. And your correct about Curran, I should have mentioned him. He is a good partnership breaker and when he bowls or bats things happen. I’m sure he will become the 3rd or 4th bowler in the team eventually. Probably not quick enough to open but in the right conditions he will get his 3/4 wickets and bat well at 7/8/9 and get his 30s and 40s. He has been operating at the same kind of pace that Hoggard and Anderson bowl / bowled at in this series and he is quicker than Philander. If he can bowl at 82/85mph then that is quick enough if he can develop exceptional control and skill levels. The key is to ensure you don't have an attack full of bowlers than all operate in the low to mid 80s though. I think my point with Bess is that he may not get to play enough county cricket to reach his potential. With that in mind, if England think his potential is high enough, they could just decide to invest some time in him and see where they are in 20 tests time. Given that Yorkshire have signed R.Ashwin for the 2020 season, I don't think he will be returning to Headingly this season. What do you make of Philander signing for Somerset? He could take a hat-full of wickets, but I wonder whether he will be able to stay fit for 14 matches, especially in 3 years time. I would have thought Somerset could do with a bit of top order batting experience but they keep signing bowlers!
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Jan 17, 2020 11:31:33 GMT
England have had a good few days since my last post. There are finally some signs of progress from our batting line up. I maintain that we will not consistently win abroad without a top 3 who can score hundreds regularly, but I do think there are promising signs from Burns, Sibley and Crawley. Denley has also done a job and is worth his place in the side at the moment, but clearly, given his age, he has less scope to improve into someone who can regularly provide anything more than a solid platform.
I heard a bit of criticism about England's lack of tempo yesterday. I am not having that. The directive seems to me to be very clear at the moment to the guys who are batting in the top order. Play low risk cricket. Set a platform. Sometimes, we will plod along to 120/3 off 60 overs and then lose a couple of quick wickets and be bowled out for 250. That doesn't make the approach wrong in the short term though. The more time our young players spend in the middle the more chance our experienced middle order have of doing what Stokes and Pope have done this morning. Moreover, the more experience the top order get, the more match awareness they will pick up. Stokes has become a master at working out how to win us matches with the bat but it took him 50 odd test matches to get there.
I like Bess. Unless you are an exceptional spinner, I think it is very difficult to become England's first choice spinner unless you can bat and bowl. That is because more than half of England's tests are played on wickets that are not especially spin friendly. I am not saying that is fair, but it is undoubtedly true. It is also true of seamers when we play in the subcontinent. In Sri Lanka last time, Jimmy played because he is the best in the World. Broad, who is possibly a notch below was left out. If he could still bat I think he'd have played instead of Curran.
I think Leach is just a notch below exceptional. I really do rate him. His record is very good and I think he can get better. If he could bat at 8 and field at second slip then he'd play every week. As it is, I think he might find himself in and out of the team.
Bess isn't as good a bowler at the moment, but has a few things going for him. Because he can bat and is an exceptional fielder, you feel he will always find a way to contribute. He clearly has a very good temperament and he is only 21 so I think his ceiling is relatively high. Perversely, he is unlikely to get enough game time to develop in County Cricket, so his best chance may be finding a way to hang on to his place in the test side.
Parkinson really can't bat so again, for better or worse that counts against him. He is really slow through the air as well. I can't think of a leggie who has had a successful test career who has a stock ball less than 50mph.
I agree with both of you regarding the quick bowlers. We could do with a couple who have been in and around the side kicking on. I think that Archer and Curran could be a decent opening partnership once Broad and Anderson retire. I know people aren't convinced by Curran but I think he has put on a yard of pace. He usually swings the new ball. Compare his record after 15 tests to Broad and Anderson and his record is favourable. He is only 21 and I think he will continue getting better. I really rate Woakes, but his injury record hasn't been great recently.
There are some players in first class cricket that look like they could succeed at Test level to me. Both Overtons, Tongue, Helm and Brooks are the ones that spring to mind, but if Broad and Anderson both retire in the next 12 months, we could do with a Sidebottom figure to come in to the side as a short term stop gap. I do not think there is on of those in County Cricket at the moment, although Woakes could fill that role. Steve Finn is another outside bet too.
Is today the day that we finally manage to score more than 400 in the first innings (and would 400 be enough, or is 500 closer to par)?
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Jan 3, 2020 16:33:18 GMT
Not going well for England is it.
