Ruthless Vaughan axes Harmison and Hoggard
Wellington - By dropping his two most senior bowlers, Matthew Hoggard and Steve Harmison, Michael Vaughan has certainly demonstrated his ruthless side.
This illustrates just how much he appreciates that his own position as captain is coming under pressure. He might have gone further and had a go at the batting line-up too, but this move will certainly send out a warning to those players who failed to come up to scratch in the first Test in Hamilton last week.
Vaughan called it the end of an era, and that suggests youngsters James Anderson and Stuart Broad will now get an extended run in the team.
Of the two elder statesmen, Harmison will find it the toughest to get back. For a start, he must really decide if he is prepared to devote the necessary time and effort to maintaining a career as an international sportsman.
The 29-year-old can happily cruise in for Durham for another five years, and never go away in the winter again.
If that is what he decides, then fine. But if he wants his England place back, it must be on the back of bowling more competitive overs than he has done for a very long time.
Hoggard is just two wickets away from taking 250, and stands at number six in England’s all-time list.
At 31, he is older than Harmison but still has time to return if he can rediscover the nip that was missing last week.
Again, preparation is an issue and he must also reflect on whether or not he could have done any more.
So what a responsibility now falls on Broad and Sidebottom. One down with two to play, England are in a mess, but at least they will bring ambition and youthful enthusiasm to a team that looked so flat. They will also inject some pace to the ground fielding.
The pitch in Wellington has more grass on it than Daniel Vettori would have wanted – and the groundsman might decide to take some off before play starts.
Otherwise the Kiwis will have to look at the balance of their team and opt for another seamer rather than Jeetan Patel’s off-spin.
Comments Post your comment
Hold on a sec wasn't it the batsmen that let England down in Hamilton?
Complain about this comment
I'm glad that harmison is dropped, though think its a bit harsh on hoggard who has been a consistent performer for us for years. Harmison was given the benefit of the doubt enough times, why not hoggard? Plus really cant see anderson doing any better. The team spirit there in the past seems to be missing. Wonder whether its from losing the ODI series, or do some of the players think there should more radical changes?!
Complain about this comment
Harmison is a permanent drop.
Hoggard is temporary.
Just like Prior
Complain about this comment
This was an inevitable development and Michael Vaughn deserves credit for taking this decision. I suspect he had few qualms about dropping Harmison, who seems to spend most of his career under the shadow of a large question mark. Matthew Hoggard has always been a dedicated servant of his country and county and I think Vaughn will not have taken the decision to omit his Yorkshire team mate lightly. Harmison's international may now be over. I am confident, however, that Hoggard will bounce back to his old form and may eventually be good for his 300, let alone 250 test wickets.
Complain about this comment
asinine decision to drop hoggard. If anybody deserved the boot it was the batsmen. They could not score runs when needed and they could not play out the overs when needed.
Vaughan is just clutching at straws here.
Complain about this comment
Having lived in the UK for some time you soon start to see the trend when it comes to selection, when all goes wrong Sack,Sack,Sack.Yes this is so typical of the ECB,two of the finest bowlers that have ever graced the runways of this wonderful game have fallen fowl to this old English tradition,when all fails send them out to pasture.
During the winning Ashes series those boys could do no wrong,now when the chips are down its the fireing squad, yes we are talking about Hoggy & Harmison.
Take a look at your arch ennemy, yes the boys from down under, when they have problems within the ranks they only do one thing encourage encourage encourage encourage, thats how true champions return to form.
Signed Dave from Western Australia
Complain about this comment
harmison had to go. am surprised by hoggy getting dropped and the key thing is can we get 20 wickets for less than 600 runs??? i thought shah might have got a look seeing as strauss seems hopelessly out of form. i think whoever wins the toss will bat and win. c'mon vaughny!!!!
Complain about this comment
At last, so good to see Harmison dropped, he has just been performing poorly for so long now it was getting ridiculous. Like you say, it's his decision now whether he comes back or not.
More surprised with Hoggard, especially after the Kiwis went after Anderson in the ODIs. Perhaps it will be different in the test matches, but let's not forget Anderson's performances against Sri Lanka in the Test arena. Not so good...
Complain about this comment
Charle - it was principally the bowlers that let England down as NZ should never have been allowed to get 470 in their first innings.
I think this is harsh on Hoggy, particularly as that was his first poor test for England. Harmison has had it coming for a long time and is fortunate tpo have played so many games for England recently.
Complain about this comment
About time too...that's my feeling,especially in the case of Harmison.I'll never forget that pie chucking first over in Brisbane ,first test of the Ashes. The whole tone of the series was set on that first morning,and showed the Aussies what our mental state was like. The interview Harmison gave last week showed where his head is at. Wife and kids? fine,but if that's your choice ,make way for someone with a bit of hunger and fire in his belly.Can you imagine McGrath, Warne or Gilchrist putting ANYTHING before playing for Australia? Or Botham / Stewart for England?
Complain about this comment
Comment 1. Nope, although they were crap. Bowlers and fielders decide matches over a period and, although batsmen can win or lose games, you can have them fail and still win if bowlers do the business. Conversely, bad bowling and good batting will often only get you a draw. But, more often, the bowlers will have put more pressure on the bats than they can handle. As happened in this first Test.
Focus all efforts on positive and creative bowling and fielding along with controlled aggression and we'll win a few
Complain about this comment
I'm glad that harmison is dropped, though think its a bit harsh on hoggard who has been a consistent performer for us for years. Harmison was given the benefit of the doubt enough times, why not hoggard? Plus really cant see anderson doing any better. The team spirit there in the past seems to be missing. Wonder whether its from losing the ODI series, or do some of the players think there should more radical changes?!
Complain about this comment
I totally agree with this move Aggers.. I don't think Hoggy's match fit and Harmison's mind has gone. Broad is chomping at the bit to get a run in the test side. I would've probably dropped Harmison for Broad and left it at that. But Anderson may be able to get it to do a bit.. then again when he fails.. he tends to do it big time so the jury's out on him.
Harmison's mind is more worrying... David James made similar comments when playing football for England and he was dropped for a long time. I'm not sure if he'll ever recover.. then again are we putting too much pressure on him? He had a golden two years in 04/05 and set the bar very high. His biggest mistake was quitting one day cricket.. he needs the bowling and the urgency.
I think this tour could be make or break for Michael Vaughan.. there seems to be constant pressure on batsmen like Ian Bell even when he continues to deliver the goods... then he gets demoted down the order from three to be replace by Strauss who's hardly put any form together in the last two years. Maybe it's time to clear out the old guard. Look at Wright, Shah and others and plan for the Ashes in Australia rather than trying to win it back here with the team that lost 0-5.
I think central contracts enable players to be complacent.. I wonder how focussed Harmison would be if he knew a contract was performance related in the present rather than hoping he'll click again one day.
Ed
Complain about this comment
Harmison's exclusion was necessary - he simply hasn't produced the goods for a while now. But dropping Hoggard is disappointing. It's hard to fault his commitment and determination to the England cause and I hope he makes a return sooner rather than later.
Complain about this comment
Amazing but no real surprise. After all its Michael Vaughan we're talking about it here not a Brearley or even a Gatting.
Harmison, for now, is a no brainer. But to give out the signal that Hoggard, who just five months ago was running a few Sri Lankan batsmen ragged in Colombo(not Edgbaston), is no longer good enough is off the ball altogether.
And as someone said it was not the bowling that was the main issue but the frailties in the batting.
Complain about this comment
Dropping Harmison is a must. He hasn't performed for England for a long time. Dropping Hoggard is harsh. The main problem is the batting where Bell, Collingwood and Strauss are too much hit and miss and Pietersen doesn't seem to be able to concentrate beyond 45 runs.
Complain about this comment
This is knee jerk reaction, Harmison demise has been a long time comming but Hoggard has had one poor performance and a couple of indifferent ones, how many of the rest of the team would still be there if we applied that criterion to all?
Complain about this comment
Harmison has been dropped after not turning up for three years, but Hoggard has been dropped after only one bad game. In Hoggard's case this really doesn't fit the crime, particularly as there's noone pushing for his place - Anderson played badly in all the ODIs, then did nothing in the state game, so why is he in the side?
Complain about this comment
I am really not sure I follow the logic that the bowlers get axed but the batsmen deserve another chance?
While I agree Harmison had had too many chances and his time as gone, I believe dropping Hoggard so quickly for Anderson ( who I don't believe is test match quality) is inappropriate.
Just how many chances have several of the failing batsmen had exactly. I suppose the question could be asked who else have we to but in their place as we left Ramps at home.
I will hope for a result in the 2nd test match, but it is just that.. hope...
Complain about this comment
I have to agree with Charle, we scored 458 runs in 2 innings. Clearly we are not scoring enough runs. Granted we let their tail score too many in the first innings but we are always going to need more runs than that to win a test on decent wickets against decent teams.
