Who gets your vote for the 2009 Yorkshire CCC PLAYER OF THE YEAR?
FINAL RESULTS: POLL CLOSED
Tim Bresnan 1.73 % (4)
Gerard Brophy 3.90 % (9)
Andrew Gale 10.4 % (24)
Matt Hoggard 2.60 % (6)
Adil Rashid 2.16 % (5)
Jacques Rudolph 35.5 % (82)
Joe Sayers 15.6 % (36)
David Wainwright 24.2 % (56)
Other 3.90 % (9)
Total votes: 231
This message has been edited by AlexRoberts on Sep 25, 2009 12:25 PM
I think you have to move with the times and batting averages of over 40 may have impressed in the past but these days with 4 day cricket, batsmen friendly tracks and some pretty poor bowlers around the circuit due to ECB contracts and decent overseas players not playing for counties for a full season then the benchmark for a decent batting average shoudl go higher.
In the good old days you used to look around the county circuit as a young batsman and have the fear of god put into you by the opposition having one (and sometimes two) quality fast bowlers. Holding, Roberts, Marshall, Garner, Croft, Clarke, Imran, Wasim, Waqar, Hadlee, Rice, van der Bijl, le Roux were all fearsome bowlers but i don't see too many on the circuit now with anywhere near the same reputation.
Names like Noffke, Rana, McLaren, Arafat, and the like don't quite have the same impact.
So in old money an average of 40 may have been the benchmark but surely it should be over 50 now?
I'm surprised that Rudolph is trailing so badly. He is a heavy scorer, but I guess like many of the rest of you, I'm not sure he scores his runs when we really need them. He also has five ducks (a team record for an opener?) which is unconscionable for an opener.
Wainwright is certainly a big match player. He's demonstrated it time and time again. He could be a huge boost to Yorkshire's fortunes for years to come, at last until he gets the "black spot" from the ECB
Nick Hobbes asks whether Rudolph's 5 ducks is a record for a Yorkshire opener. I can't give a precise answer but Len Hutton had 6 ducks in championship matches in 1949 - including a pair against Worcestershire.
He redeemed himself in his 22 Championship matches by scoring 2098 at 63.97 In all matches that year he scored 3429 runs at 68.58, and in June, when he had three ducks in a row, he scored 1294 runs, still a record for anyone in the world
It is always nice to have a chance to mention Len Hutton on this forum !
Now I'm with the majority on here in that I don't see Rudolph as a natural opener, but when it comes to the player of the year he's the only show in town. I think we're all being slightly pig headed in the support of our own beliefs. We don't want him to been seen as a successful opener.
Stats don't show everything but Rudolphs are very good
Runs in CC 1266 at 50. Next highest 1008 (Sayers) and third Gale with 824. Rudolph has 50% more runs than the third highest!! 4 tons makes him top of that stat and his strike rate is only bettered by Rashid and almost irrelevently Kruis at number 11.
In the Pro 40 Rudolph has more runs than any player from any county - 421 at 70.
Wainwight fits our view of the world, we've argued for his selection and he hasn't let us down. If the pole was 'most improved' or 'most potential' or even 'most loved by WRF members' it's Wainwight but the 'Player of the Year' has to be Rudolph.
If Wainwright had played all season then he too could have topped 1000 runs as well as taking god knows how many wickets. Instead he has carried drinks or idled away in the 2nds when he could have been in the 1st based on batting alone.
I also balance out Rudys successes with his 5 failures at the top of the order whereas Wainers has had far fewer poor days at the office.
Plus Rudolph has won this for the last 2 years so its time someone else had it on their mantlepiece at home.
