Windies test tour - interesting news

First topic message reminder :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/international/england/11448739/England-begin-planning-for-Test-tour-of-West-Indies-and-life-after-Kevin-Pietersen.html

Just when you think you're losing interest in England, they're going to select Adil Rashid and bring back Trott

Training squad....

Sulieman Benn, Devendra Bishoo, Jermaine Blackwood, Carlos Brathwaite, Kraigg Brathwaite, Darren Bravo, Shivnarine Chanderpaul, Sheldon Cottrell, Miguel Cummins, Shane Dowrich, Shannon Gabriel, Jason Holder, Shai Hope, Leon Johnson, Veerasammy Permaul, Denesh Ramdin, Kemar Roach, Marlon Samuels, Devon Smith, Jerome Taylor

http://www.espncricinfo.com/west-indies-v-england-2015/content/story/855329.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/international/england/11516038/Englands-Alastair-Cook-and-Co-in-need-of-reality-check.html

I don't often agree with much of what comes out of Geoffrey boycott but this is a very good article

--Like Boycott...I found Cooks's remark on perceived superiority of his ODI leadership naive at best and stupid in earnest....he almost seemed to be speaking in glee at the world cup melt-down.
Had he mad the same statement at the start of world cup...he would have sounded like a man of character and conviction......now it came across as "bitter n grudging"

--Trott picked again...bad move on many counts....and publicly backed by Cook as the next opener....even worse

--and the entire establishment already defensively erecting fences to keep KP out.....sooooo negative.

Cook definitely and some of the seniors most suspiciously sound like English cricket is their personal fiefdom....makes it hard in even good times such mentality and perilous in bad times when the team is losing.
and this "personal fiefdom" mentality a legacy left behind by Flower.

--If he doesn't win against WI and NZ...Cook won't be leading Eng in this  round of "annual ashes show" is my prognosis...and his delusional statements are accelerating this route for him.

There will be no doubts drama and  entertainment off field in this English season of cricket's soap opera

This tour of the West Indies is a classic no-win situation for Cook.

If his team triumphs over the West Indies - so what? It was expected, routine victory etc.

If his team does not triumph or, heaven forbid, loses - job on the line, calls for his sacking etc.

Assuming triumph, the problem will be exacerbated when England face the very dangerous New Zealand team.

If Cook and co can't win against this West Indies, then that has to be an absolute line in the sand moment.......
Anyways Cook should stop acting like Downton and shouldn't come across as a big-mouthed idiot.......

Cook would be well advised to say as little as possible at present ...which is difficult if you are the England Captain and the media keep demanding quotes , opinions etc.
Quite agree he needs to make runs , get results ; but I am not sure he has ever actually denied that. Even his (definitely unwise) comments after the World Cup included the acknowledgement that he couldn't complain about being dumped from the squad due to his rotten form. He got a lot of flak for that interview ; and I think he'd have been smarter to keep some of his thoughts to himself. But most of what he actually said was not as unreasonable as it has been portrayed . He was disappointed to lose the job just before the big event they'd been working towards for a couple of years : wouldn't you be ? He would have liked the opportunity to help the team recover morale after the first two disastrous games : what leader worth his salt wouldn't ? Now you can believe - as I do - that his awful form leading in meant that the selectors didn't really have much choice ; and indeed that he would have been most unlikely to help the team do any better ; but I don't condemn him for what amounts to his own personal aspirations. And as he pointed out (again unwisely , as it came across like sour grapes) the change in leadership clearly didn't do a damn bit of good for either team performance , top of the order success or the personal game of the new leader...
As I say , all this was better kept to himself. It has served to intensify the pressure on him personally , and he only has himself to blame for that. But if he can come back to form and lead the team in the right direction , I would like to think his critics will give him due credit and ease of some of the criticism , which seems to have developed a bit of a personal edge in many quarters. I hope so in any case.
As to the KP thing , Boycott seems to have rather misinterpreted Cook's comments . Far from putting his opinion above the management he said that it was up to the selectors to decide. That he didn't expect Pietersen to return is hardly remarkable , given the fact that KP is still yet to play a first class innings in his "comeback". Again , better unsaid ? Perhaps ; but when the question is asked...

Fortunately the actual matches start again in a few days . So we can get on with judging people by what they actually do on the field.

