zimcricketforums.com

The knives are out for the senior players ... Article Here

“We are obviously concerned with the way the senior players performed; a trend is developing where if Taylor fails to perform we do not compete and we only do well when he gets a good score,” said cricket committee chairman Alistair Campbell. “We expect the other senior players like Hamilton Masakadza, Tatenda Taibu and Elton Chigumbura to step up and perform so that the younger players like Regis Chakabva and Malcolm Waller can feed off that.”

So Taylor should been at the top of the innings and not expose guys like Chakabva.

Not only are their places at stake but whispers within the ZC corridors suggest that some of the older players may even lose their central contracts.

Maskadza, Taibu, Chigumbura,

Campbell has defended the team saying while they played badly in New Zealand, they generally had a good season.

So one series, the first one away against a team which has our number would warrant an inquest? Its score settling time, and the NZ series has only given opportunity for that.

What trend? When did it begin? I certainly haven't seen it! The only trend we've picked up is that Zim has had the most successful Test opening partnership - which is what led to a win against Bangladesh and competitive performances against Pak & NZ at home, plus the first ODI series win against Bangladesh, something we could've repeated against Pakistan. They key and trend to those achievements has been Vusi, who was missing from that debacle in NZ - not Taylor who really didn't do anything when you look closely and impartially. Those half centuries were as good as batting practice(something his colleagues were accused of). Just like everyone else he failed in the Test - as batsman&captain; we were never going to get anything from the limited overs because through his captaincy, he had already lost us all 3ODIs&T20s in the 1st innings, before handing the last T20 to them - after the others had actually done their bit

Interestingly Bayhaus, I've just been listening to a conversation between Tony Greig and his colleagues. All are unanimous in saying Clarke should bat at 3 in both Tests and ODIs. They question why Khawaja, Shaun Marsh & now Forrest, have had to bat at three while Clarke doesn't step up. To the question of possibly weakening the middle order considering the amount of runs he's made - the simple response was 'your best batsmen bat between 1-3, in fact Aus should even consider moving Clarke up to open in ODIs - examples SL-Mahela, Eng-KP', but he really should step up and bat at #3 in Tests!'

Since when did Malcom Waller become young? Especially when you bracket him with Regis

You're quite right in saying NZ has our number! Zimdoggy has pointed that out before as well, highlighitng that they're the only team which disrespects Price. They thumped us home&away in all games! When you look at the Test&limited over squads they sent down here, and the way they've changed around their players and combinations in NZ, it really shows that they treated us with absolute disregard - and got away with it. The only reason we came close to competing against them was 1)we were at home, 2) they let us! But examining their relaxed attacks reveals that we were never anywhere near them. Which is why their Ryder-less Test team obliterated us using it's proper attack. In fact, to point to any positives against NZ is a joke. Pakistan was understandable because an addition of Rehman&Gul wouldn't have prevented us from going past 250 in the 1st innings. Still would've been an achievement I feel! But by and large any of our positives against NZ were fictitous!

All in all, Taibu has actually done well since he came back from injury. Hami started of ok with his batting, then regressed when he was messed about in the batting order, but I believe his bowling made up for a lot of it - saving Zim many embarassments - albeit not the reason he's in the side. Elton has done resonably well too. Unlike Waller, Regis, Mutizwa, Jarvis, Vitori&Cremer - these 3 ARE among our best players! None are more deserving of staying in the team and retaining their contracts! There's nothing better to replace them with!

Anyway, just like certain sections of this forum, I don't expect AC to say anything relevant because no white player will be questioned - not even the senior Price who HAS been abysmal. The reason why we failed is because of the totals we conceded due to a combination of the captain and bowlers, plus fielding to an extent. That reflects on Taylor, Jarvis & Vitori . The attack failed the team by not taking wickets where they were supposed to. All the more reason why Vitori won't be publicly catsigated(or dropped), because Jarvis&Taylor would somehow have to be questioned as well, and I don't see that happening.

Yes, hhm, only sissies bat at 4. You might like to elaborate on that theory on the next Sachin-thread on Cricinfo or in any Indian forum. On your return you will find that in comparison we're all meek lambs at ZCF.

foreignfield wrote:Yes, hhm, only sissies bat at 4. You might like to elaborate on that theory on the next Sachin-thread on Cricinfo or in any Indian forum. On your return you will find that in comparison we're all meek lambs at ZCF.

I have explained with utmost clarity on those forums just how superior a cricketer Kallis is to Sachin (and true - ZCF is a much calmer place ... though still with a tendancy not to see sense ).

I think AC has good intetions for Zim and he takes many wrong decisions along the way.Taibu,Masakadza,Chiggs are the foundation of Zim....

