Pakistan vs England in United Arab Emirates - October/November 2015

[richowebbo]

Stephen Parry has to play in T20 World Cup. Far superior limited overs spinner to Rashid. We don't need the extra batting. The 8 and 9 spots can go to people like Woakes, Broad, Plunkett, Jordan and Willey.

Only ever seen him play once. Don't know much about him.

 

[richowebbo]

We are seeing the results of a coach having extra powers here mate... so the format at-present currently doesn't suit our team in my opinion. Your view is respected. I will differ with the saying that Cricket is quite different than football/rugby, It is a 14 hours constant on-ground job with field strategies, bowling changes, making different calls etc, As the Great Imran Khan said "Cricket is a chess of sports" It is the captain who has to extract the best results from his players so captain should have more say in selection as well, His call should be final. It has a lot more ground strategy then backdoor things. As we can see in history of Cricket, Captain is always more to share the onus relative to coach.

I think you are right to a point. However, my issue comes that because you spend so long with the players, it can be hard for a captain to separate their role as captain and their role as mates. Bell is a prime example of this. Cook obviously wants Bell in, so despite the fact he clearly inst anywhere near the standard for test cricket, he gets picked.

 

[Rehan_24]

Pathetic performance by Pakistan. It was kinda expected right after seeing the team combination. This result is a result of egoistic and brainless coaching with highly in-experienced captaincy.

Just two to three days back, Imran Khan said in a sports interview that M. Irfan is a kind of bowler that Had he played under me I would have win matches for Pakistan by using him alone.

When you do injustice and bring players and make them captains who don't even deserve to be in the ODI side, things suffer. I believe that intentions and actions play a bigger part in winning matches. Nothing is bigger than unity and working for your country rather than satisfying your own egos.

Good Job England

 

[Rehan_24]

I think you are right to a point. However, my issue comes that because you spend so long with the players, it can be hard for a captain to separate their role as captain and their role as mates. Bell is a prime example of this. Cook obviously wants Bell in, so despite the fact he clearly inst anywhere near the standard for test cricket, he gets picked.

I agree with you, the captain has to be strong for it. Its his job to think first about the team role than friends. You are here to win matches and that should be first priority. I remember, One of the great captains Imran Khan dropped Majid Khan his first cousin after the consistent poor performance by him, Due to that decision there was a fight in the family but Imran stood firm on his decisions.

 

[Rehan_24]

Not following this game, but these Vaughan tweets popped up in the twitter feed -

Now run outs can happen ... anything particularly suspicious about the run outs?

The only suspicious thing here is the captaincy war which was bound to happen after they named Azhar Ali as captain. It isn't suspicious for many Pak fans

 

[richowebbo]

I agree with you, the captain has to be strong for it. Its his job to think first about the team role than friends. You are here to win matches and that should be first priority. I remember, One of the great captains Imran Khan dropped Majid Khan his first cousin after the consistent poor performance by him, Due to that decision there was a fight in the family but Imran stood firm on his decisions.

Interesting story, was not aware of it! Imran Khan was great!

It's not the same, but similar, but I'm a vocal coach and I work with my Wife's choir. Her Mum and Sister both sing with the choir and a lot of them are my friends, and when I first started coaching them, quite a few of them disliked that I wasn't friendly with them when coaching (preferential treatment, praising them or ignoring their wrong-doings etc.). It took them a while to realise that what I was saying wasn't personal, it was to make them better at singing and improve the choir (my Wife included!). Point is, it can ruffle a few feathers putting aside relationships, and whilst it's important to build them, you have to be tough some times.

In England's case, I don't think Cook is at that point yet. I think he is getting there though. I have spoken a lot on these forums about their being an England Manager, rather than head coach, who takes responsibility of picking the teams. This would be mainly to get rid of the horrible "old boy's club" that is currently our selection panel. That being said, I think Andrew Strauss has done a decent job so far, although is handling of the Peter Moores situation wasn't great.

 

[PokerAce]

On a general conflict of interest note, I believe that there cannot possibly a captain who will play his friend or relative, at the expense of the team. Its just some mischief makers who when they disagree with a selection look at things from a conflict angle.

Proximity with the captain if anything makes things more difficult for both the person under scrutiny and the captain.

I will give the example of Shukhar Dhawan from earlier in the year, when he was woefully out of form, but Dhoni kept backing him and backing him, and ultimately Dhawan went on to have a stellar World Cup and was among the top 5 highest run scorers in the tournament.

Now since Dhoni and Dhawan are not relatives and not known to be great friends, it was easier for Dhoni to back Dhawan, as no one could attribute ulterior motives to Dhoni in that regard. Had Dhoni and Dhawan been business partners or great friends or relatives, it would have been far harder for Dhoni to back Dhawan, as people would then have not stopped talking about how Dhoni was looking out for a friend over the team.