We scored 110 runs in the second innings so we are going to drop the bowlers?
Complain about this comment
Dropping Hoggard is ridiculous - is he really a worse options than Anderson? It smacks of panic and people protecting their own position - not unlike Ashton in the rugby. Surely some of the batsmen should have been axed too - their averages have been...average over the last 2 years.
Complain about this comment
If there is always a question of your commitment then maybe the commitment isn't there. Harmison can't keep protesting his desire for England when it is patently obvious that it's not there. Good luck to Broad and Anderson.
Complain about this comment
Obvious parallels with England dropping Jonny Wilkinson with a firm selection making way for the new generation - although it's easy to forget Anderson has been around a while. The right decision but I'm surprised that the entire batting lineup has survived unscathed. This was billed as a series England were expected to win comfortably so let's see how the top six respond. A few hundreds wouldn't go amiss.
Complain about this comment
I'm relieved that Broad is in for Harmison, who has not seemed committed, but do hope Hoggard, normally the most reliable of bowlers, will be back. A bit worried about Anderson, who can be very expensive. We'll see. Certainly England seem to make a habit of making an appalling mess, then making a strong come-back. I wish they would make the first couple of hours of the match exciting for those of us who'd like to get some sleep. It all seems to happen when I doze off!
Complain about this comment
As an outsider i always felt harmy was overrated.
His stats against the top teams in cricket are awful, he basically bullied some awful west indies and NZ teams in 2004 and got over rated by england fans.
If he had of been up against australia and india that year i highly doubt he would have had much success.
Complain about this comment
English sport like English society and culture itself has a deep seated guilt complex .
This complex interferes with the englishman's fully cogniscent perception of reality.
Deep down , he knows that sport is a circus , a distraction from harsh reality , and never gives his very being to win .
The australians on the other hand , suffer not from this history of globalist power and circus led distortion, and ,because they have little else culturally, make sport the pinnacle of their existence, hence out perform their adverseries.
Though little realising that the australians are england's giant circus tent !
Complain about this comment
Jonathan is right again as far as I am concerned. I thoroughly enjoy his balanced columns. Harmison does need to make a decision: he has the potential to be amongst the elite of the world's fast men but has not shown anything since that appalling first ball we all witnessed in Brisbane a couple of seasons back. His lack of grit - homesickness, unwillingness to tour - has always concerned me. You cannot imagine a Freddie Truman, say, not really wanting to engage anywhere, any time with the Aussies and others.
I think Hoggard will come back. As soon as conditions are conducive to swing he will make his presence felt. One more point: when is Michael Vaughan going to perform? I have mentioned before the English tolerance of captains who are not worth their place in the side. Brearley is perhaps the outstanding example though it might be argued that his captaincy was so astute it made up for his mediocrity with the bat. We all know what Vaughan CAN do but, like Harmison, WHEN will he produce it again? The clock must surely be ticking for him as Jonathan seems to be suggesting.
Complain about this comment
Bob Willis was right, during the test match he stated live on air that it will be the bowlers who pay for the batsmens lack of runs. 300 to get in 80 overs with 5 or 6 batsmen averaging 40+ and all due big scores after the lack of runs in Sri Lanka? The top order are very very lucky to get another chance. Pietersons footwork was abismal in the second innings. Bell batting back down the order (id prefer him at 6) is our only shining light, he helps steady our fragile tail and even got Monty to face 30 balls!!!
Complain about this comment
Fair enough about Harmison, but very surprised about Hoggard. As Charle wrote, it was the batsmen that were the main problem, yet they all get another chance...double standards and as Hoggards been their best bowler for a few years now, they are obviously panicking. Lets hope the batsmen perform this time to stop putting the pressure on the bowlers all the time.
Complain about this comment
Vaughan spouts on saying "we must do better" when in fact its usually himself that should do better, England are an embarrassment to the country most of the time.
Complain about this comment
Hey Aggers - we'll look forward to hearing your commentaries on NZ radio again in this test.
Complain about this comment
As an outsider i always felt harmy was overrated.
His stats against the top teams in cricket are awful, he basically bullied some awful west indies and NZ teams in 2004 and got over rated by england fans.
If he had of been up against australia and india that year i highly doubt he would have had much success.
Complain about this comment
Harmy has struggled for England since we won the Ashes and deserved to be dropped,I feel Hoggard has got a raw deal as he has been our best bowler for 5 years had a poor game and got dropped.How many poor games has harmison had before being dropped?
Complain about this comment
The decision to drop Hoggy is absolutely outrageous and demonstrates the "headless chicken" approach the current England set up takes. Hoggy has one bad test in literally years and that's it. It stinks and Vaughan should be ashamed of himself. Bowled all out for a hundred and odd, so let's drop our best bowler. That must be a Peter Moores decision. Sure I'd get rid of Harmison, in fact I wouldn't just drop him, I'd retire him because we now know apart from wanting to be a footballer instead of a cricketer, he now prefers to think about changing nappies instead of the batsman he's bowling against.
As a massive england cricket fan all my life, I've seen some bad selection decisions, but to drop Hoggy is perhaps a worse one than picking Jimmy Anderson to replace him!
Complain about this comment
feel very sorry for hoggard. but think Harmison's career may well be over. surely we need to sort the batting out though?!?!
Complain about this comment
In paragraph four, it should read: "Harmison will find it tougher..."
One can never use the superlative adjective when comparing two objects.
Complain about this comment
What a joke. Vaughan should be dropped not Hoggard. He's shown no form with the bat for years and some of his captaincy decisions have been woeful. Get him out!!
Complain about this comment
MV should have persevered with Hoggard , but as he is the one closest to the action I think all should support his effort in trying to get the best from the team.
I am not an Englishman, but I have followed England for some time now and cannot understand how with the talent around it is such a poor team.
Complain about this comment
Bob Willis was right, during the test match he stated live on air that it will be the bowlers who pay for the batsmens lack of runs. 300 to get in 80 overs with 5 or 6 batsmen averaging 40+ and all due big scores after the lack of runs in Sri Lanka? The top order are very very lucky to get another chance. Pietersons footwork was abismal in the second innings. Bell batting back down the order (id prefer him at 6) is our only shining light, he helps steady our fragile tail and even got Monty to face 30 balls!!!
Complain about this comment
I'm glad to see us show a ruthless side and drop Harmison but can't say i'm too sure on Hoggard. He is a willing worker who'll run in all day for us if we want and to me looks like he just needs a few overs to get himself right. I'm a Lancs fan and can't honestly say i'm happy with Anderson ebing picked. He just isn't consistant enough although maybe we'll catch him on a good day. We need to thats for sure.
As for Harmison this has been coming since the Ashes and i can't believe it;s taken so long. His attitude is emabarassing for a professional sports man and if he does just want to stay at home with his family why doesn't he do everyone a favour and tell the selectors before they announce him in the squad.
I'd have called up Shah for Strauss aswell to be honest. He(strauss) just doesn;t look right at the minute and even though he probably like Hoggard just needs time we've not got it and Shah deserves a chance for his solid one day form aswell as him doing well the last time he played test cricket.
All in all though a positive selection and surely thigns can't get any worse!
Complain about this comment
Why drop hoggy! He has been our most consistent bowler for a long long time. Its stupidity!Its the attitude and application of our batsmen that needs looking at. Fair enough, get rid of Harmy, he is not prepared to make the sacrifices of an international sportsman and is no longer good enough but hoggy, come on he just had a bad test! Madness absolute madness. Michael Vaughan needs to look at his batsmen and captaincey before making our most consistent seam bowler of the last 8 years a scapegoat.
Anyone with half a brain would take Hoggy over Anderson.
Complain about this comment
re #5, Sam - I'm getting a bit fed up with strauss bashing. You say he is out of form. He scored 2 100's in three games before the test. 1 in NZ domestic cricket and one for England in the warm up (and only Bell did likewise) so if he is out of form, then what kind of form are the rest in?
Complain about this comment
Surprised by the decision to drop the Hogster......Harmy's not been up to scratch for a long time. My real question has to with grit & determination.It's an old cliche that "when the going gets tough the tough get going." I'm not sure that our cricketers are mentally tough enough............
Complain about this comment
How many chances is 'Jimmy' going to get? Everyone in the England set-up must like him A LOT. So here's his big chance (yet again) to impress us. I'm not sure he'll manage it though, he has to do better than H&H, and produce better than 1-121, to retain his place in the team. So, Hoggard is going to get back in the team, once he's trained a bit more, which means it's a shoot out between Broad and 'Jimmy' for a long run in the team. Ok, so here's what's going on here; i predict 'Jimmy' will be given the ball at the best times and well protected, and Broad will be given the ball when the batsmen are already nicely settled. Favouritism just doesn't wash with me, i'm afraid. You might think i'm joking, but i've seen it many times before with the England team.
