bigfluffylemon wrote: Regardless of the failings or not of county cricket, when a player who has performed well there goes into the England set-up, they should be benefitting from elite coaching and further improving. How many players in the last ten years have actually got better, or even maintained their capability, under the England management?
I have been saying this for over a decade, but it all comes down to the vision you put in place for selection and what elements of a player you are actually putting your faith in.
There are many examples, but the best that springs to mind is someone like Tom Westley. They looked at short term form over career production, something I didnt agree with at the time, but the guy then came in and I thought actually he looked pretty technically sound. There was something to work on there. You just sometimes look at a player and think, regardless of how he gets out or how he scores, that he sets up like a superior player and given time he might do something - but England's view was, he was picked because his form had peaked, and if he didnt peak instantly he was not worth more than 4 tests. By extension, you are then saying you dont even trust your own judgement.
Regardless of how a test player comes into the game, one has to assume that once he has satisfied the grade for test cricket, you have to give him time.
Another that springs to mind was Mason Crane. They said Mason had something about him, take out the stats and hes a young guy trying to perfect the hardest art in the game.... we think he will improve, we think he has the tools. One innings later, suddenly the figures mattered. A guy averaging 50 a wicket in FC was never, ever in a million yeras going to walk into the test arena and hit the ground running on the hardest tour, at the end of a cremation of a series, vs a side with batsman at the time averaging in the 70s at home on dead pitches.
What is thinking behind the selection then? Why bother picking him to develop him and give him experience acknowledging he isnt at that point ready, only to then drop him forever when he returns about what any reasonable person would expect. Kerrigan is another, what was it? 6 overs he got? You telling me a selection panel sat there and said "this guy is the future for x,y,z" and that opinion was strong enough to get him a cap in the national team, but that opinion was destroyed in the space of 15 minutes? Or was that just a punt. Were those involved picking him not believing he could do well, and just hoping?
It matters a lot because, where spin is concerned especially, is you are a 20 year old spinner in county cricket playing on pitches that are already tough and dont help you, imagine what it must be like. You see the Cranes and Kerrigans getting one innings. You see Jack Leach tearing up the championship, but the coach dismantling his personality in public. You see someone like you in Bess doing an OK job for the national team, but the coach tearing into him after one bad game away against the one side that destroy spin routinely.
Motivation much?