Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2015 11:48:56 GMT
Good appointment. Only a year ago his name was banded about as a possible replacement for Flower in the top job.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Mar 26, 2015 11:57:42 GMT
Good appointment. Only a year ago his name was banded about as a possible replacement for Flower in the top job. Probably better as a highly-skilled and respected motivator for bowlers than for other posts - and as a top-class bowler himself not one to fool around with changing bowlers' actions. |
|
|
|
Post by coverpoint on Mar 26, 2015 12:33:00 GMT
Good appointment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2015 12:38:49 GMT
Good appointment. Only a year ago his name was banded about as a possible replacement for Flower in the top job. Probably better as a highly-skilled and respected motivator for bowlers than for other posts - and as a top-class bowler himself not one to fool around with changing bowlers' actions. Agree with that. But it means that if England lose in the West Indies and as a result Moores is sacked, Gibson (and possibly Farbrace, too, if he survives) can take temporary charge for the New Zealand series while England try to twist the arm of Gillespie, Ford or another overseas heavyweight to take over for the Ashes. |
|
|
|
Post by invicta1977 on Mar 26, 2015 20:27:43 GMT
Was Gibson a success last time around? I recall Anderson coming to the fore during his previous tenure and Sidebottom making a successful return to the side. But I also remember Broad veering from deadly to dead awful and both Hoggard and Harmison declining rapidly. Did Pattison and Amjad owe their unfortunate one-off appearances to his influence? Roach aside, It doesn't seem that his charges in the West Indies side have been ripping up many trees.
I have to point out that I have no axe to grind with this appointment and in fact probably don't know enough to make a judgement either way. I'm just wondering if he's being so rapturously received* simply because he isn't the previous bloke.
* across a variety of social media
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Mar 26, 2015 21:28:37 GMT
Was Gibson a success last time around? I recall Anderson coming to the fore during his previous tenure and Sidebottom making a successful return to the side. But I also remember Broad veering from deadly to dead awful and both Hoggard and Harmison declining rapidly. Did Pattison and Amjad owe their unfortunate one-off appearances to his influence? Roach aside, It doesn't seem that his charges in the West Indies side have been ripping up many trees. I have to point out that I have no axe to grind with this appointment and in fact probably don't know enough to make a judgement either way. I'm just wondering if he's being so rapturously received* simply because he isn't the previous bloke.
* across a variety of social media Probably he is being cheered because he isn't Saker. I do know that he was regarded as a great inspiration at Leicestershire, and of course he didn't make Broad into a terrifying spearhead bowler - but then that wasn't what Gibson did best himself, so it is possible that he was asked to try and work with something that wasn't quite the best kind of clay for that particular job? I wouldn't draw too many conclusions from his performance with West Indies - there are simply too many other issues to consider beside coaching that have affected that team. |
|
|
|
Post by invicta1977 on Mar 26, 2015 21:45:03 GMT
Was Gibson a success last time around? I recall Anderson coming to the fore during his previous tenure and Sidebottom making a successful return to the side. But I also remember Broad veering from deadly to dead awful and both Hoggard and Harmison declining rapidly. Did Pattison and Amjad owe their unfortunate one-off appearances to his influence? Roach aside, It doesn't seem that his charges in the West Indies side have been ripping up many trees. I have to point out that I have no axe to grind with this appointment and in fact probably don't know enough to make a judgement either way. I'm just wondering if he's being so rapturously received* simply because he isn't the previous bloke.
* across a variety of social media Probably he is being cheered because he isn't Saker. I do know that he was regarded as a great inspiration at Leicestershire, and of course he didn't make Broad into a terrifying spearhead bowler - but then that wasn't what Gibson did best himself, so it is possible that he was asked to try and work with something that wasn't quite the best kind of clay for that particular job? I wouldn't draw too many conclusions from his performance with West Indies - there are simply too many other issues to consider beside coaching that have affected that team.I think that's fair comment. There's also some sense in choosing one who knows Caribbean conditions as well as anybody. Then again, he would have had decent knowledge in 2009, when England constantly - and excruciatingly - failed to bowl out WI twice. |
|
