Is there still justification in any hope?

[PieChucker]

Hope?
who said there was hope? posting.php?mode=reply&f=3&t=2576#
The key quality of all good Zimbabweans is the ability to be optimistic in the fact of absolute and irrefutable doom. This is the only reason we support our boys - not so?
So hope will remain regardless of the results and regardless of our shrill comments on this blessed forum.
And so, let me add my 2 cents worth..
The thing about playing against New Zealand is that they always show up. Unlike Bangladesh, especially Gladesh on tour. How can you measure any progress by beating them? And Pakistan are about as consistent and erratic as the French Rugby team!
The Kiwis, however, are a proven outfit who always put up a fight and make the most of their talents and resources. They may not have the depth of the top teams, but they have got a few star players and the others always muck in. If you win a game against them then you know you beat them, they didn't roll over, collapse or just lose heart and give up.
Our boys do seem to have a problem with self belief, they get themselves into a good position and then don't know how to convert it into victory. They should have won the ODI in Byo against Pakistani, but didn't have the belief and the sense of entitlement to rip it from Pak's hands.
When Djokovic was asked how he had managed to suddenly turn around from a nearly ran to World No 1, he said simply, "I lost my fear and began to believe."

[bayhaus]

They still owe us big time

I have mixed feelings about our players, sometimes I feel they don't care about the supporters and are only concerned about themselves etc, but the better part of me believes they want to make the fans and supporters happy and try their best, especially when they do laps of honor after victories. I personally think that I have overrated our team, and now expect less than before and I have not really been off the mark.

All that's left for Coventry now is to hope he can still break into the Tuskers side

Please Please Please don't tell me Coventary hasn't been able to make the Tuskers side! Cos if thats the case then my conspiracy theories of trade offs is happening at a much deeper level! And we are headed nowhere. Is it confirmed that CK hasn't played for the Tuskers this season, if not why not?

The ease with which their batsman flayed our bowlers … NZ might just be more brutal and clinical.

NZ will be brutal and are certainly clinical they won't give us too many chances and they will take whatever half chance comes they way. I believe the game will be won in the batting. Mainly by the first 4 from either team. How they perform will determine how well each team does.

coventry is rubbish i have said this for so long, he is useless and a waste of talent get over him people , he will be remember for one innings.

Harsh but i need convincing otherwise. I know guys who were very talented in highschool like Maregwede, but they just couldn't convert that talent into results, then guys like tibia who are not talented naturally with the bat, but through determination, innovation and hard work leads the way and his absence is shouting right now.

we need a shrink. we put on an awesome score of 154 that could have been in the 160s. if we werent chasing such a large score we would never have got 154. The case with zimbabwe is ifthe team are chasing 90, they will get 80. if we are chasing 190, we get close. we have a serious mindset problem, we have a team of scared sissies. coventry isnt a sissy

we cannot pace an innings and it happens when we bat first as well.

only 2 teams make me scared on the field playing
zim. Safrica and new zealand

Yep we always seem to have a chance against everyone else, but not these two teams!

I think many Zimbabwean cricket fans make the mistake of thinking NZ really isn't that far ahead in talent and productivity.

I was certainly a culprit of that, until the world cup, and even up to this series the notions still lingered, but now I have seen we are not close.

[hhm]

Contrary to my headline, and the usual disposition of my comments, I am not in agreement with those here who concede that Zim is overrated, or too far below the standard. Our key problems lie in failure to develop our players, and allow them time in our FC competitions. Because we do not have the kind of luxury and talent which the likes of Aus&SA who pick stars literally off the streets have, there must be a preresquisite for selection which will not be waivered lightly. We simply cannot afford to be selecting players who do not have for example a bare minimum of having played at least 10 games, bowlers - 50 wickets (25- avg, 3.5- eco, incl 2 5fors), batsmen - 1000 runs (30+ avg, incl 2 100s)in our domestic structure.

