Jump to content

Should England even be considering picking Ramprakash?


Recommended Posts

I was having a look at the leading run getters of County Championship and I was surprised to see Michael Carberry at #2. I haven't watched a lot of him..not sure how good he is. Nevertheless, he boosts an average of 64 this season, so I guess he is a pretty good bat. Maybe, he can replace Bell and Trott for Bopara. Picking Ramprakash is a step backward, I am afraid.

Link to comment

Ramps has been in unbelievable form of late, he has scored a ton of runs in the last 2 seasons as well. He's become somewhat of a run machine, plus the final test is at his home ground. It wouldn't be so bad to consider him. That middle order scored nothing in the 4th test, so why not?

Link to comment

Hmm, this is a toughie. Its like being stuck between a rock and a hard place. I am not sure of the composition of the England squad for the Ashes, but if they already have another batsmen in the reserve (which they should), surely they should pick him first, before flying in an emergency replacement. Secondly, employing such a drastic measure signals a measure of desperation and is bound to boost the morale of the opposition. That cannot be a good thing. Finally, what if he comes in and scores a handy 55 and England still go on to lose? Will they keep him for the next test or will it be a one-off move? Will it be Business-as-Usual for the next test series, with the regular batsmen coming back? Besides, how capable is Ramprakash of handling the stresses and strains related to an international match? Its ok to blast tons of runs in County cricket, but can he translate that into runs, in a stage as important as the deciding test of an Ashes? On the basis of logic, it may look like something that can be tried out, but philosophically I am not able to reconcile with the long-term message such a move would send. So, I don’t think they should bring him back.

Link to comment
Hmm, this is a toughie. Its like being stuck between a rock and a hard place. I am not sure of the composition of the England squad for the Ashes, but if they already have another batsmen in the reserve (which they should), surely they should pick him first, before flying in an emergency replacement. Secondly, employing such a drastic measure signals a measure of desperation and is bound to boost the morale of the opposition. That cannot be a good thing. Finally, what if he comes in and scores a handy 55 and England still go on to lose? Will they keep him for the next test or will it be a one-off move? Will it be Business-as-Usual for the next test series, with the regular batsmen coming back? Besides, how capable is Ramprakash of handling the stresses and strains related to an international match? Its ok to blast tons of runs in County cricket, but can he translate that into runs, in a stage as important as the deciding test of an Ashes? On the basis of logic, it may look like something that can be tried out, but philosophically I am not able to reconcile with the long-term message such a move would send. So, I don’t think they should bring him back.
Good points there. It is a difficult choice, but I guess if its going to be a one-off there really isn't a point in bringing him in, rather let Trott have a go.
Link to comment

Rob Key for me. Bopara should go and a number 3 should take his place. Key has been is good from this season too for his county and unlike Trott has intl experience. Ramps as Sriram points out would be a backward step as he's surely not a long term bet and test cricket versus Australia at 38? Trott, it would be a bit unfair to put st into an ashes decider, and he cant bat at three. Playing him would mean Bell at numer 3 (shudder)

Link to comment
Is Ramps a 'cricketer of pedigree' though? Ave of 27 in 50 tests?
He had a mediocre record, which wasn't helped by 16 of those tests being vs. some pretty darn impressive WI attacks including Marshall and Patterson back in '91 and the likes of Ambrose, Walsh and Bishop at other times. FWIW Ramps had a history of playing mostly v. some damn good attacks (7 games v. SAF, 12 v. Aus, 16 v. WI - not many against India, Sri Lanka or weaker teams in the 90s). And even then he did do well vs. Australia averaging 40+ against them (no mean feat given the bowlers he was up against in that decade). Now with more experience and maturity he might still be a better bet for runs than a Bopara who's good for bashing up a disinterested WI attack or a Bell who feasts on softer bowling lineups on easier pitches and does little when it counts. Re. the Hayden quote, hardly a surprise given that after being backed for 25 innings without a decent score at one point going up to the Oval test of '05, he's the last guy who'd be calling for people's axings after a few bad games.
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...