A packed Old Trafford. Applauding FORWARD DEFENSIVE shots. As believe it or not, spectators don't just enjoy the crash bang wallop of T20 white ball cricket. I hope (but doubt) the authorities are taking note
I'm trying to find, with no success so far, how much Lancs C C C paid the ECB to stage the Ashes test and how much of the gate receipts go back to the ECB. The thing is, tens of millions have been spent on OT to get it up to standard. Ashes tests attracting maximum crowds, only come around every 4 years. Other than rock/pop concerts, Lancs C C C has to find a way to make the place pay, AND the best way, like it or lump it, is 20/20 cricket. This is the 'cricket world' in 2019.
I wasn't knocking T20 cricket just highlighting that it isn't the only form of cricket that people want to watch. Even less attractive Tests will get very decent crowds if priced sensibly, and how much money will Lancashire have made from 5 days of drinking, food sales, sales of inflatables etc
George Dobell has pointed out that Jason Roy has never batted for two whole sessions opening the batting in his entire first-class career.
I wonder whether it occurred to the selectors whether there was a reason for this. And why Alec Stewart was so forthright in his commendation of Roy's ability to do the job when clearly he had no evidence to back it up and has never trusted himself enough to do the job!
Genuinely think the unchanged side is the death knell for roots captaincy. Just lacking in ideas and freshness. If we lose the series 3-1 people will be rightly saying why the hell did we have essentially the same team for all 5 of the test matches
Genuinely think the unchanged side is the death knell for roots captaincy. Just lacking in ideas and freshness. If we lose the series 3-1 people will be rightly saying why the hell did we have essentially the same team for all 5 of the test matches
I have held a theory for a long time about certain cricket coaches - they will give every chance (and more) to players they like because they want to be proven right and as little opportunity as possible to ones they don't fancy because they don't want to be proven wrong.
By virtue of the subjective nature of this selection process, if that coach already has a connection with a player then that individual has a distinct chance of falling into the former category. However, it also means that the person in the latter category has to bulldoze his way by weight of performance to get a chance in the first place. I would suggest that when you have a Thorpe or Ramprakash as England batting coach and you play for Surrey then you do have an advantage - even if that bias is, by human nature, a sub conscious one.
Sam Northeast averages just under 40 in first class cricket. His average this season is 56.87 - 3 hundreds and 4 fifties from 17 innings this season in Div 1. How close is he to being called up for England - the argument that he could "only" score runs in Div 2 now holds no water after all.
Heaton, Rashford or Kane might have been available for selection were it not for the fact that cricket can be incredibly expensive to fund for a parent as well as for schools and clubs - plus a starting salary of £20K a season (as opposed to a week) isn't the greatest of attractions (article courtesy of Henry Winter of The Times):
During his successful years at Burnley, Tom Heaton once showed me around the club’s training ground after its magnificent rebuild. When I noticed a cricket bat in the changing room, the England goalkeeper just said that they loved some impromptu cricket, many having batted and bowled at school.
Now impressing at Aston Villa, Heaton threw himself into a range of sports growing up, as befits somebody whose parents are PE teachers. He played tennis to a good standard before football claimed him fully.
A flick through the school sports careers of the present England squad reveals how many starred in other sports during their early years. No surprise there, of course, because of the transferable skills such as athleticism, pace, co-ordination, balance and the will to win. Anyone demonstrating sporting prowess at school is almost fought over by rival games masters.
Trent Alexander-Arnold was a talented rugby full back at St Mary’s College, Crosby, with his coaches remembering his first try when he ran 80 yards as they urged him to put the ball down when he crossed the line.
He did, and subsequently nailed the conversion. Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain was a good scrum half and full back at St John’s College, Southsea.
Cost is a factor. Football can dominate schools because it is the national obsession, because many children and their parents dream of a route to riches, and because it is also relatively cheap and simple to organise, of particular importance at a time of cutbacks.
But, talk to players, and they are curious of other sports. It was noticeable covering Team GB football at the London Olympics how fascinated Stuart Pearce’s players were by the training of others inhabiting the village, especially the intense workouts of Sir Chris Hoy. Jesse Lingard has worked at the GB Taekwondo National Centre in Manchester with the strength and conditioning coach Wayne Richardson.
Engaging in other sports and taking time out from the pressure zone that is football could also remind schoolboys that sport is also to be enjoyed. Focus on football, specialise early, but there is time and energy enough to appreciate other sports too.