Our team lacks maturity. Just consider the average age of it, without taking into account Price. I've been impressed by some of the associate nations who include 'old' players or expatriates in their sides, some of them 35+ in age. This has helped the likes of Canada and Ireland to develop, and come close to beating us. We did the same when we came through initially by including some old players. Since readmission into Tests we more or less find ourselves in the same boat. The problem is we lack the calm mature heads needed to know when to slow down the pace of a game, yield to better bowling despite not putting runs on the board but with wickets on hand, and avoid losing the match in an hour or a single session. I will not forget that wonderful final over Andrew Hall bowled in the local T20 game last year. Old but mature enough to know what to do. Surely a combination of Panyangara+Rainsford+Mpofu+Chigumbura wouldn't leak as much as Vitori+Jarvis+Nicholson+Shingi. Teams are beating us by 10 wickets so the argument that the youngsters strike more is without substance, however with tighter bowlers at least it's harder for the oposition to get their runs and hence might succumb to that kind of pressure. Matsi&Ewing in the middle order looks safer than Waller&Mutizwa. The kind of maturity referred to here is in terms of a combination of age and exposure - been on tour and faced better bowlers/batsmen under foreign conditions a number of times.

You just have to bear with me because you have heard and will continue to hear this from me many times, but our fortunes will only start turning around when these players are included. They are in their prime so might as well take advantage of that. They may have failed 4-6 yrs ago, but now is a different time. Yes we also collapsed countless times when we had the old heads like Andy and Heath, but the general consensus now is that the level of the game is gradually getting poorer and the standard/technique of bowlers and batsmen is less tougher to exploit. Which is why all the teams are beating each other so much - Pak bt Aus, NZ bt Pak, Zim bt Ban, Ban bt WI, Eng bt Ind, Ind bt Aus, SA bt Ind, Aus bt SA etc - and if that Andy/Streak team was playing now they'd probably be top 4/5 behind AUS, SA & Eng.

One thing that I've noticed from Aus in the last few years is that they've tended to pick players who have captained their states - e.g. Katich, North, White etc, so it helps if key players are given those kind of roles locally so that they can translate those captaincy skills into their game plus how they cooperate with their captain in the national team.

[brmtaylor.com admin]

I think you are seriously overrating the so-called mature members of the Zimbabwean domestic set up hhm. Compare Rainsford's last 10 matches to Vitori's and tell me who looks better. You press on about only judging Vitori's career from the Pakistan match onwards in order to conveniently ignore a number of brilliant bowling performances - not only against Bangladesh but against strong Australia A and South Africa A sides as well.

Now compare Jarvis to Panyangara. There are a lot of wicketless games recently for Panyangara; not to mention that in his last two ODI's he got hammered. Not to say Jarvis won't get hit around the park as well, but he has recent form on his side so of course he deserves selection.

Your Matsikenyeri and Ewing argument holds more weight because those guys have displayed good form. Matsikenyeri is discovering some serious form in the domestic competition: 110* last week, 80* a few days ago and another century today. If he makes any squad ahead of Waller or Mutizwa it's because he's earned it through good form; not because he's been on tour or faced different kinds of bowlers - that is a bonus though. I'm not Matsikenyeri's biggest fan, 100 ODI's for an average in the low 20's is a concern but if he continues to dominate domestic attacks then obviously that should result in national selection. Ewing hasn't performed badly either, but it should be noted that both Waller and Mutizwa have put together some nice scores this domestic season as well. I would err on the side of giving the incumbents another chance in this ODI series against New Zealand (which I expect will happen). By the time the tour to New Zealand rolls around we'll have a far better idea of how the middle order will look as this four-way battle will resolve itself in the domestic arena.

[hhm]

The argument can be in many ways BRM. For example it could also be said that if after 50 FC matches Vitori has an average of 20odd&almost 200 wickets like Rainsford, instead of 40odd avg&wickets, then we can talk. Form is temporary, class is permanent. Time is usually the deciding factor, and normally long term FC class performances are the ladder to Test honours, so on that basis Rainsford should have got the nod. However, like a new Zim 3rd division soccer club, 'trials' were held. You will remember one of my topics where I pointed out that the exercise was much ado about nothing because only Vitori was unearthed really(Jarvis&Mawoyo had been around and they were determined for the latter to open anyway much to the surprise of many in the ZCF). Which is actually turning out to be true because it was best to have simply selected the seniors and put them in a two month training camp ahead of those XI games. Unfortunately Vitori is regressing badly and it was highly evident from all the commentators we listened to. You mistake my protection of Vitori and Jarvis for a willingness for them to fail. I stand by the fact that they are doing their growing up in the wrong place - which will be to their detriment, not benefit, as it's proving to be.

