Amar Virdi on his way out ?

According to the latest issue of The Cricketer, Amar Virdi has been offered out on loan to second divsion counties, just before the latest championship round, but there wee no takers. Apparently the management at the club feels Will Jacks can develop as an off spinner as well as batsman and Dan Moriarty is ahead of Virdi as a spin option.

Amazingly poor judgement by Stewart/Batty, cannot understand their thinking. As far as Jacks is concerned,you can’t manufacture a spinner just like that!!! You can’t make silk purse out of a sow’s ear. Thank goodness Batty is only “interim” coach before he does anymore damage!! Can’t understand their obsession with Jacks ,good batsman and extremely good fielder, but quality off spinner? No way!!

All rather sad, if true, for someone who looked likely to become a Test level spinner. I know he's not the best in the field, doesn't score runs and doesn't play T20 - spinners seem to be expected to be multidimensional these days - but even so.

A loan would have made sense but a lot of loans seem to be cover for injuries and counties' own spinners are not as likely to be injured as seamers.

A couple of year’s ago,Stewart said Virdi was our number one spinner, now out of nowhere comes SuperJacks to take over the mantle!! He has no justification for freezing out Virdi and Moriarty!! But to suggest Jacks is a better spinner is laughable Virdi has nearly 140 wickets at just under 30runs per over ,and a best of 8/61. No comparison!!

The way he's been treated over the past few years has been nothing short of disgraceful; granted he seemed to have some off-field/fitness issues in 2019, but he definitely improved with the latter.

It's a difficult one. Virdi was undoubtedly very exciting in 2018: spinners take time to develop, but he hit the ground running in the championship season, displacing Gareth Batty in the process.

Batty, who had pretty much retired from championship cricket, unexpectedly replaced Virdi for the first half of the 2019 season when it was no secret Surrey were not happy with his fitness levels, but when Virdi returned certainly looked to be reasonably fitter. He also made his mark on a spinners' wicket at Trent Bridge (though against a dreadful Notts team I have never accepted that he "outbowled Ashwin" there).  

He has done okay in the past couple of seasons, but arguably hasn't pushed on quite as much as might have been hoped. Dan Moriarty has also emerged, and while it's difficult to say who is now better, Moriarty has the advantage of offering the left-arm variety and being seen as more of a short-form player. Virdi remains a better off-spinner than Jacks, but given all of the factors is that going to give him enough game-time?

Ideally, I think it might be best all-round to loan him out for the rest of the season, with the option to review ahead of next year. It could be, for example, that find ourselves without Jacks, either because he has been snapped up by the IPL/England or that he is injured.

Spinners take a long time to develop,how then does Super Jacks come from nowhere to a fixture in the side? There is no evidence to suggest that Jacks has made any significant progress at all. Furthermore,until this season Jacks hardly bowled in the CC at all.
Other than bias from Stewart/ Batty,he wouldn’t be our main spinner!

To quote from the article

Surrey invested in the developing Will Jacks for their off-spin. It was a policy that reaped 11 wickts in the opening seven rounds of matches, and helped the club retain top position.
The decision was given furher credence when Jacks claimed four wickets in one innings on a flat pitch at Beckenham in May. Then in the next fixture hs twin half-centuries proved crucial in a three wicket win over Somerset at Taunton

On loan to Somerset

The club should be appalled with themselves

Dreadful decision by Stewart/Batty !! He has been shabbily treated
It’s seemed to have been a conspiracy by the club to freeze both Virdi and Moriarty out of the team and manufacture a spinner in Jacks. Good job we only have Batty as an Interim Coach. Let’s hope that the new full time coach is a better judge than Stewart and Batty.

It makes perfect sense to release him on loan to Somserset for one game, under the circumstances.

Rightly or wrongly the club do not envisage that Amar will play at Scarborough. Somerset are not title rivals so strengthening them against Lancashire (who are) and giving a motivated Amar a chance of first division cricket against Lancashire next week is a smart move. 

I hope he does well and gives us a selection problem going forward.

Sorry but I don't see Virdi or Moriaty probably, as part of the club's plans. In my view I don't think either are good enough anyway, but I'd choose Moriaty if I had too.
It's pretty harsh to criticise Batty or Stewart when we are 16 points clear at the top of Div 1! Batty has done a great job, but obviously does not see Virdi and maybe even Moriaty playing much of a part.

