Do our young players lack dedication, drive and determination?

[Remie]

We all have different views on which players should be in the West Indies squad but have any of these players actually earned their places in the side. Some people will argue Ganga should be in the side, some people will say Morton has scored a lot of runs, some will say Samuels has the makings of a class batsman. There is uproar that Ramdin has been left out for Baugh. Now please do not think i agree with the current selectors but have the players that you feel should be selected actually gone out and proven that they are head and shoulders above everyone else? Forget about Test and ODI matches for a moment. Look at the career first class batting and bowling averages from our current players in and around the squad.

Batting                                       Bowling

Lara 51.12                                  Taylor 23.13
Chanderpaul 51.41                       R.Kelly 25.09
Gayle 44.18                                 Bradshaw 25.56
Baugh 37.86                               Collymore 25.59
Sarwan 37.52                              Mohammed 25.79
R.Hinds 37.42                              Best 26.82
Devon Smith 36.62                      Collins 27.14
Ganga 36.10                               Bravo 30.17
Samuels 35.59                             Dwayne Smith 30.27
Morton 35.00                              Lawson 30.66
W.Hinds 34.26                             Lewis 33.02
Bravo 30.08                                Edwards 36.09
Dwayne Smith 27.61                    Banks 37.34
Ramdin 26.24

To me what this shows is that the young players, especially the batsmen, are either not good enough or lack dedication, drive and determination to be the best that they can possibly be. It is no surprise that the two batsmen from a different generation are averaging over 50.  But the best player from our most recent generation, Sarwan is averaging less than 40. This does not mean that he is not talented- he averages more in Test cricket. But maybe this is the reason Sarwan has not reached the next level in Test cricket. I personally am extremely dissapointed with Sarwan, because this is the first time i have checked his first class average. What does it say about his dedication, drive and determination that a man of his class is averaging 37.52 in West Indies first class cricket. At the end of Sarwan's career will we be saying that he was one of the greatest Test batsmen ever or will we be saying that he never reached his full potential?

There are a hell of a lot of mediocre averages there. The question is why these players are not performing when they go back home to play domestic cricket. Is it because of the money, the fame, the women? Do they feel that they will be in the next West Indies squad even if they do not perform in domestic cricket. Are they motivated enough to want to be the best or are they just satisfied with what they have achieved already?

I heard a Bennett King say a while back, in other words, that the standard of West Indies first class cricket was not up to scratch. In my opinion the standard of player in West Indies first class cricket is pretty good for a country that is ranked bottom of the major test playing countries. Our U-15 team won the U-15 World Cup and most of those players progressed though to the U-19 team that reached the final of the U-19 World Cup. These players are all playing first class cricket. Even if King was right and the standard was poor, then surely our Test players would be scoring plenty runs and taking plenty wickets?

In Australia and England, batsman of the likes of Hussey, Clarke, Bell, Pietersen all had to wait their turn to get into the Test team. They had to be scoring 100s consistently in domestic cricket to get their chance. They had to sweat blood and tears to make it and stay in the team. Both Clarke and Bell went through a bad patch and were recently dropped, but went back into domestic cricket, scored 100 after 100 and have forced themselves back into their respective sides. This is the perfect way to respond and our young players can learn a lot from the examples set by Clarke and Bell.

I met Ramdin as a 15 year old with the U-15 World Cup squad in England and after seeing him play i could tell he was going to make it big, but although he has played Test cricket he still has a major way to go to fulfill his potential. His first class average is very poor for a player of his calibre. We are all calling for him to be put back in the squad but does he deserve it. What has he done to deserve a recall? What does his batting average tell you?

Samuels is my biggest dissapointment. He was the player i always thought had class. I saw him make a 50 on debut in Australia, and even the Aussies rated him. He scored a sublime century in India. Then he started to go off the boil and was in and out of the squad. If Samuels really wanted it that badly he would be topping those averages. What has he done to deserve to be consistently in the West Indies squad?

Edwards is always in the team when fit. He took 5 wickets on debut against Sri Lanka but what has he done consistently since then? Look at his first class bowling average. Okay the man is a strike bowler, but that average is embarassing. Does he deserve to take the new ball every match?