Its the same situation with all captains. I find it hard to believe that any captain will put an individual ahead of success and the team. Just that where there is that extra relationship between the captain and the player under pressure who is being backed, it just gives the mischief makers room to have a go.

 

[Markkkkk]

On a general conflict of interest note, I believe that there cannot possibly a captain who will play his friend or relative, at the expense of the team. Its just some mischief makers who when they disagree with a selection look at things from a conflict angle.

Proximity with the captain if anything makes things more difficult for both the person under scrutiny and the captain.

I will give the example of Shukhar Dhawan from earlier in the year, when he was woefully out of form, but Dhoni kept backing him and backing him, and ultimately Dhawan went on to have a stellar World Cup and was among the top 5 highest run scorers in the tournament.

Now since Dhoni and Dhawan are not relatives and not known to be great friends, it was easier for Dhoni to back Dhawan, as no one could attribute ulterior motives to Dhoni in that regard. Had Dhoni and Dhawan been business partners or great friends or relatives, it would have been far harder for Dhoni to back Dhawan, as people would then have not stopped talking about how Dhoni was looking out for a friend over the team.

Its the same situation with all captains. I find it hard to believe that any captain will put an individual ahead of success and the team. Just that where there is that extra relationship between the captain and the player under pressure who is being backed, it just gives the mischief makers room to have a go.

So Stuart Binny does deserve to be in the team...

 

[PokerAce]

So Stuart Binny does deserve to be in the team...

Thats poor selection not favoritism ... not a case of Kohli being best buds with Binny and so playing him ahead of everyone else.

Kohli (mistakenly according to me), felt that Binny would add something to the team, so he selected him. But its still not a case of deliberately picking someone ahead of a more deserving player just because the captain is best buds with the guy.

You can accuse Kohli of making a poor selection, not favoritism. Also with all due respect, even Binny deserves to be playing test cricket more than all the walking wickets that presently make up the SA test XI in India.

Would you accuse Amla of deliberately putitng the team interest on the back burner in selecting Vilas in the starting XI, because they are best buds?

Sometimes a captain backs a player ... doesn't mean that he has a personal interest in that selection. If no one ever backed an under performing player then that would be the day.

 

[Markkkkk]

Yea that was a joke so...

 

[stefan]

Thats poor selection not favoritism ... not a case of Kohli being best buds with Binny and so playing him ahead of everyone else.

Kohli (mistakenly according to me), felt that Binny would add something to the team, so he selected him. But its still not a case of deliberately picking someone ahead of a more deserving player just because the captain is best buds with the guy.

You can accuse Kohli of making a poor selection, not favoritism. Also with all due respect, even Binny deserves to be playing test cricket more than all the walking wickets that presently make up the SA test XI in India.

Would you accuse Amla of deliberately putitng the team interest on the back burner in selecting Vilas in the starting XI, because they are best buds?

Sometimes a captain backs a player ... doesn't mean that he has a personal interest in that selection. If no one ever backed an under performing player then that would be the day.

Amla has no vote in selection, neither does the coach when it comes to SA. They can merely give their opinions, the selectors pick the side and needs to be approved by the CEO.

No idea whether Kohli/Dhoni has a vote or not.

Said it before the tests starting QDK should have been there ahead of villas as he is the better player irrespective of the odd form slump.

 

[PokerAce]

^ See the point is not to turn the spotlight on Binny or Vilas or any specific player.

I am talking about a general principle that I refuse to believe that any captain can be accused of favoritism. No captain will deliberately play who he knows doesn't deserve his place, because they are related or best friends.

Sure captains will back some players, and sometimes the players they back will let them down. However backing a player who eventually turns out to be a let down is not the same as favoritism.

Players need backing, and captains will back players who they feel will help the team in the long run. Its the mischief makers who then aim to twist this backing into favoritism, or the captain selecting the player for ulterior motives. No Captain will sabotage his side, and his legacy by playing players who he knows don't belong there.

 

[PokerAce]

Yea that was a joke so...

It didnt read like a joke, however if it was then yes the response was over the line.

 

[cricket_icon]

England have done quite well in the ODI series, as I fully expected them to and I think they'll win it 3-1. My issue is, a lot of the England team will be flattered by a mediocre at best Pakistan side. No Junaid Khan, a batting order without an umph and yet England have still struggled at times. Against the spin, they have often looked lost and they haven't consolidated good starts with big scores. I'm chuffed that Taylor is doing well, he's been waiting in the wings for a while now. I feel that Buttler's time may be limited and I don't think there's a captain in England who knows how to use Rashid so he might have to go too.

 

[bigred]

Does anyone think Stuart Broad should be picked in limited over tournaments even though he's rested for the majority of one day series'? I think I'd pick him. Similar to the situation SA were in with Kallis towards the end of his career, where he barely pulled on a one day shirt unless it was a World Cup, champions trophy or world t20.