Mark Wood - totally mismanaged

T

The Rat

Striker
www.standard.co.uk

Rare talent Wood shows England’s contract system needs rethink

As one of England’s more entertaining and emotionally intelligent cricketers, we hear a fair bit from Mark Wood about what has proved a complicated, captivating career.
www.standard.co.uk www.standard.co.uk

Really infuriates me this, all this talk of winning abroad, ashes etc, hasnt been backed up with actions

Mark Wood has won England his las 3 tests he played abroad, averaging 14, he averages just over 20 abroad

We have 5 tests against India coming up, 5 tests in Australia

We don't win here without Mark Wood

Yet he gets dropped from a central contract, and is now thinking about moving to white ball stuff

Yet Sam Curran will now earn double Mark Wood. He won't even be in the squad to Australia. Chris Woakes, great England, very unlikely to even play in these 10 tests, earns more than double.

I don't get it. Have they just dropped him because they thought he won't kick up a fuss?

It goes against everything they have talked about over the last 12 months, building to Ashes etc, then they just treat one of the major reasons they can win there like this?

Answers on a postcard.
 


The Rat said:
www.standard.co.uk

Rare talent Wood shows England’s contract system needs rethink

As one of England’s more entertaining and emotionally intelligent cricketers, we hear a fair bit from Mark Wood about what has proved a complicated, captivating career.
www.standard.co.uk www.standard.co.uk

Really infuriates me this, all this talk of winning abroad, ashes etc, hasnt been backed up with actions

Mark Wood has won England his las 3 tests he played abroad, averaging 14, he averages just over 20 abroad

We have 5 tests against India coming up, 5 tests in Australia

We don't win here without Mark Wood

Yet he gets dropped from a central contract, and is now thinking about moving to white ball stuff

Yet Sam Curran will now earn double Mark Wood. He won't even be in the squad to Australia. Chris Woakes, great England, very unlikely to even play in these 10 tests, earns more than double.

I don't get it. Have they just dropped him because they thought he won't kick up a fuss?

It goes against everything they have talked about over the last 12 months, building to Ashes etc, then they just treat one of the major reasons they can win there like this?

Answers on a postcard.
Click to expand...

I think in principle you right and I think everybody knows his talent,but maybe the reason for it, is he can’t be relied upon to regularly produce that talent becuase he is not on the field enough due to injuries.

That’s not getting at the lad, just suggesting that is the rationale for the decision.

I suppose in any business you don’t want to pay someone top dollar, in they can’t be relied upon, to produce the results regaulrly to justify the investment.
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
I think in principle you right and I think everybody knows his talent,but maybe the reason for it, is he can’t be relied upon to regularly produce that talent becuase he is not on the field enough due to injuries.

That’s not getting at the lad, just suggesting that is the rationale for the decision.

I suppose in any business you don’t want to pay someone top dollar, in they can’t be relied upon, to produce the results regaulrly to justify the investment.
Click to expand...

He did in South Africa, they'd have lost the series without him IMO.

They lost in West Indies when he didn't play

They won't win in India or Australia without him.

How many people have England produced in the history of cricket faster than Mark Wood?

He needs to be protected and used in these big series.

Its probs a money thing, I think they will live to regret it, and its a really poor move by Giles and Ed Smith.

How cany anyone in the ECB think Sam Curran is worth double the money of Mark Wood? Who also just won them a world cup
 
The Rat said:
He did in South Africa, they'd have lost the series without him IMO.

They lost in West Indies when he didn't play

They won't win in India or Australia without him.

How many people have England produced in the history of cricket faster than Mark Wood?

He needs to be protected and used in these big series.

Its probs a money thing, I think they will live to regret it, and its a really poor move by Giles and Ed Smith.

How cany anyone in the ECB think Sam Curran is worth double the money of Mark Wood? Who also just won them a world cup
Click to expand...

Well yeah once again think the above points are correct!

But like in anything, decisions have to made regarding whether you can rely on somebody to produce the goods on a regular basis and he can’t do that if he is not on the field no matter how talented he is!

I am not saying I agree with it, you just said you could not understand it, and rightly or wrongly I think that is probably the reason.

I suppose in football there will be lesser players or players who are not match winners awarded better contracts than those who are, becuase they are more reailable.
 
Last edited:
Simply because of who he plays for, fact is if you are talented as fuck and preform you are overlooked for someone else because they Play for Surrey
 
The Rat said:
www.standard.co.uk

Rare talent Wood shows England’s contract system needs rethink

As one of England’s more entertaining and emotionally intelligent cricketers, we hear a fair bit from Mark Wood about what has proved a complicated, captivating career.
www.standard.co.uk www.standard.co.uk

Really infuriates me this, all this talk of winning abroad, ashes etc, hasnt been backed up with actions

Mark Wood has won England his las 3 tests he played abroad, averaging 14, he averages just over 20 abroad

We have 5 tests against India coming up, 5 tests in Australia

We don't win here without Mark Wood

Yet he gets dropped from a central contract, and is now thinking about moving to white ball stuff

Yet Sam Curran will now earn double Mark Wood. He won't even be in the squad to Australia. Chris Woakes, great England, very unlikely to even play in these 10 tests, earns more than double.

I don't get it. Have they just dropped him because they thought he won't kick up a fuss?

It goes against everything they have talked about over the last 12 months, building to Ashes etc, then they just treat one of the major reasons they can win there like this?

