<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Idle man
(Login Idle_man)

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

October 27 2017, 12:32 PM 

No, it's Tyson rather than the WI quicks, not Tyson rather than Fred. Fred wouldn't like it, because he disliked any suggestion Tyson was quicker than him, which for a brief period, I suspect he was. Infinitely inferior in every other respect though.

 
 
Anthony Rowe
(Login tonyinsiam)

PWW2 Team

October 28 2017, 4:03 PM 

Ah! Sorry Dave and Idle Man. Got it now. I'm a bit slow to-day, yesterday and the day before that.

 
 
Gavin Gray
(Login yorkie1863)

Post ww2 team

October 29 2017, 11:43 AM 

There's been a lot of discussion about this team. So let's start from the beginning and choose openers.
After reading the posts would now pick Boycott and Hutton (L).

 
 
sid
(Login sid-don)
Assistant Moderator

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

October 31 2017, 7:22 PM 

Gav: I think the openers are universally agreed. Boycott and Hutton.

If I can be a member of the virtual selection panel, the middle order is more open to debate. We probably have to take three, four and five together.

I'm with Vaughan, Root and Lehmann but can be persuaded otherwise!

 
 
Idle man
(Login Idle_man)

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

October 31 2017, 7:54 PM 

We seem to have decided Hutton is in the post-war side.

Pretty good Sid. However are you going to pick Jonny? If so as batsman or batsman-keeper?

 
 
sid
(Login sid-don)
Assistant Moderator

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

October 31 2017, 8:42 PM 

Idle man: The historical knowledge of others out stripes me. Hutton - pre or post war? I'm not sure. When did he play his most effective cricket? If its in the 1930s, that helps with some difficult choices, Vaughan, from my middle order, could open freeing up a middle order slot.

Johnny - sorry about this but he edges out Binks, but we'll come to that.

DB Close, we probably want him in there somewhere but we'll also come to him, I'm not sure who drops out.

 
 
Idle man
(Login Idle_man)

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

October 31 2017, 9:31 PM 

Post -war admirers of Hutton were often told 'you should have seen him before the war'. He did, of course, have a bad war-time accident which shortened one arm. Legend says it prevented him hooking, though how the hell you dealt with Lindwall and Miller if they knew you couldn't hook, I can't imagine. My Dad said he just swayed contemptuously out of the way to most bowlers who dropped short, letting it pass his nose. A bit like Ali dodging a punch I suppose.

I wish I'd seen him. More than any other player except perhaps the two great all-rounders.

Er, that's Muhammad, not Moeen by the way. Could be important these days.


    
This message has been edited by Idle_man on Oct 31, 2017 9:33 PM


 
 

Guest
(Login dpressed)

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

November 1 2017, 9:01 AM 

I do have an important question. Are these teams being picked on overall ability or just how well they played for Yorkshire. The question is important as Vaughan would get in on his England form but apart from the odd good innings was no where near as good for Yorkshire.

 
 

Guest
(Login dpressed)

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

November 1 2017, 9:01 AM 

Duplicate post


    
This message has been edited by dpressed on Nov 2, 2017 8:57 AM


 
 

Guest
(Login dpressed)

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

November 1 2017, 9:01 AM 

Duplicate post


    
This message has been edited by dpressed on Nov 2, 2017 8:58 AM


 
 
Idle man
(Login Idle_man)

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

November 1 2017, 9:47 AM 

Valid question Depressed. My first instinct is it should be Yorkshire, but that's probably a bit unfair these days. If someone's really good they disappear early to England, and we get to see little of them at their best. I saw one or two absolute quality innings from Vaughan (one at Ilford sticks in my mind), and I think we may be overinfluenced by some disappointing final seasons.

I wonder whether Joe will be similar. He's got some of the same issues: the weight of the England captaincy, fitness problems, and so on. Perhaps around 2025 there will be a 'what did Root ever do for Yorkshire?' school of thought. If so, it will be grossly unfair.