On the outside looking in, English cricket does seem incredibly soft. Players talking to press about how they were afraid of fielding because the bowler might get upset if they misfielded (Looking at it, this may have been the softest thing I've ever heard from any athlete, the guy's name escapes me). Cook crossing the line must be a joke. He gave a personal interview, he didn't expressly state he didn't want KP back, he merely said what any reasonable thinking person in this situation would say, "No, an injury prone player past his sell by in two formats releasing a book slagging his employers and teammates probably isn't gonna come back".

Beggars belief really that Cook is admonished for this while it's apparently okay for KP to tell Taylor who should try being jockey.

And for what it's worth, ridiculous to nth degree to suggest Cook isn't more qualified than the Chairman/CEO of English cricket to discuss this. Agree with Alfie that this does however put more pressure on him. Maybe needlessly so

Nice to know that Pietersen wrote a book right out of the blue just without any context. A context involving a rotten to the core attempt at public humiliation despite top-scoring in a disaster of a series for the side.
We have gone over it time and time again, the way the saga developed, both parties were at fault, Cook making those stupid statements as if there was only 1 party who was wrong in the entire saga, it was utterly foolish from him. And no need to say totally uncalled for.......
And if he was just responding to persistent media questions, he could have given one of those bland statements that he almost always makes....... Something on the line of 'that has not been our focus......., that is not my call......., it is winning the series against a very fine West Indies side that is our priority......., or if failing that taking whatever positives we can.........

Yeah...Cook ain't responsible for his absolute spoken words...or their implied meaning.
It's someone else's fault...for asking such questions  and making him say these things

he is such a nice guy......and comes from the "right background" as ECB boss once said

On the rather more interesting , actual cricketing front : it is of some concern that the opposition put up for England's warm up games appears to be somewhat short of first class standard...judging from day one of the tour it isn't going to provide any sort of measuring stick for selection ; or indeed do much to prepare the players for the intensity of a Test Match.
Can't be helped. At least it will let the bowlers get a few overs in (presuming England will give a few more players batting practice and then have another bowl at them) and already Cook and Trott have had some time in the middle - albeit against a fairly unthreatening attack.
It is unfortunate , in my view , that the modern abbreviated tour affords little opportunity for players to actually earn their places in the Test team with performances on the field. Selectors are pretty much forced into picking their preferred XI at the start so as to give those players the best preparation they can...the "reserves" are then just that ; waiting on an injury or a drastic form failure to get a chance - and even then finding themselves thrust into the Test arena on limited match practice. (I know it isn't always that bad : some tours still include enough non-Test play to enable a bit of flexibility. But this one certainly doesn't)
I hope Lyth and Wood get a run out in game two at least. Imagine they will ; but it will be hard to mount a convincing case for Test selection against this class of opposition , if they are not first choice options.

A good show by Eng on their first tour game.
some cricket writers are "putting it down" for the quality of the opponent.....BUT...it still takes a lot of things to click well together...for a side to bowl out the opponents for 50 odd even if they are club quality.

and then get time in the middle for the main batsmen.

This is far better than struggling "even against the club level opponents".

It's good to hear Stokes was generating pace...and Adil ( whom I have never seen ) was mixing googlies with he conventional leg breaks.

and the team compositions of Eng....3 pure seamers + Stokes as a pace bowling all rounder + Adil as a spin all rounder is a very balanced one.

as a good a start as Eng would have dreamt of.

KP_fan wrote:

It's good to hear Stokes was generating pace...and Adil ( whom I have never seen ) was mixing googlies with he conventional leg breaks.

.

Agreed, a shame though that Rashid only got to bowl 3 overs though! I read a report saying he has not impressed in the nets, I note both Rashid and Tredwell playing in this match. Presumably an audition for one place, but the selectors would have learnt nothing so far from 3 overs for one and 0.3 for the other so far so lets hope for a better second innings effort from the opposition.

Considering the quality and more importantly, the overall state of the current West Indies, I don't think there is not a lot to complain about the side for the practice games, not expecting the quality of the cricket from the West Indies to be dramatically superior....... Perhaps a Brathwaite or a Holder might give it their all and Chanders is Chanders, but that's it with the bat for the WI. If Roach is fit and firing, and if Taylor is on top form, and if the tracks has a bit of life in them, then the West Indies bowling lineup can be half decent. But the greatest challenge is to keep it all together, a demanding task for the captain.......