I think we are reaching a bit nadir. The era of Stokes, Bairstow, Buttler and Moeen in the middle order looks like it's drawing to a close to me. The sample size with Buttler is definitely big enough now to make a decision on him as a test cricketer. Averages less than 35 as a specialist middle order batsman with one hundred in 30 odd tests and less than 30 with no hundreds when he keeps wicket. Unless he scores a hundred in this series then I think Foakes will come back into the side for the Sri Lanka series.
I think Bairstow could come back in to the side in the future but he has to demonstrate that he has tightened up his technique first. It probably means he has to forgo some white ball cricket for a while. He probably has to average 55+ in first class cricket whilst looking demonstrably tighter before I'd consider him again.
Moeen would clearly walk in to the side if he was at his best. He's got a good record against everyone other than Australia but does he want to play Test Cricket or is he happy on the T20 circuit? In my opinion, he has copped a disproportionately high amount of criticism when playing for England. I am not sure he still enjoys playing Test cricket for England and I think that affects his performance levels.
Stokes is infuriating. He has the talent and technique to be a World Class player and consistently win England Test matches. Does he have the temperament though? His dismissal has been the catalyst for significant England collapses more than once this winter. Likewise Root. Australia have an average batting line up but they are supported by two superstars at the moment. Stokes and Root could be out Smith and Labuschagne. We would look an infinitely better side if we had the Root of a couple of years ago to hold our batting line up together.
Just as the middle and lower order fall apart, the top order have started to show some signs of at least offering England something better than 40/3 on a regular basis. Burns and Denley are not world beaters but are at least laying a platform on a semi regular basis.
We've gone in to another overseas test match with a seam attack that operates between 80-85 mph. I cannot imagine that will end well. It is starting to feel like we need to make a decision to play Anderson or Broad outside of England. Root has also broken Archer. The amount of over he has been asked to bowl it was only a matter of time before he picked up and injury.
I also think the jury is out on Giles and Silverwood. Given that our test cricket has been moving backwards was appointing a continuity candidate a sensible move? I think Giles was afraid to split the coaching roles based on his experience, but cricket has moved on and appointing two coaches at the same time meant that the kind of relationship Flower and Giles had was unlikely to be replicated.
On the plus side Pope looks the real deal to me. Obviously still very early to judge but I think his footwork is good and given his age he should have scope to improve.
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Nov 25, 2019 13:23:56 GMT
Well that went south quickly! I thought New Zealand were brilliant and really demonstrated that they are an excellent side. Their bowling attack looks no more suited to taking 20 wickets on a flat pitch than ours does but they are a disciplined side who have scored a lot of first innings runs during recent test matches played in New Zealand. Most bowling attacks will look more potent when defending 600. Their basis for success is very similar to the one we deployed so successfully when we won the Ashes in Australia. Score lots of runs in the first innings and then bowl a disciplined line and length and rely on scoreboard pressure.
I think we tried to adapt our approach in this test match but we got bored before their bowlers. They kept bowling outside off stump and too many of our batsmen got bored of leaving the ball. I find myself having more sympathy with the new players, especially the young ones like Sibley and Pope than I have for the experienced ones. I still think Stokes was the catalyst for the England collapse. Had he batted with a bit more discipline then we might have scored 450 and the game might have played out differently. He also dropped Watling which obviously didn't help.
England need their experienced players to stand up. The team look dangerously close to one that is "in transition" and you need the likes of Root, Stokes, Buttler and Broad to take some of the pressure off the players with less than 10 caps.
I think there are questions to answer around Root continuing as captain. His leadership is uninspiring, but the primary issue I have is that putting Kohli, Williamson or Smith into our team would see us become infinitely more competitive overnight. Root was in that bracket a few years ago and we need that player back. When Vaughan was made England captain his returns dipped but that was compensated by some astute captaincy and, more importantly, by the development of the rest of the batting line up. It didn't matter than Vaughan's average dropped because Trescothick, Strauss and Pierterson were all reliable batsmen. England do not have that luxury at the moment. I know there are not many alternatives to captain the side but I think it would almost be worth picking a specialist captain if it meant Root rediscovering his best form. Broad might be able to do it as a stop gap, although I don't think he gets in the side in Sri Lanka or India next winter. Burns is obviously another option and I would have said Buttler was too before they gave him the gloves.
