Planetcricket Journalism Contest No.1: Jones v Read - Winner: Puddleduck

[barmyarmy]

Members were asked to vote for a suitable topic and then submit articles to be voted on anonymously.
This thread will contain the articles and a poll; any discussion of the articles, which one you voted for etc should be in the original thread.

The first topic to be written about was "Jones vs Read". The articles follow:


Article number 1 - Treva


"The long disputed decision of who should play as England?s test and One
Day keeper is still going on with Geraint Jones and Chris Read the men in
the mix. I will discuss for and against argues for both players and my
overall verdict of who should be England's starting wicketkeeper.

Geraint Jones, the Papua New Guinea Wicket Keeper made his test debut for
England in April 2004 against the West Indies in the 4th Test match. He
replaced Chris Read who had scored a run of low scores. 13,3 and 20
respectfully had been his 3 scores in the 3 innings he had played in.
Geraint Jones was a particular favourite of Fletcher's because of his
ability to bat as well as keep. He hit 38 and 10 not out on debut.
Although his debut was not a winning cause he had witnessed a terrific
batting performance from Brian Lara who made a world record amount of runs
scored in a test match innings by making 400 and taking his team to 751-5
dec. Jones made his first century against New Zealand at Headingly making
100 exactly off 146 balls including 15 fours and 1 six. Since then Geraint
Jones has not made any really big scores and his place continued to be
under threat as a few poor performances with the gloves called for Read to
be the keeper for the 2005 Ashes. Jones was picked and at Trent Bridge he
showed all of England what he could do scoring 85 in a massive 167 run
partnership with Andrew Flintoff to secure a big chance of going 2-1 up in
the series against Australia. Since then he continued to have poor
performances with the bat and gloves and was dropped in the 3rd test match
against Pakistan in August 2006 for Chris Read. Jones has shown that he
can bat on a few occasions but he needs to be more consistent to book his
place in the side. His glove work continues to improve and he is rapidly
catching up with Chris Read in that department.
Geraint Jones has not made any really big scores and his place continued
to be under threat as a few poor performances with the gloves called for
Read to be the keeper for the 2005 Ashes. Jones was picked and at Trent
Bridge he showed all of England what he could do scoring 85 in a massive
167 run partnership with Andrew Flintoff to secure a big chance of going
2-1 up in the series against Australia. Since then he continued to have
poor performances with the bat and gloves and was dropped in the 3rd test
match against Pakistan in August 2006 for Chris Read. Jones has shown
that he can bat on a few occasions but he needs to be more consitant to
book his place in the side. His glove work continues to improve and he is
rapidly catching up with Chris Read in that department.

Chris Read, born in Devon got his first England cap in 1999 against New
Zealand in the 1st test. He made 1, but picked for his keeping, he showed
his skills as he took 7 catches and 1 stumping. Since then he has taken
30 catches and 5 stumpings in just 12 matches. He has had to battle for
places with one of the best wicketkeepers Alec Stewart and now Geraint
Jones and has found it tough going at international level. But at county
level he has blow everyone away with 495 catches in just 171 matches and
scored 6790 runs at 31.14 in First class matches. Overall at domestic
level he has taken 709 catches and 63 stumpings. But his batting is what
has kept him out of the England squad and he will need to step up a gear
at international level if he wants to get that number 1 spot at wicket
keeper for England.

Now after looking at stats, performances and watching them both I have
come to my opinion about the two players and most importantly who I
believe should have the number 1 spot as England's wicketkeeper. Jones
has great potential and batting skill. But he needs to be consistent with
both bat and gloves to enable him to be come a class keeper. Read is one
of the best keepers in the world but has played very poorly at
international level and his batting is serverly lacking patience,
composure and resistance against most of the top bowlers. Overall I have
come to the conclusion that Geraint Jones should be England's number 1
keeper. He has improved immensly with the gloves since his debut back in
2004 and is certainly showing how good he can be. His batting, although
lacks consistancy is very good technically and has showed more than once
how crucial he can be down at number 7."

