England in the 90s

[blockerdave]

Streaming a bit as it looks gorgeous. I'm batting. Lost Athers early, Larkins and Gower are scoring quickly. Aussies just brought on the spinner, so i'll probably collapse.

 

[blockerdave]

Streaming again. I made 366 thanks to tons from Gower (105) and Russell (104).

 

[relaxedanderson]

It

Streaming again. I made 366 thanks to tons from Gower (105) and Russell (104).

It still baffles me how Russell kept getting dropped because his batting apparently wasn't good enough. Ok, he was no Alec Stewart with the bat but he was as good as if not better than Ian Healy, Junior Murray, Rashid Latif, Moin Khan, Dave Richardson, Adam Parore and possibly, maybe Romesh Kaluwitharana. The only two keepers in the (pre-Gilchrist) international game that were clearly better batters than Jack were Andy Flower and Alec. But Jack was a far, far superior keeper to Alec and Alec was selected as a batsman anyway.

They used to say that by picking Stewart as keeper meant they could pick an extra bowler, but if four bog-standard, RFM trundlers couldn't get Brian Lara out for less than a couple of hundred then adding someone like Mark Ealham, Ronnie Irani or Adam Hollioake to the attack isn't really going to make much of a difference.

But I'm a proper sucker for the art of great wicket-keeping. I grew up watching Colin Metson keep week in, week out so I know great keeping when I see it (I also grew up watching Colin Metson bat week in week out so I know how Laurel and Hardy would have batted if they'd made a film about cricket). It's probably a bit late now as most of the exceptional specialist keepers are long retired but I would support a law change that meant teams could select a keeper from outside the batting 11. Surely it would benefit the spectacle of the game to see those little eccentric nutters with their lightning fast hands, their chirping and their diving all over the place, rather than some of the lead-footed, concrete-gloved lumps we've had recently who are only in the side because they can smash the ball into the car park and they own a pair of gloves?

That's one of the reasons I've been following the England Women's team so closely for the last few years, Sarah Taylor was an absolute dream to watch keeping (and she could bat as well). I knew it was coming but I was devastated when she retired. Where do I go now to see God-level wicket-keeping?

 

[blockerdave]

It


It still baffles me how Russell kept getting dropped because his batting apparently wasn't good enough. Ok, he was no Alec Stewart with the bat but he was as good as if not better than Ian Healy, Junior Murray, Rashid Latif, Moin Khan, Dave Richardson, Adam Parore and possibly, maybe Romesh Kaluwitharana. The only two keepers in the (pre-Gilchrist) international game that were clearly better batters than Jack were Andy Flower and Alec. But Jack was a far, far superior keeper to Alec and Alec was selected as a batsman anyway.

They used to say that by picking Stewart as keeper meant they could pick an extra bowler, but if four bog-standard, RFM trundlers couldn't get Brian Lara out for less than a couple of hundred then adding someone like Mark Ealham, Ronnie Irani or Adam Hollioake to the attack isn't really going to make much of a difference.

But I'm a proper sucker for the art of great wicket-keeping. I grew up watching Colin Metson keep week in, week out so I know great keeping when I see it (I also grew up watching Colin Metson bat week in week out so I know how Laurel and Hardy would have batted if they'd made a film about cricket). It's probably a bit late now as most of the exceptional specialist keepers are long retired but I would support a law change that meant teams could select a keeper from outside the batting 11. Surely it would benefit the spectacle of the game to see those little eccentric nutters with their lightning fast hands, their chirping and their diving all over the place, rather than some of the lead-footed, concrete-gloved lumps we've had recently who are only in the side because they can smash the ball into the car park and they own a pair of gloves?

That's one of the reasons I've been following the England Women's team so closely for the last few years, Sarah Taylor was an absolute dream to watch keeping (and she could bat as well). I knew it was coming but I was devastated when she retired. Where do I go now to see God-level wicket-keeping?

After the 3rd test of this series, Jack Russell will never play another Ashes test.

Warren Hegg will, but Jack won't. Criminal.

It was bad enough when they dropped Jack for Alec, but at least that was nominally for balance. The fact that at points Richard Blakey, Steve Rhodes and Warren Hegg were all picked as specialist keepers over Jack was insane. And of course, if they'd just let Alec bat and Russell keep, Alec would have averaged another 6 or 7 runs at least, Russell would have saved runs in dismissals and less byes etc. and we'd never have had to watch Blakey try and bat against Kumble.

Often we picked Alec because we played 2 spinners. At times during this odyssey (in fact starting 3rd test of this series), I'll have such delights as Tufnell and Hemmings, and Such and Tufnell in the same XI. At least once in this series thats Tufnell and Hemmings in a 4-man attack, in Australia (albeit Sydney). It was a different time.

