Of course if two of the top six did what they were paid to do - namely converting decent starts into hundreds, England would have scored >400 and this thread would be largely irrelevant.

However, Foster would seem to be a more than useful stopgap until Davies gains more experience.

Knee jerk reactions galore...

I feel sorry for Read. While most players have been treated responsibly under Fletcher he's had to endure the 90's style knee-jerk pick-drop-pick problems. He's clearly the best keeper in England and none of the keepers are significantly better as a batsman to be worth mentioning. If there was a Stewart it the wings it would be different, but what did Sutton or Nixon or Davies do in the last three years with the bat in county cricket that Read didn't? Since he's been recalled he's averaged in the 30s in Tests (vs Warne, McGrath, Asif, Clark Kaneria.), and been a class act with the gloves

As I said a few months back, Foster would have been a good back up keeper to Read for the Ashes. He is clearly much better than Jones.

quote:

Originally posted by Growler:
What about this chap Nixon they selected for the ODIs?

If he does OK, could they give him 12-18 months in the test side & give the "promising youngsters" a bit longer to develop?

So - has nobody got an opinion on Paul Nixon? Why has he seemingly appeared from nowhere into the ODI squad when so many other names have been kicked around on here ?

quote:

Originally posted by Growler:

quote:

Originally posted by Growler:
What about this chap Nixon they selected for the ODIs?

If he does OK, could they give him 12-18 months in the test side & give the "promising youngsters" a bit longer to develop?

So - has nobody got an opinion on Paul Nixon? Why has he seemingly appeared from nowhere into the ODI squad when so many other names have been kicked around on here ?

Good team man
Decent keeper, but so are most of the other keepers in the county game
Effective one-day batsman for his county
Too old at 36

If I may wade into this never-ending debate...

The way I see it, there are only three credible options.

1) Matt Prior. His career average of 39 is better than Michael Vaughan's, and he's supposedly about to walk (hobble) back into the side as a specialist batsman. Prior's a very positive batsman, likes to 'take it' to the bowlers and is a good age (25 in a couple of months) to have enough first-class experience to hit the ground running, yet be a decent investment for the future as he develops. Fourteen hundreds, a double-hundred to his name - he can score big runs.

His supposedly iffy glovework has been over-played as well. Keeps very well to Mushtaq - probably the best spinner in the league and is perfectly competent behind the stumps. Not the best gloveman, but some way off being the worst.

2) Steven Davies. Like Prior, he's held down a place in his county side at times as a specialist batsman. He started off opening the batting for Worcs until he took over full-time keeping duty and moved down to six. In little more than a season and a half of senior cricket, he's bagged four career FC hundreds. That's the same amount as Geraint Jones, ten years his senior, has.

He's a nice-looking batsman, very elegant. Doesn't seem much interested in footwork, but he's got a great eye, and other left-handers, such as Gower, Trescothick and Gilchrist have shown you can be pretty successful even without text-book foot movements.

Looks a natural keeper, though he also looks like a twenty year-old keeper - which is what he is: good, but still learning his trade. Spills the odd one on the dive.

If England wanted to follow South Africa's lead, when they just decided Mark Boucher was the best long-term hope and dropped him in at the deep end as a kid and let him work it out for himself, then Davies would be the obvious choice. A safer course of action, though, would be to give him another couple of seasons to mature.

But, then, desperate times call for desperate measures.

3) James Foster. I've never undrestood how or why he fell off the selectors' radar. His keeping has improved year after year, as has his batting. He was selected out of university to tour New Zealand and India as a pup, and he showed more than enough potential to deserve a big tick next to his name - he was lippy, cocky, kept reasonably (better in India than in NZ), and showed a lot of determination and guts as a batsman. Though he didn't have many shots, he batted for a very long time in both series, with a top-score of 48 against India.

Against NZ, he was only out twice in five innings, ending up with an average of 52.5 for the series. His best contribution being an unbeaten 25 which helped Graham Thorpe reach 200.

Has apparently paid his own way to get out to Australia this winter and work on his batting some more - that kind of commitment to self-improvement must play well with the selectors. You would think.

He'd be the safest choice of the three. His keeping's already at the 'solid' level, and his batting is already 'reliable'. But is it 'reliable' enough to average high-thirties or better?

Chris Read could score a hundred in the second innings of this Test and put the debate to bed (for a while), so it's unfair to write him off too early - and he's basically on a hiding to nothing anyway, being dragged in to play the final two matches off the back of virtually no warm-up cricket.

But, for me, he just doesn't look a convincing enough batsman to justify his selection at seven. And if that carries on, England are going to have look elsewhere.

Should at least give Read another innings - if he fails, we'll form an angry mob, find his house and burn it down. It's only fair.

Firstly or more like secondly it's absolute first class gubbins of the highest order to say anything like it's not down to the number seven to score runs, the top six should be doing it. In the real world at most levels of cricket it's common when the frontline bowlers are starting fresh and armed with new ball and the wicket's doing a little bit that a batting side will lose 4 or five wickets before they've got a huge total on the board. Let's see how many Australia eek out of their last six wickets tomorrow.

In general we're not asking for much- a keeper bat who can average about 30 (late 20's at a push) with the bat and keep solidly. We're not really after a messiah, just a very moderate test batsman who's also handy with the gloves. I'm sure a Prior or a Foster has that ability and they should be given the same chances Jones and Read have had to prove that.

quote:

Originally posted by Toga:
Should at least give Read another innings - if he fails, we'll form an angry mob, find his house and burn it down. It's only fair.

