Graeme Swann Retires from International Cricket

First topic message reminder :

An already struggling England received another jolt today as Graeme Swann, one of the most successful spinners in the history of English cricket made a retirement announcement mid series.
Swann has announced that he won't play the remaining 2 games of the series and the retirement has come into immediate effect. Swann said that he had already known that retirement was not too far away as the body was struggling to meet the demands of a 5 day game. But he wanted to contribute to a 4th successive Ashes win, and now that the series is gone, there is no point playing on.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2013-14/content/current/story/702897.html

''Swann mistaken not to see it through'' is the heading and theme of an article on ESPNcricinfo by their UK editor, David Hopps.

Hopps articulates well some of my thoughts and concerns. Whilst acknowledging my lack of neutrality on the subject, I would still contend it's worth a look (can't attach from here unfortunately). There's some support for Hopps' views in the subsequent cricinfo conversations although certainly not unanimous.

Guildford
Haven;t read the Hopps article and don't know if he (or anyone else) has raised it, but one of the main problems that I have with Swann's announcement is that it can be viewed as a case of abandoning a sinking ship. Quitting mid-series so publicly just raises more questions about problems within the England camp. If he'd just told the England management that he didn't want to play in the last two tests had then been dropped due to 'poor form', which most people would have accepted, and then announced his retirement at the end of the series, a lot less would have been said about it IMO.

Hoggy_Bear wrote:Guildford
Haven;t read the Hopps article and don't know if he (or anyone else) has raised it, but one of the main problems that I have with Swann's announcement is that it can be viewed as a case of abandoning a sinking ship. Quitting mid-series so publicly just raises more questions about problems within the England camp. If he'd just told the England management that he didn't want to play in the last two tests had then been dropped due to 'poor form', which most people would have accepted, and then announced his retirement at the end of the series, a lot less would have been said about it IMO.

Hoggy - that is a key theme of the Hopps article (and my own thoughts).

farewell Swanny

There again though why should there be rumours going around about fall-outs. Clearly, if you watch Swann's presser he gives the reasons why. He also taps on that he wouldn't want to carry on in his physical and mental state just to take part in the next test because it is a Melbourne Boxing Day Test - he remarks that would be unfair. I'd understand the angst most definitely if the series was still alive and his retiring now hasn't made the tour a shambles - the first three shocking test performances were the shambles of the tour.

Fantastic career and a real character in the game. Thanks for the memory's Swanny!!! Will be very missed   

I do find it a bit disrespectful though, he has done it now and won't be playing in the last 2 test matches. Should of waited for it all to come to a conclusion. 

Also Monty as our number one spinner, don't like that one bit. Not only because the bloke is a complete pervert, but his bowling has become very dire now as well. Would rather Tredwell tbh. Trying to think of a young lad on the way up, can only think of Danny Briggs but he strikes me more of a ODI and T20 bowler.

NickisBHAFC wrote:Fantastic career and a real character in the game. Thanks for the memory's Swanny!!! Will be very missed   

I do find it a bit disrespectful though, he has done it now and won't be playing in the last 2 test matches. Should of waited for it all to come to a conclusion. 

Also Monty as our number one spinner, don't like that one bit. Not only because the bloke is a complete pervert, but his bowling has become very dire now as well. Would rather Tredwell tbh. Trying to think of a young lad on the way up, can only think of Danny Briggs but he strikes me more of a ODI and T20 bowler.

i hope you proof to back up that libellous claim!

NickisBHAFC wrote:Fantastic career and a real character in the game. Thanks for the memory's Swanny!!! Will be very missed   

I do find it a bit disrespectful though, he has done it now and won't be playing in the last 2 test matches. Should of waited for it all to come to a conclusion. 

Also Monty as our number one spinner, don't like that one bit. Not only because the bloke is a complete pervert, but his bowling has become very dire now as well. Would rather Tredwell tbh. Trying to think of a young lad on the way up, can only think of Danny Briggs but he strikes me more of a ODI and T20 bowler.

