posted Jan 25, 2007

Oh!Mrnoneofyourbusiness looks like is hell bent on criticising me!Anyhow as he has opened up an pandora's box on that Giles inclusion and other things it is better to go for a bit of analytical debate

1)Giles v Panesar-Panesar is the one who bowls more attacking lines as he concentrates on bowling off and middle stump line compared to Giles who bowls outside the line of leg stump along with that Panesar gets more drift, he is more accurate, as well as he gets bit more spin.To justify it these are the Ashes averages. Panesar got 10 wickets at 37 which included an five wicket haul at Perth where warne has struggled compared to Giles who got 3 wickets at 87!

2)Giles v Panesar batting comparison-Here Ian chappell the channel 9 commentator says a bowler is picked to do his job as a bowler and not to bat and I do hope our friend considers atleast chappell as somewhat of an intelligent person.These are the Ashes averages as far as their batting is concerned-Giles has scored 74 runs at an average of 24 but that includes an notout at Adelaide in the first innings where as Panesar scored 35 runs at an average of 8.So if you take out that useless notout in the first innings because in the crucial second innings he scored nothing.His averages comes down like anything.So for 10 or so runs you want that Giles wow!

3)Kp should have batted at 4 but he did score 490 runs.Probably a person of your stature and intelligence will be satisfied if he scores 1000 runs.

4)Abysmal oneday strategy-The kiwis have players like Marshall, macmillan, Gillespie, Franklin, Patel etc.Though all these players are not bad but they are not outstanding still they contribute but our players who are surely comparable to these players cannot even take 4 runs an over with quick singles.That is all we needed against kiwis.

Yes Fletcher has been good but he has done too many mistakes in Austraia from giving the captaincy to Flintoff, to the shabby treatment of Read etc.So he has to go.

Finally I might be a dimwit but what about you?As you have continuously supported Giles inclusion for the first two tests and then you say what Fletcher says is right though it is clear that they are excuses as I have already given the eg. of kiwis doing better than our team in onedayers though they have missed key players and surely donot have much depth.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 25, 2007

how fickle are u muppetts, i bet u was all on the duncan bandwagon in 05 when we just scraped past the aussies, that series could've so easily gone the other way & i for one could c this white wash on the horizon, so the question is, should we have dumped fletch in 05

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 25, 2007

As far as your comment that kp or shah cannot open the batting is also an joke because for eg. sehwag was not an opener when he was playing firstclass cricket for Delhi but he has scored lots of hundreds for India in onedayers.I have put Strauss at number 5 because he will be suited to it as he is adapt at keeping the scoreboard ticking when in form and here donot you remember the crucial 45 which he made at the champions trophy against Aussies at no.4 position in 04 which helped us to win.After that he didnot do that well at that position in southafrica but he played only three or 4 innings at that position in Southafrica but donot you think his batting style is more suited to number 4 or number5 position in onedayers-Mrnoneofyourbusiness.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 25, 2007

Why has Stuart Broad been dropped? Personally I can't think of one reason.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 25, 2007

Also, we were never going to be at the races after letting Troy Cooley return to the Aussies. I mean, he was the man who turned our bowling attack, particularly Jones and Harmison, into Ashes winners. He knew all our strengths and all our weaknesses. We should have moved heaven and earth to keep him i) with us, or at the very least ii) out of Australian hands. We lost from the day he left us. It is no wonder we contrived to lose the Adelaide game even after Collingwood had struck a double century. Pathetic.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 25, 2007

People - why do you go on with all this breast beating & what ifs about a national team whose incompetence is abysmal
Does it really matter who bats where or which bowler is picked - they will lose - they are just not competitve - a different class - or actually NO CLASS
Why not get some joy from your sport and watch FEDERER while you can
Warne is gone - Federer is in that glorious league - watch him & FORGET CRICKET

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 25, 2007

comment by OldRegret

"Intotherough, put like that it does sound depressingly par for the course.

Boot camp time after the WC?"

______________________________

Frankly, boot camp before the WC., during and after if I had my way. Boot camp until they win something. Then they can have their trinkets back. Provisionally.