Chinaman ,there is nothing to suggest that we still wouldn’t be in the same position in the CC if Virdi or Moriarty had been picked. Clearly the think someone who has taken 12 or so this season as better than someone who has 139 career wickets. Totally flawed thinking by Stewart/Batty. The fact Super Jacks has scored well this season doesn’t make him a quality spinner by any standards.

Jackers wrote:It makes perfect sense to release him on loan to Somserset for one game, under the circumstances.

Rightly or wrongly the club do not envisage that Amar will play at Scarborough. Somerset are not title rivals so strengthening them against Lancashire (who are) and giving a motivated Amar a chance of first division cricket against Lancashire next week is a smart move. 

I hope he does well and gives us a selection problem going forward.

Somerset asked (Leach not playing), Surrey said yes. I quite see why you wouldn't loan a player to Hampshire or Lancashire but I would hope that Lancashire being Somerset's opponents didn't enter into it. Allowing one match loans does sort of invite manipulation though. I'd make it three matches minimum, and even if he doesn't play, the county has to pay.

"Not title rivals" is interesting. In 2016 Somerset looked very likely to be relegated until they took five Durham wickets for nothing on the last morning. They then took the art of designer pitches to new heights and would have won it without Middlesex and Yorkshire deciding that come what may one of them was going to win it. My point being that the points system then enabled teams to jump from bottom to top in the space of a few matches. With more points for a draw that is less the case than it was but it would be ironic if loaning Virdi to them ended up making them title rivals.

Neither of these last two postings make much sort of logical sense unless I'm missing something. The fact remains we are leading the Championship without either of these two. 139 career wickets in how many years? If they had played who would have not? It's all a bit this and that. I don't follow the "manipulation" argument either and fail to see that even if Somerset won the one match with Virdi it would make much if any difference. But yes 8 points for a draw is daft.

You can't compare Somerset this year to 2016, Ciderabad or no Ciderabad. They had Tresco, Trego, Chris Rogers and Hildreth in his prime, all four played every game and all four averaged over 40.

 Their batting this year is pretty poor. They are most definitely not title rivals, Lancashire definitely are...so the Virdi arrangement is a smart bit of business with no obvious downside.

Just a few facts,not opinions. SuperJacks last year took 4 wickets at 54, Virdi took 29 at 34. Jacks this season has taken 12 at 50.8 runs. What an improvement!!!!!. How can he be our number one spinner?? So what has changed since last year? Only one thing, Batty as coach!! How many matches will Jacks win ?? going at 50 runs per wicket. Virdi’s best is 8/61, can you see Jacks ever matching that? Only in the fantasy world of Batty.

Jackers wrote:You can't compare Somerset this year to 2016, Ciderabad or no Ciderabad. They had Tresco, Trego, Chris Rogers and Hildreth in his prime, all four played every game and all four averaged over 40.

 Their batting this year is pretty poor. They are most definitely not title rivals, Lancashire definitely are...so the Virdi arrangement is a smart bit of business with no obvious downside.

Jackers

Despite those batting averages, until (I think) some time in August they were in no better a position then than they are now, yet they nearly won. They say that bowlers win matches; I can only suppose that their bowling was weak until the pitches magically started to suit them or that they were just unlucky to lose some matches. Once they got on a roll, confidence would have grown; they beat Yorkshire away in their penultimate match which put them just about in pole position.

The points system and the number of matches has changed but it remains a "never say never" for me.

On selecting Jacks ahead of Virdi (or Moriarty), presumably the argument is not that Jacks is anywhere near as good a spinner (at least yet) but that his runs (which are usually quick ones) enable another seamer to be picked for pitches that don't favour spin. It's actually quite disappointing to me that in a hot dry summer pitches don't favour spin/the spinners aren't good enough/the selectors are seam-obsessed (choose from smorgasboard as desired).

dougieginn wrote:Just a few facts,not opinions. SuperJacks last year took 4 wickets at 54, Virdi took 29 at 34. Jacks this season has taken 12 at 50.8 runs. What an improvement!!!!!. How can he be our number one spinner?? So what has changed since last year? Only one thing, Batty as coach!!  How many matches will Jacks win ?? going at 50 runs per wicket. Virdi’s best is 8/61, can you see Jacks ever matching that? Only in the fantasy world of Batty.