 

[barmyarmy]

Article number 2 - duded64

"There has been one question that has plagued mankind for millions of years, 'How was the world created?'. There are two main theories on this case, the big bang and the other is the theory of evolution. This can be compared to the wicket keeping scenario that England are currently in. Geraint Jones is the 'big bang' out of the two, he has always been a good wicket keeper and has been useful with the bat but has pretty much stayed at the same quality since his introduction to the team, although he has increased in skill there is only a slight difference. On the other hand you have Chris Read the 'evolution? wicket-keeper. He started out playing for England but then he wasn?t good enough so he was removed from the squad however he's gone back to his county and has evolved and come back a much stronger player.

Now getting onto the big question 'who deserves the gloves?' In my opinion ever since Jones was removed from the squad after breaking his finger against Sri Lanka the decision had already been made. Fletcher said that he thought Jones' batting wasn?t good enough but however I interpret this in another way I think this was saying that he?s finally confident that Jones was good enough to keep in the ashes and to put him into the county circuit so he could get some runs and build confidence. With this decision made Fletcher decided to bring in Read with the theory that he wouldn?t play anyway but may as well bring him in while Jones went and got some confidence for his county. Then it came to the ICC CHAMPIONS TROPHY, Read was once again picked as first choice wicket keeper and left Geraint Jones in England again. This again being assumed was another opportunity to take the pressure of Geraint Jones and to allow him to improve his batting in the nets. Once the ashes came around Geraint Jones had regained the gloves and improved his batting slightly and in fletchers eyes he was ready to go to war with Australia.
Looking back on the decision to remove Jones from the team in the first place I really wonder why Fletcher decided to do it, at the point he was removed he was playing the best he had for a long time and Read was settled playing for his county. Its almost mind-boggling for me as I see no reason at all why Fletcher would remove his 'favoured' keeper from the team to bring in a keeper who it seemed he had no intention to play in the ashes anyway. It really gives me the feeling of if it aint broke then why fix it?
Now getting onto the statistical side of the two keepers, Jones started with a high batting average and has been slowing getting lower and lover for England, on the other side Read started with a low average that has been slowly rising each game and looked dangerous in the games he played in the summer being second top scorer in both English innings. Jones averages 25.80 at Test level but averages more, as you would expect in first class cricket with a respectable average of 31.43. However Chris Read averages 20.31 at test cricket, an average that rised after playing this summer, in First class he averages 31.14. However when it comes to catching and stumping in just 13 tests for England Chris read has taken 37 catches and 5 stumpings. On the flip side Jones has taken 120 catches and 5 stumping in 32 matches. This shows that Read knows how to stump and that he gets on averages less catches per game but maybe the opportunities just didn?t come in those games. So what exactly does this show? It theory the stats show that there?s not much to pick between the two wicket keepers on the batting side but however on the actual keeping front Read is a slightly better wicket keeper. On the stats alone it gives the impression that the coach should pick the keeper on whoever is better at the time or to keep it the same.
To draw a conclusion from this situation is very tough, and after pondering over this decision for a long time all I can decide is that there is not much of a difference at all between the two players. If the coach wants to pick the best wicketkeeper then I would go with Chris Read but if he wants to pick the best wicketkeeper batsman then id go for Geraint Jones, as it appears that the current coach is obsessed with even the number 11 being a great batsman then it looks like Jones will be keeping for England for the near future. But also Fletcher could have saved himself a lot of hassle by never picking Read this summer, Jones was at his best so like the saying goes 'if it aint broken don?t fix it' I think Fletcher tried to fix a problem that realistically wasn?t there and that he could of made it much easier for himself and the team by, excuse the pun, keeping it the same."

 

[barmyarmy]

Article number 3 - barmyarmy

"For much of English cricket history a battle has raged between the purists and the realists over who should keep wicket. On one side of the divide stood the men who opined that the best gloveman should have the job regardless of his batting, and on the other stood those who countered that a keeper who could score hundreds was a must. For those of us watching the Jones/Read debate played out now there are many echoes of the past debates between supporters of Russell and Stewart; Taylor, Knott and Parks; Ames and Wood etcetera. Despite this we should not kid ourselves. The situation is simply not the same.