Cozier has written a good review and he is very insightful.

when most of WI "stars" will be playing IPL......is a good chance to get younger talent in qho more hungry to perform and more manageable by their captain.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/858323.html
England spent their first day in the West Indies on Friday in their luxury accommodation in St Kitts, an island of 35 square miles in the middle of the Caribbean Sea, populated by 45,000 easy-going inhabitants. There is no more relaxing venue to be found anywhere, ideal perhaps for temporarily blanking the persistent distraction of Kevin Pietersen, if a little too laid-back a place in which to properly get ready for three back-to-back Tests in the space of three weeks.

Captain Alastair Cook, Ian Bell and Jimmy Anderson would remember it as the location where they started their 2009 tour with matches against a St Kitts Invitational XI and West Indies A. They moved on to Jamaica for the first Test a few days later, where Jerome Taylor's pace sent them spiraling to 51 all out and defeat by an innings and 23.

Jonny Bairstow, Adam Lyth, Adil Rashid and Ben Stokes were there for 12 days at the start of England Lions' tour of seven first-class matches four years ago.

This time, England are restricted to a couple of two-day matches against St Kitts & Nevis, a team without first-class status. Cook and his men can anticipate an effortless workout. They then make the short hop of 65 miles to Antigua for the first Test at the Sir Vivian Richards Stadium, starting Monday, April 13. They could find that their ground work would have been better served by tougher opposition first-up.

At a time when chief selector Clive Lloyd speaks of building a West Indies team for the future, a four-day match would also have allowed some of the emerging players exposure to a somewhat higher level than the domestic Caribbean Professional League.

In its inaugural season, the CPL was weakened by the absence of several leading men, who were at the World Cup or in the preceding Tests and ODIs in South Africa. As Lloyd followed the team throughnits difficult campaigns in South Africa, Australia and New Zealand, his colleagues who followed proceedings back home had to balance performances against standards in choosing a training squad of 20. They are presently in Antigua in new coach Phil Simmons' first assignment.

Four of the 20, all from Barbados, are yet to play Tests. Seamer Carlos Brathwaite is 26, fast bowler Miguel Cummins 24, wicketkeeper-batsman Shane Dowrich 23, and batting stylist Shai Hope 21.


Left-arm spinner Jomel Warrican took two eight-fors this season © WICB
The other 16 all have Test experience; new ODI captain Jason Holder and strokemaker Jermaine Blackwood are both 23, and Kraigg Brathwaite, the dogged opener, 22.

Their prospects are for lengthy careers as Chris Gayle, Shivnarine Chanderpaul, Marlon Samuels and Sulieman Benn near the end of theirs, and as Dwayne Bravo, Kieron Pollard, Lendl Simmons, Darren Sammy and Sunil Narine concentrate on global T20 tournaments.

A few wait in the wings for the turn they might have had in a combined team against England in St Kitts. There is no hint when that might be, as nothing has yet been scheduled for the A team.

None of the young contenders is as intriguing as Rahkeem Cornwall, the 22-year-old Leeward Islander from Antigua. He is a massive unit, cricket's most identifiable man mountain since the similarly immense Bermudan Dwayne Leverock, a popular star of the 2007 World Cup. Like Leverock, Cornwall is the butt of inevitable jibes; like Leverock he is not to be discounted because of his size.

Viv Richards, Andy Roberts, Richie Richardson, Ridley Jacobs, Curtly Ambrose, the Benjamins Winston and Kenny, all Antiguans, made the Leewards as powerful as any team in regional cricket through the seventies and eighties. As with West Indies, they suddenly and inexplicably plummeted to the bottom of the pile. They ended the 2014-15 CPL season with their first victories in four seasons, over Jamaica and Trinidad & Tobago.

Cornwall was prominent in both - seven Jamaican wickets with his deceptive offspin, delivered after a casual shuffle to delivery, and an explosive unbeaten 101 off 84 balls with 11 fours and six sixes chasing 241 against Trinidad & Tobago. He entered at 100 for 5 and two hours later it was over. His partner, Steve Liburd, scored 44 in the partnership. Earlier in the season, Cornwall returned his best figures, 7 for 96, against Guyana.

