The vice-captain, Ollie Pope, said after training: “It looks like an interesting pitch. There are a lot of cracks. It doesn’t necessarily look like a belting wicket at the moment. It kind of looks like one half is good and then there are a lot of cracks. We will see what happens tomorrow after the Indian team has looked at the wicket. We’ll see whether they want to leave more grass on or not.”
Pope said that these conditions may lead to a faster game, with batsmen going in search of quick runs while they can. “That’s how I see things when the ball’s doing more. Your best bet is trying to hit the bowler off his length and get him to not bowl where he wants every ball. It helps if you try and put more pressure on the bowler. There might be more sweeping and more positive shots.
“We’re going to have to read the wicket quickly and feed that back to the guys coming in and then each batter’s got their own game plan from there.
“It looks like batting from the far end, it [the cracked area] is outside the right-hander’s off stump and then from this end, [outside] the left-hander’s off-stump . . . the other side [of the strip] looks like a pretty good wicket.
His keeping is exceptional but you can see why England don't fancy Foakes in England. Fairly hopeless with the bat. Granted Bairstow is in just as poor knick
"There might be more sweeping" - 'kin 'ell, barely possible.
The sweep (and reverse sweep), when the wicket is at its best in the first day or so, is a decent ploy to move the field to where a batsman wants it as long as that doesn't become an obsession and the only club in the bag. All of a sudden, the opposition captain probably has to have a man on the 45, one behind square on the leg side boundary, one on the midwicket boundary, a point and a backward point on the boundary - that only leaves another four in front of square and a lot of holes to exploit. Utilising it on the 4th or 5th days, especially when you aren't in, is a lot more fraught with risk.
Robinson replaces Wood, while Bashir replaces Ahmed.
Robinson coming in is no surprise but I'm surprised that Anderson is playing again in this one. He didn't bowl badly in the last Test but only took the one wicket and the fact that he got taken apart in the second innings suggests that the fear factor of facing him might not be there now. I suppose the reason for going with Bashir is down to the fact that India could have three left handers in their top 5 and he might though, personally, I do think having a wrist spinner does offer a bit more balance than a left arm orthodox and two offies.
His keeping is exceptional but you can see why England don't fancy Foakes in England. Fairly hopeless with the bat. Granted Bairstow is in just as poor knick
Foakes bats at number 7. He averages over 30 in tests. Hardly hopeless with the bat.
I've been saying this for the last decade on here, from my own experience of seeing the county set up at close hand, everything that Ramparakash mentions below about the influence of private schools and also the need for kids to be able to smash the ball out of the park. Things haven't really changed much in that respect - I've heard recently of a 14 year old lad who has the best technique going, gets into lad at 80mph but who was dropped from his age group squad because he didn't score fast enough last season. In India, they would at a later age layer the range hitting on top of that established technique but we don't want to do that. There is a danger that those players who would develop that power will be lost to other sports:
Ramprakash also raised concerns about the the system that produces English cricketers: “Sometimes I wonder if there is something fundamentally unserious about the cricketers we are producing. Many county academies are pushing power hitting. They want young players to have a strike rate of more than 100 even when the pitch and match situation are not necessarily conducive to that. Young players who are yet to hone their skills are being told not to worry, to have fun, to go for it. Where are the Test run-scorers of tomorrow and how are they being developed?”
He added how the “extraordinary childhood” of Yashasvi Jaiswal (“leaving home at 11, living in a tent for two years, selling street food”) was a study in contrast with some members of the English team: “Ollie Pope and Zak Crawley are superb players whose youth was spent at Cranleigh and Tonbridge private schools”.
I've been saying this for the last decade on here, from my own experience of seeing the county set up at close hand, everything that Ramparakash mentions below about the influence of private schools and also the need for kids to be able to smash the ball out of the park. Things haven't really changed much in that respect - I've heard recently of a 14 year old lad who has the best technique going, gets into lad at 80mph but who was dropped from his age group squad because he didn't score fast enough last season. In India, they would at a later age layer the range hitting on top of that established technique but we don't want to do that. There is a danger that those players who would develop that power will be lost to other sports:
Ramprakash also raised concerns about the the system that produces English cricketers: “Sometimes I wonder if there is something fundamentally unserious about the cricketers we are producing. Many county academies are pushing power hitting. They want young players to have a strike rate of more than 100 even when the pitch and match situation are not necessarily conducive to that. Young players who are yet to hone their skills are being told not to worry, to have fun, to go for it. Where are the Test run-scorers of tomorrow and how are they being developed?”
