|
|
Post by joe on Sept 1, 2016 17:16:02 GMT
Thank you hh for your comprehensive report.
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Sept 1, 2016 17:54:34 GMT
Thank you hh for your comprehensive report. Hear, hear! |
|
|
|
Post by jonboy on Sept 1, 2016 22:10:41 GMT
I think we will continue to plummet if we try and go the home grown route. We have promising youngsters who may develop into good county players, but there are no guarantees. There was promise from the previous group of home grown players, but not many can nail down a spot, in, what is, a pretty average side, their progress has stalled.
However, they are not alone, if anything, most of the experienced players have fared even worse, so you could be right about a coaching issue. What we need is a balance, youngsters must be given opportunities, not en masse, but introduced into a competitive side. The cuts to the playing budget have been too stringent, and we are now seeing the results of a few years poor recruitment.
The squad desperately needs an injection of quality, not at the expense of the youngsters, but maybe instead of one or two of the under performing seniors. It's Sod's law that the two players most likely to be hanging up their boots, are still, by far our best batsman and bowler. That means we would have replace with similar, just to maintain our current low standing. I don't hold out much hope that, the people who got us into this mess, can be entrusted to find the solutions to get us back on track.
|
|
|
|
Post by coverpoint on Sept 1, 2016 22:34:55 GMT
I think we will continue to plummet if we try and go the home grown route. We have promising youngsters who may develop into good county players, but there are no guarantees. There was promise from the previous group of home grown players, but not many can nail down a spot, in, what is, a pretty average side, their progress has stalled. However, they are not alone, if anything, most of the experienced players have fared even worse, so you could be right about a coaching issue. What we need is a balance, youngsters must be given opportunities, not en masse, but introduced into a competitive side. The cuts to the playing budget have been too stringent, and we are now seeing the results of a few years poor recruitment. The squad desperately needs an injection of quality, not at the expense of the youngsters, but maybe instead of one or two of the under performing seniors. It's Sod's law that the two players most likely to be hanging up their boots, are still, by far our best batsman and bowler. That means we would have replace with similar, just to maintain our current low standing. I don't hold out much hope that, the people who got us into this mess, can be entrusted to find the solutions to get us back on track. Playing budget has been cut because we don't have the money! We spent £300K on the playing budget last year we simply didn't have! With us now in division 2 attracting better quality players has just become a whole lot more difficult. If you are an opener and Durham, Warwickshire and Sussex are after you where are you going to go? Therefore Davis has sensibly dismissed the Kolpak route and realised the homegrown route is essential. One county to have down this route is Kent who are now starting to see the benefits of this. Do we have coaches who are good enough to bring out the full potential of these young players? |
|
|
|
Post by jonboy on Sept 2, 2016 8:09:22 GMT
I think we will continue to plummet if we try and go the home grown route. We have promising youngsters who may develop into good county players, but there are no guarantees. There was promise from the previous group of home grown players, but not many can nail down a spot, in, what is, a pretty average side, their progress has stalled. However, they are not alone, if anything, most of the experienced players have fared even worse, so you could be right about a coaching issue. What we need is a balance, youngsters must be given opportunities, not en masse, but introduced into a competitive side. The cuts to the playing budget have been too stringent, and we are now seeing the results of a few years poor recruitment. The squad desperately needs an injection of quality, not at the expense of the youngsters, but maybe instead of one or two of the under performing seniors. It's Sod's law that the two players most likely to be hanging up their boots, are still, by far our best batsman and bowler. That means we would have replace with similar, just to maintain our current low standing. I don't hold out much hope that, the people who got us into this mess, can be entrusted to find the solutions to get us back on track. Playing budget has been cut because we don't have the money! We spent £300K on the playing budget last year we simply didn't have! With us now in division 2 attracting better quality players has just become a whole lot more difficult. If you are an opener and Durham, Warwickshire and Sussex are after you where are you going to go? Therefore Davis has sensibly dismissed the Kolpak route and realised the homegrown route is essential. One county to have down this route is Kent who are now starting to see the benefits of this. Do we have coaches who are good enough to bring out the full potential of these young players? Kent have also recruited well, and they are performing better because they have added quality to those youngsters, who themselves have now matured. It will be near on impossible to field a side of local youngsters, and hope to be successful. Yes we need to promote youth, and it seems that we are starting to do that, but we also need to add quality to the squad, so we remain competitive. I agree, we don't have the appeal that we once had, so we need to recruit smarter, and if that means going the Kolpak route, so be it. As I see it, we do have some promising youngsters coming through, but that's all they are, promising youngsters who may or may not make the grade at county level. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2016 8:25:25 GMT
