Who's Gary Keedy?

[Doink]

Who's Gary Keedy? I read some place that he may be closing onto 31 but as per some people he's England's best spinner, who unfortunately has nver played a test...

[DaveGillespie]

He's a SLA spinner for Lancashire. Has taken a lot of wickets over the last two seasons, but it's 99% probable that he'll never get a game for England while Fletcher's in charge as he doesn't know one end of a bat from the other. Plus, he's a left armer and Giles is locked into the side. Hence why Batty was picked ahead of him - Off Break, offering some variety beside Giles, and competent with the bat.

[Kirsty Harris]

Keedy is a gifted SLA, and has been somewhat unfortunate never to have had a shot at the England side, but there are many players in the same boat. It's a question of being in the right time and place, and it's never really happened for Keedy - certianly Giles has (deservadly)got the spinners slot sown up for the time being, especially as he is a far superior batsmen. Also, I would have to say Giles is more reliable generally than keedy, and more able/willing to work to a game plan.

[Ernest]

No I doubt he ever will play a Test due to the obsession by Fletcher that every players has to be a batsman.

Giles has kept Keedy out of the England team, in the main because he is the better batter, and is accurate.

In past years keedy would have got the nod because he is a good spinner, could have got even better had he had international experience, remember Underwood he was a rabbit with the bat.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Ernest

In past years keedy would have got the nod because he is a good spinner, could have got even better had he had international experience, remember Underwood he was a rabbit with the bat.

I'm sure if he was as good as Underwood, he'd be in the team!

[Zainub]

I can hardly question Fletcher's aversion for spinners who are rabbits with the bat - look at the world stage, nearly all spinners internationally, probably for the exception of, Harbajjan (even he can hit a few out of the park when he's in mood) Murali (he's a classic number 11) and Kaneria (who was very poor at one stage, but now, under Bob, he's probably being forced to get better, although I presume that is with no strings attached) - Kumble is probably a very under achieved batsmen at the test level, for some one who has not one or two but a complete set of seven first class hundreds (if I'm rembering correctly) you would expect to have scored at least one century at the test level - but all the same he's one very reliable customer, Shane Warne as we all know, has got the most test runs of any test batsmen of all time without making a century, Daniel Vettori is right now most probably in New Zealand's best top 5 batters wrt to amount of runs made in the last seasonr, Nicky Boje can certainly bat as well, most keepers in world cricket bat - unless they're in the same bracket as Harbajjan or Kaneria (let alone Warne or Murali) its difficult to argue why selectors and/or coaches should not be tempted to preffer those who can bat a bit as opposed to those who cannot at all. It really is difficult, as much as I hate to admit it.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Pete

I'm sure if he was as good as Underwood, he'd be in the team!

Well I doubt he is as good as Underwood, but say he was, and he was included, then the way this England set up thinks, we have to have a number 11 pace bowler who could bat.

Originally Posted by Zainub Razvi 46017

Daniel Vettori is right now most probably in New Zealand's best top 5 batters wrt to amount of runs made in the last seasonr,

A good example here, I would say vettoro is no better than Giles, but have New Zealand a better spin bowler?, who can bat as well.

Originally Posted by Zainub

its difficult to argue why selectors and/or coaches should not be tempted to preffer those who can bat a bit as opposed to those who cannot at all. It really is difficult, as much as I hate to admit it.

Well it's the modern way of thinking, everyone has to be able to bat, first Read was replaced by G O JOnes, then Giles holds the spot automatlicly because he can bat.
I am not saying he is not there on merit, what I am saying is no matter if Keedy or others are the better bowlers, Giles will always get the nod.
Wicket keeping and spin bowling are now genuine all round spots in the England and some other teams.
it was not just Underwood Pete, Tuffers was no great shakes with the bat, neither was Edmunds, and Embury only became half decent with the bat near the end of his career, the days that a spinner gets into certain teams on bowling merit alone are gone, and it is a modern ploy selectors choose.

[Zainub]

Modern ploy it is Ern, but if you live in the modern world, one would expect you to adjust or else face the consequences.

I'm not sure why Mr. Keedy should not at least try and give his batting some respectability. It's not like its impossible. I've seen it happen. Danish Kaneria was an absolute rabbit a season ago, but now, he's improved his batting by something like 5%, he's learned to first play proper defensive strokes, and then he's probably trying to get a few drives in his armory as well. Now he can certainly hang around longer then he could in the past. Look at Jason Gellispie - there's no better examples of a bowler who's learned to bat then him - he was never the number 8 he is now 5 years ago, but with a bit of hard work he's made it possible - common Erne, even Pigoen has a test half century now.

The thing I'm trying to say, is I that I find it surprising that all these people should come to the defence of Gary Keedy saying he is a great/good bowler who has not got into the test side because he can't bat - I say what's the big issue - he should learn how to bat then. It's really just as simple as picking up a bat, putting on your pads, and then getting some one to throw down balls at you in the nets. Give it a few weeks, and you'll at least make your self a determined defensive player ala Gareth Batty if nothing more. If Keedy is really keen on getting an England call up, he should be getting his batting sorted out, because this is what evolution is all about - Darwin called it the survival of the fittest. (It must be noted that this does not imply I agree with Mr Darwin or his theories on evolution of life, this is merely an adverse affect of giving 2 biology tests in the last 48 hours)

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Zainub Razvi

unless they're in the same bracket as Harbajjan or Kaneria (let alone Warne or Murali) its difficult to argue why selectors and/or coaches should not be tempted to preffer those who can bat a bit as opposed to those who cannot at all.

Exactly what I think. Plus, he doesn't have a name as cool as the king of spain.

Kirsty, you can even get King of Spain mugs now..

[Kirsty Harris]

Originally Posted by Pete

Kirsty, you can even get King of Spain mugs now..

Oh! Pretty!! Must get me one of them

Re: Keedy, as I said early, he has had some misfortune in not getting England recognition, but it has happened to a lot of good county players - for example, Martin Bicknill was hardly called upon despite being one of the best county bowlers season after season, simply because the timing was never right. I don't belive Keedy is necessarily a better bowler than Giles, on his day, he may be, but he lacks consistancy. As Zaniub rightly said, if he was keen to play for England he could have worked on his batting, as it is he has made it an easy choice.

Incidently, there was a lovley piece in the Observer, by Vic Marks about Graham Hick today, which concludes with the passage ' Hick and Ramprakash were, ultimatley, not tough enough to succeed (at test level), yet both remain an adornment to the English game. Now we should simply marvel at their craft while they are still around. the time for agonising - by us or them -has passed'

Perhaps this applies to players like Keedy and Bicknell, who may not have reached the top level, but have shown great skill for their respective counties.