Answers on a postcard.
Click to expand...

agree 100%
 
rentaghost said:
agree 100%
Click to expand...

England were in a tricky situation this summer with Broad and Woakes undroppable and Jimmy... well, I would have kept with him and the pay-off came at the end.

Archer’s was the spot to debate for me but Wood didn’t help his cause in the one test he did play.

The article is obviously about the financial side of things but I think the general theme of the ECB reducing contract spend to preserve the pot for the recreational game as far as possible is the right one.
 
Last edited:
NorthCountryBoy said:
England were in a tricky situation this summer with Broad and Woakes undroppable and Jimmy... well, I would have kept with him and the pay-off came at the end.

Archer’s was the spot to debate for me but Wood didn’t help his cause in the one test he did play.

The article is obviously about the financial side of things but I think the general theme of the ECB reducing contract spend to preserve the pot for the recreational game as far as possible is the right one.
Click to expand...

I never thought they were personally, I'd have played Broad in the first test of the summer, and then later in the summer given him a rest at some stage.

It was totally unfair for Wood and Leach to be in that bubble all summer and barely play

But its beside point, we have now 9 tests coming up that Woakes and Curran will not play in, yet they both got central contracts

Just find it unbelievable that our key weapon next year, alongside Archer, has been treated so poorly that he is debating giving up red ball cricket

I really think its really poor, as they really need him

But he is a nice lad, who doesn't kick up a fuss.

He is also quicker than Archer.

Wouldnt blame him if he went away to the T20 circuit, its disgrace, really is.
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
Absolutely fuck all to do with it, just simply complete bollocks!
Click to expand...
Deep breaths and in and out
TheRey said:
What absolute tosh.

Either grow up, or boil your head
Click to expand...
Was a tongue in cheek comment but he does get overlooked by Curran? Who I would say wood is a better bowler, Curran has also been below average with the bat too.

tell me to grow up and then write boil your head really defeats your purpose of your message.

jesus people are sensitive souls these days.
 
Last edited:
Concordsafc said:
Deep breaths and in and out

Was a tongue in cheek comment but he does get overlooked by Curran? Who I would say wood is a better bowler, Curran has also been below average with the bat too.

tell me to grow up and then write boil your head really defeats your purpose of your message.

jesus people are sensitive souls these days.
Click to expand...

Players who play for England hardly play for their county anyway nowadays, could probably count on one hand how many times Wood has played for Durham in the last 5 years.

I think most people would agree with you a fully fit Wood a lot better option than Curran, that’s not the debate.

It’s your ridiculous suggestion that it is the county Wood has played a handful of games for in the last 5 years is a factor in his selection or central contract.

Whether he gets a central contract or not, is probably down to his injury record imo, but I repeat it’s absolute nonsense to suggest he hasn’t because of who he sometimes plays county cricket for.
The Rat said:
No it didn’t
Click to expand...

As I said earlier in reply to you I think Wood is a massive talent and totally see your point of view on him, he is exactly the type of bowler we need on the hard wickets of Australia, and they seem to not have the confidence to give him that contract based of his injury record which is a massive shame.

However to suggest it is because he doesn’t play for a certain county as the poster did is absolute nonsense and that’s why it got the response it did.
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
Players who play for England hardly play for their county anyway nowadays, could probably count on one hand how many times Wood has played for Durham in the last 5 years.

I think most people would agree with you a fully fit Wood a lot better option than Curran, that’s not the debate.

It’s your ridiculous suggestion that it is the county Wood has played a handful of games for in the last 5 years is a factor in his selection or central contract.

Whether he gets a central contract or not, is probably down to his injury record imo, but I repeat it’s absolute nonsense to suggest he hasn’t because of who he sometimes plays county cricket for.
Click to expand...
Suggestion was tongue in cheek I’ve said it for years about Surrey I’m aware they produce some brilliant players obviously touched a nerve,

but To boil my head from one lad was t warranted at all tells someone to grow up then is a bit of a bairn himself in his next statement.

my opionion on players who play for England should play for their county but thats harder unless they change the Calendar around which they won’t

it’s a tad frustrating for wood etc to be in a bubble and hardly feature wood played through injuries in South Africa maybe he is carrying them and is too proud to say.
 
Concordsafc said:
Suggestion was tongue in cheek I’ve said it for years about Surrey I’m aware they produce some brilliant players obviously touched a nerve,

but To boil my head from one lad was t warranted at all tells someone to grow up then is a bit of a bairn himself in his next statement.

my opionion on players who play for England should play for their county but thats harder unless they change the Calendar around which they won’t

it’s a tad frustrating for wood etc to be in a bubble and hardly feature wood played through injuries in South Africa maybe he is carrying them and is too proud to say.
Click to expand...

I am from the North East, and have no connection to Surrey, but just think the same with football.

It happens quite often where people say, ‘ He has only been picked because who he plays for’

I honestly find it nonsense whoever says it, international teams be it in cricket or football are under a lot of pressure to win games and simply pick what they consider the right team/squad to win them games.

As for Wood think fully fit, hell of a bowler, however his injury record suggests unfortunately for him, he can’t be replied upon, which is a shame.

And rightly or wrongly that is probably why they have decided to not give him a central contract, who he plays his county cricket for would not have been even a consideration.

Tbf to you yes, telling you to boil your head by the poster was over the top of course, but I think your comment was way of the mark.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top