"Foreign" English Players. So What?

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Whips_off_the_bails

I cannot believe some of you seriously consider that picking Law would be a good thing. You might as well just tell English youngsters to give up if you're going to pick a 37-yr-old Australian serial reject-cum-carpetbagger ahead of them.

The fact that Graveney hasn't ruled Law out means nothing. He doesn't have to. He just won't ever pick him.

I wont waste words I agree

[Nikhil]

Originally Posted by ernest

I wont waste words I agree

And I hope so.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Nikhil

And I hope so.

We dont need anyone ,we have home grown players,New spinners maybe Keedey

[butchering lee]

as long as there´s a quota system.

you still need a couple of home-grown kids on the fringes.

i´m truly a "so what?" kind of guy. we have or have had , the flowers, olonga amoung others who are not strictly zimbabwean - - as you said. so what!!!

[Nikhil]

Originally Posted by butchering lee

as long as there´s a quota system.

you still need a couple of home-grown kids on the fringes.

i´m truly a "so what?" kind of guy. we have or have had , the flowers, olonga amoung others who are not strictly zimbabwean - - as you said. so what!!!

Ok folks, who do you think are the next BIG thing in England? I mean they should be really young about 21-24. Anyone above that is not exactly young these days.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Nikhil

Ok folks, who do you think are the next BIG thing in England? I mean they should be really young about 21-24. Anyone above that is not exactly young these days.

Good one this if you had posted it earlier maybe tomorrow

The next big thing in England is,and Jones,Anderson,Hoggard had better watch their backs.

Mahmood young lad from Lancs,very fast and tall to all accounts.

[sostenurter]

Originally Posted by high_on_linseed

My point was, that to enthusiasts like us, there are more things to cricket than winning the Ashes. But to the casual observer, with a passing interest in cricket, winning the Ashes is the ONLY thing (apart from maybe the World Cup) that is relevant. And is, therefore, the only thing that could revive the popularity of the game....if it needs reviving.

in the 80s though, casual cricket fans would have thought that beating the WI was the thing to do, because we hadn't beaten them in donkey's years, and they were as good then as the Aussies are now. So I think our defeat of the WI, while it obviously isn't as impressive as beating the Aussies would be, will inspire a lot of casual cricket fans, who remember our losses to WI and aren't entirely aware of how much the WI have declined. It will probably do more for cricket in this country than beating NZ would, even though that is a much tougher series that will give a true barometer of England's progress. Also, the media will pay much more attention to any match against the WI. In a perverse way, Lara's 400 has ensured that this will continue - and that England will get more praise for beating the WI than NZ, as they have a bona fide world star.

[high_on_linseed]

Im not suggesting we swap Freddie for Law. No way! But ask any Lancashire fan who, deep down, they feel is the better batsman, and if they were beig honest and seeing past their provincial prejudice, theyd surely say Law without any hesitancy. That Law is a better player than Hussain, Butcher,Tres, Collingwood, and, yes, even Vaughan is such a universally acknowledged fact that Im not even gonna bother debating it any more. Even Hussain would admit that, and his word is gospel round here, right?

[high_on_linseed]

Mahmood, though Ive never seen him bowl! But Scott Newman, i have seen bat, and he is looking mean these days. Thirdly, Bell is the quote-unquote classiest young batsman out there.

[high_on_linseed]

I was not exactly immune to the impact of us beating West Indies, though if we do it at home (again), perversely, it will catch more attention. But winning the Ashes would really put cricket on the front pages.