I could go on all day about 90% of the players on the list but i will not. Any player with a batting average below 40 and a bowling average above 25 should take a good long hard look at themselves.

But just to take a few positives out of these statistics, Taylor is showing us what he is about. The cream will always rise to the top. Taylor has said that he wants to be the greatest fast bowler ever and is doing his utmost to reach the top. Topping the first class averages is a start. I regret that i have not seen Kelly bowl yet, but his consistent bowling performances show that he possibly merits a call up. It is also nice to see Mohammed go out there and prove that he can do it. But Kelly and Mohammed have been overlooked for the recent DLF tournament. What they need to do it go out there and push their bowling averages closer to 20 to make sure that they are not overlooked next time.

Overall, i really believe that even if Bennett King and the selectors select our best eleven we will be competitive in ODIs but in Tests we will still be far short of what is required. Yes a new coach and selectors would be nice, but most importantly our young players really need to step up their game! It is not too late to save West Indies cricket!

[ann3boys]

you make some good points. however, isn't the benefit of Ramdin behind the wicket? the fact that he can make some runs is a bonus. If he can contribute 26 runs at no. 6 or 7 then that is a good thing,no?
the idea that our players do not impress at the regional games is probably due to not knowing how players are chosen to represent WI. they are 'only' playing for their individual country, and while there may be good individual performers, they do not have confidence that their team is good enough. when guyana won the 20/20 Sarwan talked about the importance of team. so too Ganga. maybe also team is what is missing in the WI.

[Remie]

I agree that Ramdin is the best wicketkeeper available however he should not be allowed to take his place in the side as certain. My question is why is he only averaging 26.24 with the bat in first class cricket? When i first saw him play i genuinly thought he had the potential to become the best wicket keeper batsman in the world. Something has gone wrong along the way, as has happended with a lot of our younger players- Samuels, Devon Smith, Dwayne Smith, Lawson, Edwards, Best, etc.

With regard to the West Indies not playing as a team, i see your point but i have to admit that since Lara recently has taken charge all the players, if not adminstrators, have been all pulling together in the same direction. We have competed in every series under Lara and if we have lost is because the players have not performed well enough.

Look at the most recent Ashes between Australia and England. Australia had the best team spirt in the world but as soon as McGrath got injured they lost the Ashes. The team ethic is very important but you need the quality to match it. The West Indies seem to be getting there with the the team ethic but we still do not have the quality. I know why.

My main problem with the players are that they are all talented but are not pulling out the performances in first class cricket. Look at the following player's first class averages.

Batting                                  Bowling

Walcott 56.55                        Garner 18.53                                             
Weekes 55.34                        Marshall 19.10 
Sobers 54.87                         Clarke 19.52
Worrell 54.24                         Ambrose 20.24   
Richards 49.40                        Walsh 21.71
Haynes 45.90                         Daniel 22.47
Greenidge 45.88                     Holding 23.43

Why did these players have such good averages in first class cricket (including Lara, Chanderpaul and Taylor)? I dont think talent alone will get you these rewards. I am sure these players also had/have dedication, drive and determination. I would like to say that all West Indies test crickets have these attributes but i cannot say our most recent generation of cricketers do.

How can we expect Dwayne Smith, Bravo, Ramdin to score test hundreds consistently when they do not score runs consistently in first class cricket?

How can we expect Edwards, Bravo, Mohammed to bowl sides out in tests consistently when they do not get wickets consistently in first class cricket?

Bennett King wants new investment,
Everyone wants a new board,
Everyone want new selectors,
Lara wants Lawson,
I want our players to perform in first class cricket

I believe it is the quickest, cheapest, most effective way of putting the West Indies back on top in world cricket. We always have produced talented players and we always will produce talented players, however it seems that some players just want it more than others.

[dwolfman]

Me being a stats man myself I'll jump into this discussion.

I think that you're a bit off track with your use of the stats this time ignoring the fact that the guys on the list out perform their contemporaries for the most part. That is why most of them are on the team. There are varying reasons why some of them do not have more flattering 1st class averages. Some just don't get to play a lot of matches because of international duty with the Windies team so might play 2 matches and do little in them. This past season Sarwan had 4 matches under his belt and was 5th in the batting averages with 54.5 including 2 100s.

