Stokes...September 13 2016 at 6:41 AM
|Dave (Login Jonno121)|
Is playing for Durham. He's played all 3 formats for England yet is allowed to play for his county. Bluey has played tests and a couple of ODI's and is asked to rest by the ECB. Total joke and a disgrace.
|This message has been edited by Jonno121 on Sep 13, 2016 6:43 AM|
|September 13 2016, 7:01 AM |
I suspect the ecb flimsy argument will be he needs to play more to get match fit after his injury as he only recently returned to bowling.
It is all the more galling to hear Johnny is at headingley and twiddling his thumbs. He is desperate to play and he is as fit as a fiddle. He won't play the odis if buttler is skipper in Bangladesh so his next game will be the tests so surely some four day cricket is beneficial.
Since the end of the test series Cook Vince Ballance have all gone back to play four day cricket for counties and Buttler and Stokes likewise from the odi team. That leaves Hales Root and Moeen who play all formats being rested. Bairstow is the exception to any consistent application of the rules. He gets slated for his poor keeping yet when there are games he can play in to improve the ecb deny him the chance.
He is not interested in golfing or trips abroad he just wNts to play with his county. Perhaps he should have made himself unavailable for the winter like others and he could have rested then.
|September 13 2016, 7:11 AM |
I noticed this too. Laughable stuff.
|September 13 2016, 7:52 AM |
Agree entirely that preventing Bairstow from playing for us in the last two CC matches is completely incomprehensible and wrong. It is not in the best interests of the player, his club or his country but the "men in suits" remain silent on their reasoning. Buttler is allowed to play for Lancashire and is to be ODI captain and wicket keeper on the tour and has played more recently but Johnny is not - where is the logic and fairness? Of course, there is no need to specify about individual players, only needs policy statement from ECB management about centrally contracted players and others.
|This message has been edited by Alibor2 on Sep 13, 2016 8:41 AM|
|September 13 2016, 8:26 AM |
Do we really expect any coach or selectors to explain in detail why one player is rested but not another? And to what end, even if they did explain, many would find a reason to disagree with whatever the reasons anyway.
|This message has been edited by sooty-yorkie1 on Sep 13, 2016 9:19 AM|
|September 13 2016, 9:12 AM |
It's almost as if they're judging each player individually and tailoring they're participation to suit what they feel is appropriate to each player.
England leave for Bangladesh and India on the 30th Sept I believe. Before returning about 3 days before Xmas they'll play 3 ODI's and 7 test matches plus a few warm up games. I fully expect Bairstow to play a full part in all of these games, in testing condition for a wicket keeper. On this basis, it's not totally illogical to give him 3 weeks rest before he's "on the road" for 3 months.
|This message has been edited by EastYorkshireTyke on Sep 13, 2016 9:22 AM|
|September 13 2016, 9:44 AM |
"It's almost as if they're judging each player individually and tailoring their participation to suit what they feel is appropriate to each player."
That's exactly what they are doing. The England team management are managing each player's workload in the interests of (as they see it) the player himself and the England team. The effect on the players' counties is (to them) an insignificant consideration.
In my view, there is a serious risk of burn out for players like Joe and Jonny if they attempt to play virtually twelve months a year. Stokes is in a different position, at present, as he's had a long break from the game through injury.
|September 13 2016, 10:16 AM |
I may be imagining this, but wasn't there an announcement a few weeks ago that Buttler wouldn't play for Lancashire again this season? Yet he's playing in the current match
|September 13 2016, 12:36 PM |
Since the final test v Pakistan ended on 14th August a month has now passed.
Hazard a guess as to how many days cricket the cotton wool wrapped Bairstow has played?
Two odis due to buttlers injury on 1/9 and 4/9 and two one day games for us and the t20 semi final defeat on 18/8, 20/8 and 28/8.
That's five days cricket over a month. Now if there was a fifth test I bet he would have played. Also seems more bizarre that he is released for our one day games so soon after the tests but then not released now for the style of the game England prefer him to play.
Mind you he only racked up 25 runs in those three knocks for us so perhaps that was the sign he needed a rest.
Ok I accept the point some are trying to make about the volume of cricket ahead in Bangladesh and India but that applies as much to everyone else. No doubt Morgan declining to go means bairstow has more chance of being picked for the one dayers and the tests.
So that will be Morgan who plays for which county again?
|East Coast Type |
|September 13 2016, 3:02 PM |
The ECB has responsibility for the integrity of English cricket and its competitions. If this tour was going to lead to these types of tailored player decisions (easily foreseeable), impacting on business end of the CC, then the tour should not have been arranged for this time. This is not just about Yorkshire winning the title or not, but the integrity of first class cricket. The ECB knows what it is doing and it is classic 'long game' politics. In US politics it is called 'starve the beast'. Neglect an institution to the point where you can say that it no longer functions and needs to be abolished.