The relative arguments go somewhat like this. England should pick a pure keeper who can take the difficult chances, make the stumpings and prevent the byes. There is nothing worse than for a bowler to have all his efforts in inducing an edge reduced to nothing by a poor piece of keeping. Equally, with a sharp gloveman behind the stumps, opposition batsmen tend to be noticeably more reticent about advancing down the track. The only way (save declarations) to win a cricket match is to take 20 wickets. Teams simply can?t afford to miss so many chances they effectively end up taking 25+ wickets rather than 20.
In recent times England have been inclined to the more defensive ploy of hoping that the runs given away by poor keeping will be made up by good batting. Alec Stewart averaged a shade under 40 and scored 15 hundreds. Read and Jones have just 1 between them and average 20 and 25 respectively. Interestingly Stewart?s average was lower when he kept and on occasion he played as a specialist opener with Jack Russell taking the gloves. A batsman who can score heavily and might miss a few chances has been the favoured approach ? Marcus Trescothick even being given the gloves on several occasions in one-day cricket.

What is intriguing about the Jones/Read debate is that the goalposts (or should that be stumps) are now moving. It is no longer possible to classify Jones as a batsman who can?t keep very well as the improvement in his keeping has been accompanied by a proportional decline in his batting. Read too has made keeping errors and can no longer be adjudged to be a vastly superior gloveman. What rankles for many in this affair is the perception that Jones has been given more than his fair chance. When Read was brought in at the backend of the Pakistan series we were given to understand that he would be given a fair run in the team ? as Jones had been. To be dropped after 2 tests in which he performed adequately on the basis of his one-day form seemed for many like a return to the chopping and changing England selection policies of old. Whilst Read?s technique may appear shakier and less able to deal with an Ashes series to the selectors than Jones? there is no denying that Jones is not the batsman he was when he made his maiden (and still only) century against New Zealand. It might be considered strange in this situation that despite the shortcomings of both the touring keepers the other possibilities are not seriously considered as alternatives. Matt Prior has shown himself to be not up to international bowling, James Foster continues to languish at Essex wondering what he did to upset the selectors and Tim Ambrose, once the next big thing in English cricket (and incidentally another Australian), has yet to fulfil his considerable early promise.

It does appear then that this debate is no longer along the lines of Stewart vs Russell. Instead it is Russell vs Russell and frankly some of us would rather have Stewart. If there was a keeper/batsman who could actually score centuries and dominate opposition bowling attacks there is no doubt England would pick him. As it is they are forced to plump for the least worst option; hardly an inspiring selection policy.
So where now then for England?s beleaguered selectors? If we take it as read that the neither keeper is going to justify his place as a batsman what options remain for England? Recall Foster? Give the gloves to Collingwood? Show Geraint Jones never-ending DVD?s of his early batting for his country?
The one thing for sure is that the problem isn?t going to go away simply by ignoring it. The purists and realists may continue their shouting match but their views have become increasingly irrelevant and are doing nothing to move us forward."

 

[barmyarmy]

Article number 4 - Adarsh

"The quest to find the perfect wicket keeper seems to have existed for decades, but in fact started in 2004. It?s the question that starts people talking, journalists pondering and Duncan Fletcher scratching his head. Two years on, the question still remains ? Who deserves to be in the England team?

Well, before we answer that question, let?s think about what are the required criteria for a modern day wicket keeper. Does he have to be the best glove man, or does he have to be the best batsman in the country who can merely wear them? Wicketkeepers across other test nations have set the bench mark, whether it?s the dashing styles of Gilchrist and Dhoni or the pure class of Sangakkara, they are expected to be an allrounder; to provide safety and assurance with the gloves and to contribute towards the team?s total.

What do the statistics say? Well, they all point towards Geraint Jones. He?s the man with the higher batting average and the higher rate of dismissals per match. So, what is this debate all about, cry the Jones fans. Behind the veil of statistics, there lies a hidden truth. Jones has dropped far too many catches and fumbled far too many stumpings that, if a list was compiled, would be longer than Pinocchio?s nose when reading the Da Vinci Code.