In total only 6 batsmen averaged over 50 in this past season and of that 6 four are currently members of the team. No one on this site has talked about selecting Liburd from Lewards or Ryan Hinds of Barbados. We should note that Liburd played in 2 matches and had 3 innings with a not out. When we look at aggregate runs in the season Hinds leads the way with 720 runs with Ganga second with 563, Richards (Bds) 480, Simmons 398 and Kelly 384. They all had at least 12 innings to make the runs. Sarwan - 327 - and Chanders - 324 - came 10th and 11th respectively. They both had 6 innings work. Lara was 16th with 276 runs from 5 innings of work. Sarwan's returns are pretty good domestically this year. Ramdin scored 313 runs from 11 innings with a century and two 50s and an average of 31.3. It's a bit unfair to hold career averages over them at this stage. It's much harder to increase an average than it is for it to drop, so a slow start or one bad season can take 3 or 4 seasons to repair. Bravo, with a 50, averaged 9.9 from 11 innings. Dwayne Smith in 11 innings scored 214 runs at 23.77 with one 50. Their career averages are better than this season's returns.

So there definitely is a disturbing trend among some of these guys to fail regionally. However, when you look at the regional game there top of the class is very small and the general grades mediocre. This is why King says that the league is not up to scratch and I happen to agree with him. Success at U-15 level does nothing but show that we have players with raw talent. If anything you prove his point because these U-15 players go on to mediocre regional careers and some of the better ones end up in international cricket where they are exposed as lacking in many elementary skills of the game. Mental tenacity, ability to think on the field, the discipline to stick to the game plan are just some of many deficiencies common with the younger group. Best has no right to be on a West Indies team. He runs in faster than he bowls it and can barely put the ball on the same side of the wicket far more the same spot with consecutive balls. Imagine that an over is 6 balls and you see the problem. Now look and see that he gets wickets when fit in the regional game and you see again that there are many deficiencies in the regional game that need to be fixed.

So basically I agree that these guys need to come up to scratch regionally as well as internationally, but I think the problem is more than just lacking desire or determination while that might have a part to play in it. I think too much is missing from the regional game in the first place so we'll find the couple exceptions to the rule who come out into international cricket ready to handle the challenges of the game. The others look like what they are... mediocre cricket players, the biggest fish in their small pond.

[ann3boys]

You do make good points, both of you.
I would like you to consider the impact of the ODIs on the concentration and mental strength of our layers. I think that this short form of the game has done some damage to the test game. Most of our players are asked to contribute in both forms of the game, and I believe we have a prblem in their minds switching from one form to the other.

is it that the player pool is too limited? How come we can't have an ODI team and a Test team? That's how the other countries are getting the better of us.

[dwolfman]

Look at Australia, England, India or South Africa. While they have players who are specialists in the short form of the game they still don't field 2 separate teams for Tests and ODIs. I do agree that there is a problem with their concentration, but that problem starts in their local development, not international cricket where the bad habits and missing pieces are exposed.

Let's look at Secondary Schools cricket in T&T. The shortened format encourages batsmen to just come out swinging, score a quick 30-40 in 20 minutes and they're back in the pavilion being congratulated on a job well done. They don't have the time to build an innings so the discipline and concentration needed to get accustomed to the pace and bounce of a wicket, what the bowlers are doing, etc. is never developed. We need only to look at the better ones who graduate to see how that has affected them. The bowlers in turn do not need to learn the importance of consistant line and length nor do they need to develop the guile to set up a batsman for a dismissal. Just put the ball somewhere on the pitch and the batsman does the rest. Look at how difficult it is for most of our regional bowlers to bowl the ball in the same general area for more than 2 or 3 balls per over.

We need to forget about how much talent we have in the West Indies. Every other country will also have talented players. The skills they eventually develop that we don't is the key to producing good players and teams; that is what needs to be changed. Talent and $5 will get you from City Gate to Arima. It is the hard work that makes a good player, not the talent.

[Remie]

First of all i would like to say thanks to Dwolfman for bringing these statistics to the debate.

Me being a stats man myself I'll jump into this discussion.

