Obviously we have to sort out the openers for 2009. We can't go on like we have in the past two years, virtually throwing away the first wicket in match-after-match. It doesn't look like the club will attempt to sign an opener, so what is the solution? What are our options? What combination of Lyth, Vaughan, Gale, McGrath or Taylor will work?
Taylor and Vaughan is the obvious choice but that creates a massive problem as we have 4 middle order batsmen in Gale, Lyth, Rudolph and Mags to fill 3 spots. None of them can be left out. None of the four are of any use when they open. The opening slot is a problem but if we solve that by playing Taylor we create an even bigger problem of who to leave out. I personally would gamble on Brophy, Bresnan or Rashid opening with MV and leave the 3 to 6 slot for Mags, Rudolph, Gale and Lyth. Whichever of the three who opens with Vaughan they surely can not be any worse than last season and the gamble might just pay off. If we do lose the early wicket thats no worse than last season but at least we have a strong middle order to follow. There were times last season when we lost the early wicket and we had no one in the middle order to pull the situation around.
With the glaring problem we have on openers, any other County but Yorkshire would be doing an intensive search for a non-overseas solid opening bat to sign. Don't tell me there are no such players available. When will Moxon think big? I'm all in favour of his bringing on our own youngsters, but such a signing wouldn't cut across that. It's not as though there were a melee of existing youngsters all positively fighting to open.
I've a feeling Sayers will be given first opportunity to either shine or fade. Perhaps the best way too because if he shines he is the quality opener we need and if he fails to produce at least we'll know early enough to move on. Also, isn't Vaughan on record as saying he wants to bat number three? As an England contracted player I imagine we'll bow to the pressure and bat him wherever he or England want.
I think it's too much to ask Brophy to be keeper, battle to keep his place and open the batting and so as we have more middle order batsmen than places, one of them will have to open the innings. I'd go for McGrath, the captain to lead by example from the front, and as he's usually in within ten minutes of start of the innings opening should merely save a few minutes time.
That's provided we don't surprise everyone and sign an opener from elsewhere.
...makes the middle order problem even worse, as we then have to have two middle-order men opening to fit them all in the team. If Brophy is at 6 followed by 5 bowlers how do you accomodate Lyth, Gale, Rudolph, Mags and Vaughan any other way. Signing another opening bat from another county or playing Sayers or Taylor with MV causes similar problems of how do you fit Lyth, Gale, Rudolph and Lyth into 3 middle order batting slots. The problem is we have 1 decent opener in MV and 1 to many good middle order batters.
I don't see why we should accept any "directive" from the England set-up to play Vaughan anywhere other than suits us.Also if he doesn't produce the goods PDQ we should leave him out and let him try to re-discover his form playing for the 2nd XI.
The fortunes of YCCC are what we should care about not Vaughan or the England set up.It's bad enough them telling us (and the other counties) that we can't play who we want without them telling us who we must play.
Here we go again ... lets sign an opener, another overswas player ... etc etc .... could I ask why people dont go & watch Notts or Lancs rather than Yorks
Because, dpressed, we support Yorkshire and want Yorkshire to win the championship - not with an inordinate number of non-Yorkies (which, as regards overseas players and kolpaks, is not now possible anyway), but on the same basis as other counties contending for the championship.
Btw, on another point: Vaughan surely doesn't come into the openers equation at all (even if he opens instead of batting at no.3); or if he does, then only marginally. If his last season's form continues, he won't be all that much use to us. If he recovers his dazzling form (which for his sake I hope he does), Moores will take him away from Yorkshire.
Dp, I'm not advocating doing this wholesale - only for a suitable non-overseas opener to meet what must be acknowledged to be our present glaring need.
but surely the plan has to be to ditch Rana if we can and as our bowling attack looks OK we can then get an overseas player to sort out our opening problem at top of the order
With Gale stating that: I am best suited to batting in the middle order, and Vaughan all but insisting be bat at #3, our options are more limited than the numbers might indicate.