Complain about this comment
I think that had to happen, judging by many of the English fans's commments, Harmison was ready for the axe and Hoggard was ineffective. Good on Elngland for moving forward too, Broad struck some serious fear into our Kiwi batsman during the one dayers, so who knows... As the old saying goes, one swallow don't make no summer, I think the English batsman will also be challenged to perform and the next test will have a very different outcome. If it doesn't my pick for next axing is Pietersen. He has played no-brainers the whole tour.
Complain about this comment
Typical Vaughan, only 2 batsmen manged double figures in the second innings when the match was there to be won so who cops the blame? the bowlers. What a lesson in motivation. Don't they have mirrors in New Zealand Michael?
Complain about this comment
In response to post number 1, the batting did not exactly cover itself with glory, but the bowling was the reason that NZ got 470 odd in the first innings, which gave the Kiwis the advantage.
Complain about this comment
In paragraph four, it should read: "Harmison will find it tougher..."
One can never use the superlative adjective when comparing two objects.
Complain about this comment
Glad Harmisson has been dropped, persoanally think 2004 in West Indies was a blip, he has gone down hill every year since. Had plenty of chances.
Glad to see Broad in as I believe he is the future always seems to have plenty of fire in his belly for the fight (what Harmisson seems to be lacking).
Not sure about Anderson needs to be more consistent.
On Hoggard am suprised, I wonder whether Matthew has indicated that he really isn't in form being the good egg that he is?
Complain about this comment
It does not matter who gets picked or who is dropped!! The end result will be the same..!!England will Lose again..The history is against them!!
Complain about this comment
This is knee jerk reaction, Harmison demise has been a long time comming but Hoggard has had one poor performance and a couple of indifferent ones, how many of the rest of the team would still be there if we applied that criterion to all?
Complain about this comment
wow, i, like you Jon, love the Hogster and will miss him if it is the end, but i would back him to return. I admire this selectorial decision as the platter served up in the first test was nowhere near good enough. Lets see the hunger - Shane Warne was right - we need to shut up and perform.
Complain about this comment
How many chances is 'Jimmy' going to get? Everyone in the England set-up must like him A LOT. So here's his big chance (yet again) to impress us. I'm not sure he'll manage it though, he has to do better than H&H, and produce better than 1-121, to retain his place in the team. So, Hoggard is going to get back in the team, once he's trained a bit more, which means it's a shoot out between Broad and 'Jimmy' for a long run in the team. Ok, so here's what's going on here; i predict 'Jimmy' will be given the ball at the best times and well protected, and Broad will be given the ball when the batsmen are already nicely settled. Favouritism just doesn't wash with me, i'm afraid. You might think i'm joking, but i've seen it many times before with the England team.
Complain about this comment
If Anderson is the answer, it was a helluva strange question. He was truly dreadful in the ODIs. Broad for Harmison is absolutely right. To dump Hoggard after one off game is disgraceful - he has been magnificently consistent for years. If the batsman got the same treatment, they'd be changing 3 every game - it wasn't the bowlers who screwed up on Day 5 was it? Kevin Pietersen - mind your back - long time since you did anything serious in a test match - or an ODI come to think of it?
Complain about this comment
I think that had to happen, judging by many of the English fan's commments, Harmison was ready for the axe and Hoggard was ineffective. Good on England for moving forward too, Broad struck some serious fear into our Kiwi batsman during the one dayers, so who knows... As the old saying goes, one swallow don't make no summer, I think the English batsman will also be challenged to perform and the next test will have a very different outcome. If it doesn't my pick for next axing is Pietersen. He has played no-brainers the whole tour.
Complain about this comment
It does not matter who gets picked or who is dropped!! The end result will be the same..!!England will Lose again..The history is against them!!
Complain about this comment
Glad Harmisson has been dropped, persoanally think 2004 in West Indies was a blip, he has gone down hill every year since. Had plenty of chances.
Glad to see Broad in as I believe he is the future always seems to have plenty of fire in his belly for the fight (what Harmisson seems to be lacking).
Not sure about Anderson needs to be more consistent.
On Hoggard am suprised, I wonder whether Matthew has indicated that he really isn't in form being the good egg that he is?
Complain about this comment
Bob Willis was right, during the test match he stated live on air that it will be the bowlers who pay for the batsmens lack of runs. 300 to get in 80 overs with 5 or 6 batsmen averaging 40+ and all due big scores after the lack of runs in Sri Lanka? The top order are very very lucky to get another chance. Pietersons footwork was abismal in the second innings. Bell batting back down the order (id prefer him at 6) is our only shining light, he helps steady our fragile tail and even got Monty to face 30 balls!!!
Complain about this comment
If Anderson is the answer, it was a helluva strange question. He was truly dreadful in the ODIs. Broad for Harmison is absolutely right. To dump Hoggard after one off game is disgraceful - he has been magnificently consistent for years. If the batsman got the same treatment, they'd be changing 3 every game - it wasn't the bowlers who screwed up on Day 5 was it? Kevin Pietersen - mind your back - long time since you did anything serious in a test match - or an ODI come to think of it?
Complain about this comment
I'm surprised Hoggard has been dropped, but would have been more surprised if Harmison hadn't been.
I'm looking forward to seeing Broad push a claim for the number 8 berth alongside his consistency as a bowler, and I hope Jimmy takes a hatful of wickets to wake the selectors up to the fact that a few nets and some time in the gym is no substitute for overs under the belt - like Jimmy has got in the last 14 days.
Agers is spot on in saying that Hoggy is the more likely of the two to come back, but not only because of his consistency over the years, but because of his style of bowling.
Relying on swing and guile to take his wickets offers him a greater chance of a comeback than Harmison, who relies on pace and bounce - both much harder to regain.
Hopefully the new blood will bring a renewed vigour to the side that was sadly missing in the First Test, plus Broad and Anderson will improve the fielding levels of the side in place of Harmison and Hoggy - despite the later's Champagne Moment at Hamilton!
Complain about this comment
Can anybody answer me as to why the greater majority of comments on this site seek to embellish the faults of the English squad and believe...I mean truly believe that they are one or two selection changes away from completely sticking it to this colonial club side who stands in the way of them completing a series win?
Can we all just step back and accept that this is New Zealand at home with their confidence up and a lot more support than they had a week ago.
As a Kiwi (and a rugby fan) I know only too well what asumption is the mother of and just wish some of the posters would view this as a series to be ferociously contested over the next two tests rather than a series for the English to lose.
Sorry...rant over but a bit of impartiality wouldn't go astray.
Complain about this comment
I am a Yorkshireman and l have umpired Michael Vaughan many times,and he is a good captain, but l think its the batsmen he should be looking at,Hoggard should be playing, every one has bad games including Vaughan.
Complain about this comment
Vaughan is still kidding himself! He said he 'HAD A GUT FEELING' change was needed!!!:)) Was he not at the game? It stuck out like a sore thumb that changes had to be made! Hoggy should have been kept on. Harmy-- no need for expanding on this decision. Another point; headline states VAUGHAN MAKES CHANGES, then he starts using the royal 'WE' Are there 2 selectors there now they stopped Miller abandoning ship?
Complain about this comment
A little churlish to drop Hoggard so early. Also a very starnge decision to put Strauss in at 3 (after a career of opening!) and to push Bell down the order. I think this uncertainty reflects the fact that we do not know our best side.
Will, Malta
Complain about this comment
Have we lost the plot- Harmison yes and long overdue but Hoggard! He is still our top ranked test match bowler, had a great warm up match and yes he underperformed on a flat pitch but is Jimmy Anderson a better bowler- New Zealand will be quaking in their boots. England have a problem with misplaced loyalty- we back Harmison for two and a half years when clearly he just doesn't have the appetite and jettison Hoggard after one ordinary match who has been our top performer and always gives his best. Unbelievable!
Complain about this comment
should have played 5 bowlers, thats when we have had our most success recently and kept hoggard in and not jimmy, he has been proven not to be good enough. Strauss very lucky to have another chance
Complain about this comment
How unlucky for Hoggard. He would surely have come good in the next match - he was obviously underprepared. MATCH PRACTICE is what counts.
For the first time I think Vaughan has got it wrong.
It takes a batting captain to only think of dropping bowlers!
Complain about this comment
the quicker vaughan and moores are got rid out of the better.
the only problem in the bowling is harmison who deserves to be dropped, hoggard does not.
the batting is where changes are needed, it seems vaughan will pick anyone but shah, shah should have played in sri lanka and should be playing now, we know nothing about how good he is while hes sitting on the sidelines and batting 6 in the one day team. if he is that awkward to deal with whats he doing out there?
strauss shouldnt be in the squad either but we show faith to him as an experienced senior player, but not to hoggard, no wonder were a mess.
Complain about this comment
I completely agree with both decisions. If Hoggy is out of form he shouldn't be played, regardless of past history. He is undercooked and not ready so I applaud the decision.