Football is working class traditionally and cricket isn't, as much as we love people like Flintoff, Tufnell, Gough because they like drinking and misbehaving most professional cricketers and local players have come from a bit of money or are from more middle class backgrounds. Mainly because football is cheap to play and can be played anywhere whereas cricket, not so much. There is also a lot of snobbery with cricket that you don't get with football
I love playing both and watching both and I'm very much working class and see the snobbery with cricket. In a nice way, a lot of snobbery is on display on this forum every time someone shows they don't know a rule or doesn't understand why a certain decision has been made by a player.
The lack of working class cricketers isn't helped by them having very few places to play the game at school nowadays
One of the other issue is that the majority of teachers (even qualified PE teachers) do not fully understand and have not been trained to coach cricket. So they avoid it like the plague. The most obvious example I've witnessed is when one school master gave a batsman out by raising his finger and confirming the fact with a "that's out" - even though middle stumped had actually been catapulted in the process of the batsman being bowled!
Facilities is a big issue too but I know of one school who hires out their pitch every Saturday and offers it to clubs for colts cricket mid week and even have a new artificial strip. But the school offers minimal cricket and the square is there, in the main, to raise money for the school.
George Dobell has pointed out that Jason Roy has never batted for two whole sessions opening the batting in his entire first-class career.
I wonder whether it occurred to the selectors whether there was a reason for this. And why Alec Stewart was so forthright in his commendation of Roy's ability to do the job when clearly he had no evidence to back it up and has never trusted himself enough to do the job!
I hardly think you can blame stewart for backing his player. Would be poor management not to. A lot of the media were picking Roy to open as were plenty on here even if like me they didnt think it was the role he was suited to. Given that talk and Roy's selection to open in the Ireland test then what else could Alec say? Nah I don't think he's good enough and not got the technique? You have to back your own players.
And to be fair to him he did say all along something like "he'd be much better suited at 5/6/7 but I will still back him to do well anywhere, he has shown he has the big match temperament". Hardly calling for him to open.
Phil Tufnell attended Highgate, an expensive independent school, fyi
loveable 'Tuffers' .. cricket's favourite mockney .. made a career as a modern day Norman Wisdom and BBC lovie .. like Boycott, the BBC likes to employ ham actors in sporting programmes instead of really clever people with something real to say
Phil Tufnell attended Highgate, an expensive independent school, fyi
He was kicked out of Highgate though aged 13 and then went to the local comprehensive, which he left aged 16 with one O level, so while he's hardly working class, he didn't have the effortless rise to the top that many other players had
George Dobell has pointed out that Jason Roy has never batted for two whole sessions opening the batting in his entire first-class career.
I wonder whether it occurred to the selectors whether there was a reason for this. And why Alec Stewart was so forthright in his commendation of Roy's ability to do the job when clearly he had no evidence to back it up and has never trusted himself enough to do the job!
I hardly think you can blame stewart for backing his player. Would be poor management not to. A lot of the media were picking Roy to open as were plenty on here even if like me they didnt think it was the role he was suited to. Given that talk and Roy's selection to open in the Ireland test then what else could Alec say? Nah I don't think he's good enough and not got the technique? You have to back your own players.
And to be fair to him he did say all along something like "he'd be much better suited at 5/6/7 but I will still back him to do well anywhere, he has shown he has the big match temperament". Hardly calling for him to open.
Agreed Stewart could hardly say "there is a very good reason why Jason hasn't opened for us for six years" but, if he was being totally honest, he should have been a bit more forthright at the outset (and no doubt in his discussions with the selectors which he undoubtedly would have had) in saying that he should not be opening. Saying he was "better suited to the middle order" was a "get out of jail free card " for Roy if and when he failed at opening - so he could be given another opportunity in the middle order to the possible detriment of Denly who had already earned the right to stay at 4.
Notwithstanding all of that, what if Stewart does become England coach? Is the slate clean or might there just be a bit of bias albeit of the "unconscious" variety. We'll have to wait and see about that one but anyone who has been around as long as I have has seen how much influence the England coach and captain have - just look at some of the teams we've had littered with players from Surrey/Lancs/Yorks etc etc at various times, many of which should never have been anywhere near wearing an England shirt.
Sadly for someone like Sam Northeast he's never had that "leg up".
George Dobell has pointed out that Jason Roy has never batted for two whole sessions opening the batting in his entire first-class career.
I wonder whether it occurred to the selectors whether there was a reason for this. And why Alec Stewart was so forthright in his commendation of Roy's ability to do the job when clearly he had no evidence to back it up and has never trusted himself enough to do the job!