So I would say, if he's good enough, pick him, whether the runs came for Yorkshire or England. Hard choices though, aren't they? Some brilliant people to be left out. As far as I can see Sid is on the point of leaving out either Bairstow or Close; I await his choice with fascination. (I might actually leave Vaughan out and have Jonny at 5 and Close at 6)

 
 
Guest
(Login sid-don)
Assistant Moderator

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

November 1 2017, 10:17 PM 

Hutton - post or pre war? If he's pre-war it solves a selection dilemma! However played 79 tests with 66 after the war, he made his 364 in 1953 and played 16 season (although the last couple were only a game or so each) after the war as opposed to only 6 before. He's got to be a post war player.

England or Yorkshire form? Being fair to the more recent players, it has to be all round ability, its not there fault they play so little for the county.

Boycott and Hutton. Since last night I'm dropping Vaughan, I've done some reading, DB Close has to play, he might not be worth his place as a batter or a bowler but he must be just about the best cricketer we've ever had. Jonny is keeping and batting five with Brian C at 6. Root and Lehman are three and four.

My 1 to 6 are GB, Len H, Root, Lehman, JB and DB Close

Gav as chair of selectors feel free to disagree? Dave and Idle Man - convince me I'm wrong to omit Binks

Bowlers to come

 
 
Idle man
(Login Idle_man)

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

November 2 2017, 8:13 AM 

Well Sid, one thing I should be able to convince you of is that the 364 was in 1938. The completed scorecard is hanging on my wall as I write. First day (Saturday interestingly) August 20th. However I accept the drift of your argument.

Binks? It's a really interesting example of the dilemmas selectors face, and actually have faced for ages (Murray or Binks/Parks, and as far back as Duckworth/Ames. Even Knott ahead of Taylor and Evans ahead of Andrew owed a little to their batting, though Evans and Knott were top quality anyway). Jonny is a reflection of it, with us and particularly with England, where you could make an argument for playing Foakes and Jonny purely as a batsman. Actually I think he was starting from a very low base - he might never have been called on to keep at all, and had limited experience. He's improving steadily and is a natural games player with high achievements in a variety of sports. He'll be fine.

In theory I would always want a 'proper' keeper. In practice he's one of eleven, and you need a balanced side. One of the top six batsmen has to offer something different. For this team the bowling has to be of real quality. Is there a top six batsman who is good enough with the ball? I only remember Closey well from the mid-sixties. His bowling was then very much slow medium, about on Mags'level, though with a huge amount of wisdom and sheer kidology thrown in. You certainly couldn't have had him as your third seamer, but a fifties version might be different. Though he wasn't in the class of the rest of the batting and bowling line-up, the only man who could possibly bat in the top 6 and bowl first change is probably Craig White, as DM suggested, but he is not really quite good enough. The other option is Raymond Illingworth, but I'm not sure he quite makes the cut either, unless you're prepared to leave Close out, and let Raymond captain - hardly a poor choice. However for reasons I made clear, I'd be picking Bob Appleyard, and he might just square the circle, for he could both be a top quality change seamer, and one of your two spinners. On that basis you could afford Close at 6, Binks to keep, and an attack of FST, Ryan, Appleyard and Wardle.

The downside? Only four bowlers plus Close (and to be fair, the other four batsmen all offer some first-class overs and wickets in their record). I hope to God Ryan doesn't break down. The other three won't.

 
 

Dave Morton
(Login DaveMorton)

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

November 2 2017, 9:42 AM 

If you've got a top four of Hutton, Boycott, Root and Lehmann you don't need to sacrifice a wicket-keeper to shore up the batting!

If Sir Len is to play for the opposition, then perhaps...

If the game is to be played on, say, a 1920s pitch then a 'balanced' attack would be essential: Trueman and Sidebottom + Wardle and Appleyard + another bowling option from the batsmen. Craig White could provide this, or Close, who bowled a lot of overs in his day. The lbw law of the day would not please the modern bowler, by the way; it had to be pitching in line (not just impact, but pitching) as well as hitting the wicket, of course. Herbert Sutcliffe would have padded up to everything else.