I think we need to blood new bowlers and use hoggy sparingly now if he isn't delivering. All players should be fighting for their places, a poor run of 3 games should result in being dropped. It fosters healthy competition and means they know they have to perform. Worryingly Harmy, Freddie et al know if they are fit they'll play regardless of preparation or form. It's unhealthy and central contracts need to be reviewed on a regular basis to remove this complacency.
Complain about this comment
Harmison deserved to get the axe and I'd never play him again for England but the decision to drop Hoggy is disgraceful.He's been consistantly Englands best bowler for 5 years now and i feel that Moores and Vaughan are using him as a scapegoat to hide their own failings.As for selecting Anderson,what a total joke.He was useless in Sri Lanks and the one dayers,and for the State side he had an outing for.
I just feel that the England side is in disarray at the moment and is there for the taking!!
Complain about this comment
On face value this couldn't be a worse time to make such a drastic decision - by that I mean Hoggard. Of, course we all knew Harmison (despite his past glory) was not good enough to be playing in the current England team and hasn't been for a while. But by removing another experienced bowler in Hoggy, England go out to face a confident Kiwi squad with Vaughan having to captain a new and largely untested bowling unit in the test arena. Of course, I hope I am wrong but if the powers that be believe that it was the England bowlers that ultimately failed, hence putting the pressure on our batting line up that so miserably capitulated on the final day in the last test, surely the pressure to perform with the ball is even greater now and I'm not sure Broad and Anderson will have the confidence or experience to go out there and take it to the Kiwi's in what is a must win game!
Complain about this comment
Feels less like strong leadership than self preservation. If Harmison & Hoggard came on tour undercooked, we've just dropped them both after they got 5 days of meaningful cricket in them, which Broad and Anderson haven't had. Seems very harsh on Hoggard, but if you're picking a batsman to drop, maybe the spotlight might fall on another old stager who's not contributed meaningful runs for a good while. If Vaughan's batting doesn't improve and his motivational powers are spent, it's time he went.
Complain about this comment
Good decision. If Sidebottom was not a swing bowling factor, Hoggy might has stayed. However we need wickets/ without giving away masses of runs and Hoggy isn't in the groove.
I suspect Broad will do OK chipping in with 2-3 wickets per innings, keeping things tighter. This is what we need. Wouldn't it be nice to have Freddie available now, but not an option. Anderson I suspect will get a few more wickets, and be a out swinging threat as a strike bowler, with the ODI cap off and behind.
This change does sent a message to the top six batsman..|"perform" big score now overdue..Shah is in the wing..good form, hungry and Collys or Strauss's positions under threat if no significant contributions next match.
Complain about this comment
How come the hopeless batsmen get a chance to redeem but the bowlers face the firing squad?
Complain about this comment
The right decisions were made. In the case of Hoggard, it is a tough one, but the right one. Anyone who saw the game would have seen that Hoggard was off the pace.
These decisions send a message that bowlers must be ready from ball one of a series and that is exactly the message that needed to be sent.
OK the batting was poor on the last day, but many a side has collapsed on a last day pitch and it was right to give them another run. But they have to start producing hundreds. Otherwise it is would be unfair to Ramprakash not to bring him back.
Complain about this comment
I quite agree with everything Aggers has said. I feel for Harmison though, as a father of two myself, I can appreciate what it must be like to be on the other side of the planet from your children. There's no doubt that it will have an effect on you and certainly lower your spirits. That said he must make the choice and if his heart's in Durham thats where he should be as well! Make way for somebody else, you can't have it both ways and its no good for England Cricket.
I also feel sorry for Hoggy. He has been consistenly good for England. If only Petersen were as consistent as Hoggy!
Hopefully this shake up will give our boys the encouragement they need and find them off to a flyer in the second test. Come on England!
Complain about this comment
I look forward to seeing Broad flourish in his role as a test bowler over time BUT if Anderson becomes Harmison Mark II. Who else is there to turn to in the County ranks as a genuine pace man?
Complain about this comment
Anderson was badly treated compared with Harmison Against India last summer when we lost 1-0 (the same top six batsmen failed in deciding Test, so what's new) Anderson took 14 wickets including opener Jaffer(3 times) Dravid (2) Tendulkar (3) and Ganguly (2) so he can knock over the top order. He may expensive in one-days but so was Courtney Walsh for the Windies and he was a pretty good Test bowler.
And finally get fit soon Freddie. They can't blame you for this little lot
Complain about this comment
I've watched this team grow up together over a period of time. From the miracle win against South Africa back at the Oval in 2003 until the Ashes win in 2005. But now is no time for sentimentality. The shocking truth is that we are in danger of losing three test series in a row. And that is something that has not happened for a long, long time. It is time for a change in direction. I don't see wholesale changes as the answer however.
I'm one of Harmy's biggest fans, but if his heart and mind aren't on the field then there is no point in picking him. Send him back to county cricket and see how much hunger he has really got. Hoggard is a dedicated servant to England and wears his heart on his sleeve. I'm sure that dropping him is only a short term measure. Stuart Broad deserves a run in the side. He would be Harmison's replacement. But in the summer I'd like to see him alongside Hoggy, Sid and Monty in the attack. And hopefully Fred will return.
Batting is an interesting one. Ian Bell should have stayed at 3. He's earned it. He's been very consistant the last couple of years. Vaughan and Cook to open i think. Strauss should not have got back into the side on the back of a warm up hundred. Shah deserves his opportunity.
Lets just hope we turn it round and win the remaining two games. Things can only get better after a performance as bad as the one in the first test match.
Complain about this comment
Completely agree with most of the other posts. Harmison deserves to be dropped and has been given the benefit of the doubt for too long, although this also reflects the inexperince of possible replacements in Broad and Anderson. Personally, I would have persisted with Hoggard and think he will be missed given the likelihood of the pitch being seam friendly early on. Strauss could not conceivably have been dropped one test in to his comeback; although in the first test he hardly played a shot in anger and now seems far too introspective in how he bats. Moreover, in my view, he never really deserved a recall to test cricket. Finally, why play Strauss at number 3 when he is an opener (to accommodate Vaughan as an opener??). Once again, we have fallen into the trap of trying too hard to mould the team around individuals rather than the other way round.
Complain about this comment
Just seen the news that Steve Harmison and Mathew Hoggard have been dropped for the second test. To drop SH was expected and probably long overdue. Everyone has said that a long spell back in county cricket would do him the world of good. The dropping of Hoggard is another thing. He has always given his best for England and to drop him after one mediocre performance is harsh. It smacks of reacting to press criticism. There was a case for dropping one of the batsmen but give them another chance and then drop several if there is a failure. It is interesting to compare this decision with the one taken by Brian Ashton yesterday in the rugby. England Rugby lost because of Jonny Wilkinson and England lost because of the opening bowlers ??
Can I suggest everyone reads the article in The Times this morning by Simon Barnes.
Andrew Yeandle
Complain about this comment
Completely agree with most of the other posts. Harmison deserves to be dropped and has been given the benefit of the doubt for too long, although this also reflects the inexperince of possible replacements in Broad and Anderson. Personally, I would have persisted with Hoggard and think he will be missed given the likelihood of the pitch being seam friendly early on. Strauss could not conceivably have been dropped one test in to his comeback; although in the first test he hardly played a shot in anger and now seems far too introspective in how he bats. Moreover, in my view, he never really deserved a recall to test cricket. Finally, why play Strauss at number 3 when he is an opener (to accommodate Vaughan as an opener??). Once again, we have fallen into the trap of trying too hard to mould the team around individuals rather than the other way round.
Complain about this comment
Personally, I don't see that anyone apart from Collingwood, Bell and Sidebottom have really shown any sort of consistent international form so far. The problem is, drop Vaughan, Strauss, Pietersen et al, and who do you replace them with? Rob Key and Mark Ramparakash? I can't think of anyone else waiting in the wings. Can you?
Complain about this comment
Dropping Hoggard will turn out to be a total disaster - the man consistently gets wickets when none of the other bowlers are firing. I agree with the other comments regarding batsmen leading charmed lives in the side - surely Hoggard deserved at least 5 more matches before we thought about dropping him?!
Complain about this comment
110 all out so Vaughan/Moores drops two bowlers.
After such a devastatingly poor show when we had a legitimate chance of victory - I would have preferred to have seen a radical shake-up, bringing in all of the squad (except Anderson, who was inept in the one-dayers), and calling up Charlie Shrek who is playing in Wellington and is a promising prospect not a tired has-been.
Attack, score at 4 an over, put them under pressure, and attack again - sound familiar? Australia's formula for the last decade or more.
My Team would be:
Mustard
Vaughan
Cook
Pietersen
Bell
Shah
Ambrose
Swann
Broad
Sidey
Shrek
Can't do worse than the last line-up?