I think that you're a bit off track with your use of the stats this time ignoring the fact that the guys on the list out perform their contemporaries for the most part. That is why most of them are on the team. There are varying reasons why some of them do not have more flattering 1st class averages. Some just don't get to play a lot of matches because of international duty with the Windies team so might play 2 matches and do little in them. This past season Sarwan had 4 matches under his belt and was 5th in the batting averages with 54.5 including 2 100s.

Your statistics for this season tend to suggest that Sarwan is heading in the right direction and i sincerely hope this is the case. However we cannot ignore the fact that he has played 261 first class innings (114 have been in tests) so he has played 147 domestic innings. Because his first class average is 37.52 and his test average is 39.51, he must average 35.98 over 147 domestic innings. Something is not right about this. Who knows, he might have realised this himself and tried to make more of an effort to perform in domestic cricket over the last year. If he has i will hold my hands up and admit that i was wrong about him. However he should not be averaging 39.51 in test cricket. Dwolfman if you would like to try and tell me why he only averages 39.51 in test match cricket please go ahead.

In total only 6 batsmen averaged over 50 in this past season and of that 6 four are currently members of the team. No one on this site has talked about selecting Liburd from Lewards or Ryan Hinds of Barbados. We should note that Liburd played in 2 matches and had 3 innings with a not out. When we look at aggregate runs in the season Hinds leads the way with 720 runs with Ganga second with 563, Richards (Bds) 480, Simmons 398 and Kelly 384. They all had at least 12 innings to make the runs. Sarwan - 327 - and Chanders - 324 - came 10th and 11th respectively. They both had 6 innings work. Lara was 16th with 276 runs from 5 innings of work. Sarwan's returns are pretty good domestically this year. Ramdin scored 313 runs from 11 innings with a century and two 50s and an average of 31.3. It's a bit unfair to hold career averages over them at this stage. It's much harder to increase an average than it is for it to drop, so a slow start or one bad season can take 3 or 4 seasons to repair. Bravo, with a 50, averaged 9.9 from 11 innings. Dwayne Smith in 11 innings scored 214 runs at 23.77 with one 50. Their career averages are better than this season's returns.

All these guys seem to have played 10+ domestic innings for the season which for test players is generally the average amount that English test players play. It is a good guide for seeing which players are in form. Generally i would say an aggregate total of 500 should be the minimum target for any test players who have played 10+ innings.  As players can have a season that is uncharacteristic, i.e a really good or poor season, players should only be selected solely from domestic cricket of the back of exceptional performances, i.e. Ryan Hinds should be selected in the test team if he has scored 720 runs in anything less than 15 innings. If Simmons has scored 398 runs in 12 innings he has had an average season- nothing special. If it is indeed the case that Simmons is one of the top performers then i am not surprised because this is exactly the point i have made. Players like Bravo, Samuels, Ramdin, etc are not scoring excessive runs. And it is not because they are not talented enough. All three of the players have the technique and talent to score against the test bowling attack of Australia. Bravo, Samuels, Ramdin, etc have all proven it. What is their excuse for not performing in domestic cricket?

So there definitely is a disturbing trend among some of these guys to fail regionally. However, when you look at the regional game there top of the class is very small and the general grades mediocre. This is why King says that the league is not up to scratch and I happen to agree with him. Success at U-15 level does nothing but show that we have players with raw talent. If anything you prove his point because these U-15 players go on to mediocre regional careers and some of the better ones end up in international cricket where they are exposed as lacking in many elementary skills of the game. Mental tenacity, ability to think on the field, the discipline to stick to the game plan are just some of many deficiencies common with the younger group. Best has no right to be on a West Indies team. He runs in faster than he bowls it and can barely put the ball on the same side of the wicket far more the same spot with consecutive balls. Imagine that an over is 6 balls and you see the problem. Now look and see that he gets wickets when fit in the regional game and you see again that there are many deficiencies in the regional game that need to be fixed.