I've voted for Andy Gale. He's been consistent and reliable - and he's always the man who's scored runs when we've REALLY needed them. He's also worked very hard to turn himself into a decent fielder, and he's tailored his batting to serve the interests of the team and the nature of the game. If quick runs are needed he'll happilly have a bash at the expense of his wicket, but more often this season he's had to dig in and play the long match winning innings. I was also impressed that when his form dipped a bit, he had the commitment to go and play for the seconds and get himself some runs. While Wainwright and Hoggy stole the glory at Hove - it was Gale's rediscovered form and gritty application in the first innings that made it possible for us to create a match winning position...
I WAS tempted - but I thought you'd all laugh at me!
Yes indeed - I like the way Andrew plays his cricket and I like the way he carries himself in the field and around the ground. I make no apologies for that - I think he'd make a good captain at some point!
You don't agree with the decision therefore the process must be wrong........?
Well done Andy Gale - if he hadn't played so well and been so valuable to the side - perhaps we'd have needed to pick Adam Lyth.....
The process was not wrong, but choosing Gale over Rudolph, Wainwright and even Sayers is just plain bizarre. Gale was a non-factor for most of the first half of the season; Sayers and Rudolph have been consistently valuable. If Wainers had played the number of matches he deserved to, he would have taken 50 wickets and scored 800+ runs. Shazzy was up and down all year...not consistent enough to be an MVP.
It's all about judgements I guess - but I think you have to look beyond averages and statistics. Throughout the season, whenever we've got into tricky situations, it always seems to have been Gale who's played the pivotal role or occupied the crease to enable us to recover. Every time Mags has failed - or Rudi's got a duck - it's inevitably Gale who's managed to shepherd the tail and get us into a better position....
I do find it odd that Wainwright should be leading our poll but didn't get into the top three of the official YCCC poll conducted on their website. Perhaps his performances and value have taken on a mythical status on these pages that isn't reflected among the wider membership - it does seem very odd....
I agree with Steve about Gale. He's been a mature and versatile performer all year. We know what to expect from Jacques Rudolph and we got it. He's batted well, though not always as consistently or fluently as I'd have liked in an ideal world.
Gale has come on in leaps and bounds. He can now adapt his approach to suit the nature of the game. Two years ago , his hundred at Worcester could not have happened. The 60 he scored at Hove was critical to our achieving a decent first innings score.
On top of that he has a thrilling attacking game, which he deployed paricularly well in several of our 20/20 games. One of my memories of the season was his assault on Nottingham in the 20/20 match against them at Headingley. Fabulous clean straight hitting.
He's also a sunny natured lad who looks like he knows how lucky he is to be playing cricket for a living. (I don't recall much is-he-staying-is-he-going talk in relation to Andrew. My guess is that he's as loyal as they come. Good luck to him and well done.)
I hope the mods will allow me to double-post this:
Running the poll over the last four weeks of the season as the YCCC did coincides with Gale's best performances of the year, whereas during that period Rudolph had 4 of his 5 ducks. Thus, the results are highly suspect and quite biased
The White Rose poll is much fairer and will probably yield a somewhat less biased result, since voters are more likely to base their choices on the the entire season. Next year I would suggest the club polls later, perhaps during the last week of the season and the week after the season ends.
of course someone deserves the award. even in a year where players struggle the one who performs best wins the award. and our players have not been terrible just inconsistent. rudolph and sayers have batted well, shahzad and hoggard have bowled well. wainwright has contributed in every game he has played. rashid and bresnan have earned international recognition, brophy has been solid, and bairstow and lyth are emerging talent. just select one to win the award. sorry i forgot andrew gale. it shows we have a lot of talent.
This message has been edited by marsker on Sep 25, 2009 12:15 AM
No matter how good or bad a team is, someone has to be the best, even of a bad bunch, if that's what they are.
Equally, someone has to be the best fielder. If everyone dropped every catch that came their way one of them surely did it with more grace and style?
If a fielder of the year can't be found then a player of the year may be equally difficult to pinpoint.
Several players were much of a muchness, good but not great. Good but not as good as we hoped they would be.
I voted for Rashid, good but not as good as we hoped he would be. Lets hope we are not saying that ten years from now.