Complain about this comment
why drop Hoggard for Anderson when the latter has struggled in the ODI's?? This is a must win Test and therefore the pressure is on, Anderson has not proven that he is capable of bowling in NZ so why give him extra pressure?? Hoggard and Sidebottom to open the bowling on a more seamer friendly wicket going by NZ's decision to bring in a quickie and drop a spinner. Headless chickens come to mind!!!!!
Complain about this comment
shameful decision to bomb hoggard - how long ago was it he had sri lanka 42-5 on his own? he just needed a game under his belt - albeit a test.
anyway, was it the bowlers' fault that we surrendered to 77-9, with one batsmen taking an hour for two runs?
Complain about this comment
It's about time they dropped Harmison but Hoggard is a staggering decision Anderson was far from world class in the ODIs had a relatively poor game for Auckland is is back in very strange just like the decision to drop and then bring back Strauss. I would have gone with
Vaughan
Cook
Peitersen
Bell
Collingwood
Shah
Ambrose
Broad
Sidebottom
Hoggard
Panesar
Complain about this comment
Where is Simon Jones nowadays? Hasn't seen him in last 3 years since Ashesh? I wonder has England not got over the hangover from Ashes 05!!
Complain about this comment
110 all out - time for some radical action. So we drop two bowlers.
It was such a shockingly poor performance in the last test, when we actually had a legitimate chance to WIN. I wanted to see an appropriate response for this test - DROP AS MANY OF THE CULPRITS AS FEASIBLY POSSIBLE and bring in the rest of the squad - keen and hungry to prove themselves.
And then ATTACK, score at 4 an over, put them under pressure and attack again - sound familiar - it has been Australia's method for years.
I would also have drafted in Charlie Shrek for the inept Anderson who was cannon fodder in the one-dayers.
Too radical? I reckon this team would do no worse than the last line-up:
Mustard
Vaughan
Cook
Pietersen
Bell
Shah
Ambrose
Swann
Broad
Sidey
Shrek
Complain about this comment
shameful decision to bomb hoggard - how long ago was it he had sri lanka 42-5 on his own? he just needed a game under his belt - albeit a test. as for anderson, if he hasn't done it by now, he never will.
and was it the bowlers' fault we surrendered to 77-9, with one batsmen taking an hour for two runs?
Complain about this comment
I totally agree with the decision to drop Harmison. It is difficult for me to say that being a Durham lad. He's pretty much like Ramprakash really - can perform for his county but not at test level.
Complain about this comment
i'm also fed up with the Strauss bashing. to my mind he has been exemplary.
contrary to most of the ill-informed bwallz spouted on here - he HAS, by any international team's standards, proved he has some form with three hundreds in various warm-up games.
and here's a player who has never once publicly moaned or groaned or griped - despite pretty hamfisted treatment by the England set-up...
make him captain and bell vice.
drop colly and tell him to focus on one-dayers. get shah in at 5. team's a good'n.
Complain about this comment
By picking Anderson I would say we have managed to reduce the control of the opening bowling attack and weaken the batting line up.
Complain about this comment
By picking Anderson I would say we have managed to reduce the control of the opening bowling attack and weaken the batting line up.
Complain about this comment
I can't believe the English would drop Hoggard. He and KP are the only quality players in the team. As for James Anderson - well that guys is a joke. I seriously believe that a scarecrow installed at fine leg would be of more use than him.
I cant believe it took so long to dump Harmison. Just to put things into perspective Harmison gets paid more than the Prime Minister of England. It pains me to say it but I think that the country gets more value out of Gordon.
Anyone know the odds at William Hill on a 3-0 whitewash?
Complain about this comment
Batsmen fail again - solution drop the pace bowlers. Is this anything to do with having a (failing) batsman captain?
Complain about this comment
I think the England bowling and batting coaches should be dropped! We never seem to be prepared for test matches or do the basic things right. Cricket is a great game but you need to be prepared both mentally and physically and England for quite some time now are coming up short in all departments. Get a grip!
Complain about this comment
I am an Indian but have been following English (test) cricket for quite some time now..
"Hoggard dropped from England test team" - this is definitely a shocker.
Hoggard has been one of the better performers in the English side. A few failures and he is out !! just look at the numerous chances few others have got to prove themselves...
Despite of good performances over a long period of time, Hoggard has had to 'prove himself' every time he went out to bowl !!
His case reminds me of V V S Laxman from the Indian Cricket team [test]...
I just hope he is back in this English side soon !!
Complain about this comment
Somewhat disappointing news. A bowler has a few bad games and gets dropped (or for Hoggard one bad game). A batsman like Strauss manages to average in the 30s for the 3 years and still retains his place.
So, the man who is showing terrible form, even in his recent New Zealand domestic cricket debut, James Anderson, gets back into the test side? Give me a choice of a potentially out of form Hoggard and James Anderson and I will pick Hoggard every time.
Harmison, like Strauss, has been living on his reputation, so needed to go.
Complain about this comment
I fell really soory for Hoggard, he has been Englands most consistant bowler for years, one bad game and he is dropped, unlike Harmison that has been poor, very poor for a couple of seasons now, but gets in the team because he has something different, yes, he bowls of the cut strip regularly. Something not right there. Then Vaughan said the batters need a second chance, but Hoggard doesn't, again, the most consistant England bowler and player. I like the inclusion of Broad for Harmison, should of been done previously when Harmison was throwing down melons. I agree with Aggers, if harmison wants to sack of England then fine, but for now stop mincing and moaning it, and messing perople about, you either want to play cricket for England or you don't and at the moment he doesn't, he is a liability. Thanks for the 7-12, will always be a great highlight of mine, but now, goodbye.
Complain about this comment
Dropping Hoggard is plain stupid.
He is class and improving his fitness.
Harmison is old news - and needs to be gone.
Complain about this comment
I have a strong feeling the only reason for dropping Hoggy was to make Harmison feel a bit good!
Complain about this comment
shameful decision to bomb hoggard - how long ago was it he had sri lanka 42-5 on his own? he just needed a game under his belt - albeit a test. as for anderson, if he hasn't done it by now, he never will.
and was it the bowlers' fault we surrendered to 77-9, with one batsmen taking an hour for two runs?
Complain about this comment
Hoggard must be a bit disgruntled, if Jimmy's the only alternative. But this just shows how much England miss Simon Jones. Harmison was gone as soon as he spoke to Nasser Hussain last week. He's been a rabbit in the headlights of most batsmen recently, and you could see him getting more and more desperate as the interview went on.
That said, England's batting line-up really need to show in this game. All of them have averages of 40 or better, and yet in the last two test's they have been bowled out for 80 & 110. These totals do not win games, and rarely draw them. Looking forward to England provideing the answers tonight, but not confident in the slightest. NZ will have their tails right up.
Complain about this comment
I don't think Anderson is a test player, he has been in and out of the team for years. He never gets in the team for his own performances only when others in the team fail to perform themselves.
Complain about this comment
Dave Gourlay (No6) wrote that the Aussie’s always encourage their men where as England just bin them and move on. How many test series has Harmison had to do the business? How long did Gillespie get after the 2005 Ashes?
Complain about this comment
Strauss should have been dropped as well- it has been a case of diminishing returns for quite a while with him now. I would like them to look at bringing Steve Kirby in next summer- if you want a confronational, aggressive strike bowler, then he is your man.
Complain about this comment
I can't believe the English would drop Hoggard. He and KP are the only quality players in the team. As for James Anderson - well that guys is a joke. I seriously believe that a scarecrow installed at fine leg would be of more use than him.
I cant believe it took so long to dump Harmison. Just to put things into perspective Harmison gets paid more than the Prime Minister of England. It pains me to say it but I think that the country gets more value out of Gordon.
Anyone know the odds at William Hill on a 3-0 whitewash?
Complain about this comment
Dear Aggers,
I can only agree with all those who say the decison to drop Hoggard is harsh - extremely so, I would say, unless he is considered to be unfit.
Harmison's dropping is long overdue. He has been living on the reputation of his spectacular performances in the Caribbean and his brief spell as Number 1 bowler in the world for far too long. His performances since then have been patchy to say the least, and he has let England down many times, most spectacularly during the Ashes series down under.
When, however, has Hoggard let England down? OK, he may have had one poor Test, but he has performed heroically for England on several occasions, at times when it was least expected of him, e.g. in India.
This kind of treatment of an honest, whole-hearted, committed Cricketer sends out all the wrong messages.
One gets the impression, I'm sad to say, that Vaughan didn't have the guts to sack Harmison alone, to whom the England set-up have been pandering for years on the grounds of his potential 'match-winning' status. (It has remained at potential. When did Harmison last win a test for England abroad?)
It seems that Hoggard is being used to turn this into some kind of radical change of policy, one of bringing in younger bowlers, because just to drop Harmison would have meant admitting the folly of pandering to him for so long.
