Message Board Archives

He may not be the best player of spin or the best player on the team but he has proven to me that he is a thinking skipper and this has translated to his often thoughtful interviews.

We need more players who "think cricket" and who don't have a sense of entitlement.

Kudos to T20 skipper Rovman Powell.

In reply to Courtesy

What do you think of the squad/team he's working with?

In reply to InHindsight

We need a bowler who can win matches. The batting lineup is ideal for T20. I would hope that our brains trust will make batting adjustments depending on the situation at hand.

I made the remark yesterday that "de more I see batsmen get out is de more I see batsmen coming in."

So yes, good batting lineup...subpar bowling resources.

Btw, Akeal Housien is worth a mention. I think this lad has the potential to be an excellent white ball cricketer.

In reply to Courtesy

potential?

man Akeal has played 78 intls

he has done well

Powell thinks the game

In reply to Courtesy

Bravo was a consummate captain in regionals- that is why he WON…

In reply to Barry

Powell won last year the regional 50 if i recall correctly

In reply to doosra

I say "potential" because I think there is plenty of upside to his current cricket. He has barely scratched the surface of his true potential.

Good thinking cricketer.

....................

Btw, the context is important: "the potential to become an excellent...."

In reply to Courtesy

to this i would say keep searching but don't forget to use the best available properly...

we do not have too many options elsewhere

looks like they have worked out a core to build around...

play to your strengths while looking for ways to improve...i think they need more versatility in the bowling unit and not as much batting ....

In reply to Courtesy

.

We don't have many bowlers to choose from.

I like the newbie Forde though. An exciting prospect. Let's hope Sheppie keeps improving and Motie i wouldn't count him out

In reply to Courtesy

he should find a way to play some FC cricket...it will help his ODI bowling...Motie for example has learned to do a few more things with the ball playing FC cricket - there is more time, there is a greater need to work people out etc and you learn to be a little bit more patient....

In reply to doosra

The Poms have obviously assessed that Caramel is weak and inconsistent as a bowler and have sought to target him every time he the ball in his hands. We need to react to this promptly.

In reply to InHindsight

I like Forde as well...but I don't think he should be exposed to the intracacies as well as vagaries of T20 cricket at the moment. He should now work on plenty of variations and perfect his craft.

In reply to doosra

Motie in combination with Akeal is a combination which can work.

We cannot depend on Russel to bowl tight consistently.

I say bring Motie in for Caramel..

In reply to Courtesy

get Forde to play a full season of regional 4 day...people underrate the learnings that you can get from this

In reply to Courtesy

I like that they have spin options

i noted last night they may go for 2 spinners in the day games

caramel needs some rest too...non stop cricket may cause him to lose some of that passion

In reply to doosra

Caramel does not only "need a rest" he needs a neuronal transpant.

The boy bowls too short and too legsidish and for one who has had a long stint working with Sir Curtly he does not understand "hitting the top of off,"

In reply to Courtesy

that is the biggest disappointment...and it works everytime

his short should be the surprise not the norm

perhaps Sammy will get in his ears a little

In reply to doosra

It's the key to honing your cricket skills. If I could have played cricket 10 days a week I would have...

It's important though to have supervisory expertise with constant evaluation and re-evaluation.

This where CWI has short changed our cricketers. They don't understand that such investments can yield quality outputs.

In reply to doosra

Tits only have potential or are too old…

Bravo denied
Threads removed
Communism

In reply to Courtesy

If you're talking about Aljo, he also grabbed 3 wickets which made the diff between 170 and 190.

He is a wicket taker, because you need to dismiss the tail to bowl a team out

Worst bowler on display last night was Holder

Boycott the Trinidad leg

In reply to Barry

Red Barron, give it a rest.

In reply to Headley

Are you boycotting- Jamaica get a match? You know why…

In reply to DIEHARD

The Poms have clearly targetd Caramel. And it did not just start yesterday. Do you agree with this?

Btw, Holder within recent times is only marginally better than Caramel...but he stays for his better batsmanship if a choice has to be made.

If Bravo had played we would have one in 15…

In reply to Barry

No boycott. To paraphrase the Govt, Jamaica cannot afford the required cricket facilities for a match once every 5 or 6 years.