His overall numbers from seven matches - a batting average of 27.46 along with 29 wickets at 26.93 - placed him among the season's leading allrounders. Ridley Jacobs, the Leewards' coach, described Cornwall as "very talented, up there with any of the players of his age and limited experience". But he recognised the obvious problem he has with his weight. "We can give him all the help he needs but, in the end, it's up to him to deal with that," Jacobs said.


Batsman Nicolas Pooran missed the World Cup due to an accident, but impressed in the Under-19 World Cup last year © ICC
The setback of the season was the damage to ankle and knee from a car crash that eliminated another exciting young hope, 19-year-old Nicolas Pooran, after the third match. The slim Trinidad and Tobago left-hand batsman and keeper revealed his precocious ability and attitude with 143, with 14 fours and six sixes, out of a total of 208 against Australia in the quarter-final of the Under-19 World Cup in Dubai in February 2014. He had little cricket since; this was to have been his time.

There are others who encourage optimism that coach Simmons will have genuinely gifted material with which to work as he gets into the role in which he thrived with Ireland.

Benn's absence in South Africa and at the World Cup opened up a position for 22-year-old left-arm spinner Jomel Warrican for Barbados. He ended the season with 49 first-class wickets at 14.97 each, among them two returns of eight wickets in an innings.

Lloyd is impressed with Jamaican fast bowler Marquino Mindley, 20. While Shivnarine is near the end of 20 illustrious years propping up the West Indies middle order, another left-handed Chanderpaul, 18-year-old son Tagenarine, showed his worth at the 2014 U-19 World Cup.

Simmons' challenge is to ensure that they and others of a similar vintage and skill are disciplined and committed to a career for West Indies. His adversaries are the lure of T20 fortune and the pressures of international sport that have already accounted for several promising players.

Tony Cozier has written about and commentated on cricket in the Caribbean for 50 years

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/858323.html

If the likes of Cornwall are the upcoming hopes for West Indies cricket, well, I don't hold out much hope for them....... A guy who's numbers with bat or ball are a distinct second to his physique, a bits and pieces player by the look of things.......

Well, yes. That's exactly what he is. We are in the dying embers of West Indies cricket. The loyal fantasists would have you believe that the Windies are in fact a decent team, but they've been ruined by mercenary cricket. "Just look at all the guys playing international pop up T20", they say. "Imagine if Russell, Pollard, Narine and Bravo played Tests". Unfortunately, this does ignore the fact that while these guys are fantastic domestic T20 exponents, they aren't too hot internationally at any format of the game. There is no way forward.

kingraf wrote: There is no way forward.

Break them down by the Islands....and let them compete with minnows in ICC tournaments and some of them will qualify for international grades.

They have a FC structure in Caribbean.....retain that.
I am sure 2 or 3 of these island teams will emerge better than Zim and BD

I don't think WI cricket has paucity of talent......
Allrounders of the quality of Bravo and Russell.
Spinners SLA s 2 to 3 of them, Narine, Bishoo and Badri the leggies is a well stocked cupboard of spinners second to or perhaps at par with Pak.
And plenty of raw pacers
And not bad batters at all.
They lack the spirit and desire to play anything more that 20 overs......and have no sense of national pride.

Atleast playing for their Islands there will be national pride.

That said this Man-mountain of a guy is a genuine off spinner who can whack the ball....more than bits and pieces.
WI is a side not short on cricketing  talent now and has some of the games greatest from their supreme Era as selectors and coaches.....and know how to identify talent and don't pick anything that's less than genuine talent ......Hence bits and pieces cricketer don't make it so far.

I am looking forward to this Cornwall guy play

KPF, there is absolutely no batting quality emerging out of the West Indies. T-20 slogging is one thing....... Among the younger West Indies batsmen to have emerged in recent times, only Kraigg Brathwaite has the technique, temperament and attitude to become a good batsman, ant at this point in his career, he's a test only player. Chanderpaul, Gayle and Samuels won't be around much longer, the younger Bravo has serious potential but has been grappling with too many issues on and off the field....... Assuming he sorts himself out, its the these 2 young guys who have makings of batting quality, beyond that there is nothing much, think the Bangladesh lineup would be superior.......
Their bowling is better, but only relatively to their batting. But Roach has always battled fitness issues throughout his career, Taylor is 30+ and has had fitness issues and conflicts with the board in the past. Holder isn't quite ready for test cricket as yet as a bowler in a 4 man attack. The backups are not much to talk about. The spinners are OK and not special....... So the bowling does not have the quality to overcome the serious problems in the batting department.......