Okay i agree that i was wrong when i said that standard of first class cricketers in West Indies cricket is pretty good. I chose the wrong words. What i should have said was that the talent pool in West Indian cricket is pretty go. It is no less than in English cricket or other test playing nations across the world. Something obviously goes wrong from the ages of 18-21. I still believe that the main problem is that our players do not prove themselves in first class cricket before moving into the test arena. Stuart Broad from England is a great example. He looks like he is going to be one of the best ever bowlers in English history. He has had one full first class season where he has topped the bowling averages. He made his ODI debut recently against Pakistan and impressed but has not been named in the forthcoming Ashes test squad. Providing there are no injuries he will be made to wait until next summer after some more first class games for his test debut. Our players just have to have a good half a season and then they are put into the test arena. Generally this player will then fail in the test arena and then be in and out of the squad regardless of how they perform in first class cricket, i.e Samuels, Dwayne Smith, etc. It is no wonder that the standard of first class cricket in the West Indies is poor. The selectors and Bennett King are the ones in power so they should do something about it.

But even so, our test batsmen should be averaging above 50 and the test bowlers should be averaging below 25. With regard to Tino best, although i really do not want to see him in a ODI or test again, he does produce balls which take wickets. If he played in English first class cricket he would take wickets because he bowls at 90 mph. He proved he could take wickets on the A tour against English county teams this year.

So basically I agree that these guys need to come up to scratch regionally as well as internationally, but I think the problem is more than just lacking desire or determination while that might have a part to play in it. I think too much is missing from the regional game in the first place so we'll find the couple exceptions to the rule who come out into international cricket ready to handle the challenges of the game. The others look like what they are... mediocre cricket players, the biggest fish in their small pond.

Yes i agree with this. But we have to look for ways to put West Indies back on the map, and i think the first step should be for our first class game to be the next barrier after U-15 and U-19 cricket to getting into the West Indies senior team. At the moment it is not. If players know that performing in the first class game is the only way they will be selected then i beleive that those few that hurdle the barrier will become mentally tougher, technically better and more tactically astute. Do you all not think so?

[Remie]

You do make good points, both of you.
I would like you to consider the impact of the ODIs on the concentration and mental strength of our layers. I think that this short form of the game has done some damage to the test game. Most of our players are asked to contribute in both forms of the game, and I believe we have a prblem in their minds switching from one form to the other.

is it that the player pool is too limited? How come we can't have an ODI team and a Test team? That's how the other countries are getting the better of us.

Look at Australia, England, India or South Africa. While they have players who are specialists in the short form of the game they still don't field 2 separate teams for Tests and ODIs. I do agree that there is a problem with their concentration, but that problem starts in their local development, not international cricket where the bad habits and missing pieces are exposed.

Let's look at Secondary Schools cricket in T&T. The shortened format encourages batsmen to just come out swinging, score a quick 30-40 in 20 minutes and they're back in the pavilion being congratulated on a job well done. They don't have the time to build an innings so the discipline and concentration needed to get accustomed to the pace and bounce of a wicket, what the bowlers are doing, etc. is never developed. We need only to look at the better ones who graduate to see how that has affected them. The bowlers in turn do not need to learn the importance of consistant line and length nor do they need to develop the guile to set up a batsman for a dismissal. Just put the ball somewhere on the pitch and the batsman does the rest. Look at how difficult it is for most of our regional bowlers to bowl the ball in the same general area for more than 2 or 3 balls per over.

We need to forget about how much talent we have in the West Indies. Every other country will also have talented players. The skills they eventually develop that we don't is the key to producing good players and teams; that is what needs to be changed. Talent and $5 will get you from City Gate to Arima. It is the hard work that makes a good player, not the talent.

I agree with Dwolfman that you need a stable core of players that are in both the test and ODI teams with a few specialist ODI players that replace a few of the specialist test players. However i do think that our relative ODI success has overshadowed our shocking performances in test matches. Sarwan is the world's number 1 player in ODI cricket but has been underperforming in Test cricket. I believe ann3boys is right to suggest that maybe our players have problems switching their mindsets from ODI to test cricket. However having two seperate teams is not the answer. I believe this is where the ex-players who have won everything there is to win in cricket should come and help. They had no problems switching their mindsets from ODI to test cricket. Each current player should have a mentor who they can talk to about all aspects of the game.

[ann3boys]

yup, mentors is definitely the way to go!! good suggestion.
is there any hope anyone in the WICB will read this forum?

[dwolfman]

Most of Remie's post went unread because of its length. I apologise in advance, but I don't have the patience to read something that long. I did read parts of it though and I'll respond to what I read.