The legspinner Scott Borthwick.   

http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/player/310519.html

31 with bat and ball on the county circuit, and only 23 years old.

im a huge fan of Borthwick, but he dosent bowl much for Durham in the longer form....

CF wrote:im a huge fan of Borthwick, but he dosent bowl much for Durham in the longer form....

Yes, my impression was that Borthwick was mainly concentrating on his batting in the CC for Durham during 2013.

How about Ollie Rayner Guildford?
Don't know much about him myself but didn't he take a hatfull against Surrey at the Oval?

Hoggy - I haven't seen much of Ollie Rayner and missed him getting a shedfull of wickets against Surrey. I understand that a helpful pitch and even more helpful Surrey batting played a large part in that. Nonetheless, in a fairly bare spinning cupboard he's one we should keep an eye on. My gut feel would be that he's a long way off Test standard currently although, in light of Swann's retirement, I'm probably going to have to quickly lower my standards!

On Swann's timing, think I am coming around to the Guildford perspective.
The most important thing is that England were losing and doing it so pretty badly. Swann retiring now does give the message that he's kind of abandoning the ship when it is sinking.

India's U-19 spinner Harmeet Singh, highly rated by the likes of Ian Chappell, is struggling to get an opening with Mumbai in the Ranji Trophy. Perhaps Ashley Giles can study a bit of his family history and offer him a contract with Warwickshire and get Boyd Rankin to talk to him about the importance of playing test cricket?

guildfordbat wrote:Hoggy - I haven't seen much of Ollie Rayner and missed him getting a shedfull of wickets against Surrey. I understand that a helpful pitch and even more helpful Surrey batting played a large part in that. Nonetheless, in a fairly bare spinning cupboard he's one we should keep an eye on. My gut feel would be that he's a long way off Test standard currently although, in light of Swann's retirement, I'm probably going to have to quickly lower my standards!

Hopefully Monty will be a good enough replacement. At least for a couple of years until (hopefully) someone else emerges. Alternatively, we could always go down the 4 seamer + couple of not quite top class spinners route.

msp83 wrote:India's U-19 spinner Harmeet Singh, highly rated by the likes of Ian Chappell, is struggling to get an opening with Mumbai in the Ranji Trophy. Perhaps Ashley Giles can study a bit of his family history and offer him a contract with Warwickshire and get Boyd Rankin to talk to him about the importance of playing test cricket?

i am sure ECB's talent scouts and immigration consultants have made a note of your post and will be soon working on the case of how to turn Harmeet English and make him eligible by aged 23  

I am rather irritated with England and Giles on the Rankin situation and I like to express it a bit now and then.
But on a serious note, has George Dockrell qualified for England? Is he ready to jump the ship? He could be the next good spinner for England and the lad is only 21.

I think it'd be more disrespectful for a half arsed Swann to play in these final two tests personally, I really don't understand why him retiring ahead of two dead rubbers is such a disgrace.

What's the point in him playing these final two tests? Why is it such a necessity? If he feels he's done, why should he continue?

KP_fan wrote:

msp83 wrote:India's U-19 spinner Harmeet Singh, highly rated by the likes of Ian Chappell, is struggling to get an opening with Mumbai in the Ranji Trophy. Perhaps Ashley Giles can study a bit of his family history and offer him a contract with Warwickshire and get Boyd Rankin to talk to him about the importance of playing test cricket?

i am sure ECB's talent scouts and immigration consultants have made a note of your post and will be soon working on the case of how to turn Harmeet English and make him eligible by aged 23  

If he's Indian, are you sure he doesn't live over here already?

KIDDING! It's a joke, I promise.

Olly wrote:I think it'd be more disrespectful for a half arsed Swann to play in these final two tests personally, I really don't understand why him retiring ahead of two dead rubbers is such a disgrace.

What's the point in him playing these final two tests? Why is it such a necessity? If he feels he's done, why should he continue?