At the end of the day I see clear signs that things WILL pan out as I initially said. Matsi's scores won't be ignored and Ewing's runs and leading the Tuskers to victories won't be either. Albeit few, the wickets of Panyangara and Rainsford, taking into account their experience and the impeninding mauling of the current seam attack, means they will be preferred instead of turning to another set of novices like Chatara and Nicholson. If Mawoyo comes short, Duffin will probably considered to open - seeing as Hami is slowly going into a downturn and a promotion up the order might be avoided. I don't overrate these seniors or tell myself that somehow they will create miracles. Nonetheless I do trust them to have performances which will be consistently better in the short term. Forget the distant past. I think they've been playing cricket long enough to know what they must do to get the job done. Right now there's a huge contrast between our batting and bowling up top. Vusi(a senior) sets a wonderful base for the rest of the batsmen to follow, Jarvis(the novice) on the other hand gets bludgeoned and the opposition builds immediate confidence from dispatching the 'best bowler', but we still expect Mpofu(the senior) to pick up the pieces. Just give Mpofu the new ball and let him take control. A hierarchy must be maintained. For all of Broad's exploits Jimmys still calls the shots and talks to the other bowlers. Right now we are relagiting our senior consistentantly better bowler to second or third fiddle at every chance we get! So far, how many international matches have we lost on the trot? When do you suppose the rot will stop, if not what do you expect should be done?

[brmtaylor.com admin]

Your argument is all over the place hhm. In one breath you say look at how impressive Rainsford's career stats are and that despite not being amongst the wickets now Rainsford and Panyangara have loads of experience. Then in another breath you say forget the distant past - which is precisely when these guys were last in scintillating form.

Obviously time is the deciding factor (in assessing past performance); hindsight is a wonderful thing! But selectors don't have the benefit of looking back over an extensive list of past performances with young players so they have to make do. You can't overlook good form (ie. Vitori) just because a player doesn't have 10 years and 50 First Class matches worth of experience under their belt. No matter how you twist it and despite everything you say, Vitori made an immediate impact when he was selected - it was a good decision to play him and he rewarded the selectors faith.

I think you base your ideal selections on the probability of a player not under-performing; hence you feel it is safer to pick players with more experience (ie. you feel Mawoyo has a greater chance of failing in the next Test than Duffin, so even though Mawoyo scored 160 odd in his last game he is a more high-risk selection). Whereas I base ideal selections on how a player has performed in the recent past with the view that if they are in good form now, hopefully they will perform well in the upcoming match or series (ie. Mawoyo scored 160 odd in his last game, therefore I think he is in good form and deserves to retain his place). Do you think that is a fair assessment?

Jarvis(the novice) on the other hand gets bludgeoned and the opposition builds immediate confidence from dispatching the 'best bowler', but we still expect Mpofu(the senior) to pick up the pieces. Just give Mpofu the new ball and let him take control.

Wow! I must have missed all these games where Jarvis opened the bowling and poor old Mpofu had to come in and pick up the pieces. Because of the games I've seen it's been Mpofu to take the new ball and often get a pasting. When a senior player gets a pasting whatever will we do then? Find an even more senior player? Douglas Hondo? Roll Eddo Brandes out in a wheelchair? Of course not, you pick a team based on form because you want your best eleven on the park. And you persevere with them through the odd bad performance because nobody is immune to that. Yes experience plays a factor in selection, of course it does, but it's not the deciding factor. That's why Mpofu, Jarvis, Vitori, Meth etc are all there and abouts as far as national team selection goes and why Panyangara and Rainsford are not. When they hit some form I'm sure they will get another crack just as Matsikenyeri inevitably will if he continues his rich vein of form continues.

