He just gets better.

[Ernest]

Well should this player not be in the England team after re-writing the history books.

Originally Posted by BBC

The former England batsman, 38, scored an unbeaten 130 at the Oval as he reached 2026 runs for the season at an average of 101.30.

How can England pass him by - even at the age of 38, well he has scuppered Lanc's chances.

Details click here

[pie_chucker]

He is still a quality player but he had enough chances (over 50 ) to prove himself in the test arena and failed miserably!

What he needed early in his career was the england management that exists now - a management regime where Ramps would be encouraged to play his natural attacking game and never be worrying about wether his performance would get him selected for the next game or if he would be dropped for the latest flavour of the month. If this had happened we may have seen the "Real" Ramps play test cricket, as it was he had to play a lot of his early years under the worst 2 regimes ever in test cricket - Gooch / Stewart and Illy / Illy .

Anyway as this 20/20 WC has shown, performances in county cricket dont mean much when it comes to the international game... The little cricket i saw on holiday involved Kirtley getting carted all over the place. After reading the reports our other specialists didnt do much better.

[greg]

Looked a class act on tv but he didn't do it when it mattered for England and wasted his career.A big shame as if he had got the temperament of some lesser players who have carved out good test careers he could have gone down as a great,as it is he will go down as a never was.

[John]

Another Graeme Hick. One of crickets enigmas which makes things so interesting. I don't know about mangements role but a quality player should come through no matter what.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by John

Another Graeme Hick. One of crickets enigmas which makes things so interesting. I don't know about mangements role but a quality player should come through no matter what.

Think is John - both Hick and Ramp's played in the England set up (pre Fletcher) - and they always seemed to be playing for their places - that was pressure they did not need.

Even after the presshad hyped them up - they where on their backs at the first sign of failure - IMO we will never know the true value these two players could have been under a proper England coach.

[pie_chucker]

Originally Posted by Ernest

..they always seemed to be playing for their places ...

Thats the thing Ern, if they had scored 3 hundreds in 3 matches but failed in the 4th they would be dropped for the 5th match for the latest "flavour of the week". Thankfully those days are long gone.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by John

Another Graeme Hick. One of crickets enigmas which makes things so interesting. I don't know about mangements role but a quality player should come through no matter what.

I'm not sure Ramps and Hick should be bracketed together. Questions always remained of Hick. He, like Hayden, had great hands... but never completely satisfied all of his critics when it came to playing "grown up fast bowling" - though unlike Hayden... Hick had the misfortune to play in an era where all time great seamers really could test the theory that he had a crucial weakness.

You could argue that Hick never proved himself against the best... but Ramps did: what let Ramps down was being ordinary against the second-raters! Put him into a head-to-head with an all time great new-ball pairing and he'd concentrate and win through... but put him up against second raters and he'd lose concentration and give his wicket away!

In that way, Ramps was arguably more comparable to Gower than to Hick!

[pie_chucker]

Hick and Ramps IMO should be bracketed together they were both very talented but in differant ways and ultimately they both failed at test level (Ramps more so than Hick). Hicks problem with "proper" fast bowling was that he wasnt prepared to take it on, he was too scared of being dismissed. On the odd occasion when he did cut and pull he looked a differant batsman.... Hicks main weakness was at times his ordinary footwork left him vulerable to straight ish balls that shouldnt really have caused him a problem.

Originally Posted by Rachael

Put him (Ramps) into a head-to-head with an all time great new-ball pairing and he'd concentrate and win through...

Like Ambrose and Walsh perhaps with a batting average of 20.....

[*Jonty*]

Originally Posted by Rachael

I'm not sure Ramps and Hick should be bracketed together. Questions always remained of Hick. He, like Hayden, had great hands... but never completely satisfied all of his critics when it came to playing "grown up fast bowling" - though unlike Hayden... Hick had the misfortune to play in an era where all time great seamers really could test the theory that he had a crucial weakness.

You could argue that Hick never proved himself against the best... but Ramps did: what let Ramps down was being ordinary against the second-raters! Put him into a head-to-head with an all time great new-ball pairing and he'd concentrate and win through... but put him up against second raters and he'd lose concentration and give his wicket away!

In that way, Ramps was arguably more comparable to Gower than to Hick!

You NEVER cease to amaze me Rachael with the array of excuses you have come up with time after time after time after time.................AMAZING how you think them up,congratulations.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by pie_chucker

Like Ambrose and Walsh perhaps with a batting average of 20.....

Cricinfo - 5th Test: West Indies v England at Bridgetown, Mar 12-16, 1998