facebook Twitter RSS Feed YouTube StumbleUpon

Home | Forum | Chat | Tours | Articles | Pictures | News | Tools | History | Tourism | Search

 
 


Go Back   BanglaCricket Forum > Cricket > Cricket

Cricket Join fellow Tigers fans to discuss all things Cricket

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 24, 2004, 03:31 PM
oracle oracle is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: July 25, 2003
Location: U.A.E
Posts: 3,750
Default The Analyst: Captaincy not a job for beginners

Still mystified about who gets to be England captain. Who, why and how? But they still manage to win with all these changes. Good idea? Maybe.

Source: S.Hughes-Channel4

The Analyst: Captaincy not a job for beginners

Marcus Trescothick does lack a real captainís instinct and that was evident in his use of his bowlers throughout Sundayís play. To be fair to him he has been landed with the job at a time when he has his own batting concerns and itís a bit unfair to be too critical.

Itís also unfair to blame only Trescothick as there were many experienced cricketers out there with him, like Nasser Hussain and Mark Butcher, and he frequently called them into a huddle to ask their opinions.

However, Ashley Giles was left on for most of the day at the Nursery End when England could have tried other ploys from there. The captain let things drift in the middle session and if he had been more imaginative England could be chasing only around 200 for victory.

Giles performed fairly well, but we may find that when New Zealandís left-armer Daniel Vettori bowls there will be quite a bit of help for the spinner on a dry pitch.

Letting the game drift may have been a deliberate ploy to lull New Zealand into a false sense of security, but Trescothick could have tried a few more bowling changes. Andrew Flintoff, Matthew Hoggard or even a change bowler could have varied the attack from the Nursery End, interspersed with Giles.

He could have shown more confidence in his seam attack. Flintoff bowled well and yet had few overs and Hoggard hardly bowled at all. Even though itís not Hoggardís type of pitch, he could have done a holding job from the Nursery End.

Trescothickís decision not to take the new ball was also probably a mistake. I would have taken it after 80 or at most 90 overs. I think he felt he had Giles as a controlling factor at one end and the new ball would come onto the bat better and go for more runs. But his thinking was a bit negative.

In the end Harmisonís burst of wickets saved Trescothick from a more embarrassing match situation which would have highlighted the flaws in his captaincy.

Had Michael Vaughan been in charge I think he would have backed his seam bowlers more and taken the new ball earlier.



[Edited on 24-5-2004 by oracle]
Reply With Quote

  #2  
Old May 25, 2004, 03:10 AM
Saurav Saurav is offline
Club Cricketer
 
Join Date: January 4, 2004
Posts: 83

Undue criticism! Trescothick did a great job!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:21 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
BanglaCricket.com
 

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Partner Sites | Useful Links | Banners |

© BanglaCricket