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Nov 22, 2019 10:05:58 GMT
Interesting first couple of days. I thought day one was pretty good from England and they demonstrated a clear shift in mindset. The top order lacked a bit of temp and struggled to play a low risk, get off strike shot, but hopefully that will come as confidence grows. Yesterday morning wasn't very good. I know Stokes top scored and you don't want to curb his attacking instinct, but he should have been caught on 50 odd the night before playing a lose drive just after the new ball was taken and then played an awful shot on 90 which led to his dismissal and an England collapse. These are the kind of moments that England need to have fewer of. New Zealand were almost out of ideas at 270/4 and with a bit more discipline England could have scored 450+ and really set up the match. Pope's shot was really poor too but I think on balance there are more positives than negatives. Ultimately, most dismissals are down to batsmen error to some degree. Sibbley's shot for example didn't look great but I thought de Grandhomme used the crease well and created the angle that drew Sibbley into the shot.
I didn't see the bowling effort but it's certainly encouraging to hear that Curran and Leach pick up wickets and kept control. I think the bowling attack has better variety to it than previous line ups. If Leach can hold up an end then it gives us the opportunity to rotate our seam bowlers at the other end and the 4 of them all offer something a bit different.
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Nov 12, 2019 15:34:22 GMT
Firstly, I am not sure whether this forum will still exist by the time this series concludes. I am very much a lapsed Rovers fan these days but I have enjoyed talking about cricket with all of you over the last few years.
I remember discussing our dismal effort at the 2015 World Cup and the need for systemic change. We had some talented players in the side but the mindset was wrong and we picked too many test specialists in our team. We needed to move on from the likes of Anderson, Broad, Cook and Bell and give players like Bairstow, Roy, Stokes and Rashid an elongated run in the side. We needed to adopt a bold strategy without fear of recrimination when things went wrong.
Fast forward 4 years and our one day side have pushed the boundaries of what is possible over the last couple of years. By contrast the test team have similar problems to the ones outlined above, all be it, the mirror image. We have spent the last couple of years picking too many one day specialists. We have had a muddled strategy and seemed to think we could succeed by playing attacking cricket all of the time. We have had an unsettled batting line up and have struggled to decide whether to pick all of our all-rounders and hope a couple of them can make a go of it at the top of the order or whether we pick less talented players who are top order specialists.
Whilst you can argue about the personnel the selectors have picked for this tour, the strategy is clear. Pick 3 red ball specialists at the top of the order. Give them a mandate to bat as long as they can. Wear the bowlers down. Put the best player back at 4 where he feels most comfortable, put the youngster at 6 to give him a chance to acclimatize to test cricket before moving up the order if he makes a success of it and have a wicket keeper and all rounder in the middle order who can take the game away from the opposition, bat well with the tail and counter attack. Pick the best spinner regardless of his ability with the bat and make sure we've got some genuine pace in the team. I think Sam Curran will play too giving us a left arm option with the ball.
I think it's the right decision. We have plenty of talent in the squad and we have 7 or 8 players who have the talent to be genuine World beaters in the right set up. There is no stand out team in Test cricket at the minute and in truth there hasn't been since 2008 when the Australian side broke up. There is a chance for someone to emerge from the pack as the dominant side in test cricket for an elongated period of time. England have the talent to be that side. Like the one day side, I would imagine there will be bumps along the road, but I hope the captain, selectors and coaches have the resolve to stick to the plan.
I have seen a bit of Sibley bat. He is not especially pretty to watch and I do not think you could describe his technique as textbook, but he has a good temperament, has the aptitude to bat all day and bats within his limitations. He's worked with Gary Palmer (he of Sir Alistair Cook fame) and his influence is evident when you watch him bat. He's got quite an open stance but plays through the V a lot. I have seen much less of Crawley but I understand he is a bit more flamboyant and easier on the eye, all be it, he does not have an especially good first class record. Happy with him being on the tour, but I'd be surprised if he played.
I am not a big Denley fan. I think he had a fair amount of luck against Australia. A bit like Vince, he looks great getting to 30 and then he flashes at a wide one. Unlike Vince though, he had a few lives in the Ashes series, or missed the ball rather than nicking off. He did well enough to earn a spot on this tour though buit I would be surprised if he was still in the side in 12 months time.