But of course, under the current enlightened system, the players of course would all have to be happy with the boot camp idea. They would no doubt want to bring their wives and girlfriends, travel in limos to-and-from the camp, with their body-guards to do any strenuous stuff. Some would probably want to take time off to go and see Kylie, and of course Harmison would no doubt decline on account of saving himself for county cricket or something. Tresco would attend long enough to secure another central contract then break down sobbing. Flintoff would no doubt say the boys are trying, and they're going to look to take any positives from boot camp.

At least it's a chapter in their next round of auto-biographies. "My hell in England boot camp: first they made me tour abroad, then they made me practice in the nets, they tried to make me attend a Christmas dinner, and now THIS!!! I have an MBE, don't you know!!"


___________________________________
comment by LancashireLad43


"Good comments, intotherough; not sure what to add, except that I'm staggered (again) to read Fletcher's comments that when he's having to pick young, inexperienced players, it's difficult to suggest new strategies, and give them new shots to play! What???!!!

What the hell are we doing? Presumably by "new shots" he means the brilliantly successful "reverse sweep" that everyone from Strauss to Nixon has tried, and failed with, every time. I've supported Fletcher for a long time, I think he's just lost the plot totally."

___________________________________

It's starting to get a little surreal, isn't it? It's beyond "disturbing", now... pretty soon it'll be frightening. I think they're in a bit of a bubble, unaware of how they're coming across. However, Fletch has made this particular cross for himself, and ought to know it, since he was the one who said the problem with young players is consistency. Obviously, if they're struggling for consistency, introducing new shots is not going to be an ideal thing to do.

Which is why the Aussies wait until a player has proven their consistency before bringing them in. Even if it means waiting till they're 30. (But at least then they WILL bring them in at that age). It took Hussey several years to acquire the range of shots and consistency he has now. Conscientiously working on a shot every year. What makes Fletcher think he can sort new shots out in a few weeks? It's the same madness that lay behind playing Anderson and Giles, both with newly remodelled actions, before they were ready.


_______________________________
comment by goforjugular


"1.The decision to make Flintoff skip was giving in to a foolish media clamour. What more could Strauss have done? Averaged 60, won PAK series convincingly, given Monty opportunies to bowl early and helped him blossom (unlike Flintoff who underbowled him against SL). Also helped Mahmood to blossom. Going back to Flintoff detracted from his play, deflated Struass contributed to Monty and Mahmood being shoved aside (though I accept that the latter has performed unevenly he would almost certainly have done better if faith had been shown in him)."

________________________________

Yeah, when you put it that way, the knock-on effects of picking the wrong captain can be quite considerable, can't they? Especially when the captain is given such a say in selection.


________________________________

comment by hagley57


"People - why do you go on with all this breast beating & what ifs about a national team whose incompetence is abysmal"

________________________________

Well, it beats breast-beating about people who breast-beat, I suppose....

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 25, 2007

What about this intotherough that kiwis with players like Franklin, Macmillan, Patel can do better than our team though all these players are comparable to the English players.That shows our team is not getting the basics right especially in rotating the strike and keeping the scoreboard ticking.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 25, 2007

Dunno, greyblazer. I mean, if you take out Oram's score in the last game, the rest of the Kiwis didn't do so well either. But yeah, we're not doing well at the basics.

Given the Aussies have been struggling a bit in the last couple of games, I'm wondering how much it is that the bowlers are starting to copy the Aussie way of doing things now, hence the poor batting totals across the board...

When you're up against bowlers consistently bowling good line and length, and good variations, the only batsmen liable to prosper are those good at making something out of nothing. The rest will just waft nervously for a bit and get out.

Or in our case, waft nervously for quite a while, scoring very little, before getting out.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 29, 2007

Confidence- England lack it at the moment. BIT TIME............The atmosphere in the England camp must be dreadful and the boys must be looking forward to getting home and returning to the safety of county cricket (assuming Fletcher will let them play) - Best way to boost confidence is to win games, something which England have been unable to do and more likely not able to achieve for the remainder of the trip. Lets forget the world cup and hope we can at least beat the minnows in our group.

Someone has got to get a grip of what is clearly a disillusioned and demoralised group of players.

Fletcher is too close and too involved-

add comment | complain about this comment