Latest news:


WELCOME TO THE MIDDLESEX ROOM, THE ONLY MESSAGE BOARD ON THE INTERNET DEDICATED TO MIDDLESEX CCC

Eating away over the winter


Goto Page: Previous123456Next
Current Page: 5 of 6
Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
Seaxe_man1 25 August, 2020 15:49
Exile in Stockport. Good post. At Chelmsford against a strong batting side and top spinner in Harmer. It will be a test of Mx mettle. They are also county champions.

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
Primrose Hillbilly 25 August, 2020 18:38
Err, ..... no, ..................Ft, you select a bowler to do a job for the side, according to how you read the situation as leading most effectively to a win - yes, ideally to take wickets, but by bowling in the context of what is best for the side, and according to the strategy.

To explain with examples :

So, you either keep it tight and help the seamers rotate and pick up wickets by maintaining the pressure, in the hope that they take a chance on you, or (usually second innings, but see First innings 2016 vs Durham) by giving it a bit more air and rip and bounce, as circumstances dictate, and maybe, .............gosh, who'd'a'thought it, folks, .............as agreed with the Skipper.

Real life examples : How many times was Edmonds taken off by both Gatting and Brearley, because he didn't comply with the plan, because he tossed it up and gave it some air and got driven, and was too pigheaded to desist.
By contrast, how many times was Emburey favoured as the first choice (and sole) spinner because he could and would do both jobs?

Don't read your posts enough to peg you as one of the rather pointlessly backwards looking,negative and boring anti Rayner lot, moaning about the past through 20 : 20 hindsight vision and England DNA enhanced glasses, but happy to - as they say - have gaslighted you as such, if that is what has been achieved.


Seaxeman, I'll deal briefly with the point I think you were trying to make : when Murtagh has a better C.C. batting average one recent season than M0rg0ne, the stats speak for his negligible contribution to our redball efforts, which is what I have focused on. The Facts.
What has reference to M0rg0ne got to do with a comparison between Rayner and whoever else? Do you, yourself, know why you brought that up, apart from the possibility that I have inveighed against one of your possible sacred cows?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 25/08/2020 18:48 by Primrose Hillbilly.

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
freddie tittlemouse 25 August, 2020 19:01
My take on Rayner is that he was an extremely important contributor to our championship winning season as a wicket taking bowler and useful no. 8 batsman. Thereafter, for whatever reason, his bowling and batting declined rapidly to the extent that in one season he had just about the worst bowling average in the country (for a regular bowler) and he batted like a no. 11. Eventually he was shunted off to Kent and Sowter, no 4 day bowler, became the prime spinner. Rayner's decline mirrored that of Middlesex
Don't ask me why it happened, but the facts show that it did. Maybe Patel should have been given more opportunities or maybe he was perceived as lacking commitment application and discipline. Maybe the coaching was poor. He certainly wasn't as bad a fielder as you insinuate and he had batting ability which might have developed.As we are none of us flies on the wall or crickets in the grass we don't know what goes on in the inner sanctums.

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
Seaxe_man1 25 August, 2020 19:47
Not in the least PH. We are talking different opinions from Mx fans. My point with Ollie which upsets you is that with the 2009 regime's Plan A there was no flexibility. As stated four seamers plus Ollie and that seldom if ever varied. On the seaming front not too bad as with form or injury reasonable chance for the back up. On the spin front not so. Hence few games over a long period for Patel. Difficult to improve under those circumstance. As Fred said there were signs of improvement. But I suspect his card was marked by then. Since Tufnell left around 2002/3 we have not had a home grown spinner in the first team on a regular basis. Those who were Smith Udal were brought in as was Rayner. On the Morgan front just pointing out you hold strong opinions. You won't agree. But for me little interest was shown in the spin department during the 2009 regime's era.

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
Bobstan 26 August, 2020 15:26
The Taunton pitch isn't a Bunsen. If it ever was why has Jack Leach been more successful in matches away from Taunton than in home games? There certainly was a long period of time when it was a batsman's paradise, but somehow that never seemed to be commented on by visiting coaches.