In my opinion, and based on the travesty of 2008, where our openers were the worst in the county's history, Yorkshire have NO OPTION but to cast about for a proven opener. Not to do so, would be unconscionable, and basically mean that we are set to write off another season.
Moxon, of anyone, should know that if the Tykes are demoted in the CC in 20089, he would and should be finished.
"Yorkshire have NO OPTION but to cast about for a proven opener"
Yes, I agree. But it seemed to me that that, vital though that is, it's our #2 priority; and that our #1 is a penetrating fast bowler. Which was why I suggested the search for and signing of a NON-overseas opening bat.
If Rana stays, the question of another fast bowler doesn't arise and we just hope he comes good. If Rana goes, surely for our overseas player we look for an outstanding fast bowler?
If people think that order of priority is wrong, I shall be glad to hear the arguments.
Given that Rana is unlikely to let us out of his contract, I'd say looking for a British-born opening bat might be the ONLY option. The two-year contract given to an aging, and injury-prone Rana was, in my opinion, one of the worst errors Yorkshire management has ever made. It has all but scuppered our chances of being a contender, until we are shut of him. What was Moxon thinking?
Its my considered opinion that a captain should generally not open the batting or bowling. It puts even more pressure on what is a stress-filled, critically important job --- captaincy, that is.
As I see it, if we make the error of not signing a specialist opener, Gale and Taylor would be the best option. I see more potential in Taylor and Gale than the other options.
There is absolutely NO WAY we sign a new opening batsman.
We already have 3 openers; Sayers, Taylor, Vaughan
We have 4 first class middle order bats; Mags, Rudolph, Gale, Lyth.
Fringe: Ballance, Wood, Bairstow
ALL of the middle order 4 MUST play. Mags and Rudy are brilliant, Gale and Lyth are promising and benching them would be criminal as they have performed well when given the chance. None of them excel opening but one may have to in order to fit them in. I would suggest Mags.
We don't have room for more batsmen and I suspect we can't afford the wages what with the ground development and the looming recession.
The 3 openers will be given another go just like last year.
Vaughan will start for sure. We haven't got the room to play him middle order and he's world class on his day. Given a winter off he may come back refreshed. If he plays well and England take him so be it. Thats the nature of county cricket. It didn't stop us playing Hoggard when he was with England.
Sayers has one year left. He will be given at least one more shot at it. He has the potential and ability, it's just not firing. I suspect he'll be thrown out there and he'll either sink or swim. Maybe the fact he's about to be cut will kick him into action. I suspect he'll have another early season of failure and be released. Surrey or another team will sign him up and turn him into a world class opener. Or he'll "do a Wood" and sink like trace at Glamorgan.
Taylor was brought in to give us more options at opener. If he performs well in practice/2nd XI he'll be given an opportunity. He's got 2 more years (I think) so relegating him further down the pecking order doesnt make much financial sense. He might edge out Sayers or replace him, but he's not shown anything to suggest he's the answer.
So with 3 openers and a middle order bat to fill 2 opening spots I can't see us bringing in more players to muddy the waters.
I predict we will have a similarly inconsistent year at opener, lots of chopping and changing not helped by the mid season retirement of Vaughan from cricket (into commentary once he fails to regain his form).
At the end of a season hampered by the Rana contract and continued opening troubles, Moxon will be fired, Sayers will be released and Vaughan gone, and we will start to rebuild. Hopefully not from Division 2.
Thankfully I have my other sports (American football, soccer) to enjoy during the Winter. Yorkshire's inactivity is hardly enough to keep me entertained. The same can be said for England's string of pointless ODIs. A two Test series against India, yet how many forgettable One Day games?
Oh Joe, what an argument - "We've got them so we've got to fit them"! Even if they're not especially suited for the place into which we fit them because we've got them?
Anyway, we've haven't got three specialist openers as you say. Vaughan will not in practice be in that number.
Just what I need on a miserable November day, really positive thoughts on this forum! I suggest that Joe should start going to watch Leeds at Elland Road. At least there would be something genuinely to be miserable about!
Personally I look on the bright side:-
1. We have some great youngsters who have started to perform and will get better. (How quickly some forget the heroics of Rash and Auntie at the end of the season!!)