But if the TTO boycott we can throw a spanner in the works- no

In reply to Courtesy

I agree, but it's also because he's been our best limited overs bowler, the way the Indians ended the Real McCoys career, so it's obvious to me that visiting teams, always target the best bowler, the bowler needs to be good enough to ride it out/ counter.

I think Aljo picking up three wickets to have them all out for < 180 was him countering.

Well Motie should play for sure, Holder can't play ahead of Shep or Russell..so he's competing for the lone fast bowling spot ..him or Aljo..idk..it may really be a coin toss at this point, Aljo DID have the better bowling figures though

In reply to Courtesy

I am happy to see so many realize that both SLA orthodox can play together.
Does CWI? Clive Lloyd-'Pick your best bowlers' England (India too?) pick/s 2 leggies
who sometimes bowl in tandem. 'Strategery' of the lickit game is way more important
than I used to give it credit for, truthfully you have given it the deserved worth all along

In reply to DIEHARD

Aren't you going to discount Caramel's wickets?

Don't you think if Caramel was bowling to Salt and Butler he would have been seasoned.

The Quality Factor of wickets cannot be overlooked.

What is the quality factor in wickets?
How is it defined?




- Bravo’s Life Matters-

In a real statiscal world we would say: Caramel picked up the scraps.

Like batting too slow last ODI?

I think AlJo is suffering the same effects Darren Powell did.

Both were batsmen who could bowl fast and as a 'consequence', coerced into concentrating on bowling as their primary skill. That only worked for a while until they both suffered relapses.

In reply to doosra

The players seems to be the ones that do not value 4 day cricket.

In reply to Courtesy

Winning Post Sir.

just in time for the end of year awards


I get called all sorts of names when I echo those same sentiments-

May the message WIN - to hell with the Messenger!

Message is support Michael..

In reply to powen001

Thanks for the accolades...I am honoured to think like you (when you are off the fence).



We call it as we see it and we don't bitch all over this MB like a baby man here who has not reached the age of emotional maturity,

Well done again!!! skipper.

In reply to Courtesy

All wickets matter, best way to keep runs down, take wickets, Aljo role is to disrupt by taking wickets, let everyone else focus on economy

In reply to DIEHARD

Mate you do not know cricket.

Joseph was gifted wickets because Motie and Akeal stifled them and they had no choice but to play risk averse cricket.

A econ rate of 9.7 is nothing to write home about. One other bowler took wickets and was much more economical.

In reply to Barry

Tell Bravo to stick with his SDA - it's his comfort zone... He bun down his bridge @ both ends...

In reply to TheTrail

Bravo’s Life Matters
Boycott for Michael

In reply to Courtesy

This....is my point.

Bowlers hunt in packs, Tino Best and Darren Powell would benefit from Collymore's good bowling.

In white ball cricket we have suffered from having teams 4, and 5 down and yet can't finish them off.

For some reason, not all bowlers get wickets gifted to them as easily as others.

Let Joseph keep getting these gifts, because that's better than keeping the batsmen quiet for 4-5 overs just for them to unload and end the innings N.O

Bruh his economy rate even when being shielded from the power play overs was 9.75

Trust me Alzarri does not have a clue of what he is doing. He has no plan.

In reply to DIEHARD

By your reasoning England should have won because they had us 54/4.

Although Sam Curan bowled his first over for 8 his next over cost 30.

Econony rate gets a higher weighting than wickets in a T20 game.

If your 5 bowlers are frugal without taking any wickets, most times this is enough to win you a game.

In reply to DIEHARD

Btw, did you see Alzarri's reaction after his last over? It was clear that he thought he let down the team.

Luckily, Jason Holder bowled a superb penultimate over.

In reply to doosra

Our spinners can win us matches we need to always play at least two..sometimes three.
Look at the stats of our spinners. They go for 6.x runs per over.
That can translate to 80 runs in 12 overs and always keep us in the game

In reply to Courtesy

Actually no, what happened to England kinda emphasises my point.

They needed wickets...if only Curran could have been gifted wickets after Rashid and Rehman kept us quiet, then they would have been chasing 160!