There is a new groundsman at Taunton, the former one now being at Southampton.

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
adelaide 26 August, 2020 16:42
Quote:
Bobstan
The Taunton pitch isn't a Bunsen. If it ever was why has Jack Leach been more successful in matches away from Taunton than in home games? There certainly was a long period of time when it was a batsman's paradise, but somehow that never seemed to be commented on by visiting coaches.
There is a new groundsman at Taunton, the former one now being at Southampton.

What are the corresponding comparisons for Bess and Van der Merwe?

Taunton's roadlike wickets were commented on unfavourably by many. I think Leach would have bowled plenty of overs on that unforgiving surface in his earlier years, which could help explain his home and away statistics but also arguably made him the more rounded bowler. I don't think anyone would argue against conditions which made for a fairer contest between bat and ball.

The transition to result wickets happened quite suddenly (under Chris Rogers?). There was the famous "What? Murtagh isn't playing? Let's move it to a barely prepared strip" case, then there seemed to be a spell where all bowlers got assistance, then some matches, when it suited Somerset, where the pitches were heavily in favour of Somerset's three spinners. Not Bunsens? No warnings or points deductions then?

Leaving aside Somerset's exemplary record on pitches, it had occurred to me that Somerset were a good example of adjusting your strategy to suit the players that you have and they undoubtedly have two very good spinners. If they had had mediocre spinners there is no way that such spin-friendly pitches would have been in use and probably no way that two, let alone three, would have been selected (they often select just one in away matches anyway).

So, Middlesex might well have started off with a strategy of using one spinner for containment but if they had seen enough in Patel as an attacking spinner they surely would have changed tack. If they didn't, was it because they were too stubborn to see his potential or because he genuinely wasn't quite there? After all, there was no rush to sign him when released. I should add that the wasn't helped by injury problems, nor perhaps (as a four day bowler) by playing in T20, as the demands on a spinner are so different.

I recognise that there is some circularity in this. If you don't believe in attacking spinners you do not take them on in the first place. I'd be surprised if the hierarchy had ever been that dogmatic. Any decent coach has to be flexible and to recognise what works when it is in front of them. The Hughton-Galvin partnership which was crucial to the early 80s Spurs team only came about by accident when someone was injured and Galvin, who had played the odd game on the right wing, played as a sub on the left. It worked, the manager went with it and the rest was cup history!

PH mentioned Phil Edmonds. I agree that he was an awkward character who did not take kindly to instruction but my recollection was that he was rarely omitted from the CC team. One day cricket was another matter but he and Emburey often choked the life out of opposition innings so he was on message then.

Anyway, fantastic comeback win against Sussex, viewed from afar as the storm was gathering off the Welsh coast. Murtagh never ceases to amaze while Andersson appears to have that happy knack of taking wickets with bad balls as well as good. Extras did us proud as well. We have been at worst competitive in each of the matches so far. If we can do the same against Essex, I'll be fairly happy.


Adelaide

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
Primrose Hillbilly 26 August, 2020 18:35
Your posts would have to pique my interest and excite me first, to upset me, Seaxeman.

I'm afraid I find the whole "2009 regime" riff a bit repetitive, self referential, negative and boring, if you must read my mind.

To me, it implies that the "2009 regime" - the First Team coaches - had loads of options, and had they taken, a'hem, a'hem, wiser counsel, all of this might have been avoided.

"2009 regime" - taps side of the nose meaningfully. Big sigh. "They were told they could come to me, but they didn't. Tsssk, tsssk. "

So, to examine this blame game of yours,

Can you prove that there were other spin options within the club - at either Second XI or development level - both viable and available, that the "2009 regime" spurned ?
Can you show there were other spinners available to recruit, that they turned down?
Assuming there were, can you show that they were approached, or even that their salary was nixed by the board?

That's a "No", to all three then.