A problem with threatening the like of Taibu, Chigs, Hami is that we will in quick time need to return to them. If there were standouts who could do much better they'd have shown their class by now. We'd all put Ballance in a class above, but he is not interested in serving. Ervine is perhaps a better long term prospect than the other middle order options of Waller and Mutizwa, but behind Taylor, Vusi, Hami, Taibu, Chigs are pretty essential to our top 7.

So whilst we might rage about a poor tour, it doesn;t make sense to slot in a Dabengwa or Mutumbami out of vindictiveness.

And I menat Craig, not Sean.

How rich....1. you drop one of your best player to set a precedent (valid or not is moot), 2. Don't take a recognized opener in his place 3. Ask a struggling Hami to open??... 4. Have debutants and youngsters in your top 3.....and you have the audacity to come out and point fingers....please....

Having said that Chigs and Hami with the bat have had a torid 12 months, in ODI Chigs out of 19innings he has 1 fifty to show for it, Hami from 13 only a marginally better 2, averages are modest, 22 and 27 respectively. But Taibu??? Where's that one coming from??? ....Second highest runs getter, at 31.88 an innings, 6fifties at a SR of 76.... .....

Mutizwa is not an ODI player even his List A figures say so...he is more a Test player and I refuse to judge him on the wreched debut where he had to open in his two innings, he is better than that. Craig is the future in the middle order, and largely due to a terrific WC where he was the best batsman, he had a great 8 or so months, but was terrible post WC, but form is temporary and class permanent I back him to comeback.....and yes hhm since when has 27 year old Waller and 26 year old Mutizwa become youngsters?...

If we are to limit ourselves to just the NZ tour, all blame should lie with the brains trust, firstly for the Vusi debacle, if he had to be punished why not dock him a few match fees? Plain truth, the cupboard IS bare and we can't afford the moral high ground. Secondly having chosen that idiotic stance, why not get a specialist opener (Duffin, Marillier, etc?)...failure to that why not our form batsman the captain? What good was it for him to open from 4 at 3/2?? Taibu again is second highest runs getter at 32....Even Chigs is a close 3rd at 31.....where is Ali coming from?.....everyone except Regis, including Taylor failed in the Tests....except in Hami's case it's a continuation of very poor form in Test and ODI, T20 is a different case, maybe we should let him play his natural game of belting the leather off the ball, and not trying to be Raul Dravid.

Why can't ZC accept they messed up and let down the team badly, let's learn, kiss and make up, and move on already, instead of pretending what strategies (if any) we employed in NZ were good enough. Please stop it already you messed up, stop treating us like idiots, we aren't.

If there is an area of concern it's our bowling, having lost Mpofu, maybe in hindsight, Raisnford, whom I have mentioned as being overlooked would have made sense, that's as far as I will go hhm, forget Panyangara, but Rainsford's milage would have been worthwhile, Jarvis and Vitori aren't ready to lead the line unfortunately ( I believe in them, and there is potential) but prematurely rushing them in is not doing them any favors.

Yes Hami and Chigs need to soul search, but are we off on a Vusi on them? Do we ever learn??....so as much as this duo has something to ponder ZC and Ali and committee have a lot more to ponder.

I find it rather funny that amidst a cricket journalist, Zim former player&administrator - AC and fellow ardent cricket fans we are actually debating the futures of senior batsmen, when the Zim team went on a tour and conceded such totals:
TEST-495/7dec@4.0; ODI-248@5.11, 372/6@7.44, 373/8@7.46; T20I-160/3@9.5, 200/2@10! That's 1848runs, 35wickets at an economy of 7.4!

On average just 6wickets per match - no more than 1 wicket per bowler! On average just wo wickets per match for you top two bowlers is pathetic in my opinion - am I right Morne&Dale?

By all means question the senior batsmen for failing in the 1st ODI, but when considering the Test don't be selective please - no one is free from blame on that one - not even Taylor!

In all honesty, this should really be a discussion about the captain and the bowlers! They are the only ones who shouls be under threat!

No way any of the top sides would have been guaranteed to chase down those totals(assuming they had conceded them in the first place).

Really Mr Campbell, shouldn't we be more concerned about the bowlers? All the matches were already lost by the time we came on to bat Am I wrong guys?

Well, my post could well have been the same, but considering the bowlers. We can be not entirely satisfied with returns, but the same guys are going to be needed again, even if you seek to make a point with them. Obviously we were missing Mpofu, as we were missing Vusi, but those two could have had pretty average tours just like the rest, had they played. As I said elsewhere, Vusi may well have been better off excluded.

Jarvis, Price, Mpofu are going to be the core of the bowling, + Chigs. All our other options are of a similar class, whatever quibbling may go on here at ZCF.