msp...the WI batsmen are not lacking technique but rather will and spirit to play any format longer than T20 when under the WI banner...IMHO

KPF, Denesh Ramdin as a test number 5!. Says it all doesn't it!?
Of late he has become a good number 7 but because they really don't have much quality in the lineup he has to bat a couple of positions up the order.
Chris Gayle and Ramnaresh Sarwan at their peak, along with Shiv, constituted a decent lineup and the support acts in the likes of the elder Bravo and at a stretch Samuels were decent. Now Sarwan is out of the frame, Chanderpaul is in the last stages of his playing career, Gayle has major fitness concerns and cares more for the T-20s. Consistency has never been the strongpoint of Samuels.
Among the new generation, its only the younger Bravo and Brathwaite who have shown half-decent consistency even when playing FC cricket for their island sides. John Charles is a limited overs slogger, Kieran Powell is a totally mediocre player, Adrian Barath has drifted out of the international game and hasn't been making a case for himself with consistent batting performances in domestic cricket. The likes of Russell have not achieved any consistent level of performance with bat or ball for their domestic side either and laks the temperament to play the longer format.

It's got nothing to do with willingness. They are ranked #7 in T20s... and that's the format where their best players almost always play, and other nations are willing to rest theirs. They won the 2012 (got it right this time msp ) T20 world cup, but that was a combination of the broken clock phenomena, and a rampant Gayle. They aren't very good. The T20 excuse is a comfortable one, but it doesn't stand up in the light of day

kingraf wrote:It's got nothing to do with willingness. They are ranked #7 in T20s... and that's the format where their best players almost always play, and other nations are willing to rest theirs. They won the 2012 (got it right this time msp ) T20 world cup, but that was a combination of the broken clock phenomena, and a rampant Gayle. They aren't very good. The T20 excuse is a comfortable one, but it doesn't stand up in the light of day

rankings in T20s ?...on the basis of what ?

can you even name one...just one 3 match , T20 bilateral series ever played in the history of cricket....?
T20s are played...like one per series, at the end of the series of 5 ODIs and 3 tests.....as a carnival game more than anything else.

the only serious T20 internationals I know of are the bi-annual world cups that WI has won once and made to semi finals twice in 5 appearances.

the only other measure in T20 worth any reckoning is a player's IPL and BBL prices

Just one? Is that not counting the 3-match bilateral series the West Indies had in South Africa less than four months ago?

Domestic competions are in no way a benchmark. The IPL is a valiant effort, but it's hardly eight national team-quality outfits trying to win the thing. It's not like the Uefa Champions League, where the teams which make the last eight could almost certainly give winning the world cup a good crack, because it's at a higher level than the national game. That isn't true of cricket. The national game is still supreme. You cannot seriously try to claim that any competion where Piyush Chawla can moonlight as an all rounder is a good barometer of ability?

I think I am more with Raf and MSP on this - the Windies are pretty much finished as a Test nation, especially if Ramdin is a number 5 and a 20 stone bowling all-rounder is their best prospect!

I don't buy the argument that because they have some good T20 players, they would be even half-decent if those same players applied themselves. Luke Wright is a decent enough T20 player, but I think I would give up watching cricket if he was suddenly in the England Test team with the promise to bat carefully!

They ones picked Luke Wright as replacement/cover all-rounder for Fredye Flintoff in a test squad didn't they?

msp83 wrote:They ones picked Luke Wright as replacement/cover  all-rounder for Fredye Flintoff in a test squad didn't they?

Thanks for reminding me of that! Yep, after the 2009 Ashes, Flintoff retired, so Wright was in the Test squad for the tour of South Africa, but thankfully never played a game.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/858859.html

That England series (the one after the Ashes 2009) was nothing short of fantastic. It's remarkable to think we haven't beaten England at home since the turn of the millennium (or the year before the millennium, if you're picky)

Mark Wood has an invisible horse that he jousts people on in the field. I've not gone mental, that is right. Please pick him, doesn't look like they are thinking that way though unfortunately.

And Paul Downton has been fired, in less exciting news.

Downton gone.
Boycott even at this age has the sense to read the situation.....'you can't (or shouldn't) disagree with your boss....not in the least publicly.