Swanny, if he wasn't feeling he wasn't quite up to it, could still have stayed on with the squad. Monty could have played, Swann could have contemplated the call a bit more. But the timing of the announcement doesn't give out the best message really.

msp83 wrote:

Olly wrote:I think it'd be more disrespectful for a half arsed Swann to play in these final two tests personally, I really don't understand why him retiring ahead of two dead rubbers is such a disgrace.

What's the point in him playing these final two tests? Why is it such a necessity? If he feels he's done, why should he continue?

Swanny, if he wasn't feeling he wasn't quite up to it, could still have stayed on with the squad. Monty could have played, Swann could have contemplated the call a bit more. But the timing of the announcement doesn't give out the best message really.

If he's made up his mind he's gonna retire, not just from international cricket, but ALL CRICKET, I'm fairly sure sitting on the sidelines for a few more days really isn't going to make him do a U-turn.

Here is the cricinfo article that Guildford had mentioned.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/703047.html

I guess for me, if I was playing and one of my teammates was playing when he didn't feel mentally and physically able to, that'd be more disrespectful than what Swann has done.

I can see why you guys feel differently, but for me, personally I just don't understand it.

Exactly Olly.

Swanny says it all in his press conference. He is a spent force so do England want ten players and a spent force in their team on Boxing Day or eleven players raring to go?

But Swann needn't have played, he could have stayed with the squad anyway.

I lack the time or the energy to fully throw myself into anti-England coaching staff rhetoric, plus KPF already laid the seeds there.

Instead I'll just congratulate Swann on a fantastic career and hope he enjoys the retired life. Hes only 32, isn't he? Given the fact that Warne kept going into his forties, I'd be surprised if the lure of mercenary cricket doesn't start to look good once his injuries have properly healed, and he's had the time to clear his head and get bored of his cat.

msp83 wrote:But Swann needn't have played, he could have stayed with the squad anyway.

Is that really so important? I am not sure in any case when he will be leaving the squad. Life goes on after Swann for England and the squad and they are going to have to get used to life without his presence in the dressing rooms and the sooner they start to acclimatise to that the better.

msp83 wrote:I am rather irritated with England and Giles on the Rankin situation and I like to express it  a bit now and then.
But on a serious note, has George Dockrell qualified for England? Is he ready to jump the ship? He could be the next good spinner for England and the lad is only 21.

msp - sorry, don't know the answer (Mike might with his detailed following of associate cricket and how the big nations upset their applecarts!) but it's a good and relevant question.

I believe Dockrell had some issues with form and fitness in our domestic 2013 season which rather kept him out of the headlines. However, he shouldn't be overlooked if he is eligible (please don't interpret that as me having no appreciation or sympathy with your wider general point about Ireland players being nicked).

Great career, not great timing. Reeks of quitting when the going gets tough regardless of the reality.

msp83 wrote:Here is the cricinfo article that Guildford had mentioned.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/703047.html

Thanks, msp. I don't expect people to immediately change their opinions because of this article but I do feel it shows where I was coming from pretty well.

I don't see the problem with it. Probably, and in hindsight, Swan would agree that the time to go should have been after the Ashes in England last summer. I suppose the drug of another Ashes Series was just too much for him to turn down.

If Australia win this 5-0, it goes down as the most complete decimation I've ever seen accrued in cricket history

kingraf wrote:If Australia win this 5-0, it goes down as the most  complete decimation I've ever seen accrued in cricket history

Since 2006/07 you mean when it was also 5-0 to Australia.

CC - the difference is - this hasn't just been an on-pitch dismantling, England's squad is quite literally falling apart at the seams in front of our eyes, and the coach is bereft of idea, and may be on his fairly sheepish as well. 2006/07 was a prior team that got meted out with the relevant punishments by a great team as close to their zenith as one would think possible. More lambs to the slaughter, this is a very literal demolition.

Well you could look at it two ways.