I was not trying to suggest that Sarwan or any of the players named has a domestic average that is good. I am sorry if I was not clear in my earlier post. What I was trying to get at is that looking at their averages like that in isolation can be a bit misleading.  One of the reasons for that is that it is easier for the average to decline rapidly than it is to increase at a similar rate. That said, most of the players have themselves to blame for their statistical position. They do not perform consistently here. Also, you'll find very few players with better stats than them in the same period. So they are in essence the best of a mediocre bunch. This has been happening as far back as Kieth Artherton (I'm not old enough to go further) who had an awful test average (30.71), but would stay in the team on the strenght of his domestic performances (1st class average of 45.29) and good fielding.

We'll go now to Ryan Hinds (24.20 Tests and 37.42 1st class). If he is selected just because of what he is done this season that will be a repeat of the mistake of selectors past. Who has he made the runs against? Stuart Williams (24.14 Tests and 40.67 1st class), Philo Wallace (21.46 Tests and 36.25 1st class) and Junior Murray (22.39 Tests and 30.95 1st class) are classic examples of players who do well over a domestic season and don't go on to do much internationally. Wallace wasn't even that good based strictly on the averages. That goes back to my point about being the best in a mediocre bunch, but it also ties into the same problem you are highlighting. Many of these guys have been selected too soon. They show "promise" or they are labelled as "talented" and we think that is enough. I'll sound like a broken record with this, but their development has been lacking so their adult cricket career will also be lacking. The problem needs to be fixed long before we're reading about them at U-19 World Cup. By then it's too late.

[dwolfman]

My last post was already getting long so I broke it down into a second part here.

I agree that our younger players do not prove themselves in 1st class cricket and honestly I do not think many of them besides Sarwan and maybe Bravo and Ramdin are capable of doing any better. That said they still out perform their peers or none of their peers really stands out as a good prospect. Those that do are basically in the same position as them. Not properly equipped to be dominant players in 1st class cricket in this region. That's the long and short of it as I see it.

Why don't those three do better? They lack the concentration tools required to do so. Look at their test careers. It's the same thing, just at a higher level. Inconsistency in 1st class goes with them internationally. It's also a cultural thing where previously players used to have to work a lot harder for everything they got (including their cricket careers). The positive, but negative of this is that now this younger group doesn't have to work as hard for it and lack the toughness of a Viv Richards, Curtly Ambrose, Desmond Haynes, Michael Holding, Clive Lloyd or even a Lara and Chanderpaul.

The best coaches need to be made available at U-12 and U-15 level, including these greats who have proven their ability. Not all can coach, but they can certainly inspire. I am not a cricketer, but I was in awe of Clive Lloyd when I met him as a schoolboy. I sat near to Viv Richards during the Commonwealth Games in Australia this year and that was also awe inspiring even though he did nothing but nod his head at me in a hello when we made eye contact. While this current bunch is not a lost cause, I think they are already doing the best that they can given what is made available to them. A sports psychologise and more cricket at a higher level than our regional competition can help them, but our cricket will struggle for years to come unless we address the complete development of our players from their early learning years.

[Remie]

We'll go now to Ryan Hinds (24.20 Tests and 37.42 1st class). If he is selected just because of what he is done this season that will be a repeat of the mistake of selectors past. Who has he made the runs against? Stuart Williams (24.14 Tests and 40.67 1st class), Philo Wallace (21.46 Tests and 36.25 1st class) and Junior Murray (22.39 Tests and 30.95 1st class) are classic examples of players who do well over a domestic season and don't go on to do much internationally. Wallace wasn't even that good based strictly on the averages. That goes back to my point about being the best in a mediocre bunch, but it also ties into the same problem you are highlighting. Many of these guys have been selected too soon. They show "promise" or they are labelled as "talented" and we think that is enough. I'll sound like a broken record with this, but their development has been lacking so their adult cricket career will also be lacking. The problem needs to be fixed long before we're reading about them at U-19 World Cup. By then it's too late.

Picking Ryan Hinds again may have helped to save Lendl Simmons career from ending up mediocre. The reason i say this is because Simmons has averaged about 30 this season. He has been put in the Test squad on the back of this. There is no way Simmons is ready for international cricket until he becomes a regular century maker in first class cricket and learns how to bat for long periods of time. He will not cut it because he has been thrown in without earning his place. If the selectors had picked Ryan Rinds it would have shown every single first class cricketer that they had to perform in first class cricket to get a chance at Test cricket. Okay Ryan Hinds may have failed again in Test cricket but he is the best equipped to deal with Test cricket. It would also make Simmons have to score more runs and average more to get into the Test arena.