Playing budget has been cut because we don't have the money! We spent £300K on the playing budget last year we simply didn't have! With us now in division 2 attracting better quality players has just become a whole lot more difficult. If you are an opener and Durham, Warwickshire and Sussex are after you where are you going to go? Therefore Davis has sensibly dismissed the Kolpak route and realised the homegrown route is essential. One county to have down this route is Kent who are now starting to see the benefits of this. Do we have coaches who are good enough to bring out the full potential of these young players? I know that's the narrative Kent like to promote but you shouldn't necessarily believe it. The Kent side currently playing at Hove includes five imports in Dickson (SA), Stevens (Leics), Gidman (loan from Notts), Viljoen (SA) and Claydon (Aus via Durham). They also have had in their side this season seven further imports in Haggett (Somerset), Rouse (Hants), Callum Jackson (Sussex), Griffiths (Hants), Hunn (who played for Essex seconds before Kent signed him), Latham (NZ) and Rabada (SA). That's 12 imports they've played in the first XI this season alone. Kent's revival has in part been based on a quartet of young homegrown players who have now come good (Bell-Drummond, Northeast, Billings,Coles). But they had to be very patient with some of them, such as Northeast who made his f/c debut in 2007 but has only recently begun to fulfil his promise with his first ever 1000-in-a-season not coming until 2015. The truth is that the Kent revival has been equally based on smart recruitment (and some not so smart, but you're never going to get it right 100 per cent of the time). And that's what Sussex are going to have to do - be smarter in their external recruitment while young players such as Salt, Garton, Whittingham, H-P and Haines try to find their feet. Sussex will also need to be prepared to stick with such young players during periods when they lose their way, because as apprentices their progress is inevitably going to be up and down. At Kent both Northeast and Coles lost the plot at several points in their careers and had to be dropped and patience and perseverance were required to see them through. on edit: just seen jonboy beat me to it with an excellent post that makes a similar point about getting the combination right between your own academy products and smart recruitment. And some academies will produce good batsmen but not bowlers and vice versa. Kent, for example, have proved hopeless at producing fast bowlers. Coles is the only decent one in a decade, whereas Sussex are lucky in having Garton and Whittingham coming through. But they cannot be rushed; they have so far played no more than four or five matches each and are both currently injured. They will need very patient handling. |
|
|
|
Post by coverpoint on Sept 2, 2016 8:32:43 GMT
Playing budget has been cut because we don't have the money! We spent £300K on the playing budget last year we simply didn't have! With us now in division 2 attracting better quality players has just become a whole lot more difficult. If you are an opener and Durham, Warwickshire and Sussex are after you where are you going to go? Therefore Davis has sensibly dismissed the Kolpak route and realised the homegrown route is essential. One county to have down this route is Kent who are now starting to see the benefits of this. Do we have coaches who are good enough to bring out the full potential of these young players? Kent's revival has in part been based on a quartet of young homegrown players who have now come good (Bell-Drummond, Northeast, Billings,Coles). But they had to be very patient with some of them, such as Northeast who made his f/c debut in 2007 but has only recently begun to fulfil his promise with his first ever 1000-in-a-season not coming until 2015. The truth is that the Kent revival has been equally based on smart recruitment (and some not so smart, but you're never going to get it right 100 per cent of the time). And that's what Sussex are going to have to do - be smarter in their external recruitment while young players such as Salt, Garton, Whittingham, H-P and Haines try to find their feet. Sussex will also need to be prepared to stick with such young players during periods when they lose their way, because as apprentices their progress is inevitably going to be up and down. At Kent both Northeast and Coles lost the plot at several points in their careers and had to be dropped and patience and perseverance were required to see them through. If Northeast had come through at Sussex they would have probably released him as if the players don't perform after 1/2 games they are released. They certainly wouldn't have waited eight seasons! What sort of strategy is this? A flawed one! Kent are seeing the benefit of having invested a over number of seasons in Bell-Drummond, Northeast, Billings and Coles. There is also Denly and Tredwell. So that's six homegrown players which should be achievable target for Sussex. I agree there are certain positions we will need to recruit externally e.g. replacing Joyce and Magoffin when they retire because we don't currently have someone who is the finished article yet to take over from them. Better to do that and give Salt, Garton, Whittingham, Hudson-Prentice and Haines time to find their feet. |
|
|
|
Post by jonboy on Sept 2, 2016 9:02:10 GMT
Kent's revival has in part been based on a quartet of young homegrown players who have now come good (Bell-Drummond, Northeast, Billings,Coles). But they had to be very patient with some of them, such as Northeast who made his f/c debut in 2007 but has only recently begun to fulfil his promise with his first ever 1000-in-a-season not coming until 2015. The truth is that the Kent revival has been equally based on smart recruitment (and some not so smart, but you're never going to get it right 100 per cent of the time). And that's what Sussex are going to have to do - be smarter in their external recruitment while young players such as Salt, Garton, Whittingham, H-P and Haines try to find their feet. Sussex will also need to be prepared to stick with such young players during periods when they lose their way, because as apprentices their progress is inevitably going to be up and down. At Kent both Northeast and Coles lost the plot at several points in their careers and had to be dropped and patience and perseverance were required to see them through. If Northeast had come through at Sussex they would have probably released him as if the players don't perform after 1/2 games they are released. They certainly wouldn't have waited eight seasons! What sort of strategy is this? A flawed one! Kent are seeing the benefit of having invested a over number of seasons in Bell-Drummond, Northeast, Billings and Coles. There is also Denly and Tredwell. So that's six homegrown players which should be achievable target for Sussex. I agree there are certain positions we will need to recruit externally e.g. replacing Joyce and Magoffin when they retire because we don't currently have someone who is the finished article yet to take over from them. Better to do that and give Salt, Garton, Whittingham, Hudson-Prentice and Haines time to find their feet. Yes, I think five or six homegrown would be desirable, but we are not far off that now are we, with Nash, Wells, Machan and Brown, when fit, all usually involved A case could also be made for the skipper, who, although signed from Leicestershire, has been at Sussex since he was a teen. So just one youngster needs to force his way through, and we are there. In fact, had it not been for the tragic incident last January, we'd already be there. The real issue is, whether they are home produced, or have been imported, they have to be of the necessary quality. |