He added how the “extraordinary childhood” of Yashasvi Jaiswal (“leaving home at 11, living in a tent for two years, selling street food”) was a study in contrast with some members of the English team: “Ollie Pope and Zak Crawley are superb players whose youth was spent at Cranleigh and Tonbridge private schools”.
Does he actually say anything negative about the influence of private schools? He only mentions private schools in respect of two players, both of whom are pretty decent players.
I sometimes wonder what the incentive is for counties to produce players, seeing that you won't get a transfer fee if they get poached by another county, and if they're good at T20, they'll probably spend most of the year playing in the franchise leagues. And if they play for England, you'll hardly see them!
Much easier to pick up journeymen from other counties, or from overseas (with a UK passport).
His keeping is exceptional but you can see why England don't fancy Foakes in England. Fairly hopeless with the bat. Granted Bairstow is in just as poor knick
Ben Foakes averages 30, so not too shabby and he is by far the best keeper.
I've been saying this for the last decade on here, from my own experience of seeing the county set up at close hand, everything that Ramparakash mentions below about the influence of private schools and also the need for kids to be able to smash the ball out of the park. Things haven't really changed much in that respect - I've heard recently of a 14 year old lad who has the best technique going, gets into lad at 80mph but who was dropped from his age group squad because he didn't score fast enough last season. In India, they would at a later age layer the range hitting on top of that established technique but we don't want to do that. There is a danger that those players who would develop that power will be lost to other sports:
Ramprakash also raised concerns about the the system that produces English cricketers: “Sometimes I wonder if there is something fundamentally unserious about the cricketers we are producing. Many county academies are pushing power hitting. They want young players to have a strike rate of more than 100 even when the pitch and match situation are not necessarily conducive to that. Young players who are yet to hone their skills are being told not to worry, to have fun, to go for it. Where are the Test run-scorers of tomorrow and how are they being developed?”
He added how the “extraordinary childhood” of Yashasvi Jaiswal (“leaving home at 11, living in a tent for two years, selling street food”) was a study in contrast with some members of the English team: “Ollie Pope and Zak Crawley are superb players whose youth was spent at Cranleigh and Tonbridge private schools”.
Does he actually say anything negative about the influence of private schools? He only mentions private schools in respect of two players, both of whom are pretty decent players.
Ramprakash makes the comparison of two players who went to private schools and their privileged journey compared to the journey of Jaiswal. He didn't make the comparison with the players that came from the State system for a reason. There is a bias that is so prevalent that 17 out of 17 in a recent Sussex squad that came through their system went to a private school. It works like this - child goes to private school, director of cricket at school has close links to county especially as they are, invariably, former players. It is upon their recommendation that they get county trials.
You don't have to believe me. This is from last year's Independent Commission for Equity in Cricket has released its long-awaited report into discrimination within the game in England and Wales:
35 - An overhaul of the schools' talent pathway to ensure more meritocratic selection
The report is damning on the influence of a select group of private schools in the cricket pathway in England and Wales.
ICEC calls for a State Schools Action Plan within 12 months, including the reallocation of central funding below under-14 level to "level the playing field".
The report proposes that the State Schools Action Plan become enforceable by introducing it into the County Partnership Agreement.
36 - Children from low socio-economic backgrounds and those at state schools should be able to enter talent pathways without charge
The report is damning on the costs associated with entering talent pathways at a young age, and the impact it has on drop-out rates among those from certain sectors of society.
ICEC says these changes need to be implemented in time for the 2024-25 winter training pathway.
37 - The ECB and counties should proactively broaden where they source talent from
Among the sub-criteria proposed by ICEC are the scrapping of schools' nominations and the introduction of widescale open trials, scouts being sent into state schools and local clubs, the increased recognition of non-traditional cricket formats as a potential talent pool, and considerable funding increases for free, year-round cricket provision in deprived areas.