I hardly think you can blame stewart for backing his player. Would be poor management not to. A lot of the media were picking Roy to open as were plenty on here even if like me they didnt think it was the role he was suited to. Given that talk and Roy's selection to open in the Ireland test then what else could Alec say? Nah I don't think he's good enough and not got the technique? You have to back your own players.
And to be fair to him he did say all along something like "he'd be much better suited at 5/6/7 but I will still back him to do well anywhere, he has shown he has the big match temperament". Hardly calling for him to open.
Agreed Stewart could hardly say "there is a very good reason why Jason hasn't opened for us for six years" but, if he was being totally honest, he should have been a bit more forthright at the outset (and no doubt in his discussions with the selectors which he undoubtedly would have had) in saying that he should not be opening. Saying he was "better suited to the middle order" was a "get out of jail free card " for Roy if and when he failed at opening - so he could be given another opportunity in the middle order to the possible detriment of Denly who had already earned the right to stay at 4.
Notwithstanding all of that, what if Stewart does become England coach? Is the slate clean or might there just be a bit of bias albeit of the "unconscious" variety. We'll have to wait and see about that one but anyone who has been around as long as I have has seen how much influence the England coach and captain have - just look at some of the teams we've had littered with players from Surrey/Lancs/Yorks etc etc at various times, many of which should never have been anywhere near wearing an England shirt.
Sadly for someone like Sam Northeast he's never had that "leg up".
To be fair, Denly's cause was probably helped by having Ed Smith as a selector!
George Dobell has pointed out that Jason Roy has never batted for two whole sessions opening the batting in his entire first-class career.
I wonder whether it occurred to the selectors whether there was a reason for this. And why Alec Stewart was so forthright in his commendation of Roy's ability to do the job when clearly he had no evidence to back it up and has never trusted himself enough to do the job!
I hardly think you can blame stewart for backing his player. Would be poor management not to. A lot of the media were picking Roy to open as were plenty on here even if like me they didnt think it was the role he was suited to. Given that talk and Roy's selection to open in the Ireland test then what else could Alec say? Nah I don't think he's good enough and not got the technique? You have to back your own players.
And to be fair to him he did say all along something like "he'd be much better suited at 5/6/7 but I will still back him to do well anywhere, he has shown he has the big match temperament". Hardly calling for him to open.
Agreed Stewart could hardly say "there is a very good reason why Jason hasn't opened for us for six years" but, if he was being totally honest, he should have been a bit more forthright at the outset (and no doubt in his discussions with the selectors which he undoubtedly would have had) in saying that he should not be opening. Saying he was "better suited to the middle order" was a "get out of jail free card " for Roy if and when he failed at opening - so he could be given another opportunity in the middle order to the possible detriment of Denly who had already earned the right to stay at 4.
Notwithstanding all of that, what if Stewart does become England coach? Is the slate clean or might there just be a bit of bias albeit of the "unconscious" variety. We'll have to wait and see about that one but anyone who has been around as long as I have has seen how much influence the England coach and captain have - just look at some of the teams we've had littered with players from Surrey/Lancs/Yorks etc etc at various times, many of which should never have been anywhere near wearing an England shirt.
Sadly for someone like Sam Northeast he's never had that "leg up".
To be fair, Denly's cause was probably helped by having Ed Smith as a selector!
He hasn't helped that much - what about the likes of Stevens?
George Dobell has pointed out that Jason Roy has never batted for two whole sessions opening the batting in his entire first-class career.
I wonder whether it occurred to the selectors whether there was a reason for this. And why Alec Stewart was so forthright in his commendation of Roy's ability to do the job when clearly he had no evidence to back it up and has never trusted himself enough to do the job!
I hardly think you can blame stewart for backing his player. Would be poor management not to. A lot of the media were picking Roy to open as were plenty on here even if like me they didnt think it was the role he was suited to. Given that talk and Roy's selection to open in the Ireland test then what else could Alec say? Nah I don't think he's good enough and not got the technique? You have to back your own players.
And to be fair to him he did say all along something like "he'd be much better suited at 5/6/7 but I will still back him to do well anywhere, he has shown he has the big match temperament". Hardly calling for him to open.
Agreed Stewart could hardly say "there is a very good reason why Jason hasn't opened for us for six years" but, if he was being totally honest, he should have been a bit more forthright at the outset (and no doubt in his discussions with the selectors which he undoubtedly would have had) in saying that he should not be opening. Saying he was "better suited to the middle order" was a "get out of jail free card " for Roy if and when he failed at opening - so he could be given another opportunity in the middle order to the possible detriment of Denly who had already earned the right to stay at 4.