For what it's worth hhm, if we'd had this discussion a year ago about who should play in the Test team upon Zimbabwe's return I would have agreed with you. Taking the conservative route might have given a draw against Bangladesh, and I think we would have all taken that. But I have to admire the approach ZC took; they aggressively developed and fast-tracked seam bowlers and made selections which could have backfired (Mawoyo). A very attacking selection policy is what won that Test against Bangladesh and unearthed potential guns in Jarvis and Vitori (and ultimately and a Test centurion in Mawoyo). They absolutely made the right call.

[eugene]

Good grief, we are still talking about Rainsford and Panyangara. Rainsford was never that great anyway and Panyangara is probably finished as far as international cricket is concerned. Rainsford and Panyangara may not get hit around so much but they are not likely to take 5 wickets either. The ceiling is much lower for them as compared to Jarcis and Vitori. Vitori and Jarvis have both been impressive, sure they have taken the odd beating, but that happens to any bowler early in his career. Selecting Rainsford, Panyangara, Mupariwa, Nkala, Hondo, etc is a step backwards and the kind of safe-thinking approach that never leads to winning and instead seeks to lose but not get thrashed.

[gargamel]

There is so much hope in our current FC system and bit by bit we will get there the fact that we a line of quick bowlers being unearthed every season is quite encouraging . Just today i opened the local Newspaper and heard there is a young Tuskers lad who took 5 for on debut . There is far more depth in numbers in our current FC system than ever before but depth in quality and experience is what we lack and this is my biggest gripe in our national team.

Surprisingly i am not overly worried by our batting its our bowling attack that makes me cringe it is such a green field project that i dream Streaky would loose some pounds and get back in there , or kick Bryan Strang off his Lion Lager Stoep or Bligzy to believe in himself to come in and guide our bowling attack for 3 years or so he has got it .
We talk about Chris being the senior but he is as green as the others as he really didn't have the guidance of an experienced hand to show him the ropes and thus most of our bowling progidies like Nicholson , Ireland , Ncube , Jarvis get plastered and never recover from it as there is no big brother to pat on the shoulder and show them the way. The Tuskers have benefited from having the countries best bowler ever in Streak to shepard them through and thus we see improvements in Chris and Crystal and i hope also with that new boy im very excited about him. If there is a bowler who has cosntantly being in the shadows its Tawanda Mupariwa who i believe is owed by the selectors a serious run as our first or second change bowler as for Rainsford injuries have robbed us of a pure talent who i remember when i first faced him in the Logan Cup while he was at high school was pretty quick and aggressive with a snarl and attitude but alas the fire is gone.For me Payngara is done his undoing was complacency and a lack of aggression or attitude to a game situation an absolute boring player if i have ever met one.

[Flower power]

Our first class system is trudging along well . What ZC needs to do is to get a sponsor for the Zim A team . If we have our A team active then
the bridge between first class and international cricket is bridged . I can quote Ray Price in an article

Price thinks Zimbabwe need to play more A team tours. "When I was coming up, I spent a lot of time on A tours, playing with guys who were much older than me," he said. "I remember an A tour to Sri Lanka that we went on in the late '90s. We lost every game. They had guys like Kumar Sangakkara and Thilan Samaraweera in the squad, and it was such an eye-opener. I wondered if I was good enough to play international cricket, and it made me work so much harder."

Look at the guys that Price had to go against before he got his cap .

Foster Mutizwa hits 100s in the domestic scene and we think he can just get a walk in the park .

i hope when Al Campbell addresses that as he now concentrates on the Cricket committee duties .
U19 should also have more games .

[Conant]

Price thinks Zimbabwe need to play more A team tours. "When I was coming up, I spent a lot of time on A tours, playing with guys who were much older than me," he said. "I remember an A tour to Sri Lanka that we went on in the late '90s. We lost every game. They had guys like Kumar Sangakkara and Thilan Samaraweera in the squad, and it was such an eye-opener. I wondered if I was good enough to play international cricket, and it made me work so much harder."

Look at the guys that Price had to go against before he got his cap .

Foster Mutizwa hits 100s in the domestic scene and we think he can just get a walk in the park .

.
U19 should also have more games .

I hope you eat your words today, flowerpower, and I dont know why you had to pick on poor Foster Mutizwa