In sum, a poor decision, likely to demotivate Hoggard, when it was Harmison, whom nothing seems to motivate, who had to go. Let's all wish Hoggy a swift and triumphant return!
Complain about this comment
Hoggard should feel hard done by. Harmison should be packing his stuff, the England team need to make a break for the future and stop imagining Freddie will come back to save us, the future is in Broad and players like him. I hope he does well and that Hoggy is back soon.
Complain about this comment
I can't believe Hoggie has been dropped. Our most consistent bowler who always gives 110%.Anderson won't be any good, he's inconsistent and lacks experience - he needs to go back to the county game and learn how to play like Sidebottam did. Harmison does not deserve an England cap and frankly should go home and play county cricket as he just doesn't want to play for England.
Complain about this comment
Dave Gourlay (No6) wrote that the Aussie’s always encourage their men where as England just bin them and move on. How many test series has Harmison had to do the business? How long did Gillespie get after the 2005 Ashes?
Complain about this comment
Harmison - agree, drop him and send him home.
Hoggard - Don't agree - will Anderson bring anything different?
On another note - Charlie Shrek bowling in New Zealand for Wellington this summer - why not pick him?? He's ben knocking on the door a while!!
Complain about this comment
It's an absolute disgrace that Hoggard has been dropped! He has been consistently England's best performer over the last few years and does the hard yards wherever he goes, a show of absolutely no loyalty.
In stark contrast the batsmen have all been given another chance, despite Shah having earned a chance at least as much as Broad. However, i think Vaughn is coming in for undue criticism, his record since returning to the captaincy is not any worse than the other batsmen, and his technique is still the best in the team.
Complain about this comment
England have new selectors, coach and a new draft to follow within the Schofield Report but still appear to be working under the tutelage of Duncan Fletcher Ashes series of 06/07.
In selecting Stephen Hanrmisson for the first test the selectors appeared to wish to continue in keeping faith in a player who had contributed little in the past four England series.
They discarded Shah who scored well in the only three day warm-up game for Andrew Strauss who had not gone to Sri Lanka, and had played in NZ league, but failed in the warm-up game.
It appeared to follow the Fletcher route of above all keep faith in players who had won the Ashes, but whose form did not negate their selection.
The 2nd test; Harmisson has rightly been dropped but Mathew Hoggard omission after a poor test is surely the management’s fault for not giving little warm-up opportunities, and so incorrect.
The selection of Anderson and Broad is a huge risk. Leaving out Hoggard who has been so consistent in taking wickets and holding up an end in the last four years. The pressure for Broad & Anderson is great, but more on Sidebottom as he is going to have to carry the attack, and hope the newcomers can support.
Andrew Strauss now has to be picked as poor Shah has not and any completeive cricket when he should have been picked in the first place.
Ship missing a rudder does come to mind.
Complain about this comment
Dave Gourlay (No6) wrote that the Aussie’s always encourage their men where as England just bin them and move on. How many test series has Harmison had to do the business? How long did Gillespie get after the 2005 Ashes?
Complain about this comment
Maybe we, as England cricket fans, need to face up to the reality that our team are not as good as we think they are. I think this has been true since 2005. The same can be said of the football team. Perhaps the media must take some blame for hyping our chances (and belittling the other teams). Every series (or fottball tournament), according to the media, has our name on the trophy right up until the first salvos are fired, at which point the media turns on the team. Let me meake it clear, I am not defending Harmison. His lack of effort was clear for all to see. I am just saying perhaps we need to adjust our expectations.
Maybe it would have been better if we only drew the 2005 ashes series. Maybe the team would not have rested on their laurels and been spurred on to improve their game - just a thought.
Complain about this comment
where did liam plunket (might have butchered his name there)??? he was pretty decent. i cant see why jimmy is getting a chance over hoggy he was horrible! hoggy has had one bad but. why do we have to be so recactionary??? thank god harmy is dropped.
Complain about this comment
As they say in cricket, 'bowlers win matches, batsmen save them.' With the decision to drop two bowlers, while ignoring the failure of the batsmen, Michael Vaughan has highlighted just what makes English cricket the beast it is today - a game of selfish politics.
Let's take a look at the batsmen in question;
Cook: fine, leave him be
vaughan: finished as a batter and as a captain.
Strauss: why would you bother. Why would he bother - hopeless.
Pietersen: Necessary, but has fallen away dramatically, as if he doesn't care or believe.
Bell: at least has heart, but not a match winner and never will be.
Collingwood: should be made captain now.
What's more, Mark Ramprakash would have made a huge difference to the middle order.
Vaughan and co care more concerned about their spot in the team, than the performance of the team. Vaughan must fall on his sword.
Complain about this comment
Well I'm sorry Dave but I think you've lost the plot a little bit. It's all very well jumping onto a debate about English selection and using it as an opportunity to waffle on about the greatness of Australia.
Surely if things arent going well and players arent performing then they deserve to be dropped. Harmison has had chance after chance. Englands perseverence with him seemed to know no bounds. He more than deserves to be dropped. Hoggard on the other hand is bordering on ridiculous and smacks a little of desperation.
Complain about this comment
the hoggster should not be dropped like this unlike harmison who should have been dropped 18 months ago. i can't beleive we have got rid of our most reliable and least injury prone seamer.
disgusted.
Complain about this comment
Broad in for Harmison was a certainty, and a correct decision.
Anderson for Hoggard is a surprise, and a MISTAKE. Anderson's only very occasionally test class, Hoggard had one poor match after years of consistent service - the backbone of our attack.
Complain about this comment
I wholly agree with your comments Aggers. Harmison has had his time, it is time to move on and forget. I was more surprised at the Hoggard omission. Having said that, given how poorly he bowled in Hamilton and in the third test in Sri Lanka. I hope he can rediscover his form playing for Yorkshire and be in contention for a recall for the first test against New Zealand in England. I do however feel the worst, remember Jason Gillespie’s dramatic fall from Australian side during the 2005 Ashes.
Moving on to the other comments posted, we are all appalled by how poorly England performed in Hamilton with the bat. Come to mention it, the Sri Lanka series too. People are calling for heads to roll, and rightly so, unless the situation improves soon. Posts regarding the captain’s position in the side spring particularly to mind. Anyway, to form clear opinions, lets look at some statistics since the last Ashes series. In that time, England have employed just 8 different specialist batmen to fill 6 spots in 11 tests. In that time, their numbers are thus:
Vaughan: 10 matches, 833 runs @ 46.28, 100s: 2, 50s: 4
Cook: 11 matches, 950 runs @ 45.24, 100s: 3, 50s: 5
Strauss: 8 matches, 424 runs @ 28.27, 100s: 0, 50s: 3
Pietersen: 11 matches, 985 runs @ 49.25, 100s: 4, 50s: 1
Bell: 11 matches, 757 runs @ 42.06, 100s: 1, 50s: 7
Collingwood: 11 matches, 789 runs @ 41.53, 100s: 2, 50s: 40
Bopara: 3 matches, 42 runs @ 8.40, 100s: 0, 50s: 0
Shah: 1 match, 10 runs @ 5, 100s: 0, 50s: 0
Immediately springing to mind from these statistics, are the lack of runs from Strauss, the very reason he was dropped for the Sri Lanka series. Why he was recalled we shall never know. Bopara has missed out in New Zealand because of his poor run in Sri Lanka. Shah played just the one test, so it is not fair to comment.
So taking the other 5 batsmen who have played the majority of the test between now and then, Vaughan is 3rd highest run getter, with the second highest average, with an average in excess of his career average. So perhaps Vaughan is not England’s issue with the bat. It is Bell and Collingwood which have suffered the leanest run of these 5 batsmen.
I know people will query the affect that the series against the West Indies had in this period, when all the batsmen filled their boots. So in Englands last 7 tests (Since the first test against India last summer):
Vaughan: 7 matches, 582 runs @ 41.57, 100s: 1, 50s: 4
Cook: 7 matches, 552 runs @ 39.43, 100s: 1, 50s: 3
Strauss: 4 matches, 256 runs @ 32, 100s: 0, 50s: 2
Pietersen: 7 matches, 519 runs @ 39.92, 100s: 2, 50s: 0
Bell: 7 mathces, 530 runs @ 40.76, 100s:0, 50s:6
Collingwood: 7 matches, 430 runs@ 33.08, 100s: 0, 50s: 4.
So in England’s last 7 test, Vaughan is statistically England’s best batsman. He may not be making the big 100s he did in his pomp 5 years ago, but he is still proving he has a lot to offer England as a batsman. It is the others, namely messer Collingwood and Strauss, who should really be feeling the heat about a lack of runs!
Complain about this comment
Is it me or should Owais Shah just come home right now, he has done everything possible to deserve a go, gets dropped in the second warm up game to give Strauss yet another chance, which in fairness he took, but what could Shah have done to influence this. No batters paying the price for a shocking display in the second dig, ridiculous!
