Page 2 of 3

Re: england cricket

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 9:49 pm
by Deuce Bigolo
Graeme hick was over rated

His techinque was exposed when he played for Queensland in Australia

Having said that on his day he was as powerful a striker as any ie Pollock


Personally i put it down to too much substandard cricket
especially limited overs cricket

Anyone can look good at the lower levels but true talent is when it meets its match on the biggest arena and succeeds

Re: england cricket

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:50 am
by diplodocus
that's a pretty good point Deuce, in Oz u have a much higher standard of 'below test' cricket. I reckon all the Oz domestic state sides would destroy any UK county sides, but they are obviously limited in their number, which is why a lot of really good aussies play over here.

personally I see and have played with some great young aussie players in the central yorkshire and bradford leagues who would never have got near the state sides in Oz. Maybe there are just too many pros in the Uk who can make a good living out of cricket without being of a required standard


Re: england cricket

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 1:27 am
by chubbs
chris lewis

Re: england cricket

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 1:59 am
by Deuce Bigolo
Any teams that play four day first and one day 2nd will always be better equipped to handle five day matches mentally

Mentally Australia have been ahead of the rest for 20 years
Might be down to what i've said or the youth academies,who knows?

The only things that have stopped them are good spinners on the continent & good accurate swing bowling

To much emphasis on the shorter forms mean you'll produce bowlers who contain and not take wickets because that doesn't matter

Unfortunately the powers that be(India)have their eyes set on making 20/20 the golden goose

Test Cricket is living on borrowed time me thinks

Re: england cricket

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:08 am
by eduardo
See I think it's the other way around Buttsie in that I think too much emphasis on the one day game makes bowlers experiment too much.

Slower balls, knuckle balls, off cutters etc etc and when they go back to first class cricket they try too many deliveries and try to get the batsmen out in too many ways instead of the basic principle that 5 out of every 6 balls should be trying to hit the top of off stump or the line and length principle for want of a better phrase.

Re: england cricket

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:33 am
by Deuce Bigolo
Either way one day cricket causes problems in the longer form of the game

Your right about too much experimenting

Murali was bowling 3 of his specials every over just recently and the batsmen were becoming used to it......very silly

Re: england cricket

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 11:46 am
by Trumpton
colonel wrote:

> And Graeme Hick!

What a strange player he is/was. Scored stacks of runs for Worcestershire and had the ability to score 100 centuries - but his test record was modest. He never really came to terms with really express pace bowling of that era.


Re: england cricket

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:11 pm
by Trumpton
diplodocus wrote:

> Maybe there are just
> too many pros in the Uk who can make a good living out of
> cricket without being of a required standard

Too many professional teams (counties), too many meaningless competitions, too many full-time professional players.