• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

England players and selection discussion thread

Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
the english batting was exceptional for 4 years. the english bowling...existed...and was bolstered at the last minute by archer qualifying.

describe how they are exceptional.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
They don't have to be exceptional. I did not claim either their bowling attack or Plunkett in particular were exceptional either. If I have a batting line up that makes 350 just about everytime, then I only need a bowling line up that can keep the opposition to less than 7 runs an over. Plunkett was a very important cog in that kind of a bowling line up for Engand. He may go at 6 or 6.5 an over but he will get crucial 2 or 3 wickets than ultimately tip the scale and let the awesome batting win them the game. Therefore, he was the main reason they won the WC, as he put through such spells quite often in the important games in the WC. England looked stronger from the moment they got him in for Rashid, I think.
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
If you look at the names in there, Plunkett didn't get a single easy wicket.

I think Mo needed a rest more than anything. He's been decent at home and at some point deserves another go. The last time around his bowling looked mechanical and low-energy. You could see he wasn't enjoying it. Happens all the time.
 
J

Jack1

International Debutant
England lost all three games they didn’t pick Plunkett during the WC. He kept getting the key man of the opponent. His guile and mastering the cross seam delivery made him the best middle overs seamer in world cricket in a four year period. I have a itk telling me he got dropped for something that isn’t cricket related btw.
 
wpdavid

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
GoodAreasShane said:
His figures may have considerably improved, but I can't say his bowling really looked any better at all. Never rated Plunkett in the slightest. Very lucky bowler
Click to expand...
Nothing at all to do with this thread, but did you get your BOYCOTT signature from a banner during the 1989/79 Ashes?
 
wpdavid

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
wpdavid said:
Nothing at all to do with this thread, but did you get your BOYCOTT signature from a banner during the 1978/79 Ashes?
Click to expand...
Starfighter said:
Someone put up series highlights and I posted a screenshot of it. As GAS said, perfect summary of the man.
Click to expand...
Yes, I thought I remembered it, even if I did manage to mistype 1978 originally, and I remember Richie Benaud being singularly unimpressed with the banner at the time.
Was the 'Ayatollah' jibe towards Brearley the following year?
 
S

sauravjha

Cricket Spectator
England announce 30-man training squad ahead of first West Indies Test

Moeen Ali, James Anderson, Jofra Archer, Jonathan Bairstow, Dominic Bess, James Bracey, Stuart Broad, Rory Burns, Jos Buttler, Zak Crawley, Sam Curran, Joe Denly, Ben Foakes, Lewis Gregory, Keaton Jennings, Dan Lawrence, Jack Leach, Saqib Mahmood, Craig Overton, Jamie Overton, Matthew Parkinson, Ollie Pope, Ollie Robinson, Joe Root, Dom Sibley, Ben Stokes, Olly Stone, Amar Virdi, Chris Woakes, Mark Wood.
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
John1990 said:
England lost all three games they didn’t pick Plunkett during the WC. He kept getting the key man of the opponent. His guile and mastering the cross seam delivery made him the best middle overs seamer in world cricket in a four year period. I have a itk telling me he got dropped for something that isn’t cricket related btw.
Click to expand...
bahahahaha what the **** are you watching?
MW1304 said:
It's pretty simple, this four year record is better than meh.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...5;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling

And anyone who watched the WC knows how important he ended up being to the bowling.
Click to expand...
credit where it's due, plunkett did better than i remember in that period. he was good, but hardly a must retain beyond his use by date. i'll be surprised to see him there in 2023. i have already acknowledged the english bowlers played above themselves in the wc. mark wood, respectable odi fast bowler was a particular surprise.

the english attack, despite the sort by most wickets aka most games boosting them to the top, are still definitively mid table in record. i said they were mid table, grecian claimed the english odi side were exceptional, to which i said the bowlers existed. those bowlers are not exceptional.

no one is going to take the english bowlers over the australians, kiwis or indians. they're 4th at absolute best, because i can see the pros and cons between the english bowlers and the pakistani/south african dudes.
 
MW1304

MW1304

Cricketer Of The Year
I mean I don't really disagree with any of that, but the bloke saying 'Nah I know he actually bowled great and had great figures and was really quite good by the end, but I never liked the look of him and therefore he sucked and was just lucky' is showing his arse.
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
original statement
Flem274* said:
excellent historical revisionism in this thread.

plunket is meh and the mediocre english odi bowlers rallying for a few decent games doesn't change the fact they are largely mediocre barring the mercenary who was fire at the wc.

the english attack is mid-table at best. fortunately they had ben stokes, two crap umpires and a fortunate deflection to tie a final.
Click to expand...
all of this is true
 
Bijed

Bijed

International Regular
GoodAreasShane said:
Perhaps I'm wrong, maybe there is some skill in getting batsman caught on the boundary to cross seam half trackers after all
Click to expand...
Forget Plunkett specifically for a minute, if I saw any bowler spend years consistently taking wickets in a manner I considered lucky, cross-seam half trackers being a perfectly good example, I'd eventually conclude that they were either good at beating batsmen for pace or good at deceiving them with variations and subtle changes of pace. Taking wickets in limited-overs cricket by virtue of just being difficult to force the pace against is legitimate.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Bijed said:
Forget Plunkett specifically for a minute, if I saw any bowler spend years consistently taking wickets in a manner I considered lucky, cross-seam half trackers being a perfectly good example, I'd eventually conclude that they were either good at beating batsmen for pace or good at deceiving them with variations and subtle changes of pace. Taking wickets in limited-overs cricket by virtue of just being difficult to force the pace against is legitimate.
Click to expand...

Half Trackers are a pretty generic term and does not always define the type of "at the ribs and climbing" short bowling which can also cause dismissals caught at deep midwicket or deep square. And then there is the issue of pace up and pace down variations apart from the bounce the bowler may get and even vary based on the shoulder he is putting behind the ball.
 
GoodAreasShane

GoodAreasShane

Cricketer Of The Year
Bijed said:
Forget Plunkett specifically for a minute, if I saw any bowler spend years consistently taking wickets in a manner I considered lucky, cross-seam half trackers being a perfectly good example, I'd eventually conclude that they were either good at beating batsmen for pace or good at deceiving them with variations and subtle changes of pace. Taking wickets in limited-overs cricket by virtue of just being difficult to force the pace against is legitimate.
Click to expand...
Probably a fair point, there probably is something to be said for Plunkett varying things just enough to more difficult to despatch than he often looks. I still certainly don't enjoy watching that sort of bowling, but all in all the scoreboard doesn't discriminate against how you get your wickets

And as an aside, it's not just an England thing. His time at the Melbourne Stars was also very much in my mind
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top