I am a huge Jonny Bairstow fan and I think his dip in form has coincided with his influence in the one day team growing rather than as a result of him being shunted around the batting order. He has the ability to bat anywhere between 3 and 5 for England and average more than 45 I think. I am happy the gloves have been taken off him and I am certain he will get back in the test team. I do think some time out of the side will do him some good though. He clearly responds well to a kick up the arse but I also think some time away from the game to work on straightening out his technique will help. I don't think he will get the gloves back though. If it doesn't work out for Buttler then I think Foakes will come into the side.
New Zealand are an extremely good test side who are only hindered by their lack of top class spin bowling options and a relative paucity of Test cricket. The spinner won't affect their chances in New Zealand though and Bolt, Southee, Wagner, Henry and Ferguson are a formidable set of quick bowlers. They have a well heralded middle order but their unsung stars are Tom Latham who I think is the standout opener in World cricket at the moment along with Dean Elgar and their wicket keeper BJ Watling who is also one of the best in the World. Should be a cracking series.
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Oct 21, 2019 15:29:03 GMT
Firstly, I do recognise that change can be a good thing. However, I think trying to ape the structure of existing tournaments like the IPL and the Big Bash is short sighted. I am not adverse to playing the tournament in a block with every game on the TV, despite the risks presented by the weather in the UK but I cannot understand how playing cricket in 7 Cities is going to increase attendances. I live in Worcester and I am not going to travel to Birmingham to watch cricket. There are venues like Cardiff and Birmingham that have struggled to fill venues consistently in the Blast. I am not sure this will change that. I just think that the spread of people in the UK does not lend itself to a City based structure.
I was in favour of a hybrid model using the existing County structure. I see no reason why you could not move to 2 divisions of 9. Finals day could consist of a 2nd vs 3rd placed semi - final, a 9th vs 10th or 10th vs 11th placed promotion play off, followed by a final to determine the overall winner. I would have had a clear differential between the two divisions including significantly more prize money for Division One Counties. If every team played everyone in their division once during the group phase then you have a similar number of games to the number you’re going to have in the hundred. You could still play it over the summer holidays and you could televise all Division One games and no Division Two games. You could still have 10 games on terrestrial TV and could have a weekly highlights programme on the BBC as well. I also see no reason why squads for the Championship and 50 over cricket must be aligned with squads for the T20 competition. You could still have a draft but you’d get to retain existing rivalries, the bigger counties with bigger grounds would probably end up in Division One, but at least everyone is still involved. If the BBC were genuinely worried about fitting T20 cricket into a 3 hour window then enforce sensible overrates.
But, we are where we are. I thought the draft worked well. There are some interesting squads but there are some uninspiring picks too. It’s depressing seeing someone like Olly Stone miss out for Hardus Viljoen or James Bracey get overlooked while 33 year old South African Kolpaker Chris Cooke gets picked is not ideal but predictable. It’s not a problem unique to the Hundred.
The area of the game that stands to benefit from this unequivocally is the women’s game. Alignment with the men’s teams is important, as is increased exposure, but it’s the money brought in to the game as a result of the new broadcast deal which gives English cricketers half a chance of closing the gap to their Australian counterparts. I still believe that an equally lucrative TV deal could have been struck whilst maintaining the existing 18 side men’s structure.
|
|
jackthegas
David Pritchard
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 313
|
Post by jackthegas on Oct 14, 2019 11:38:18 GMT
A few spring to mind:
We were mislead about moving into Filton College. I remember there being some issue around the quality of the pitches. I remember a quote from Mr Higgs, who was then a future chairman rebuffing this rumour. "The pitches are in tip-top condition". Of course, a few months later, this move was quietly mothballed.
I remember Barry Bradshaw telling me that the Share Scheme was merely a donation scheme, before it was confirmed that the Share Scheme was merely a donation scheme. I am not sure that I could pin-point one misleading quote, but certainly the SS narrative changed markedly. I also remember that Ed Ware, who must have sensed my horror at Boycies usual lack of tact, grabbed me by the shoulders and started shaking me whilst proclaiming, "we're going to have a bigger ground than City!"
Who can forget the "funding is in place and has been for some time!" quote trotted out by various board members in relation to the Mem redevelopment.
Or, Nick Higgs saying, "we're here to be criticised" shortly before banning Kevin Spencer for being critical.
|
|