On the other hand, Chris Read provides assurance. No longer will Harmison have sleepless nights dreaming about the day he got Langer out the first ball, only to be woken up because Jones had dropped it. While he may not have taken as many catches and stumpings, it?s not his fault the opportunities haven?t come his way. As a wicketkeeper, you don?t often create the chances by yourself. The reason that Read isn?t in the team is the fact that he often forgets to hold the bat the right way around, or so it seems. He had become the stuff of a legend when he ducked to a slower ball as a ball from Chris Cairns shattered the stumps. No ? Read isn?t a brilliant batsman. His average shows that. However, as I hear the Read fans shout out, he did have a pretty solid test match against Pakistan. There?s an unwritten law in cricket ? you don?t drop a guy unless he plays poorly. Well, Fletcher sure did rubbish that one. Chris Read does have the right to complain.

The reason for picking Jones can only be known by Fletcher. The decision to drop read had everyone talking. Nah, said the Jones fans, this is part of Fletcher?s master plan. By picking Jones, arguably the better batsman, England strengthens their lower order, allowing Monty Panesar to play!

But that didn?t happen either. Duncan Fletcher has picked the man whom he deems fits better into this England side. And that means someone who contributes an average of 30 runs with the bat, and could well cost England the Ashes, so be it. Harmison won?t be sleeping again."

 

[barmyarmy]

Article number 5 - Skateboarder

"Ever since the England team dropped wicket keeper Geraint Jones for the third test match against Pakistan at Headingley in early August 2006. The Kent player had suffered a broken finger in the previous test match but the selectors claimed he was left out for his poor batting from rather than his injury.
Four months later, things have taken a surprising turn. Geraint Jones has been wicket keeper for the first two Ashes tests, and shows no signs of being dropped. His counterpart must be disappointed, despite saying he holds no grudge with his Welsh-named equal. For years, people have claimed Read is the best gloveman in the land. For years, England has been struggling in the spin department but not in the wicket keeper department. They have a strange blessing in this respect. Is it necessarily a nice headache to have though?
Geraint Jones possesses a character in the team that his Nottinghamshire pal would struggle to recreate. During the success Ashes campaign of 2005, despite his innings with Andrew Flintoff at Trent Bridge, he did very little performance wise but used his character and spirit to push the team forward in times when they needed it most. Who can forget pulling off a stunning catch on that final day at Old Trafford off a deflection?
Read?s 2006 has been one of his better years. In 1999 he ducked under a slower ball that bowled him out from Chris Cairns, and had an average similar to Ashley Giles after a round in a spin dryer. After some great glovework, improved batting on the county scene and outdoing Sussex rival Matt Prior, England?s fine chain of wicket keepers continues? and with Worcestershire?s Steven Davies waiting in the wings that doesn?t look like it?s going to stop either.
Jones has his critics as well. According to these blind, ruthless people he couldn?t catch a cold in an outbreak. I personally find these views mindless, unforgiving and downright ridiculous. Give the guy a chance, he looks more assured at the crease than Chris Read and is improving all the time with his wicket keeping. As for how long it will be before the race is over and one man falls away from the limelight, only time will tell."

 

[barmyarmy]

Article number 6 - Puddleduck

"There have been more than a few contentious issues leading up and into this Ashes series down under. Monty Panesar versus Ashley Giles. Four or Five bowlers. Flintoff or Strauss to captain. Lastly, but certainly not the least important, Geraint Jones and Chris Read, who should keep wicket for England?

Let us start by being naive and believing that stats are the only benchmark for a cricketer. In Test cricket Jones has the superior batting average. He averages just under 5 runs more than Read at just under 25. To his name he has a century and six fifties, 5 more than his counterpart. In First Class cricket, Read averages a minuscule amount more at 31, yet having played almost a third the number of tests, has almost certainly faced lesser opposition for that average.

So that's the stats. Geraint Jones averages more with the bat surely he is the obvious choice for England wicket-keeper? As many of us know however, ?There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics?