38 - The introduction, by 2025, of accessible county and national-level T20 competitions for state school boys' and girls' cricket teams at under-14 and under-15 level
There might have been any number of Jaiswals in England who have had no opportunity whatsoever of getting into the pathway system. The South Asian Cricket Academy (SACA) is a body set up because 30% of recreational cricketers in England and Wales are British South Asian, whereas British South Asians make up just 5% of those within the professional male game. Last year half a dozen players from SACA earned pro contracts. Proof if it was needed that players have been missed because they weren't originally from the "right" background and didn't get the opportunities that those that went to private schools did.
As a Sussex fan despite them having links into state schools/academies, it's still Hurstpierpoint, Ardingly, Eastbourne College that dominate where the academy players come from. Not surprised at all if we have fielded an entirely private school squad when overseas haven't been available.
I sometimes wonder what the incentive is for counties to produce players, seeing that you won't get a transfer fee if they get poached by another county, and if they're good at T20, they'll probably spend most of the year playing in the franchise leagues. And if they play for England, you'll hardly see them!
Much easier to pick up journeymen from other counties, or from overseas (with a UK passport).
No more than two players can be overseas and a UK Passport doesn't exempt a player from being considered "overseas". They have to qualify via residency rules. Charlie Hemphrey. was born in Doncaster and was part of the Kent Academy, spent the first 24 years of his life here and holds just one passport - a British one. However, he moved to Australia, ended up playing cricket for Queensland and when the rules changed he fell into the trap of falling foul of the three years (used to be seven before Archer) residency rules - his contract with Glamorgan had to be ended by mutual consent as they had signed both Labuschagne and Neser at the time. The rule is designed to stop players from hopping from one country to another and displace those qualified to play for England via residency rules.
As a Sussex fan despite them having links into state schools/academies, it's still Hurstpierpoint, Ardingly, Eastbourne College that dominate where the academy players come from. Not surprised at all if we have fielded an entirely private school squad when overseas haven't been available.
Just as an example, Ardingly's Head of Cricket is Jordan Rollings. Jordan is also Lead Pathway Bowling Coach for Sussex. Does a promising cricketer who has the facilities of Ardingly and the benefits of 1-2-1s from a county coach have a better chance into a county age group squad than one who the assessors might only ever see at a trial? That is assuming that the lad from the State School ever got recommended for a trial in the first place.
The answer is absolutely. Take Kent's Jas Singh for example. He went to a State school and trialed for Kent a number of times before he finally got into the pathway at the age of 16. Jas was fortunate that he happened to be playing for a high profile club (Bexley) because if he were playing for a club in an Asian League then he almost certainly would have been missed and might even given up cricket all together. Equally, had he gone to Ardingly and worked with the Lead Pathway Bowling Coach then one suspects that he would have been in the Sussex pathway somewhat earlier.
I sometimes wonder what the incentive is for counties to produce players, seeing that you won't get a transfer fee if they get poached by another county, and if they're good at T20, they'll probably spend most of the year playing in the franchise leagues. And if they play for England, you'll hardly see them!
Much easier to pick up journeymen from other counties, or from overseas (with a UK passport).
A couple of questions:
- Is there enough reward for counties to excel? If counties earn on-field success, they should earn a significant proportion of their turnover. When that's in place, counties will be much better incentivised to nurture local talent: the better the player they can attract through their youth setups, the more likely they are to increase their top line. Right now, I think there's too much money soaked up by unsuccessful teams. In which case, where's the incentive to develop talent, when a county knows it can "earn" significant amounts without poor talent?
- Should we have so many overseas players? How many times have we seen overseas cricketers on their first international tour in the UK scoring big runs or taking hatfuls of wickets? And then realise that these players have learned how to play in English conditions, by driving up and down the country, playing for counties (and taking the burden of responsibility from poor English players)? The solution should be to allow counties only a limited (tbd) number of overseas players, but insist that those players have already played for their country in England. Don't make county cricket a finishing ground for overseas players.
If you incentivise counties by paying them significant "winnings" and prevent them from handing places to overseas players who haven't yet played for their country here, you start the process of invigorating and rewarding county cricket.
Comments
Robinson replaces Wood, while Bashir replaces Ahmed.
He averages over 30 in tests.
Hardly hopeless with the bat.