Either as you say or that this team was beset with underlying problems such as ageing squad nearing or past its best by date whilst the 2006/07 squad was on its way into a rich period for English cricket following not long after that series.

guildfordbat wrote:

msp83 wrote:I am rather irritated with England and Giles on the Rankin situation and I like to express it  a bit now and then.
But on a serious note, has George Dockrell qualified for England? Is he ready to jump the ship? He could be the next good spinner for England and the lad is only 21.

msp - sorry, don't know the answer (Mike might with his detailed following of associate cricket and how the big nations upset their applecarts!) but it's a good and relevant question.

I believe Dockrell had some issues with form and fitness in our domestic 2013 season which rather kept him out of the headlines. However, he shouldn't be overlooked if he is eligible (please don't interpret that as me having no appreciation or sympathy with your wider general point about Ireland players being nicked).

Thanks, Guildford.
Whom do you reckon has the real potential to be England's led spinner in life after Swann? Must say I am not very impressed with Briggs, and surely there are better options than Borthwick who doesn't average 2 wickets per match in FC cricket? You think perhaps Borthwick should move from Durham to a county with a less green top for their home games? Would Surrey be interested by any chance?

kingraf wrote:CC - the difference is - this hasn't just been an on-pitch dismantling, England's squad is quite literally falling apart at the seams in front of our eyes, and the coach is bereft of idea, and may be on his fairly sheepish as well. 2006/07 was a prior team that got meted out with the relevant punishments by a great team as close to their zenith as one would think possible. More lambs to the slaughter, this is a very literal demolition.

3-2, we're gonna lose 3-2, we're gonna lose 3-2. (meaning England win 5-3 on aggregate, whilst a 4-1 loss means England triumph on away tests!).

nah that was just a poor English team, lost to Pakistan in 2005/06,
drew vs Sri Lanka 2006
lost to India 2007,
lost to Sri lanka away 2008
and then to South Africa 2008,
and even the West Indies they year after that.

guildfordbat wrote:

msp83 wrote:I am rather irritated with England and Giles on the Rankin situation and I like to express it  a bit now and then.
But on a serious note, has George Dockrell qualified for England? Is he ready to jump the ship? He could be the next good spinner for England and the lad is only 21.

msp - sorry, don't know the answer (Mike might with his detailed following of associate cricket and how the big nations upset their applecarts!) but it's a good and relevant question.

I believe Dockrell had some issues with form and fitness in our domestic 2013 season which rather kept him out of the headlines. However, he shouldn't be overlooked if he is eligible (please don't interpret that as me having no appreciation or sympathy with your wider general point about Ireland players being nicked).

Ye can clear off!! He is ours! He didnt have a fantastic season last yr at somerset but he was a mainstay in their championship team and did take a 6for...He has done ok for us (Ireland) but he is more a control-type bowler
I would be distraught if he left and it would make a mockery of certain teams not being allowed to play 5day cricket because they are not a traditional cricket country

And from here we have no idea how this England side will fair. Remember that England side did hold the Ashes at that time. One of the losses was by an innings and 99 runs so this current team haven't gone to those depths yet.

Will ash win have the decency to do the same?

*Breaking*
Swann will be playing the next IPL...sources reveal he is in final negotiations with a couple of Franchisees

I can only assume they are after him for his great record limited overs bowling in India and renowned mental strength. Glad to see the ipl has grown beyond a freakshow for the retired and that agents still have the ability to make players look like assholes.
If he is in final stages of negotiations this would've been the case prior to his announcement. It was widely assumed he would be retiring after the series anyway.

I wonder if he'll have a dash at the current BB? There must be a fair few team scouts banging on his door, tweeting him or whatever they do to sign up players these days. Or is it too close to his retirement announcement and be considered poor form?

(this would give him an opportunity to play at the MCG and SCG a couple of more times)

msp83 wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

msp83 wrote:I am rather irritated with England and Giles on the Rankin situation and I like to express it  a bit now and then.
But on a serious note, has George Dockrell qualified for England? Is he ready to jump the ship? He could be the next good spinner for England and the lad is only 21.

msp - sorry, don't know the answer (Mike might with his detailed following of associate cricket and how the big nations upset their applecarts!) but it's a good and relevant question.