Harmison out is a no brainer but with Broad and Anderson in a side we may may allow periods of the game to go past with limited control, if this happens with Mccullum at the crease then the game could change very quickly for the worse...
Complain about this comment
Vaughan & Moores have got it so wrong. Dropping Hoggard is a big mistake.
If we dropped someone for one bad game we would be taking a squad of 22 to every tour. The only players deserving to keep their places were Sidey, Monty & Belly.
I look forward to Hoggard's return in the first test match of our summer, or if Anderson or Broad (hope it goes well for him) bodge it up, next week.
Complain about this comment
Hmm
So let me get this right.
Despite a not-too-great bowling performance at times, the English bowlers got England into a genuine winning position.
Which the batsmen proceeded to throw away with a display that was breathtaking in its ineptitude, even by Englands almost perennial abysmal standards! The same batsmen who have been unable to buy anything like a century for almost too long to remember.
So it's 2 bowlers that get dropped but not one of the useless, technically-bereft, gutless excuses that pass as an English batsman!~
Good selection policy!!!
Complain about this comment
I cannot believe how long Harmison has ridden on the back of his West Indies perfomance in 2003 (I think) He has been poor since the 2005 ashes and even then his performances were masked by us winning the ashes. How has Harmison lasted so long and Hoggard gets no chance to regain form altogether? I would take an off form Hoggard over James Anderson any day of the week, Anderson is outrageously expensive for his returns in wickets. He was ruined by being selected when he was too young. I fear we might do the same with Broad.
Complain about this comment
Although i've always been a big fan of Harmison it is clear that he is no longer as committed. For me he just doesn't look to be enjoying what he is doing and i agree with dropping him. However i feel it is extremely harsh to drop Hoggard who has clearly been the most consistent bowler of recent times. With the exception of Sidebottom everyone else has a hell of alot to prove!
Complain about this comment
England have new selectors, coach and a new draft to follow within the Schofield Report but still appear to be working under the tutelage of Duncan Fletcher Ashes series of 06/07.
In selecting Stephen Hanrmisson for the first test the selectors appeared to wish to continue in keeping faith in a player who had contributed little in the past four England series.
They discarded Shah who scored well in the only three day warm-up game for Andrew Strauss who had not gone to Sri Lanka, and had played in NZ league, but failed in the warm-up game.
It appeared to follow the Fletcher route of above all keep faith in players who had won the Ashes, but whose form did not negate their selection.
The 2nd test; Harmisson has rightly been dropped but Mathew Hoggard omission after a poor test is surely the management’s fault for not giving little warm-up opportunities, and so incorrect.
The selection of Anderson and Broad is a huge risk. Leaving out Hoggard who has been so consistent in taking wickets and holding up an end in the last four years. The pressure for Broad & Anderson is great, but more on Sidebottom as he is going to have to carry the attack, and hope the newcomers can support.
Andrew Strauss now has to be picked as poor Shah has not and any completeive cricket when he should have been picked in the first place.
Ship missing a rudder does come to mind.
Complain about this comment
Again bowlers are paying for batsmens' failures. Harmison is shot IMO and needs to be jettisoned from the England set up completely - no contract renewal, no retainer, nothing. His heart and soul are no longer in the game.
Dropping Hoggard after one poor game smacks of caving in to the media's baying for blood. Hoggard has always been the least appreciated, least recognised and least applauded of England's fast bowlers by the majority of people.
Harmison claims to "try his nuts off" every time he plays. With Hoggard you can see that effort; there's a huge difference there.
If dropping people after one poor game is the returning mentality then Vaughan, Strauss, Cook and possibly Collingwood had better watch out. For me the jury is now out on Vaughan's captaincy.
It wasn't the bowling that lost us the last test match, it was a chronic lack of confidence and poor batsmanship.
Complain about this comment
Forget the bowlers you've dropped, what about the batsmen you haven't? Selectors blame bowlers for batsmen's shortcomings.
As an Australian, I have lost patience with the Oz selectors, why no David Hussey alongside his brother?
Why does Shah get continually overlooked for Strauss? (Perhaps it's racizm, don't mention the war!!) Is that positive discrimination, favouring Strauss, or negative, disfavouring Shah?
Regards
John T
Complain about this comment
This is my team for the 2nd test.Vaughn,Robert Key,Compton,Pietersen,Bell,Collingwood,Ambrose,Broad,Sidebottom,Hoggard,Panesar. Get Key and Compton to New Zealand.
Complain about this comment
The removal of Hoggard demonstrates that England are now dangerously close to returning to the 'old days' of selection by form, rather than class.
Hoggard is number 11 in the LG ICC Cricket rankings, higher than any other England bowler. What possible EVIDENCE is there to justify the selection of Anderson over Hoggard?! I'm an Anderson fan, don't get me wrong, but no-one in their right mind would expect him to be more useful than Hoggard, who's been the backbone of our attack for many years. Is this indicative of a wider problem in society where quietly successful and hard working people are chronically underappreciated?
What of the coaching team? Why is Kevin Shine exempt from criticism, when it is his arrival that so correlates with the decline in the performance of England's bowlers (note that under Donald, Anderson our bowlers improved markedly, but sadly he didn't stay)?
If the England management are going to behave this desperately, then the lot of them should go.
Complain about this comment
The problem with England is not one match or tour. We are not simply not good enough for some reason. In most team sports, things go in cycles (Rugby Union is good example), and at present, I don't think we have enough world class players available. You can't pick players who don't exist. When batting, we have one good session, followed by 3 bad ones. When a batsman gets a few runs, and an interval comes, he gets out within the first over or two of the next session. Fielding (the last match excluded) is average at best. Bowling is as erratic and inconsistent as a car with a blow out on a motorway. When we get a decent bowler, why are they always injured? Concentration - or lack of - come to mind, money another. Ask yourself, how many of our team would get into Australias's, SA's, India's or even Sri Lanka's? The answer is a round figure - and you're fooling yourself if you think differently.
Complain about this comment
Again bowlers are paying for batsmens' failures. Harmison is shot IMO and needs to be jettisoned from the England set up completely - no contract renewal, no retainer, nothing. His heart and soul are no longer in the game.
Dropping Hoggard after one poor game smacks of caving in to the media's baying for blood. Hoggard has always been the least appreciated, least recognised and least applauded of England's fast bowlers by the majority of people.
Harmison claims to "try his nuts off" every time he plays. With Hoggard you can see that effort; there's a huge difference there.
If dropping people after one poor game is the returning mentality then Vaughan, Strauss, Cook and possibly Collingwood had better watch out. For me the jury is now out on Vaughan's captaincy.
It wasn't the bowling that lost us the last test match, it was a chronic lack of confidence and poor batsmanship.
Complain about this comment
Like many who have wriiten before me, I feel really sorry for Hoggie. He really doesn't deserve to be dropped...and to replace with Anderson is surely madness (Bound sure to be proved wrong now!!) Harmison should be dropped...his interview on the telly showed a man who doesn't seem to know what he wants and has too fragile a mind to be in the test arena. I also can't believe that Strauss has kept his place...someone please explain why!
Complain about this comment
This is my team for the 2nd test.Vaughn,Robert Key,Compton,Pietersen,Bell,Collingwood,Ambrose,Broad,Sidebottom,Hoggard,Panesar. Get Key and Compton to New Zealand.
Complain about this comment
Hioggard is a surprise. harmison less so, he had to go. he hasnt been the same Bowler since Troy Cooley left.
funny that.....
Complain about this comment
Harmison had to go,I"m originally from Darlington and Harmison has become an embarassment to our region.All he ever goes on about is his family and how much he misses home.Get a job in a local factory and then you can stay at home and play with yout teddy bear.As for Peter Moores he seems a bit soft and maybe Englands cricketers need a reality check from a Capello type figure.
Complain about this comment
Coming off the back of a test played on one of the most batsman friendly surfaces, it's daft that the bowlers have taken all the blame here. Dropping Harmsion was obvious but not Hoggard after one poor performance. How bad does the batting have to get to drop one of them?
Complain about this comment
Sorry, but it simply isn't true that the bowlers were the cause of England losing the first test.
Yes, they should have prevented NZ from scoring 470 in the first innings, but whose fault was it that the England batsmen then occupied the crease for 20 overs longer than NZ and yes scored 120 runs less?
And who was it who then restricted NZ to less than 150 runs with 9 wickets down in the second innings?
And who was it who capitulated to 110 all out on the last day.
Sorry, but however you slice it dropping two bowlers and doing nothing about the batting lineup is pathetic.
Complain about this comment
I think dropping Hoggard is a disgrace. One bad game in 4 years! To be fair he wasn;t even that bad, yes perhaps lacking a bit of zip but as always trying wholeheartedly in the cause.
Anderson has consistently proved that he is not up to the mark. He may well take some wickets in this test but totally lacks consistency and has little control of length and line.