Cook is walking on thin ice.....
Hanging by a spider web thin rope

He better watch out what he says..
More imprtant get runs.....
And don't lose in WI nor to NZ

KP still standing.....absence has only made his larger than life persona even larger

Downton down!. Good for the game overall!. But will the ECB stay the sensible course for long?

kingraf wrote:Just one? Is that not counting the 3-match bilateral series the West Indies had in South Africa less than four months ago?

Domestic competions are in no way a benchmark. The IPL is a valiant effort, but it's hardly eight national team-quality outfits trying to win the thing. It's not like the Uefa Champions League, where the teams which make the last eight could almost certainly give winning the world cup a good crack, because it's at a higher level than the national game. That isn't true of cricket. The national game is still supreme. You cannot seriously try to claim that any competion where Piyush Chawla can moonlight as an all rounder is a good barometer of ability?

There are 2 subjects here i think

1) TALENT
I don't think in the least there is any paucity in WI
Look at the allrounders and choice of spinners and pretty quick pacers they have....
Batting is weaker but only relative to their bowling resources.....
And batters don't find the will / pride to stick it out in the longer format and eve 50 overs appear too long.

And don't write off that guy because he is 'fat'
And don't write him off because he can bat and bowl both....he could be genuinely good at both or atleast one skill...
Trust the track record of WI....they are about the only team in my memory who rarely put out bits and pieces players....
Even bits n pieces by their standard Sammy pulled his weight thru performances and even punched above his weight.
Other than that Carl hooper Was the only one who comes close to being their bits n pieces and the highest quality bits n piece s i have seen though.

2) that WI favor T20 and yet are ranked 7 is not a reflection that they don't have quality in even T20, but rather a reflection on the ranking system....just not enuf data points...too few T20 internationals played outside of world cup.
And world cup record....1 win, 2 semis out of world cups....makes them amongst the top teams there....along with Lanka and Pak.

And Re: IPL....has 5 overseas, 2 or 3 Indian stars and about 3 to 4 average domestic players....so i would rate the strength of the top IPL sides at about 75% of a top international side.
And hence the performances there count....you can discount them by 25% but not a 100%.
And there are plenty of Westindians shining very brightly in IPL...on nothing but pure talent.

The likes of Bravo, going by test standards, was closer to being bits and pieces rather than genuine all-rounder. Useful with bat, useful with ball, but outstanding with neither. Pollard is useful with bat and parttime with the ball. Russell hasn't shown consistency with bat or ball, though had he focused on tests, perhaps he would have evolved into a more substantive player.
The only good class seamer to have emerged from the West Indies in the last 5-6 years has been Kemar Roach, and he struggles to stay on the park more often than not unfortunately.

This warm up game is a complete farce

1 - I'm sorry but there is a paucity of talent. Let's look at the pace attack shall we? Are you talking about the one that nearly conceded 400 three times in eight weeks? Or the one which conceded 230 in twenty overs? Doesn't seem a particularly inspiring amount of talent. They have Narine, and he's a good spinner, but only for T20 where the "Him or me" mentality means a batsman has to blindly attack him. He's not nearly threatening enough for Test cricket. Even in 50-overs, with the paucity of skills surrounding him, he can just be seen off, and the supposedly vaunted pace attack can be flayed to all corners. I've never called anyone out on their weight. In fact I've not even mentioned the spinner. Personally, I don't rate him, and I think his success is a direct result of playing in a farcical FC league, where scoring hundreds is as rare as Virgin births. I might be wrong, and I'm certainly not gonna "hang" him without trial.

2 - Given the amount of T20 cricket the Windies do play though, about eight a year - I think the ranking is more than fair. I can't see how it isn't, especially since the ranking system isn't biased to the amount of matches a nation plays. The Windies aren't where they are because they don't play enough. They are there because when they do play. Generally... they lose. I mean we barely play our top team and we're above them (to be fair to the Windies, they've bumped up to fifth in the latest ranking). I can't think of any team which plays their best possible XI more often in T20 than them, so it's an empty excuse.

3 - Sorry no, the IPL isn't, 75% international quality. I'm not even sure of what this means. Let's look at the Mumbai Indian team which played today, and how many of them are regular national players.