I believe Dockrell had some issues with form and fitness in our domestic 2013 season which rather kept him out of the headlines. However, he shouldn't be overlooked if he is eligible (please don't interpret that as me having no appreciation or sympathy with your wider general point about Ireland players being nicked).

Thanks, Guildford.
Whom do you reckon has the real potential to be England's led spinner in life after Swann? Must say I am not very impressed with Briggs, and surely there are better options than Borthwick who doesn't average 2 wickets per match in FC cricket? You think perhaps Borthwick should move from Durham to a county with a less green top for their home games? Would Surrey be interested by any chance?

Msp - a considered answer although far from satisfactory. I don't believe anyone has the clear potential to be England's lead spinner in life after Swann. That's not to say there is no one out there who will be ultimately able to take on the role. However, it is my view that no one has shown sufficient potential yet and that now is too soon for even one of them to be thrown in.

So what do we do?

As I see it at Test level we immediately have 3 options:

1.) Ignore what I've written above and have another 'Kerrigan type' punt. Clearly not my choice as I fear the results would again most likely be bad for the team and the player who ever is chosen.

2.) Muddle through with Root and Pietersen bowling the spinner's overs. Again not my choice. For the vast majority of the time, you need Test class (or as near as possible) bowlers bowling at Test class batsmen.

3.) Return to an old hand whilst a small core of young spinners are developed and closely monitored before one can take the big (and it will be big but not as ginormous as it would be today) step up. My choice.

As regards 3.), who are the old hands and who are the young guns?

a.) I feel the old hands boil down to Tredwell or Panesar. My inclination would be to go for Tredwell. Yes, it's unimaginative and rather safe but security is something we really need now. I accept Tredwell is a long way second to an all firing Swann but that doesn't mean he's not the current best option (MacGill was well short of Warne but still did mighty fine). The only other option as I see it in this category is Panesar. On a spin friendly wicket, my thinking would be to play both Tredwell and Panesar with the latter as the lead spinner. On spin friendly tops, I feel Panesar is really good but can struggle for effectivess on neutral and spin unfriendly wickets. Also, Panesar's fielding is close to dreadful and his batting (despite having a commendable fighting spirit) is very poor. For all these reasons, I would regard Tredwell as the more reliable and opt for him when selecting only one spinner.

b.) As I see it (apologies for probably missing some), the most likely young guns are Dockrell (if he's eligible, I would regards him as towards the head of the queue despite atletico trying to frighten me off!), Kerrigan (could still come back although I have doubts about him against the world's best - he had no answer when I saw Pietersen pummell him in 2012) and Briggs (note your doubts, I've only seem him 'live' once but he was pretty effective then).  Others who are in the 2014 Lions squad and presumably in contention are Moen Ali (never really caught my eye) and Borthwick (ordinary when I saw him at the Oval this year although Surrey still gifted him some wickets and does in any case appear to be concentrating more on his batting - don't believe either he or Surrey would be that interested in the other). An outside choice would be Surrey's Zafar Ansari - 2014 will be his first full season in county cricket having now graduated from Cambridge where he captained the University side. He has potential as a slow left armer (how much is still unknown having been the third choice slowie behind Batty and Kartik/Keedy in the bowling pecking order the last two seasons and playing mainly as a batsman or batting all rounder); also an outstanding fielder and definitely a thinking cricketer. One further aspect of concern relating to Briggs, Moen Ali and Ansari is that they will be playing their CC cricket next season (as Kerrigan did in 2013) in Division Two where the standard is definitely lower and therefore judgments as to Test suitability all the harder to make.

Interesting times. Difficult times.

Different views on here ...fair enough.

I am not going to endlessly repeat my own. What I will say however is that Swann does not strike me as one who "spins" in interviews and press conferences. So I 'd be more inclined than not to take his explanations at face value.