Notwithstanding all of that, what if Stewart does become England coach? Is the slate clean or might there just be a bit of bias albeit of the "unconscious" variety. We'll have to wait and see about that one but anyone who has been around as long as I have has seen how much influence the England coach and captain have - just look at some of the teams we've had littered with players from Surrey/Lancs/Yorks etc etc at various times, many of which should never have been anywhere near wearing an England shirt.
Sadly for someone like Sam Northeast he's never had that "leg up".
To be fair, Denly's cause was probably helped by having Ed Smith as a selector!
He hasn't helped that much - what about the likes of Stevens?
And the connection is pure coincidence anyway. Smith dumped us for Middlesex. Which is exactly what Denly did. So perhaps Middlesex is the connection after all.
George Dobell has pointed out that Jason Roy has never batted for two whole sessions opening the batting in his entire first-class career.
I wonder whether it occurred to the selectors whether there was a reason for this. And why Alec Stewart was so forthright in his commendation of Roy's ability to do the job when clearly he had no evidence to back it up and has never trusted himself enough to do the job!
I hardly think you can blame stewart for backing his player. Would be poor management not to. A lot of the media were picking Roy to open as were plenty on here even if like me they didnt think it was the role he was suited to. Given that talk and Roy's selection to open in the Ireland test then what else could Alec say? Nah I don't think he's good enough and not got the technique? You have to back your own players.
And to be fair to him he did say all along something like "he'd be much better suited at 5/6/7 but I will still back him to do well anywhere, he has shown he has the big match temperament". Hardly calling for him to open.
Agreed Stewart could hardly say "there is a very good reason why Jason hasn't opened for us for six years" but, if he was being totally honest, he should have been a bit more forthright at the outset (and no doubt in his discussions with the selectors which he undoubtedly would have had) in saying that he should not be opening. Saying he was "better suited to the middle order" was a "get out of jail free card " for Roy if and when he failed at opening - so he could be given another opportunity in the middle order to the possible detriment of Denly who had already earned the right to stay at 4.
Notwithstanding all of that, what if Stewart does become England coach? Is the slate clean or might there just be a bit of bias albeit of the "unconscious" variety. We'll have to wait and see about that one but anyone who has been around as long as I have has seen how much influence the England coach and captain have - just look at some of the teams we've had littered with players from Surrey/Lancs/Yorks etc etc at various times, many of which should never have been anywhere near wearing an England shirt.
Sadly for someone like Sam Northeast he's never had that "leg up".
Coincidentally I have just received a text from a "trusted source" that Stewart will be the next England coach albeit under a different title.
Please do not shoot the messenger - especially if he is wrong!
I also don’t get why buttler, picked as a specialist batsman, was put at 7. Seems to me a waste, when we could have got Curran in that spot which would have also given us more bowling options - something that I thought was the original advantage of having bairstow as keeper in the first place
As far as I known, I don't think the England batting coach has any say in the selection of players for the team.
Jason Roy was picked because he played so well in the World cup, It was a gamble that never came off, but I think a lot of people in cricket wanted him to play, but I don't think Thorpe had any say in the selection
As far as I known, I don't think the England batting coach has any say in the selection of players for the team.
Jason Roy was picked because he played so well in the World cup, It was a gamble that never came off, but I think a lot of people in cricket wanted him to play, but I don't think Thorpe had any say in the selection
No "say" but will undoubtedly have "input". Selectors will always ask those who know the most about players.
But yes he was picked on the back of the World Cup success. But Mr Magoo could have seen that he plays too far in front of him and will always get found out against serious pace with the red ball and four or five close fielders. As I say every single Surrey coach over the course of the last six years knew it too but the selectors still persisted in picking him to open.
Football is working class traditionally and cricket isn't, as much as we love people like Flintoff, Tufnell, Gough because they like drinking and misbehaving most professional cricketers and local players have come from a bit of money or are from more middle class backgrounds. Mainly because football is cheap to play and can be played anywhere whereas cricket, not so much. There is also a lot of snobbery with cricket that you don't get with football
I love playing both and watching both and I'm very much working class and see the snobbery with cricket. In a nice way, a lot of snobbery is on display on this forum every time someone shows they don't know a rule or doesn't understand why a certain decision has been made by a player.
The lack of working class cricketers isn't helped by them having very few places to play the game at school nowadays
Oh, for goodness sake, how many times does one have to explain it? It's "law". Not "rule".
If we really want absolute evidence of conscious and unconscious bias how many times does a player from a non fashionable football club playing at the highest level not get international recognition - but the minute he makes that move to a "big" club the call up follows in a nano second.