Sharma - kinda
Finch - Yes
Tare - no
Rayudu - No
Anderson - Yes
pollard - Yes
Bhajji - No
Malinga - Yes(ish)
Vinay Kumar - no
Bumrah - no
Ojha - No

That's six no, a couple sort ofs, and a few yes'. Which you'd expect in a first class T20 tourney (which is really what IPL is). Its certainly at a higher level than most, if not all T20s domestically... But its certainly closer to domestic competions than national.

Kingraf.....i have nothing more to add.....else we will be turning in circles

There is definitely a lack of talent in the Windies and has been for about 15 years now.

From an England perspective, it used to be an achievement to beat them, I remember the 2000 series which was hard-fought and a great win over 5 Tests. They are so bad now that if its not at least 2-0 in the two/three Test series they generally warrant, then questions are rightly asked.

Michael Vaughan likely to be the new England manager....... Anyone would be better than Downturn.
Moores has to look over his shoulder now, will Vaughan be daring like the Australians, will he and the ECB act like the Australians did with Arthur, before it gets totally out of control? If he shuts up and score some runs, Cook can stay.......
And if Vaughan is in charge, silly nonsense will not keep Pietersen out, if he makes a case for himself with the bat, the chances of him coming back to international cricket would be more realistic, though the vested interests wouldn't just give up any time soon.......

I'd be devastated if Vaughan got the job. Everything the bloke does nowadays is pretty much for hiw own agenda and the agenda of the his management company, not sure how impartial he could be. Stewart/Atherton/Hussain would be a far better option, whether they would take it is a different matter.

Moores has said he's willing to work with Pietersen again and under Vaughan as DOC.

Think the man knows he's on borrowed time

Vaughan wouldn't be my choice. An astute fellow , certainly. But of late , a bit too fond of a headline , I think. England could perhaps do with more work behind the scenes and less public chatter.

Reckon he's in as KP insurance. If KP does get in, then someone at middle management needs to not hate him.,

KP won.
Yet again

Michael Vaughan set to be the most powerful man in English cricket.

He's a bit sensationalist for my liking (like when he predicted India 4-0 England in 2012, when it was abundantly clear that the away side would triumph); Stewart or Strauss would add, I feel, a layer of calm and stability that English cricket desperately needs.

Stuart and Strauss are also in the shortlist of the ECB.

Duty281 wrote:Michael Vaughan set to be the most powerful man in English cricket.

He's a bit sensationalist for my liking

yes English are generally conservative......and Vaughan's forthrightness my be too direct.
I dunno if Vaughans' ways will work in English cricket
I personally believe his positive, and overtly somewhat brash way is a good way.......but again I sit outside the English system

Duty281 wrote:Michael Vaughan set to be the most powerful man in English cricket.

He's a bit sensationalist for my liking (like when he predicted India 4-0 England in 2012, when it was abundantly clear that the away side would triumph); Stewart or Strauss would add, I feel, a layer of calm and stability that English cricket desperately needs.

4-0 wasn't a bad prediction given what had happened in the UAE!

I like the idea of Vaughan in charge, the last thing we need is another yes man. Also England under Vaughan as a captain was an exciting time, and a lot of it was to do with the environment he created and the brand of cricket he wanted to play.

Whilst I don't believe as some would appear to that Downton is the devil reincarnated I understand that the new regime at the ECB felt the need to change things up.

I am not sure that Moores doesn't deserve a bit longer. I know the WC was a fiasco, but let's be honest the England team he inherited in ODI cricket was scarcely ripping up trees, and he has still been in post less than a year. It is worth remembering that Moores inherited a side in complete turmoil after the Ashes with various ongoing sagas. There was a general agreement at the time that England needed a fresh approach, and a fresh approach needs time. People demanding change seem by and large now to be the people demanding that Moores goes and that doesn't strike me as entirely consistent or coherent.

I made clear at the time that I didn't think Moores was the right person for the job, but having picked him I do think it a bit unfair to sack him after one reasonable test summer (not great, but 2 balls away from being 2 series wins let's not forget; England in the summer played some good stuff, some less good stuff but there was encouragement there and we shouldn't forget that because of the dreadful WC) and a continuation of England's ODI woes.

Simply put I don't think Moores has been given enough time to turn things around yet, and that if he was the best man when appointed (IMO he wasn't) then he remains the best man now. Unless you are arguing based on decisions which he has taken since being given the job which you feel have made things worse. Frankly a lot of "sack Moores" people seem to be amalgamating Moores with Downton with Cook with everybody who has a say about anything (in particular with regards to a certain...) and that strikes me as a trifle unfair - do we know how much say Moores had over KP say?