I am very very angry about Hoggard who after all carried the whole bowling attack in Australia just a year ago
shocking decision
Complain about this comment
If it's time to usher in a new era, why Anderson - in all my time watching him over the past 4 years or so he's been in and out I've never been impressed. Not fast enough, lacks control and a proper cricketing brain.
Broad has a bit of the international about him in pace and height (two Fletcher-esque-screw-the-talent principles that probably kept Sidebottom out for longer than he should have been).
Cook is the nearest thing to "new blood" with a touch of international class to him we've had in a long time and even he's gone quiet.
To be honest these changes fill me with as much excitement as when Illot, Ealham, Salisbury, Maddy, Brown, etc etc etc were brought in and while great County players just don't hack the international game.
Prepare for some very lean years to come.
Complain about this comment
Fantastic,How can anyone suggest that Strauss has not desrved his place back in the side. He showed great poise and balance, sitting on the sofa since he was dropped. Why would you drop batsmen just because they are out of form and not mentally up to it. It is obvious that the team were very well prepared for the first test, so no critisism for the Management there. It is not reasonable to suggest that the selectors made any sort of error in selecting the squad or the team. That only leaves the bowlers. Obvious really, Harmison can't help being home sick and not thinking of the ball he is about to bowl, so Hoggy, all your fault. Well done the Management. Brilliant.
Complain about this comment
I think harmison's dropping should be temporary, it was not long ago harmison was one of the top five bowlers in the world, and there is no reason why he can not find the form he once had, he is constantly given a short amounts of time, eg going to south africa for a few weeks, to find his form, he needs more overs in match situations. there is no one else like hime in english cricket, tremlett and broad are not quick enough to be in the same league.
Complain about this comment
Richard Lake: What utter rubbish; out for less than 120 and the batsmen are not to blame! And why is panesar still around?
Complain about this comment
Its the Jonny Wilkinson syndrome! Drop the most senior high profile players to deflect the criticism away from the rest of the team. Its clever but very short term.
There suddenly becomes no direction or development to the team when decisions seem to be taken based on public concensous.
Don't forget it was Fletchers single minded-ness that made the team soar in the test rankings.
Complain about this comment
Good....theyv'e finally got rid of" can't bowl straight or fast any more" Harmison. Hard luck Hoggy but class will tell and he'll be back. Now let's finish the job by getting rid of"Iam the greatest, but I only get a good score every five innings"...Pieterson and Michael Vaughan who is not worth his place as a batsman.
Collingwood for captain and bring in Owais Shah instead of Pieterson.
Complain about this comment
Do the selectors know where they are? Who's going to bowl into the Wellington wind with no hoggard? As a kiwi I couldn't be happerier to see the back of your best swing bowler.
Complain about this comment
Hmmm.
I agree with these changes, but there should have been at least one batting change as well. If only to bring in a few different ideas.
However I worry that had Vaughan dropped a batsman then questions would be asked over why that peson and not vaughan himself. Here's hoping he didnt bottle it for that reason.
Complain about this comment
I think there is real concern for Harmison as he is prone to being homesick and England will end up with a situation similar to Marcos Trescothick on their hands
Dropping Hoggard is a bit harsh having been injured in the summer last year and he has never let England down in the past
I think Vaughan has to think about about preparing bowlers that couldbe leading England's attach against the Aussies for the Ashes in 2009 as it is unlikely that England will be able to field the famous 4 again.
There is still a problem with the batting namely after Kevin Pietersen whether Bell and Collingwood are good enough to occupy the crease and defend the tail.
Shah should be given a chance to replace either of these two
Whilst Strauss is lucky to be back in the team dropping him again would be ridiculous in the circumstances they've selected him in the 1st place
The test match last week England were outplayed for 4 of the 5 days in all departments it has to be said
Complain about this comment
Paragraph four should read: "...Harmison will find it tougher to get back."
One can't use a superlative adjective when comparing two objects.
Complain about this comment
Paragraph four should read: "...Harmison will find it tougher to get back."
One can't use a superlative adjective when comparing two objects.
Complain about this comment
I think the majority of posts have been quite tame on this - in my view dropping Hoggard after one below-par display in about 5 years, is quite simply a disgrace.
If I was Hoggy, I'd pack my bags and say goodbye to international cricket after treatment like that. Luckily for England, Hoggy is not me and will no doubt work hard and get his place back when the selectors realised Anderson's obligatory 4-ball per over is not what is required at test level.
Complain about this comment
Richard Lake: What utter rubbish. Unable to reach 120 runs and you say the batsmen are not at fault!And what is Panesar still doing around?
Complain about this comment
Finally someone has identified the real problem. Selection. We continually select on past reputation, not current form. For me separate sides for one day and test cricket does not work on tour, especially when there are so little opportunities for first class games before and between the test matches. It can work at home because the players not directly involved can play for their counties etc. Harmison for me is finished. Hoggard would have benefitted from two or three first class games before the test. The batsmen have disappointed, but do we have that many options in the tour party?
Complain about this comment
I think the majority of posts have been quite tame on this - in my view dropping Hoggard after one below-par display in about 5 years, is quite simply a disgrace.
If I was Hoggy, I'd pack my bags and say goodbye to international cricket after treatment like that. Luckily for England, Hoggy is not me and will no doubt work hard and get his place back when the selectors realised Anderson's obligatory 4-ball per over is not what is required at test level.
Complain about this comment
I think harmison's dropping should be temporary, it was not long ago harmison was one of the top five bowlers in the world, and there is no reason why he can not find the form he once had, he is constantly given a short amounts of time, eg going to south africa for a few weeks, to find his form, he needs more overs in match situations. there is no one else like hime in english cricket, tremlett and broad are not quick enough to be in the same league.
Complain about this comment
Vaughan is a reactionary idiot. It's him who should herald the end of an era - his own. Why come out and say that? At the end of the day, it wasn't actually the bowlers who lost us that match, it was him and the rabble of a top six we have at the moment.
Suddenly the 'feelgood' factor under Peter Moores seems less and less how English players should be coached. They don't need a best friend to have a relaxed training session with, they need a coach who will instill discipline. English batsmen in glass houses should not throw cricket balls.
Complain about this comment
I dont see why Vaughan should get a say in who plays or doesnt play - how can that be objective.
He has been below par himself for years and rarely comes up with the goods, so who is he to say should or should not be in the team.
The selectors should pick teams.
Complain about this comment
Anderson?
Need I say more?
Complain about this comment
Richard Lake: What utter rubbish; out for less than 120 and the batsmen are not to blame! And why is panesar still around?
Complain about this comment
It falls on the captain to lead by example by actually performing his role as a player before that of a captain. Vettori is a good example in the last test and as much as it pains me to say it Ponting is the best example. He had a terrible series against India and Australia lost the One dayers and came a few lucky decisions away from losing the test series.
When Vaughan was performing a couple of years ago so were the rest of the team. Anyone who has ever played cricket, or any sport for that matter, at even a semi serious level knows you look to your skipper to set the tone - One lazy bit of fielding, one dropped catch, one unwitting comment in an interview saying the first test is just a warm up to get acclimatised and the rot can set into the team very quickly and that's exactly what we saw in Hamilton. Vaughan approached the game negatively so his trusting troops did too. You can drop who ever you like but as long as the captain is a drain on the team he won't get the best out of them.
Vettori did all his talking on the field, Vaughan did all his in the press room. It's up to Michael Vaughan alone to turn this series around by scoring some runs and playing like a test captain, not just talking like one.
Complain about this comment
In the short term, this decision had to be made and I think it is the right one. I hope Broad can cement his place in the side and continue to improve, and that Anderson can show the sort of form that Alan Donald managed to get out of him in his short time with England. Long term, the problems lie with the management, who need to look at why it is so difficult for players with Central Contracts to turn up ready for the start of a tour. This is especially important for the bowlers, and Harmison in particular struggles for rythm when he has not played much cricket. I agree that Hamison has to be dropped now, but I believe that he has been let down by the management and coaching staff and has not gone on to be the bowler that he should have been. We need to get in a decent bowling coach, in my opinion we should break the bank to get Donald back, and then make sure that our bowlers go into every future international series with plenty of match practice.
Complain about this comment
Finally someone has identified the real problem. Selection. We continually select on past reputation, not current form. For me separate sides for one day and test cricket does not work on tour, especially when there are so little opportunities for first class games before and between the test matches. It can work at home because the players not directly involved can play for their counties etc. Harmison for me is finished. Hoggard would have benefitted from two or three first class games before the test. The batsmen have disappointed, but do we have that many options in the tour party?
Complain about this comment
Hoggard has had 1 bad test and he's found himself dropped at the same time as Harmison who has had numerous bad tests over the last 3 or 4 years, to me the decision is at little rash and unusual for Vaughan, as he's normally quite level headed.