posted May 9, 2007

yes, I perhaps agree that some bowlers on my list would be better off serving their counties but I am saying they are capable if needed. Don't you hate the aussies, they have so many quality bowlers-

Lee
Bracken
Tait
Clark
Johnston
Hilfenhaus
Dorey
Hogg
White
Michael Clarke
Gillespie
Watson
etc, etc

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 9, 2007

My starting XI:

1) Strauss
2) Cook
3) Bell
4) Pieterson (if fit. If not pick Tim Ambrose)
5) Collingwood
6) Flintoff
7) A wicketkeeper (James Pipe? )
8) Bopara
9) Hoggard
10)Harmison
11)Panesar

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 9, 2007

Hilarious when you look at the recent county matches, how all the England XI have been rubbish and the rest of the lads have shone. You're picking the wrong players.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 9, 2007

1) Strauss
2) Cook
3) Bell
4) Pieterson (if fit. If not pick Tim Ambrose)
5) Collingwood
6) Bopara
7) L Sutton Keeper Lancs or Prior
8) Flintoff
9) Hoggard
10)Harmison
11)Panesar

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 9, 2007

Simon Jones can't be far away now. He's taking wickets for Glamorgan again. If he was named in the squad, then the selectors must believe that he is almost there.

For me, Jones, once he's fit again has to be in the team. He is a quality bowler, and no-one can work the old ball better than him. If we don't see him against the West Indies, surely he will feature in the India series.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 10, 2007

Jones isn't bowling in 4 day games yet.

How many 4 day games does he need before he's fit for Tests? 1? 5? 10?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 10, 2007

I am at a loss as to why so many are rooting for S Jones and that he is a brilliant bowler, a must for England etc etc.
I know we can't pick what we haven't got but if people believe that he is special then why are his stats so ordinary?

I've compared him with two competent bowlers (neither would be listed in the "special category" but good bowlers nevertheless).

I also know that stats aren't everything.

S Jones
Tests - 59 @ 28.33
FC - 217 @ 31.79

Ken Higgs -Leicestershire
Tests - 71 @ 20.74
FC - 1556 @ 23.61

M Hendrick - Derbyshire
Tests - 87 @ 25.33
FC - 770 @ 20.53

Please let's not use words like brilliant, great, the best, ace etc.
of present day reasonable to good players like S Jones, Harmison, Anderson, Pieterson, Joyce, Collingwood, Panasar, Reid, etc etc because they are nothing special if players like Higgs and Hendrick can achieve what they did. In fact some of the England players are not even proffessional.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 10, 2007

I'd say that Jones's stats, considering he's only played 18 Tests, and that's he's had two brilliant series (in South Africa, and in the Ashes) suggest that Jones is better than "reasonable to good".

I'd say he's very good. However, I agree that to be brilliant he'd have to be averaging below 25 consistantly.

Maybe he can be brilliant, if he can stay fit. We shall see.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 11, 2007

Well said Silk

Albondiga you are a complete numptey.

I love the way in this country we even slag off sportsman who have actually achieved. I'm all for criticising people who haven't got talent or don't apply themselves but Jones is a proven performer who unfortunately is injury prone.

I would say like Michael Owen in footbvall.

You ask the Aussies how good Jones is. They said in the Ashes 2005 he was unplayable. 18 wickets at 21 average in only 3 tests says it all. Stats do not lie.
He was 1 of 4 reasons we won the Ashes in 2005
1. Vaughan's captaincy
2. Flintoff's all-round brilliance
3. Trescothick's runs
4. Jones's bowling.

It's funny now we're struggling so much that none of these 4 are showing anything like they were then or have been injured ever since.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 11, 2007

iansterriersrule

I'll ask again - if Jones is so very good why are his stats so ordinary?
FC and Test history

Jones 217/31.8 & 59/28.3
Higgs 1556/23.6 & 71/20.74
B.ST. 2260/16.4 & 252/24.8
FST. 2304/18.3 & 307/21.6


Higgs was not in the class of Trueman and Statham but a good bowler nevertheless.
Trueman/ Statham were "great bowlers" and SJones does not compare with either of them and comes off worse than Higgs whose career test average was better than Jones's 18/21 that you quote.
Jones is known for his "reverse swing" with the old ball. True fast bowlers (in my opinion) do the business with the new ball by either swinging it (both ways sometimes) or hitting the seam and therefor make early inroads into the opposition batting before cleaning up the tail.
Jones has had one good series and from his records seems to have some difficulty getting batsman out in the county championship.
So , once again, please don't make him out to be so special - he isn't.

add comment | complain about this comment