Williams, Wallace and Murray are all fine examples that moderate first class averages will not do the business at test level. Arthurton seems to be an anomaly.

Although i agree that more needs to be done to improve our cricketers development i disagree that it is too late at the U-19 stage to install the attributes that are required at the highest level. The fact that our U-15 team won the world cup meant that players like Ramdin, Rampaul, Marshall, Simmons, Liburd, Maraj at the age of 15 were on a par with English, Indian, etc 15 year olds. The fact that this same bunch of players 4 years later reached the U-19 world cup final meant that these players at the age of 19 were on a par with Australian, Pakiatani, etc 19 years olds. Then these players go into first class cricket and it all goes wrong. I believe that improving the development of our 18-21 olds is just as important as improving the development at younger ages.

[dwolfman]

I see your point with picking Hinds over Simmons now. Logical and quite acceptable.

Perhaps I was a bit extreme in saying it is too late to instill good cricketing skills and values by U-19 level. However, that is way too late to try to teach it to them. By the time a player is representing the West Indies at U-19 level he has established his basic skill set and a clearly defined temperament for the game. He has most of the habits that will accompany him into his adult career. So while it is not too late for him to have a good career, it will take remedial work to unlearn the bad habits and learn new ones, while trying to keep up with the rigours of an international career. Any one of us here should be able to identify just how difficult it is to drop even the simplest of habits.

I've represented T&T at youth level and at international level. I'll tell you that the step up from youth to senior at the elite level is pretty big. Success at U-19 level means nothing when having to make the transition to full internationals. This year T&T men played Scotland's U-21 team before going on to play their senior team. We beat their youth team with some comfort, even if technically and tactically they were pretty good. We were then outplayed completely by their senior team, which included about 3 of the junior team members. We should not let the competitiveness of the boys at U-19 level fool us into thinking that they are on par with their counterparts in the other cricketing nations. Hasn't Bangladesh fielded good youth teams, but continues to get bombed internationally? Granted they have improved, but the point is youth level is youth level and international level is quite another thing.

[Remie]

Very True.

But i think in 5 years we will start to see Bangladesh reap the rewards from their youth teams. They may be the laughing stock now but i beleive they will have their day.

[dwolfman]

If their players have been learning the fundamentals both technically and mentally that ours have not then they can very well one day reach a much more competitive level. Time will tell. My point was simply that Ramdin and Bravo have come through the U-19 level as dominant players on their teams and yet while they have had moments of brilliance are generally inconsisent. We cannot judge their level from U-19 competition since when we get into the senior international level their counterparts generally speaking out perform them.

I'll also like to note that the U-15 and U-19 tournaments are limited overs rather than 3 or 4 day contests. Remember that one of our problems is discipline to bat for long periods. Perhaps they need more of a 1st class education in these formative years.

[Remie]

You are right about them needuing more of a first class education. Every year England's U-19 team plays a test series against other international U-19 sides. Recently they have played test matches against India U-19 and Bangladesh U-19s. Im not aware that Australia have a U-19 test side. But even so it would be a good idea for us to have an U-19 test side tour England rather than the A team which compromise of mainly failures. That is if cost is an issue. If not then let an A team and a test U-19 side tour.

I believe the reason why Australia have very few youth teams is because they say it is impossible to judge how good a player is compared to the others at the age group of 19 and under. However they have a great first class and club cricket standard so they can afford to skip U-15 and U-19 tournaments. We cannot.

[dwolfman]

I agree that if cost is not an issue that both an A team and an U-19 team touring for test or 1st class matches would be better. You are also correct that because of the standard of their 1st class leagues that Australia definitely need not pay the same sort of attention to U-19 teams as we do. Also remember that they don't take too many 18 or 19 year olds into test or ODI teams. Their players are given time to develop mentally as well as physically. Something we would do well to emulate. However, if at age 19 a player shows that he is mentally ready in addition to his cricket preparedness then he should be selected.