Speaking of which, it seems like this may never go away. I am impressed that he has committed to a season of county cricket (presumably on much lower wages than he could get elsewhere). If he performs well and a place opens up for him in the side then maybe he should be given (yet) another chance. The latter condition though is what people may forget. Frankly England's middle order at the moment is looking fairly settled with Ballance impressing at 3, Bell taking on more responsibility at 4 and Root finally getting a settled run at 5 (which remains for me his natural position) then the all-rounder at 6. For Pietersen to return to the side he not only needs to make a case for himself, but someone also needs to make a case to be dropped. I imagine Bell will come under the most fire, since his form over recent years has been at times patchy (although no more it must be said than KP's...) and he is older than the other two, but it is far from a foregone conclusion.

England's main issues in test cricket (in ODIs they are well documented) are Cook's bad run, and the failure to find a suitable opening partner for him (the two may be somewhat linked; I know from personal experience it is tougher to play yourself out of a trough when you are constantly worrying about what is happening at the other end as well). For all of Cook's troubles he remains (clearly IMO) England's best opener (whether he should be captain is another debate) and talk of dropping him on twitter is frankly ridiculous - England are struggling to find 1 other decent opening bat to partner him, let alone another one to replace him. However his form is an issue.

The other issue is the inconsistency of the bowling, and especially the inability to dismiss tail-enders quickly and cheaply. It may be that Rashid can address some of these issues, but at the moment it seems like he is being outbowled by Tredwell (who gets a raw deal; he probaly won't rip up trees, but he won't let anybody down) so that is not all that encouraging.

As for Vaughan I am not at all sure that he is what England need. At face value he seems to be somewhat egotistical and self-centred, and as others have noted a bit too fond of media exposure. How involved has he been in the game recently? How up to date is he? Commenting is not the same as playing or coaching... There is also surely a massive conflict of interest with his management company in charge of some of the England players (something Vaughan has never been too keen to be open about when promoting these players in his telegraphy column, even going as far as blocking people on twitter who pointed this out)...

Having said that, I am not to be honest entirely sure on what Downton's role was, or what Vaughan's (or whoever else) will be. What is their relationship to the head coach, the selectors, the captain, the ECB, the academies, etc. Come to mention it, what is the role of the coach with regards to all that? (*) The term "coach" is used but in my experience Moores probably doesn't do all that much of what people would regard as coaching. So without being clear on what the role exactly means I'm not sure it's all that appropriate to comment over who should hold it.

(*) As an aside the ECB does seem to be amazingly bogged down in bureaucracy. They have recently created a non-elected role of president it would seem just to keep Giles Clarke happy and pretend he's still important. I am not one of the old-fashioned so and so's who like to moan how in their day they didn't have the need for all this backroom staff etc. but it does seem that there are a lot of administrators and I imagine without clear boundaries and accountability as to who is in charge of what this can quickly become a nightmare.

VTR wrote:the last thing we need is another yes man. Also England under Vaughan as a captain was an exciting time, and a lot of it was to do with the environment he created and the brand of cricket he wanted to play.

Was Downton a yes man really though? I thought most of the criticism of him was that he was somewhat of a dictator who wanted (and by and large got) his way with everything. I am not sure the man in charge (which as far as I see Downton was) CAN be a yes man, unless you are suggesting it was someone else (who? Clarke is the only one I can think of?) pulling strings?

I agree that if you are going to have a director of cricket and then a head coach it is crucial that the head coach (Moores) is not a yes man but brings his own approach to his side. And I think some of the criticism of Moores as not bringing fresh ideas is warranted (one of the reasons I didn't feel he was the right man at the time), but that is a separate issue from the DoC role.

Having said that the point that KPF makes which I think is partially your point is that Vaughan will certainly bring a fresh approach and not be afraid of breaking with traditions. I think there are others out there who could do so just as well without the ego and certainly the conflict of interest which Vaughan brings.

Also regarding his stint as captain to be fair a lot of that environment and brand of cricket was inherited from the later Nasser years and the dynamics with Fletcher.

Then again I will freely admit that there is something about Vaughan which winds me up a bit (there is some arrogance in his commentary which I just don't like) so I may not be being entirely reasonable.