 

[relaxedanderson]

After the 3rd test of this series, Jack Russell will never play another Ashes test.

Warren Hegg will, but Jack won't. Criminal.

It was bad enough when they dropped Jack for Alec, but at least that was nominally for balance. The fact that at points Richard Blakey, Steve Rhodes and Warren Hegg were all picked as specialist keepers over Jack was insane. And of course, if they'd just let Alec bat and Russell keep, Alec would have averaged another 6 or 7 runs at least, Russell would have saved runs in dismissals and less byes etc. and we'd never have had to watch Blakey try and bat against Kumble.

Often we picked Alec because we played 2 spinners. At times during this odyssey (in fact starting 3rd test of this series), I'll have such delights as Tufnell and Hemmings, and Such and Tufnell in the same XI. At least once in this series thats Tufnell and Hemmings in a 4-man attack, in Australia (albeit Sydney). It was a different time.

The only players on the county scene that I saw who could even come close to Russell's ability as a keeper were, in my opinion, Metson early on and Chris Read towards the end. Although, I've heard tell that his replacement at Gloucestershire when he was away on England duty, Reggie Williams, was also a fine keeper. I never saw him play but I used to hear from Gloucestershire supporters that they didn't lose a huge amount behind the stumps when Jack was away. Cack batter though.

That gap between Botham and Flintoff really was cavernous wasn't it? Put Ben Stokes in the sides between those two and England are a far, far better side. Not because he's much better than the other players in the team but because he would have balanced it out much better.

I've always said that the England team of the 90s wasn't THAT bad, they had a lot of very good to excellent players. The problem was that all the other teams at the time (apart from NZ and Zimbabwe) had at least two or three legendary, all-time great players in their teams. Ambrose, Walsh, Lara, Tendulkar, Dravid, Kumble, Donald, Kallis, Pollock, Muralitharan, de Silva, Wasim, Waqar, Inzamam and all the freaks that Australia had back then. England had players like Atherton, Stewart, Smith, Thorpe, Fraser, Gough etc. Players that together would have been more than competitive at most times in Test history - including recently, a 26-year-old Atherton would have walked into the England team in the last seven or eight years and would have probably been their best batter. But against a glut of some of the greatest players that ever played the game they fell short. Being able to put a Botham/Flintoff/Stokes in at 6 wouldn't have matched those other teams for raw talent but at least they could have had Stewart just opening the batting, put Jack behind the stumps and been able to afford to pick someone like Tufnell even on a green-top at Edgbaston in May.

Instead, we had the four-man Trundle-Train as the main attack supplemented by a bits-and-pieces player at 6 who could *potentially* score a rapid fire century and take 5 for not many but in reality would score a tortuous 35 and take 2 for loads.

 

[blockerdave]

Streaming some more.

Afternoon session, day 3. I've a big lead, but the way the AI bats 4th inns I reckon I want 70-100 more at least

 

[blockerdave]

well, that didn't go to plan.

 

[Mouseydread]

The only players on the county scene that I saw who could even come close to Russell's ability as a keeper were, in my opinion, Metson early on and Chris Read towards the end. Although, I've heard tell that his replacement at Gloucestershire when he was away on England duty, Reggie Williams, was also a fine keeper. I never saw him play but I used to hear from Gloucestershire supporters that they didn't lose a huge amount behind the stumps when Jack was away. Cack batter though.

That gap between Botham and Flintoff really was cavernous wasn't it? Put Ben Stokes in the sides between those two and England are a far, far better side. Not because he's much better than the other players in the team but because he would have balanced it out much better.

I've always said that the England team of the 90s wasn't THAT bad, they had a lot of very good to excellent players. The problem was that all the other teams at the time (apart from NZ and Zimbabwe) had at least two or three legendary, all-time great players in their teams. Ambrose, Walsh, Lara, Tendulkar, Dravid, Kumble, Donald, Kallis, Pollock, Muralitharan, de Silva, Wasim, Waqar, Inzamam and all the freaks that Australia had back then. England had players like Atherton, Stewart, Smith, Thorpe, Fraser, Gough etc. Players that together would have been more than competitive at most times in Test history - including recently, a 26-year-old Atherton would have walked into the England team in the last seven or eight years and would have probably been their best batter. But against a glut of some of the greatest players that ever played the game they fell short. Being able to put a Botham/Flintoff/Stokes in at 6 wouldn't have matched those other teams for raw talent but at least they could have had Stewart just opening the batting, put Jack behind the stumps and been able to afford to pick someone like Tufnell even on a green-top at Edgbaston in May.