Equally, would Rufus, for example, been called up for full England honours had he moved to a United or Liverpool?
Comments
Also Andrew Strauss is knighted
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/cricket/geoffrey-boycott-racism-blacking-up-11028576
I wonder whether it occurred to the selectors whether there was a reason for this. And why Alec Stewart was so forthright in his commendation of Roy's ability to do the job when clearly he had no evidence to back it up and has never trusted himself enough to do the job!
Would prefer if we had two head coaches, one for red ball, and one for white ball.
Years ago, our one day side was poor because we picked the test players.
Well we're now the other way around, and our test side is suffering for the same reasons.
During his successful years at Burnley, Tom Heaton once showed me around the club’s training ground after its magnificent rebuild. When I noticed a cricket bat in the changing room, the England goalkeeper just said that they loved some impromptu cricket, many having batted and bowled at school.
Now impressing at Aston Villa, Heaton threw himself into a range of sports growing up, as befits somebody whose parents are PE teachers. He played tennis to a good standard before football claimed him fully.
A flick through the school sports careers of the present England squad reveals how many starred in other sports during their early years. No surprise there, of course, because of the transferable skills such as athleticism, pace, co-ordination, balance and the will to win. Anyone demonstrating sporting prowess at school is almost fought over by rival games masters.
Trent Alexander-Arnold was a talented rugby full back at St Mary’s College, Crosby, with his coaches remembering his first try when he ran 80 yards as they urged him to put the ball down when he crossed the line.
He did, and subsequently nailed the conversion. Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain was a good scrum half and full back at St John’s College, Southsea.
Cost is a factor. Football can dominate schools because it is the national obsession, because many children and their parents dream of a route to riches, and because it is also relatively cheap and simple to organise, of particular importance at a time of cutbacks.
But, talk to players, and they are curious of other sports. It was noticeable covering Team GB football at the London Olympics how fascinated Stuart Pearce’s players were by the training of others inhabiting the village, especially the intense workouts of Sir Chris Hoy. Jesse Lingard has worked at the GB Taekwondo National Centre in Manchester with the strength and conditioning coach Wayne Richardson.
Engaging in other sports and taking time out from the pressure zone that is football could also remind schoolboys that sport is also to be enjoyed. Focus on football, specialise early, but there is time and energy enough to appreciate other sports too.
I love playing both and watching both and I'm very much working class and see the snobbery with cricket. In a nice way, a lot of snobbery is on display on this forum every time someone shows they don't know a rule or doesn't understand why a certain decision has been made by a player.
The lack of working class cricketers isn't helped by them having very few places to play the game at school nowadays
Facilities is a big issue too but I know of one school who hires out their pitch every Saturday and offers it to clubs for colts cricket mid week and even have a new artificial strip. But the school offers minimal cricket and the square is there, in the main, to raise money for the school.
Given that talk and Roy's selection to open in the Ireland test then what else could Alec say? Nah I don't think he's good enough and not got the technique? You have to back your own players.
And to be fair to him he did say all along something like "he'd be much better suited at 5/6/7 but I will still back him to do well anywhere, he has shown he has the big match temperament". Hardly calling for him to open.
loveable 'Tuffers' .. cricket's favourite mockney .. made a career as a modern day Norman Wisdom and BBC lovie .. like Boycott, the BBC likes to employ ham actors in sporting programmes instead of really clever people with something real to say
Notwithstanding all of that, what if Stewart does become England coach? Is the slate clean or might there just be a bit of bias albeit of the "unconscious" variety. We'll have to wait and see about that one but anyone who has been around as long as I have has seen how much influence the England coach and captain have - just look at some of the teams we've had littered with players from Surrey/Lancs/Yorks etc etc at various times, many of which should never have been anywhere near wearing an England shirt.
Sadly for someone like Sam Northeast he's never had that "leg up".
Please do not shoot the messenger - especially if he is wrong!
As far as I known, I don't think the England batting coach has any say in the selection of players for the team.
Jason Roy was picked because he played so well in the World cup, It was a gamble that never came off, but I think a lot of people in cricket wanted him to play, but I don't think Thorpe had any say in the selection
But yes he was picked on the back of the World Cup success. But Mr Magoo could have seen that he plays too far in front of him and will always get found out against serious pace with the red ball and four or five close fielders. As I say every single Surrey coach over the course of the last six years knew it too but the selectors still persisted in picking him to open.
Equally, would Rufus, for example, been called up for full England honours had he moved to a United or Liverpool?