The Law was not amended to include balls pitching outside the off stump until 1935. It was certainly a batsman's game, run by 'toffs' who were nearly all batsmen. However, you could bowl bodyline, with fields unrestricted until the late 1950s. It is often claimed that the Law was changed following Jardine's tour, but this part of it wasn't until after South Africa bowled slow, negative leg-theory against England in 1955, more than twenty years later. Jim Laker was still able to employ three men behind square when he demolished the Aussies in 1956; two close in (Lock and Trueman were both 'round the corner' specialists, as was Alan Oakman) and one deep behind them to counter the sweep.

The wickets were smaller too, until 1931, when the width was increased to 9 inches, as at present. There would be a lot to get used to for players of either era playing in the time of their opponents.

I, for one, would love to see the look on the face of Rhodes or Verity the first time they were reverse-swept by Joe Root!


 
 
Idle man
(Login Idle_man)

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

November 2 2017, 11:21 AM 

And I'd like to see the look on his face when he tried it for the second time.

 
 

Dave Morton
(Login DaveMorton)

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

November 2 2017, 12:35 PM 

That too! But it's world class v world class, and though I don't think the modern player is better than the old ones, I don't think he's any worse, either, comparing like with like as in this example.

How about Sutcliffe v Plunkett? A bit of 21st century bodyline from round the wicket?

Given that our modern batsmen struggle against Leach and Bess, I wouldn't fancy their chances against Hedley and Wilfred, but of course our team does have Boycott, Lehmann and perhaps Hutton, who were all masterful against spin.

Finally, watching Bairstow try to keep to Appleyard and Wardle on a pre-war 'sticky' would be an entertainment in itself: "We'll get 'em in byes, Wilfred."

JG Binks, please.

 
 
garywilson
(Login garywilson2)

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

November 2 2017, 2:45 PM 



    
This message has been edited by garywilson2 on Nov 2, 2017 2:48 PM


 
 
sid
(Login sid-don)
Assistant Moderator

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

November 2 2017, 3:00 PM 

To summarises:

We all seemed to be agreed that Boycott and Hutton will open. Root and Lehman have places in the middle order and, although not discussed in huge details in the later part of the thread, FST and Ryan Sidebottom are the opening bowlers.

Based on the agreements presented, the consensus appears to be for best available keeper regardless of his batting so we're going with Binks.

That leave 4 places up for grabs. Assuming a balanced attack we need a genuine seam bowler, another batsman and two differing spinners.

Remaining places?

Spinners: Wardle, Rashid and Illy (Ras and Illy also fall into the alrounder category)

Seamer: Gough or Old + where does Appleyard fit in?

Batsman: JB or Vaughan

All rounder: White or Close

I think I've decided my team, although I keep changing my mind, however one final question, what was Appleyard - seamer or off spinner? From what I've read today I'd like him in the side, but thats probably at the expense of Illy or Close!! Surely not.

 
 
Idle man
(Login Idle_man)

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

November 2 2017, 3:39 PM 

Appleyard was before my time, but I've listened to enough family talk which puts him above people always mentioned more widely. One wise comment, in discussions over an all-time England XI: presumably the opposition will be of similar class, so you must pick bowlers who can do something out of the ordinary, not just do the familiar things exceptionally well. So my first two bowlers would be S F Barnes and Bob Appleyard.

To answer Sid's question, seam or spin, both. I think that's the reason Appleyard fits our needs for a second spinner and third seamer, and thus makes room for Binks. 'You get Bedser and Laker together' may be a bit of hyperbole, but not by much. After all, when Appleyard was picked for England Laker was available, indeed he wouldn't have played at Old Trafford in 1956 if Appleyard had been fit. If he'd played t20 I reckon Appleyard would have been devastating.

 
 
Dwight_Schrute
(Login Dwight_Schrute)

Re: Pre-ww2 Yorkshire Vs post-ww2 Yorkshire

November 2 2017, 6:06 PM 

Cheers for that footage Gary. It confirms what i suspected.

 
 
 
  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
 Copyright © 1999-2017 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement  
All IP addresses are recorded. We reserve the right to remove personal attacks, sexist, racist, homophobic, defamatory or abusive comments, comments likely to incite religious hatred, those disposed to wind others up, and unapproved advertising.

Email us: Whiterosecricket@hotmail.co.uk