Ramprakash also raised concerns about the the system that produces English cricketers: “Sometimes I wonder if there is something fundamentally unserious about the cricketers we are producing. Many county academies are pushing power hitting. They want young players to have a strike rate of more than 100 even when the pitch and match situation are not necessarily conducive to that. Young players who are yet to hone their skills are being told not to worry, to have fun, to go for it. Where are the Test run-scorers of tomorrow and how are they being developed?”
He added how the “extraordinary childhood” of Yashasvi Jaiswal (“leaving home at 11, living in a tent for two years, selling street food”) was a study in contrast with some members of the English team: “Ollie Pope and Zak Crawley are superb players whose youth was spent at Cranleigh and Tonbridge private schools”.Much easier to pick up journeymen from other counties, or from overseas (with a UK passport).
Ben Foakes averages 30, so not too shabby and he is by far the best keeper.
You don't have to believe me. This is from last year's Independent Commission for Equity in Cricket has released its long-awaited report into discrimination within the game in England and Wales:
35 - An overhaul of the schools' talent pathway to ensure more meritocratic selection
The report is damning on the influence of a select group of private schools in the cricket pathway in England and Wales.
ICEC calls for a State Schools Action Plan within 12 months, including the reallocation of central funding below under-14 level to "level the playing field".
The report proposes that the State Schools Action Plan become enforceable by introducing it into the County Partnership Agreement.
36 - Children from low socio-economic backgrounds and those at state schools should be able to enter talent pathways without charge
The report is damning on the costs associated with entering talent pathways at a young age, and the impact it has on drop-out rates among those from certain sectors of society.
ICEC says these changes need to be implemented in time for the 2024-25 winter training pathway.
37 - The ECB and counties should proactively broaden where they source talent from
Among the sub-criteria proposed by ICEC are the scrapping of schools' nominations and the introduction of widescale open trials, scouts being sent into state schools and local clubs, the increased recognition of non-traditional cricket formats as a potential talent pool, and considerable funding increases for free, year-round cricket provision in deprived areas.
38 - The introduction, by 2025, of accessible county and national-level T20 competitions for state school boys' and girls' cricket teams at under-14 and under-15 levelThere might have been any number of Jaiswals in England who have had no opportunity whatsoever of getting into the pathway system. The South Asian Cricket Academy (SACA) is a body set up because 30% of recreational cricketers in England and Wales are British South Asian, whereas British South Asians make up just 5% of those within the professional male game. Last year half a dozen players from SACA earned pro contracts. Proof if it was needed that players have been missed because they weren't originally from the "right" background and didn't get the opportunities that those that went to private schools did.
The answer is absolutely. Take Kent's Jas Singh for example. He went to a State school and trialed for Kent a number of times before he finally got into the pathway at the age of 16. Jas was fortunate that he happened to be playing for a high profile club (Bexley) because if he were playing for a club in an Asian League then he almost certainly would have been missed and might even given up cricket all together. Equally, had he gone to Ardingly and worked with the Lead Pathway Bowling Coach then one suspects that he would have been in the Sussex pathway somewhat earlier.
- Is there enough reward for counties to excel? If counties earn on-field success, they should earn a significant proportion of their turnover. When that's in place, counties will be much better incentivised to nurture local talent: the better the player they can attract through their youth setups, the more likely they are to increase their top line. Right now, I think there's too much money soaked up by unsuccessful teams. In which case, where's the incentive to develop talent, when a county knows it can "earn" significant amounts without poor talent?
- Should we have so many overseas players? How many times have we seen overseas cricketers on their first international tour in the UK scoring big runs or taking hatfuls of wickets? And then realise that these players have learned how to play in English conditions, by driving up and down the country, playing for counties (and taking the burden of responsibility from poor English players)? The solution should be to allow counties only a limited (tbd) number of overseas players, but insist that those players have already played for their country in England. Don't make county cricket a finishing ground for overseas players.
If you incentivise counties by paying them significant "winnings" and prevent them from handing places to overseas players who haven't yet played for their country here, you start the process of invigorating and rewarding county cricket.
Already England's highest-ever score on this ground
Zak was nearly in Deep trouble !
9-0 after 4 overs
Duckett 11 (21) c Jurel b Deep
Good delivery from around the wicket. The plan to restrict him worked and he got a good one that moved away from him.
47-1
Make that his 2nd wicket.
Pope LBW Deep 0
47-2
Pope 0 (2) lbw b Deep
Given not out on the field. India with a half hearted review and it’s out.