Isn't he. Should have had 3 for certain, maybe 4 or 5. Unlucky in the 1st innings at the MCG and bar an over against pipe-cleaner head in the 1st Perth innings and one even crazier one from the Earl of Tonksville in the 2nd he's performed quite impeccably.

I really did tell you all so. Shame Swanny never got a chance, we'd probably be a better ODI side for him...

Against the stereotype of every recent English spinner I can think of he actually bowls slower and with more loop, and with width outside off when being hit.

Very very brave, and it works.

A great prospect. Keep him out of the ODIs.

quote:

Originally posted by lardbucket:
A great prospect. Keep him out of the ODIs.

Why? He's useful in them on occasions.

Monty Panesar - A Quality bowler massively unappreciated and greatly underestimated by the England management - 2006/7.
We are deeply sorry mate.

That will be the epitaph on both Feltcher's and Flintoff's tombstones.

quote:

Originally posted by RedDuster:
Monty Panesar - A Quality bowler massively unappreciated and greatly underestimated by the England management - 2006/7.
We are deeply sorry mate.

That will be the epitaph on both Feltcher's and Flintoff's tombstones.

Aye, I have found it unforgiveable.

Fletcher is quite right though about tail-end runs- having Read at 7 is an absolute farce.

Look how quickly they have toppled throughout this tour.....

A quality bowler . . . he just needs to play under a quality captain who will set quality fields for him!

quote:

Originally posted by Rob:
Fletcher is quite right though about tail-end runs- having Read at 7 is an absolute farce.

Look how quickly they have toppled throughout this tour.....

If you don't try, you never know Rob.

I'd rather Panesar got zilch runs every innings with a hatfull of 3 fers and 4 fers ...
Sod the extra 10 or 12 runs ... runs ... we have batsmen who are paid to do the job.
Panesar was picked as a bowler.

This tour has changed nothing about the underlying problem which is the balance of the team namely FLints is unlikely to be fit enough again to be one of 4 bowlers, and none of the other bowlers are capable of making 50s. Throw in the worst batsman-keeper of the last 20 years, and you have a recipe for tail end capitulations.

quote:

Originally posted by Rob:
Fletcher is quite right though about tail-end runs- having Read at 7 is an absolute farce.

Look how quickly they have toppled throughout this tour.....

Selection problems?

More the fact that none of the bowlers cam bat.....

quote:

Originally posted by The Great Man Warnie:
A quality bowler . . . he just needs to play under a quality captain who will set quality fields for him!

Couldn't be more spot on. Men around the bat were needed. I'd relish the chance to see Mick captain him - Strauss did a sterling job in the Pak Test series and should've been in place this time around...

quote:

Originally posted by Rob:
More the fact that none of the bowlers cam bat.....

Should they have bitten the bullet with Broad?

Broad is very raw still- no point throwing him into this series imho. Better to let him have a stint at the Academy. Hopefully he'll become a no 8 in time.

I'd have been tempted to pick Lewis for the original test squad- he'd have been more likely to play than Plunkett.

quote:

Originally posted by Rob:
This tour has changed nothing about the underlying problem which is the balance of the team namely FLints is unlikely to be fit enough again to be one of 4 bowlers, and none of the other bowlers are capable of making 50s. Throw in the worst batsman-keeper of the last 20 years, and you have a recipe for tail end capitulations.

Rob - let's look at the situation...

The Ashes are gawn ... long gawn back in Perth.
Time to experiment.
Draymple (a bit of a bat) is drafted in when Pilo departs in shame.
So what do England do?
Select 4 ... yes 4 quicks and one spinner.
One of the quicks bowls 36 overs in 4 innings (reason: he (Saj) is in as cover for Flintoff's heel) ...
Panesar is turning it heaps .. KP is given a token few overs ... Darymple fetches drinks.

Yet Saj lopes around the ropes ... Flintoff keeps hammering his ankle .. and we still get creamed. England management farked-up mindset.
"Must have 4 quicks" .... derrrr...

Bloody frustrating - and if only someone would explain the logic.

quote:

Originally posted by Rob:
Broad is very raw still- no point throwing him into this series imho. Better to let him have a stint at the Academy. Hopefully he'll become a no 8 in time.

I'd have been tempted to pick Lewis for the original test squad- he'd have been more likely to play than Plunkett.

Aye, the accuracy would at least have been something. Plunks is and has been less fit than Fred. This tour selection really was a joke and some heads have to roll, I'm not usually a sensationalist but something was/is incredibly wrong with the way this team was picked and the one-eyed foresight that accompanied it.

I hope Saj is getting a "standing behind the stumps" drill tomorrow. And the next. Etc.

quote:

Originally posted by RedDuster:

quote:

Originally posted by Rob:
This tour has changed nothing about the underlying problem which is the balance of the team namely FLints is unlikely to be fit enough again to be one of 4 bowlers, and none of the other bowlers are capable of making 50s. Throw in the worst batsman-keeper of the last 20 years, and you have a recipe for tail end capitulations.

Rob - let's look at the situation...

The Ashes are gawn ... long gawn back in Perth.
Time to experiment.
Draymple (a bit of a bat) is drafted in when Pilo departs in shame.
So what do England do?
Select 4 ... yes 4 quicks and one spinner.
One of the quicks bowls 36 overs in 4 innings (reason: he (Saj) is in as cover for Flintoff's heel) ...
Panesar is turning it heaps .. KP is given a token few overs ... Darymple fetches drinks.

Yet Saj lopes around the ropes ... Flintoff keeps hammering his ankle .. and we still get creamed. England management farked-up mindset.
"Must have 4 quicks" .... derrrr...

Bloody frustrating - and if only someone would explain the logic.

Should read Dalrymple ... of course!

Tour selection- when Tresco dropped out I'd have taken either Shah or Key as both were more attacking players and one of the problems imho has been that the top 4 English batters have been adhesive players not really able to take the initative, which have allowed the Aussies seamers to settle too quickly into l & l and dictate terms- Tresco and Vaughan have a much greater range of and power of shot and succeeded in disrupting them early in the spells in 2005.

Other than that- Read should never have been recalled- Gilo was worth a punt, in the squad at least though imho. Would have taken Lewis as back up- as Clark and McGrath show, pace isn't everything.

Would it have made that much diff? Prob not.

Eng need Joyce or Shah to solidify its middle order. Middx rule

Wish people call him Mudhusuden !!!!

Next summer- I'd kick one of either Cook or Strauss into the long grass and bring in a more attacking opener- if Vaughan is fit might be worth bringing him in to vary the bowlers line.

Sod all this carp about not scoring enough runs from number 8-11. Bowlers bowl, batters bat. Primary Functions are the most important.

Now look at the way in which in the series the Aussies have bowled at our tail = no runs and easy wickets.

And the way our bowlers have bowler = Lots of runs at 7,8,9 down.

The point is our bowlers have been poor. And the fact of the matter is, is that having a bloke who can score you 20 runs batting at 9 is much less important than having a bloke at 9 who ave 5 with the bat, but gets you 5-7 wickets per game at 30!

I think Cook needs to be a man. At the mo' he looks very feminine.