In the case of Geraint Jones against Chris Read it is worth bearing in mind that for nearly all of Chris Reads early tests he was merely a young lad thrust into a side and asked to replace one of the great wicket-keeper batsman in Alec Stewart. After being axed, Read returned once more when Stewart finally hung his gloves for good.

His first stop was off to the Caribbean and after a fairly poor tour with the bat, he was dropped for the second time before the final test despite keeping superbly for the entirety of the tour. The man stepping in? Geraint Jones on the back of a fine season in country cricket that had bought the 27 year old over 1000 runs at 50 for Kent. A late bloomer, he was fast-tracked straight into the England team and after a good start with the bat it seemed the answer to England's desire to field a keeper that could contribute centuries had arrived.

It seemed so easy when against a New Zealand attack missing Shane Bond, Jones did indeed knock up his first test 100. Averaging close to 40 for much of his first year and a half in test cricket England's decision to drop Read looked every bit the correct one, here was a player that could fill the void left by Stewart, and give England a lower order to rival any in the world. Despite the runs, the glovework was without question sloppy. Standing up to the spinner Jones' technique seemed poor, and he had developed an alarming tendency to go at the ball one handed, reducing his catching to somewhat of a lottery. However as long as runs were being scored, and the England bowlers were creating chances the odd dropped catch was easily brushed over.

Despite an excellent start to his career, things were not getting easier for Jones and as his career wore on the average continued to drop, leading to a dreadful run of form that in his last 10 innings has seen him post the following scores - 10, 1, 33, 19, 8, 16, 18, 6, 19, 4 at an average of just 13. Ironically his keeping seemed to improve but the criteria for being judged as wicket-keeper in the modern day is runs, and Jones had failed to produce them for over a year.

Elsewhere Chris Read, having been told to return to County Cricket and work on his batting had seemingly done just that. Averaging close to 50 in the County Championship for 3 consecutive seasons and keeping continuously well the calls for Read continued to gather momentum with every Jones failure. Finally, with two tests still to go in Pakistan's tour of England he was given his third chance as England wicket-keeper. An unbeaten 150* against Pakistan for England A in a tour game had pushed his name right into the frame and after recording his highest test score, and then first 50 it seemed as though finally Chris Read would get an extended run in the English test team.

Selected along with Jones for the Ashes tour of Australia, one can only imagine what the Bristol born keeper must have felt when Fletcher announced that Jones would be England keeper for the entire series. Despite being sent back to Kent to score runs, and for the most part coming up short, a man who had failed with the bat for the last year of his career was back in the team, and Chris Read, despite averaging over 40 in his brief return to Test Cricket, was once again left to carry the drinks.

The question is who is the right choice? Without doubt Fletcher considers it to be Jones. Technically his batting is more solid, his technique looks less fallible, and his standing in the England dressing room is clearly high. Read on the other hand can come across as unorthodox, says less behind the stumps and has a reputation for sometimes being difficult to work with. In reality there is little to choose between them, Read is without doubt the better gloveman, whilst Jones by all accounts should be the better batsman and at the crease always looks like he should score more runs.

However the bottom line is that he hasn't, and performances must be taken into account. Jones has had an appalling year, and showed no signs of improvement when sent back to Kent. The fact of the matter is the man in possession was Chris Read, and after a good series against Pakistan he has done nothing wrong to lose his place. By the same reasoning, and indeed using the rather useful tool known as hindsight, Jones has done nothing to retain that place, and even with himself back in the side has done nothing to prove his selection was justified.

We can only speculate as to whether Read would have scored any more runs, but we know for a fact that in his only two tests in the last year he outscored Jones' last 10 innings, we also know for a fact that he had some form in his last test. It set a dangerous precedent when Jones walked back into the side without earning back his place at the expense of someone who had done nothing wrong to lose their place, and whilst it has been overshadowed by some of the more key selection issues on this tour, it is almost certainly another in what seems to be a growing line of curious decisions."

 

[barmyarmy]

And a final reminder not to post in this thread (or your post will be deleted). I can't close it otherwise we can't vote on the poll.
All discussion goes here.