West Indies Cricket Fans

every game of the 3 so far a Pak batsman put his down, sunk some roots and took Pak to victory.

to date no westindian batsman has attempted to do the same...bat all the way through, an innings around which a respectable ta7ol could have been built?

why is this happening...or not happening?

is there some strategy and tactics to westindies approach?

wat is it?

Very pertinient question. While the issue of whether or not there is a strategy or tactics in the performances we are seeing from the WI team is one that can be argued at length, the need for a 'sheet anchor' - a person or thing to be relied upon in an emergency - in the team is blatantly obvious. However, the person who steps up or is assigned to play this role MUST possess a solid technique, an unflappable temperament and a passion for batting ball after ball after ball for hour after hour after hour. Each ball on its merit!

In the one day format although the anchor of the innings has to be able to turn over the strike to the other batters he shold not be 'shotless' and just stay at the wicket to keep time single by single. The other batters have to know that the anchor will not get himself out to silly shots and so they too have to do their jobs i.e score quickly but with assurance. Based on this a score of 220 would have been a big test for Pakistan in the game yesterday.

In the Test team Chanderpaul and Nash are both good for the role. Many times I watch Dwayne Bravo come in to bat with Chanderpaul and I ask myself whether he knows that his job is simple - DO NOT FECKING GET OUT!!!! When any of the 'lesser' batsmen are batting with Chanderpaul their job is simple: play each ball according to merit and make the bowler bowl a great ball to get your wicket! Imagine if Dwayne batted this way and got to 60 before Chanders got out. Nash comes in - another anchor - by which time Dwayne should be seeing the ball big and knows that his job is to stay at the crease, take no risks, till Nash gets going. Once Nash is settled Dwayne can open up again. In this way we can see that it is the concept of anchoring an innings is equally important as who will be the anchor.

But mapoui all of this calls for cricketing brains and solid batting technique. How come these cant be found within the WI setup??!!! I hope that Simmons is learning that in the one-day game when he gets to fifty his job is bat the whole innings!! Not 50 and out!

mapoui wrote:ever game of the 3 so far a Pak batsman put his down, sing some roots and took Pak to victory.

to date no westindian batsman has attempted to do the same...bat all the way through, an innings arouynd which a respectable taol could have been built?

why is this happening...or not happening?

is here some strategy and tactis to westindies approach?

wat is it?

when selectors select players like smith sammy u effectively have only 9 plaers out of those 4 are bowlers...so we are left with simmons bravo snr bravo jnr and edwards samuels....edwards has just made his debut you cant expect him to take responsibilty straight away as for samuels he doesnt look good enough to me he used to be a lot better player not now...so we are left with simmonsa nd bravo jnr who are actually consistently scoring rund only bravo snr hasnt joined the party

But mapoui all of this calls for cricketing brains and solid batting technique. How come these cant be found within the WI setup??!!! I hope that Simmons is learning that in the one-day game when he gets to fifty his job is bat the whole innings!! Not 50 and out!

yu argue what I have been arguing here for days now. designated anchors and if one gets out the established batsman takes up the role to keep the innings going.

in the mix and given smiths weaknesses I thought simmons would start out being anchor... when he got to 50 he would shake his head and re-gird himself go go on, reducing risk if only for a time, to pick it up again as soon as possible.

as I pointed out the right leader can get out of westindians what they have in them even when they do not know that do posses as much as they put out. Worrell did that in cricket...so did Lloyd.

in the early days there was a connection between Eric Williams and the people of Titty exactly like that.

but the general leadership of the westindies is not like that..people like Worrell, Lloyd and an early eric williams being exceptions to the general rule. we get almost 99% of the time people like Hunter and his clones. and all these do is drive the situation to ruin

the right leadership..captain and coach...shud be able to get the proper message and required reaction from the players. but we so infrequently get the right leadership our goose seems cooked

Maps, you do know who the "anchors" are, I am sure! you want them 2 in the team? even the pale fellow???

I guess that we saw a good example of the sheet anchor role in the 4th one day international. Asad Shafiq was absolutely awful for a long time during the early part of his innings, however because Mohammad Hafeez never looked like getting out, Shafiq realised his resposibility to the team and knuckled down till his touch came back and he started to play more fluently. In the meantime Hafeez continued in the good touch he has showed all series. Result? 152/1 after 36 overs. Which means that the batters still to come can look forward to good opportunities to score freely off a demoralised attack. Even Shafiq could cash-in during this innings and contribute a major score.

yu shud see wat I mean by westindies very poor brain-trust howzat!

all of this is elementary, basic cricket. yet westindiees batting is not doing it. we show no consistent and sensible approach to our batting..at no time at all

the batsmen go out with no plan or purpose...just to bat and score if they can however they can no direction or purpose

I was just reading your big post above howzat!

yu get the concept of anchor that has changed from one of the type of basman, to one of the adaptibiliy of all batsmen in a side to posses an assortment of gears they can shift to as the flow of the game warrants

if simmons gets a start then he is the man to go all the way. a wicket falls he redoubles and refocuses himself in his role of anchoring the innings.

if the going batsman falls then the man at the other end assumes the role of anchor until the new man settles in and so on all the way through till a total is achieved.

yu see wat i am saying but if its not happening its because the brain-trust isnt planning with the side at all. I have no idea wat gibson tells his batsmen to do at the start of an innings..or if he tells them anything at all