2. We have real quality batting in Rudy and Mags
3. We have great bowling with Hoggy
4. We have two of the best young allrounders in the country in Rash and Bres
5. Moxon is actually very good at his job. (Need I remind anyone how his judgement about a certain leg spinner has been proved right at Hampshire this year given more than one game to find his feet!!!)
With a bit of luck and some confidence, we will be a very competitive side. I wish all those who want to sign everyone and their granny would just go and watch football where such short term attitudes are appreciated. Personally I enjoy watching our own talent develop and take real pride in their achievements. Having said that, we shouldn't miss the opportunity for the odd high quality acquistion but it does not guarantee success.
Agree with Joe we already have to many batsmen for not enough slots. If we sign another opener it makes the situation worse. Assuming Brophy at 6 and 5 bowlers, who do we drop out of Lyth, Gale, Mags and Rudolph. All excellent middle order players and none of them deserve dropping so all have to play. We already have sufficient bodies in place, signing another opening batsman is not needed. WE can manage perfectly well with whom we have. Let any one open with Vaughan from Brophy to Hoggard and keep Mags, Rudolph, Gale and Lyth at 3 to 6. To take a chess analogy, you "sac a piece (player in this case)to gain a strong position.
Moorfield wrote: "Oh Joe, what an argument - "We've got them so we've got to fit them"! Even if they're not especially suited for the place into which we fit them because we've got them?"
Yes indeed.
Where do you propose we acquire all this new opening batting talent from? Are there many out of contract openers available?
No. The ones that would really make a difference are under contract. So we would have to prise them away. Why would the best players want to come to us? We're hardly Championship contenders right now. We can't afford to pay them huge salaries and we would also have to pay off their contracts. That's expensive.
Money is tight, especially considering our ground developments and the fact we would have to bring in the new players as well as keep the other batsmen on the books.
You summed it up "We've got them so we have to fit them in". We aren't Chelsea FC, we can't just throw money around when, as Stu points out, we are overflowing with batsmen (even if those batsmen are not producing the goods).
Moxon has said this Winter we may bring in 1 or possibly 2 players. We have one. If Rana is replaced that would be the other. That's your lot. You better get used to it. And even if we could afford it we dont have the room to play them all.
As for positivity East Riding Tyke, there is a lot to look forward re: Yorkshire. Come the Spring I'll be eager for the season to start. In fact right now I could write a whole other essay on why things are looking up and why we can expect great things in 2009. I may even do it.
However I'm able to separate my head and my heart and the fact is nothing will change regarding the personnel at opener so I fear that we will have another season of struggle. We've almost been playing with 9 wickets each inning for a whole season and I'm yet to see what will change next year.
Moxon is not able to wheel and deal like a soccer manager. He has the same players but must somehow get different results out of them. That is hard to do.
Have we got too manyn middle order and failed openers. Maybe one or two releases are in order, to make way for a player who CAN get the job done. Just a thought.
Well, Joe, if you're right in thinking there's no-one suitable and available out there, then of course you're right in saying there's nothing we can do to find and sign a solid (non-overseas) specialist opener. But I don't accept that your factual premise is necessarily, indubitably, true.
The picture you paint (realistically) of the likely result of "Laissez-faire, let's hope for the best" is not an encouraging one, is it? And in fact you understate it. "I predict (you say) that we'll have a similarly inconsistent year at opener." But inconsistent is hardly the word to describe last year at opener, wouldn't you say? It was almost consistent in fact, though in the wrong way unfortunately.
Yet, DAvid, I don't accept that we should think of releasing any of our front-line lads and those near to being that. It's not realistic for some of us to think "x number of non-opening batting places to make up a team, therefore we need x number of non-opening batsmen to fill those places". What about injuries, international calls, continued losses of form? Some of our squad we'll rightly include without thinking about it (assuming they're not injured etc.) But it's nice to have slightly more than x altogether to pick from, according to circumstances - not x number of normal first-picks altogether and no more than that. We're not England of course, but that's what England (and even some counties) do, isn't it?