I can't even imagine Read living in an actual house.

I have visions of him living in a shoe. Or a boot.

He's very little, you see.

quote:

Originally posted by Jay Dello:

quote:

Originally posted by Toga:
Should at least give Read another innings - if he fails, we'll form an angry mob, find his house and burn it down. It's only fair.

I can't even imagine Read living in an actual house.

I have visions of him living in a shoe. Or a boot.

He's very little, you see.

Possibly a matchbox.

A matchbox inside a boot.

quote:

Originally posted by Jay Dello:
A matchbox inside a boot.

We could fill the boot with petrol.

Or water.

I shouldn't imagine Read can swim.

Although the pro-Read camp will have you believe his doggy-paddle is really coming along and he'll be able to go for his length badge in no time - why won't you just give him a chance?!

Both Prior and Davies could potentially bat at 6 for England, meaning Fred can drop down to 7(His ideal position) and England can still play 5 bowlers. Im not sure the selectors are all that impressed with Prior at the moment, though. The fact that the 36 year old Paul Nixon was called up for the ODI series ahead of him suggests that things havent gone great for Prior this winter at the Academy.

Still, this whole 'bad attitude at the Academy' stuff is a bit overplayed, imo. Shane Warne was expelled from the Australian Academy, and yet 6 months later he was making his Test debut for Australia. At the end of the day, talent should win the day, and it should be up to the Coach and Captian to handle any supposed 'attitude problem'.

Sutton would be interesting.

And would clear the swift-handed Gareth Cross to play for Lanky.



OHHHHHHHHHH Lankylanky ....

(by Jove, I needed that)

Strange for me to say this, but I feel Read is being hard done by in this. Then again, many Poms probably think the same when they hear most Aussies taking shots at Bung.

Read was recalled for Melbourne, and in the second innings was one of only a couple of English players to show any spine whatsoever with the bat:

England 2nd innings                R   M   B 4s 6s SR 
 AJ Strauss     c Gilchrist b Lee 31 173 107  2  0 28.97 
 AN Cook        b Clark           20 64 46 1 0 43.47 
 IR Bell        lbw b McGrath      2 21 11 0 0 18.18 
 KP Pietersen   b Clark            1 7 8 0 0 12.50 
 PD Collingwood c Langer b Lee    16 52 38 0 0 42.10 
 A Flintoff     lbw b Clark       25 60 45 2 0 55.55 

 CMW Read       not out           26 127 77 1 0 33.76 

 SI Mahmood     lbw b Warne        0 3 2 0 0 0.00 
 SJ Harmison    lbw b Warne        4 44 26 0 0 15.38 
 MS Panesar     c Clarke b Lee    14 20 19 2 0 73.68 
 MJ Hoggard     b Lee              5 21 20 0 0 25.00 
     Extras (lb 12, w 1, nb 4) 17      
         
     Total (all out; 65.5 overs; 301 mins) 161 

OK, granted it was never going to be a match-winning knock, but at least he showed several of the so-called top-order that it was possible to survive and grind out runs.

He's a top-class 'keeper. And his performance is the least of England's problems.

The batting has been weak in this series.

The bowling has been disastrous.

Any opinions on Riki Wessels?

Yep. My opinion on Wessels is that you should pick English players, not more expat yarpies.

And Read has now, in 2 innings, held more catches than Jones did in 3 matches.

quote:

Originally posted by The Supreme Emperor of Planet Zog:
Yep. My opinion on Wessels is that you should pick English players, not more expat yarpies.

And Read has now, in 2 innings, held more catches than Jones did in 3 matches.

Possibly true on the first count but the Wessels family does have a tradition....

Read is a certainly a superior keeper to Jones who is, unfortunately, not up to test standard.

Number of catches taken is not relevant though. I wish a leger of chances missed would be kept as part of the official record.

His catch off Hussey today was a beauty. I doubt Jones would have got close.

quote:

Originally posted by lardbucket:
His catch off Hussey today was a beauty. I doubt Jones would have got close.

It was. However, Jones did take quite a few spectacular catches (as does Gilchrist).

With keepers, its the percentage of simple things done well that counts most. This is where Jones falls short. Most current keepers fail in this area when compared to the likes of Knott, Healy and Wasim Bari.

quote:

Originally posted by Gary_86:
Knee jerk reactions galore...

I feel sorry for Read. While most players have been treated responsibly under Fletcher he's had to endure the 90's style knee-jerk pick-drop-pick problems. He's clearly the best keeper in England and none of the keepers are significantly better as a batsman to be worth mentioning. If there was a Stewart it the wings it would be different, but what did Sutton or Nixon or Davies do in the last three years with the bat in county cricket that Read didn't? Since he's been recalled he's averaged in the 30s in Tests (vs Warne, McGrath, Asif, Clark Kaneria.), and been a class act with the gloves

As I said a few months back, Foster would have been a good back up keeper to Read for the Ashes. He is clearly much better than Jones.

This is not a knee-jerk reaction in anyway, it is an opinion I have had for a long time, and one which he cemented with his dismal dismissal in the first innings.

And then plays anoher abysmal shot to get out. Someone shoot the little oik!!!!!

Is there anyone in English cricket you think is any good, Charlie? You seem to think they're all a big pile of poo.

Some of the idiots on this forum just aren't worth reading. Calling someone x and y of a swear word because they're a poor batsman - and that applies to Jones and Read. Very sad, and utterly deplorable.

Plenty Jamie. Just most of em don't get picked for England.

Mahmood
Anderson
Plunkett
Read
Giles

All garbage........