CWI, where are we going?

In reply to Jumpstart

So you saying Lara never performed with incompetents abound?

What I can never understand is how can a player whose main role is as a wicket-keeper be held more accountable for not making runs than a player whose main role is as a batsman. We complain about Da Silva's average of 26, but who in the top six whose role.is as a batsman has averaged significantly more than Da Silva? For Christ sake, we recall Chase as captain who averages the same 26 and wanted to recall Hope as captain who averages 25. So, obviously, batting average cannot be the rational for why Da Silva was not made captain. We have gotten into an age where we expect our wicket-keeper to make more runs than those whose role in the team is to make runs.

In reply to b4u8me2

And that's why I going with Imlach the better wicketkeeper.

In reply to natty_forever

If the narrative is that Da Silva was dropped solely on the basis that Imlach is the better wicketkeeper, then fine. No arguments there. But that isn't the narrative now, is it? The narrative is that he doesn't make enough runs and that his batting average of 26 is too low. That is the narrative for his exclusion. I believe Josh is able to make the team as a pure batsman. I believe in always playing the best gloveman as your wicketkeeper. So for me Imlach plays as wicketkeeper if he is the best wicketkeeper. But how does that explain Josh being dropped on the basis of lack of runs and then you select Chase with the same average and wanted to call back Hope with a worse average? How do we explain continuing with any of the top six (minus Braithwaite) whose averages are the same or lower than Josh's?

In reply to b4u8me2

They remind me of lawyers; they cannot understand math...