What's with the 'SuperJacks' rubbish?!

All the discussion of averages also completely takes away the point of his selection. Jacks is selected as an all rounder, allowing an extra bowler to be picked. If you want to directly compare Virdi/Jacks, lets bring out the batting averages to make it a fair fight on head to head.

Tbh, I actually agree, I'd prefer a frontline spinner. I think one more seamer rarely makes a difference and we score enough runs anyway. But berating Will Jacks constantly like its his own doing and totally ignoring half the game of cricket isn't really helpful.

At no stage have I criticised Will Jacks,I would pick him for every match,fine batsman and an outstanding fielder,he is being asked to do something he is not capable of doing,hence the Super Jacks.

Interestingly how many county supposed "front line spinners" are taking wickets on the now dry, and you would assume more spinner friendly wickets? Not many bar Harmar who is a class apart. Why I ask.  Well just maybe they are not good enough because until this season we've hardly played any 4 day games in June, July and August for about 5 years. I'm at Scarborough and it will be interesting to see if Bess does anything being their front line spinner. Well perhaps he will which strengthens the Moriaty argument, but I wouldn't hold your breath.

Chinaman wrote:Neither of these last two postings make much sort of logical sense unless I'm missing something. The fact remains we are leading the Championship without either of these two. 139 career wickets in how many years? If they had played who would have not? It's all a bit this and that. I don't follow the "manipulation" argument either and fail to see that even if Somerset won the one match with Virdi it would make much if any difference. But yes 8 points for a draw is daft.

Plenty of games we have gone into with 6 or even 7 seam bowling options. No reason why one of those couldn't have made way for a spinner. There have been a number of games which have ended as draws where the seamers have been completely ineffective beyond the 25th-30th over and as hard as Jacks has tried he hasn't been able to get enough from the pitch to attack consistently or enough to exert control. On more than one occasion I have felt either Virdi or Moriarty would have given us a greater chance of turning a draw into a win. Would they have been enough to change the result? maybe not but there have been times (that pitch at beckenham for example) where it was obviously a road so a 2nd spinner was the obvious choice.

Look at this match. 8 Bowlers used in 110 overs. Only 9 overs of spin. Jacks wasnt able to exert any control so we have had to use 7 seamers with Worral bowling 30 overs alone. Jacks is a good player and him developing this side of his game is great. There will be some games we play him as our main spinner for sure, there will be some games he plays as a batsman and some he plays as an allrounder and 2nd spinner. With pitches and the balls as they have been this year and with us regularly picking 7 bowlers I cant see the justification for not having a frontline spinner plus Jacks.

I know batty wants players who can contribute in all 3 facets of the game but feel these 2 (particularly Dan) have been harshly treated in this. Fast bowlers are allowed to not bat and not be especially strong in the field (Topley, Worrall, McKerr) but spinners arent? Moriarty is at least as good as those with the bat and in the field. Amar less so but its not as awful as some have made out. We've also seem some truly horrendous fielding by the likes of Amla, Pollard, Narine this year. Reeks of double standards.

I'm a big fan of Batty as I have said and love that he's doing well as coach, but given the choice between him leaving and Virdi/Moriarty leaving I would choose him without a seconds hesitation. They are two of the best young spinners in the country, spinners take a lot longer to develop and learn their game, both have the potential to really come into their own in their late 20's/early 30's and really take to international cricket. For that to happen though we need to stick with them and keep playing them.

Let’s assume Jacks is first-choice spinner. I understand if he’s batting at 7 and you have four seamers. But when he’s at 8 or 6 it doesn’t work. If he’s at 8 or 9 then you’re one bowler short and you may as well play the genuine bowler. Look at Bracewell/Patel in the last NZ test. And if he’s at 6 you’re playing too many seamers and McKerr/Lawes should be replaced by a spinner.

Ben mug, at no point have I criticised Jacks,see my previous post. It the absurd assumption that you can turn an occasional spinner into a specialist spinner ,just like that. It seems that this is Batty’s idea, what nonsense,as is the idea that only seamers are selected could Moriarty or Virdi have bowled worse than McKerr? Or bowled as few overs as Lawes? 489/7 is this a vindication of the selection policy in this match? We haven’t won anything yet, so don’t extol Batty’s virtues yet. Finally, what is a good selection in April isn’t the same as a good selection in July