Posted by He’s in the squad. The squad’s not that big. He probably will.
Australia may well be going down the same route, but it still seems weird to us to select players for a World Cup when you’ve never selected them before. We were so taken aback by Liam Dawson’s inclusion that we at first thought England had selected Richard Dawson, a spinner who played a bunch of Tests in India in 2001. Dicky Dawson finished his career with a first-class bowling average of 44.07.
Trevor Bayliss has never seen Liam Dawson play. But that’s not too surprising. Bayliss hasn’t really seen anyone English play. He is therefore reliant on ‘the system’ and Dawson did well playing for the Lions recently.
Bayliss also said: “He’s a good fielder apparently.”
You get the impression that left to his own devices Bayliss would select England’s 11 best fielders and just cross his fingers that a handful of them could bat and bowl. Not that he’s in favour of finger-crossing. It hampers your fielding.
Michael Bates to be a surprise last-minute inclusion?
Norman Bates or Master Bates would make the squad more interesting.
I agree, it’s weird. Surely if this was the plan they’d have picked him for the South African limited overs series? The conditions might not have required the extra spinner, but at least then the coach/captain could have met him and made sure he was from the right sort of family and suchlike before naming him in a World Cup squad.
Seems a little tough on Parry and Patel to miss out to an uncapped player who the coach has never seen play
If he does play, he must learn from mistakes of others and “not try too hard”
ref: http://www.espncricinfo.com/new-zealand-v-australia-2015-16/content/story/971119.html
Is Bayliss ever going to get round to watching anyone?
R Dawson was The Future once, which is probably a deep philosophical comment on futility, the unpredictable whims of fate, and the very nature of Time itself.
Bloody depressing whichever way.
Richard Dawson is one of the oldest-looking 35-year-olds I’ve ever seen, and even that’s assuming his Cricinfo photo is recent:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/player/11848.html
He is, presumably, his own decaying attic portrait of himself.
Good grief.
Not sure whether that makes me feel older or younger.
Pro: someone I arguably look younger than!
Con: someone I remember as a fresh-faced youth is no longer such, so what does that make?