In reply to DIEHARD

This guy has a habit of going after our few performing players.

Earlier it was hope, now it’s Joseph

Wait till athanaze / carry establish tjeir place, they’ll be next

In reply to brians_da_best

Bruh, You leave a trail of mediocrity and shallow thinking all over this MB.

You will never appreciate the contribution of Gudakesk and Akeal. They choked the Pom's batting so the Poms were forced to take more risks against our other bowlers. This is why Russell and Joseph bowled 8 overs for 105 runs. Had Gudakesh and Akeal not gotten frugal,the Poms would not need to risk their wickets and would have cruised to victory. Even after Joseph's 3 wickets the Poms were still in the game in the light of the fact that the last 5 overs were to be bowled by 3 runs trucks.

Joseph's 3 wickets were immaterial to the outcome of the game. Had he just bowled tightly without taking a wicket in the same scenario...we would have won.

Btw, at what stage of Joseph's wicket taking was the scoring rate slowed down?

Joseph's reaction after his last over said it all.

But the biggest luck yesterday was the Poms not being able to clobber Jason's last over.

Wickets only receive a significant weighting when they slow the scoring rate. Joseph's wickets did not slow the scoring rate yesterday.

There are times a team will want to leave a batsman who is scoring slowly in T20 games to eat up overs.

You will never come to this analysis and conclusion because you are below simpleton level.

Russell went for 66 off his 4. Add anyone with him (except motie who was exceptional) and you'll get a pretty high number

Pretty much everyone kn this thread disagrees with you.

Motie and Akela bowled very well, and so did Joseph and holder. They all fulfilled a role and helped us win, despite Russell.

Joseph will go for runs but will get you the wickets. Motie and Akeal keep things tight. Holder on his day, can do that as well.

But you have a history of going after our few performers and no one really agrees with you. Yet you belabour some pretty stupid points. So carry on man

In reply to Courtesy

That has never happened though. I've never seen nor heard of
A t20 bowling side not taking any wkts at all and wins a game.
Guess you're talking the euphemistic and not the literal here.
If so, I get it, 130/4? Usually headed to that score unless it
is a chasing win there's an innings implosion so 130/140 all out.

Questions for you:

If all bowlers bowled at an econ rate of 9.75 what would have been the score.

What was the starting RRR and was Joseph below that?

Did Joseph's wickets slow down the RR?

Was Joseph's bowling responsible for the low econ rate of Akeal and Gudakesh?

Take your time to answer.

In reply to Courtesy

If Joseph had not taken those three wickets, would better set batsmen not gone after the other bowlers too? Would motie have had 4 overs for 9 and Akeal 4 overs for 24, minus Joseph's three wickets?

Bear in mind. They would have been bowling at England's top order for their entire spell which despite their recent form. Is very strong on paper. Joseph took out salt and jacks who make 20s, and could have got many more had Joseph not chipped in.

Motie was a star, so was Akeal. And so we're Joseph and holder

You don't know that Akeal bowled his 3 overs in the power play and Joseph bowled 1 over before Gudakesk bowled 4 on the trot?

Did you see Joseph's demeanour after his last over? What did it tell us?

You don't know that even after Akeal and Guakesh finished their spells Russell and Joseph were murdered?

Bruh, don't bother to respond. You don't deserve my time.

In reply to Courtesy

Akeal bowled one over later when the wickets had been taken.

Motie bowled in tandem with Joseph, when Joseph had 2 wickets.

So yeah, I'll not respond now, but only because you're unbelievably stupid

In reply to Courtesy

I'd say Josephs' wkts slowed the run rate yes.
Hadn't he taken them then the same men that Akeal and Gudashek
kept quiet would be set, seeing the ball as if it was breadfruit and
go at other bowlers with more abandon that the team even did.
Additionally, they'd do so in the security that if they got out
at least 3 good batsmen would be in the hut ready to replace them.

In White Ball Cricket the strategy of taking wkts. is to ensure that
the last powerplay cannot be maximized by the batting team i.e.
ensure lesser batsmen are on strike for the last ten or so overs.

In reply to Brerzerk

He’s stupid, he won’t get a word and will be back saying Joseph’s three were inconsequential