Not overly enthusiastic about giving Nevill another run but it would probably be worth it just for Gero's melts.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You can't just keep rewarding mediocrity though, it sends a bad message to the team. Eventually, you have to go back to Shield form (Nevill ended the season well) or potential (Carey).Why would I melt. We'll be playing them 10v11 either way and whitewashing them in the process.
Just don't think we should change keepers until one deserving comes along.
Nevill is s**t and doesn't deserve another go. Give Alyssa Healy a go for all I care. Just not PM.You can't just keep rewarding mediocrity though, it sends a bad message to the team. Eventually, you have to go back to Shield form (Nevill ended the season well) or potential (Carey).
If you call Shield form and a better recent Test record than the incumbent 'nothing', sure.So you’ve got nothing. Cool.
Seems CA don’t either. A turd like Nevill as 2nd choice is damning. Maybe rather than ruin our ears with his crap Healy could get off his arse and coach the next crop of keepers.
The logical choice is to pick neither.If you call Shield form and a better recent Test record than the incumbent 'nothing', sure.
I see Gilchrist is calling for Nevill's return. Unsurprising. It's the only logical choice.
I'm inclined to agree with you. The only caveat being doing we want to throw a newbie into an Ashes series? I lean toward Nevill if we don't want to do that.The logical choice is to pick neither.
We tried Nevill and he was crap.
But you say none of the young guys are ready and the Ashes is not the place to trial a rookie. The choice is Wade or Nevill and the answer is Nevill.The logical choice is to pick neither.
We tried Nevill and he was crap.
They aren't and it isn't. Hence the conundrum we have atm.But you say none of the young guys are ready and the Ashes is not the place to trial a rookie. The choice is Wade or Nevill and the answer is Nevill.
And from others POV, the worst we can do is pick Wade. Absolute scrub.They aren't and it isn't. Hence the conundrum we have atm.
From my POV the worst we can do is to pick Nevill. Absolute scrub.
Well all those who would know will have to suffer the man they've backed (twice) failing (twice).And from others POV, the worst we can do is pick Wade. Absolute scrub.
The people who would know seem to be lining up behind Nevill. All the stats say Nevill too.
It really sucks that Whiteman has had injuries and a dip in form recently. I'd love to give him the first Ashes test.
The Wade effect even.Well all those who would know will have to suffer the man they've backed (twice) failing (twice).
Again, I don't give a toss for his Shield stats. He did this before and failed and will do so again. The SOK effect.
Triggered.The Wade effect even.
On the fitness front, it was a random finger injury that can hit any keeper. It's not like he was always hurt before that. But there's no doubt his form went backwards a little.Nobody should be anointed as "next in line". If you can't maintain the form and fitness required, then one way or another, you're probably just not good enough yet.
Whiteman's Shield record isn't better than either Wade or Nevill, and he's been treading water and not improving for a couple of years now. I'm not convinced he'd be any better if picked, but age would give him more free passes with the critics I guess.
Triggered.
The logical choice is to pick neither.
We tried Nevill and he was crap.
Happy with that, as long as it isn't Wade! The last thing I want is for a dud keeper dropping Root or someone on our pitches where wickets are hard enough to get!
Yawn. Pay attention, really is a time lag with you.
His keeping was good on the subcontinent just hasn’t scored