Instead, we had the four-man Trundle-Train as the main attack supplemented by a bits-and-pieces player at 6 who could *potentially* score a rapid fire century and take 5 for not many but in reality would score a tortuous 35 and take 2 for loads.

Interesting read. I think England had talented players without having a superstar, I feel however they lacked as a team competitive edge.

That's not to say Atherton, Stewart, Goughie, Judgie didn't want to win, they at times as a team lacked belief, and ruthlessness and vision from selectors evidence as I recall being spectacular collapses and someone like Jack Russell being left out at his peak.

Two of the best talents were Mark Ramprakash and Graham Hick. Ramprakash was one of the most technically gifted players of the era but along with Hick struggled, with the mentality to handle Test cricket, though Hick did get better towards the end of his Test career.

I feel under better management and stronger captaincy the talent that had been there would have performed better. Nas Hussein was part of this group but as soon as he got the reigns along with Duncan Fletcher, England developed much better as a Test Team with some if the players mentioned above.

Love your cricket replay!

 

[blockerdave]

Interesting read. I think England had talented players without having a superstar, I feel however they lacked as a team competitive edge.

That's not to say Atherton, Stewart, Goughie, Judgie didn't want to win, they at times as a team lacked belief, and ruthlessness and vision from selectors evidence as I recall being spectacular collapses and someone like Jack Russell being left out at his peak.

Two of the best talents were Mark Ramprakash and Graham Hick. Ramprakash was one of the most technically gifted players of the era but along with Hick struggled, with the mentality to handle Test cricket, though Hick did get better towards the end of his Test career.

I feel under better management and stronger captaincy the talent that had been there would have performed better. Nas Hussein was part of this group but as soon as he got the reigns along with Duncan Fletcher, England developed much better as a Test Team with some if the players mentioned above.

Love your cricket replay!

i really think bowling we were let down by lack of consistency of selection. Gus Fraser had troubles with injuries but also when fit wasn’t always picked. Malcolm was destroyed by Illingworth’s tinkering... the horses for courses picks like Mike Smith, Simon Brown etc... if I get to 92 vs Pakistan one match the seam attack is led by Tim Munton and and Neil Mallender.

 

[T.J.Hooker]

Whenever Illingworth's name comes up I think of how he "managed" Robin Smith and I get very, very cross.

Illingworth took players who were - at their best - capable of world class performances, and magnified their weaknesses instead. I don't really understand how his coaching stint didn't end up with him head first in the dressing room toilet with a tabasco suppository.

 

[blockerdave]

Streaming more of the chase

 

[blockerdave]

So, heroics from Taylor and Jones sees Australia home by 3 wickets.

Be tough for England to pick themselves up from here.

Match was memorable for one incident though, paging @Langeveldt @WealeyH and @wasteyouryouth

 

[Ed Smith]

i really think bowling we were let down by lack of consistency of selection. Gus Fraser had troubles with injuries but also when fit wasn’t always picked. Malcolm was destroyed by Illingworth’s tinkering... the horses for courses picks like Mike Smith, Simon Brown etc... if I get to 92 vs Pakistan one match the seam attack is led by Tim Munton and and Neil Mallender.

I reckon you're bang on. A lot of the bowling was utter dog in the early to mid 90s

 

[T.J.Hooker]

It still baffles me how Russell kept getting dropped because his batting apparently wasn't good enough. Ok, he was no Alec Stewart with the bat but he was as good as if not better than Ian Healy

I was surprised to see how similar his average was to Healy, when I checked.

Russell's 128 in the 89 Ashes was a gritty, fighting test knock in a series where England's batting was badly short of grit. He was England's player of the series, and such a brilliant keeper. The leg side stumping off Gladstone Small in 90/91 is one of my top test dismissals of all time. Why would they not want that guy in the side?

Stewart was a better bat when he wasn't keeping, and Russell was an ideal partner for someone like Robin Smith, either deep into an innings where Smith is trying to kick on to a big score or fighting a rearguard action.

 

[blockerdave]

I was surprised to see how similar his average was to Healy, when I checked.

Russell's 128 in the 89 Ashes was a gritty, fighting test knock in a series where England's batting was badly short of grit. He was England's player of the series, and such a brilliant keeper. The leg side stumping off Gladstone Small in 90/91 is one of my top test dismissals of all time. Why would they not want that guy in the side?

Stewart was a better bat when he wasn't keeping, and Russell was an ideal partner for someone like Robin Smith, either deep into an innings where Smith is trying to kick on to a big score or fighting a rearguard action.

difference was the Aussies, even before the emergence of Warne and later McGrath, could always put out a competitive 4 man attack, which England struggled with. So in the absence of a “new Botham” we always dropped Jack and made Stewie keep.