Certainly it isn't ideal for England in the context of unfolding crisis ; but it may be that matters more to the media and the fans than the playing group ...we shall see how it plays in Melbourne.

[quote="guildfordbat"]

msp83 wrote:


3.) Return to an old hand whilst a small core of young spinners are developed and closely monitored before one can take the big (and it will be big but not as ginormous as it would be today) step up. My choice.

As regards 3.), who are the old hands and who are the young guns?

a.) I feel the old hands boil down to Tredwell or Panesar. My inclination would be to go for Tredwell. Yes, it's unimaginative and rather safe but security is something we really need now. I accept Tredwell is a long way second to an all firing Swann but that doesn't mean he's not the current best option (MacGill was well short of Warne but still did mighty fine). The only other option as I see it in this category is Panesar. On a spin friendly wicket, my thinking would be to play both Tredwell and Panesar with the latter as the lead spinner. On spin friendly tops, I feel Panesar is really good but can struggle for effectivess on neutral and spin unfriendly wickets. Also, Panesar's fielding is close to dreadful and his batting (despite having a commendable fighting spirit) is very poor. For all these reasons, I would regard Tredwell as the more reliable and opt for him when selecting only one spinner.

Don't know about Tredwell Guildford. He's done well in ODIs and that must be taken into consideration, but his FC record is VERY mediocre. Last year he took less wickets at a higher average in Div 2 than the likes of Borthwick did in Div 1, even though Borthwick, supposedly, wasn't bowling much.
I might be wrong but, if Monty's not up to the task, I'd rather they pick a young bowler to have a run in the team. Especially now that they have the 'safety net' of 5 bowlers (presuming Stokes will get a run in the side), I think this summer would be the time to try it.

The problem as I see it is that we could really do with trying to get Finn into the team. If we do look to do that (in place of Bresnan) then we can't also play Panesar. We have to go for a spinner who can bat a bit. Is Adel Rashid now that bad a bowler he isn't worth considering?

As to the replacements I was interested to see Guildford's opinion above. Bit surprised at his advocacy of Tredwell.

I had assumed Panesar would be the immediate option - well obviously he is for these two Tests, but for the summer also. But it now occurs to me that another possibility , now that the Stokes at six plan allows five bowlers , would be to play Borthwick as a potentially useful addition to the batting anyway , and a spinner who is not expected to be dominant , at least at first. And hopefully he might develop from there ?
This could work either with a four man pace attack (the usual option in England ) or conceivably alongside a second spinner - a Panesar or a Tredwell say - if conditions allow.
Of course it may be Borthwick just isn't going to ever make it as a spinner at top level (those who have watched a fair bit of him may have views on this ) ; but it occurs to me he might just have a better chance of doing so by being in and around the Test squad than playing in the County game only at the risk of being marginalized as a batsman who bowls a bit...

alfie wrote:As to the replacements I was interested to see Guildford's opinion above.  Bit surprised at his advocacy of Tredwell.

I had assumed Panesar would be the immediate option - well obviously he is for these two Tests, but for the summer also.  But it now occurs to me that another possibility  , now that the Stokes at six plan allows five bowlers , would be to play Borthwick as a potentially useful addition to the batting anyway , and a spinner who is not expected to be dominant , at least at first. And hopefully he might develop from there ?
This could work either with a four man pace attack (the usual option in England ) or conceivably alongside a second spinner - a Panesar or a Tredwell say - if conditions allow.
Of course it may be Borthwick just isn't going to ever make it as a spinner at top level (those who have watched a fair bit of him may have views on this ) ; but it occurs to me he might just have a better chance of doing so by being in and around the Test squad than playing in the County game only at the risk of being marginalized as a batsman who bowls a bit...

I think that's the way I'd lean alfie. Stokes at 6, wickie at 7, Borthwick at 8. Combination of Borthwick and Root to bowl spin, option of playing two spinners if needs be.
I'm not usually an advocate of playing 5 bowlers but if (and it's a humongous if as yet), Stokes proves to be a true test class all-rounder, it would give the team options.