|
|
|
Post by coverpoint on Sept 2, 2016 9:13:47 GMT
If Northeast had come through at Sussex they would have probably released him as if the players don't perform after 1/2 games they are released. They certainly wouldn't have waited eight seasons! What sort of strategy is this? A flawed one! Kent are seeing the benefit of having invested a over number of seasons in Bell-Drummond, Northeast, Billings and Coles. There is also Denly and Tredwell. So that's six homegrown players which should be achievable target for Sussex. I agree there are certain positions we will need to recruit externally e.g. replacing Joyce and Magoffin when they retire because we don't currently have someone who is the finished article yet to take over from them. Better to do that and give Salt, Garton, Whittingham, Hudson-Prentice and Haines time to find their feet. Yes, I think five or six homegrown would be desirable, but we are not far off that now are we, with Nash, Wells, Machan and Brown, when fit, all usually involved A case could also be made for the skipper, who, although signed from Leicestershire, has been at Sussex since he was a teen. So just one youngster needs to force his way through, and we are there. In fact, had it not been for the tragic incident last January, we'd already be there. The real issue is, whether they are home produced, or have been imported, they have to be of the necessary quality. We have 11 homegrown players (Beer, Brown, Finch, Garton, Hatchett, Hudson-Prentice, Machan, Nash, Salt, Wells and Whittingham) out of a squad of 22 which I think is about right. The issue for me is giving the likes of Salt, Hudson-Prentice, Garton and Whittingham time to develop without the threat of being released. Three of them after all are aged just 20 or under. Whittingham is something of a relatively late developer at 22. Why is it Sussex seem to have more patience with seam bowlers than batsmen? |
|
|
|
Post by deepextracover on Sept 2, 2016 9:27:59 GMT
The issue is with bowlers if you make a mistake or bowl a bad ball that goes for 6 you can turn around and have another go.
With batsman, make a mistake or get out and you can be out of the team and not get back out in the middle again for a month.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonboy on Sept 2, 2016 9:50:23 GMT
Nash was a late developer, at least as a batsman. Personally, I don't think we can afford to cut the squad still further, but money has to be found to recruit new players. Of those out of contract at the end of the season, probably Joyce is the most likely to leave. He is our best batsman, so we'd need to replace him, before we can start improving the squad. Funds need to be found from somewhere to bring in the two or three players we will need.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Sept 2, 2016 10:16:36 GMT
Nash was a late developer, at least as a batsman. Personally, I don't think we can afford to cut the squad still further, but money has to be found to recruit new players. Of those out of contract at the end of the season, probably Joyce is the most likely to leave. He is our best batsman, so we'd need to replace him, before we can start improving the squad. Funds need to be found from somewhere to bring in the two or three players we will need. Savings could also be found by letting Tymal Mills go to a club that is happy to pay him a very large contract purely to play T20 cricket, and probably rather less of it as his England reputation grows. Perhaps other players nearing the end of their contract period and who haven't performed so well might be loaned out for the remaining time and let them have another chance with someone else to pay their wages. What about looking at the nonsense of a Cricket Director on a high salary who can't describe what his job is about without resorting to David Brent style waffle? Can we afford to fly a batting coach in from Australia and back again within two months? What about finding an overseas player who is available for nmore than two T20 games, and who doesn't charge us for his hospital treatment for the injuries he brought with him? |
|
|
|
Post by jonboy on Sept 2, 2016 10:30:10 GMT
Nash was a late developer, at least as a batsman. Personally, I don't think we can afford to cut the squad still further, but money has to be found to recruit new players. Of those out of contract at the end of the season, probably Joyce is the most likely to leave. He is our best batsman, so we'd need to replace him, before we can start improving the squad. Funds need to be found from somewhere to bring in the two or three players we will need. Savings could also be found by letting Tymal Mills go to a club that is happy to pay him a very large contract purely to play T20 cricket, and probably rather less of it as his England reputation grows. Perhaps other players nearing the end of their contract period and who haven't performed so well might be loaned out for the remaining time and let them have another chance with someone else to pay their wages. What about looking at the nonsense of a Cricket Director on a high salary who can't describe what his job is about without resorting to David Brent style waffle? Can we afford to fly a batting coach in from Australia and back again within two months? What about finding an overseas player who is available for nmore than two T20 games, and who doesn't charge us for his hospital treatment for the injuries he brought with him? Definitely valid points, all of which we should consider Doing nothing again, is not an option. Meanwhile back at the ranch......Nash gone |
|