So, it was a fairly typical county squad, with a bowling attack of rfm seamers, plus Rayner and Ravi as spinners. Did they have an express pace spearhead that might take wickets in bursts at the top of the order, and relieve pressure on whatever spinner we played ? - Another shake of the head.

Did they have a truly dominant batsman that could make enough runs fast enough to set a game up, so they could pick Ravi and risk him getting carted ? - Silly question, really.

So, unless I've missed something factual, and please point it out to me, I suggest the facts point to them making the best of what they had, and they didn't have much spin capacity with which to work, bring in, or bring on, even had they heeded the advice that might have been at their disposal, (which they didn't, more fools they). So ..................All their fault for not working a miracle.

However : good news !!!! As it's in the past, not much we can do about it either, and recent form seems to suggest we're over the high crimes and misdemeanours of that regime anyway.

Sowter Out. Walallawita In!

Hooray!



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 26/08/2020 19:36 by Primrose Hillbilly.

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
adelaide 26 August, 2020 22:43
The last time we regularly played two spinners, funnily enough, was in 2009, with Kartik and Udal. Kartik left at the end of that season for Somerset (obviously wanting to bowl on Bunsens). I think his star had waned with us a bit by then but I have no idea whether the Gang of 2009 wanted to keep him. Still, at least that meant he didn't have the chance to sully our reputation through mankading.


Adelaide

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
chunkyinargyll 27 August, 2020 08:34
Just realised-

Wrong thread!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 27/08/2020 08:46 by chunkyinargyll.

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
Seaxe_man1 27 August, 2020 11:38
You had the right words Adelaide, too stubborn, allied to a minimum interest in spin. The 2009 regime was devoid of any spin expertise in its ranks. Batting and seam. TMJ Smith moved on but still playing, to bring in Ollie Rayner. That remained the template for ten years. It therefore follows that alternatives were not thought essential.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 27/08/2020 11:54 by Seaxe_man1.

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
adelaide 27 August, 2020 12:41
Tom Smith has taken 78 first class wickets in 49 matches at an average of 50. At Glos he has primarily been what he was here, a limited overs bowler. Releasing him looks like one of the better decisions. Hard to work out what the Gang of 2009 was thinking but it seems plausible that they released him to give Ravi Patel room to develop, which would not suggest complete disinterest in spin.

You do seem to have a liking for rewriting history sometimes, as is evident on Another Thread!


Adelaide

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
Seaxe_man1 27 August, 2020 13:22
Rewriting history the flavour of the month. Statues toppling all over the place, empty plinths, plus the Proms and Land of Hope and Glory no more. Tom Smith. Certainly not a good decision on the white ball front. His successor was a walking wicket and in the field not the usual requirements applied.

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
adelaide 27 August, 2020 16:19
SM

I thought the discussion of the 2009 Gang's flaws was about spin in red ball, not white ball, as we usually fielded two plus Malan and sometimes Denly.

I do wonder whether bowling in T20 makes it more difficult to develop in the CC. In T20 the long hip outside off stump goes for one to the sweeper - success. In the CC it goes for four (or at any rate used to). The probing pitched up CC delivery is in the slot for the hitters in T20. Variation is key in T20; can someone who bowls in T20 really develop the metronomic accuracy of an Emburey? I think that is a general problem for English cricket, compounded by the eagerness of spinners to play T20 because of the money available in overseas league contracts.


Adelaide

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
Primrose Hillbilly 28 August, 2020 09:27
The ironic thing is that I believe Kartik (then aka "Special K" on here) was spotted at one ground towards the end of his time here, strolling round the boundary with an ice cream, asking Middle supporters whom he knew if they knew which one was "X", as he would like a word with him.

"X" was the nom de plume on here of a bloke not averse to dropping strong hints that he was close to the players, and privy to gossip the other side of the dressing room door.

He had let it be known on here that he knew for a fact that Special K had other offers from interested suitors, and was definitely off.

Unfortunately others had read these posts too.

So, when Special K rolled into the office to discuss an extension, he was informed that the Board already knew of his intentions, and had had no choice but to make alternative arrangements, and had already inked a deal with someone else. Thank you very much for your time with us, etc... etc..., fullsome tribute in the Annual Report guaranteed, blah, blah, blah, can you see your way out?

Red faces all round, as I believe they too had wished to extend, but there you go.

I believe that "X" was identified, and found to be a life member as well. He was, - again, I believe - summoned and given a very severe whigging, and told not to do anything like that again,or special measures would be invoked.

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
adelaide 28 August, 2020 10:46
PH

That's a great story but did the office really place so much faith in X's posts? OK, they might have found out independently that Kartik or his agent were sniffing around for other opportunities but so what? That is normal, or was by then. If they really wanted to offer Kartik an extension, why not do it and see what happens? If the office viewed considering opportunities elsewhere to be high level disloyalty, they were on a different planet.

I didn't think Kartik was as good as he thought he was (to adapt a phrase the hierarchy used about a later leaver) but that is just my opinion.


Adelaide

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
Primrose Hillbilly 28 August, 2020 13:18
Sigh.

I don't know how much credence the office placed, Adelaide, because a) I'm not a mind reader, b) these are all the details that I have and they happened in the order described (otherwise they wouldn't have happened the way they did - with me so far?), c) You might just be able get your mind round the idea that the office might be understandably reticent on this saga, so exactly how much faith they placed in the rumour may never see the light of day, d) assuming that anyone from that time is still there and can remember it to the detail you require.


From the version that I heard, Kartik was not looking for anything other than an extension to his current Middlesex contract, Adelaide - as per my "when Special K rolled into the office to discuss an extension" bit.

Certainly, what he told the office appears enough for them to realise they might have been misled by unsubstantiated rumours on here, (or just lent too much credence to them) contributing to them hiring someone whom they regarded as second best to the option of another year or so of Special K, hence why they called "X" in for a chat about not acting possibly against the interests of the club of which he was a member.

Whether or not Special K had his agent looking around for him, or not, is - to my way of thinking - irrelevant to the anecdote.

Why don't you ask him, if it matters that much to you ?



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 28/08/2020 15:00 by Primrose Hillbilly.

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
adelaide 29 August, 2020 11:06
I'll see your sigh, PH, and raise it with a groan!

This is a discussion forum. People raise questions. Even if they are not rhetorical, they do not necessarily expect answers from anyone, let alone specifically from the person whose post they appear to be answering.

Yours was a very good anecdote, though not entirely new to me. Even (or possibly especially) the best anecdotes tend to look a bit dodgy if examined too forensically. I was not doubting the anecdote as you had heard it, or constructed from what you had heard - why would I? My question was really a way of saying that if the office had put great faith in the postings of X that would have been incredibly naive. Maybe they were, maybe it happened a bit differently. We're never likely to know and I didn't expect an answer from Special K, X, the office, you or phone-a-friend.

It's still a bloody good anecdote though.

Finally, I'm bemused at the way you react to some posters on here but I suppose we are all made different ways.


Adelaide

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
chunkyinargyll 29 August, 2020 11:15
I thought there had been a thread on MTWD that questioned Silverwood and Kartik's effort and commitment to the club, and that they had gone round the boundary at Uxbridge asking the crowd if anyone knew the identity of X on MTWD, and if so, could they point him out, because they'd like to 'have a word with him'.

(Sm63)

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
freddie tittlemouse 29 August, 2020 11:57
There was a post on 30 June 2018 alleging that Kartik had been witnessed going round the boundary at an unspecified outground asking if anybody knew who Lifebuoy was as he would like to have a lively exchange of views with him. Whether it's true or "urban legend" who knows?

Re: Middle v Sussex Radlett 22-25 August
adelaide 29 August, 2020 12:33
If it were at an outground, would it become a suburban legend?


Adelaide

Goto Page: Previous123456Next
Current Page: 5 of 6

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net