posted Nov 25, 2007

OK! I volunteer. Send home Harmison and send me out. Barring 3 weeks off-work for pneumonia in 1981, I've been fully fit since 1937!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 25, 2007

I guarantee the one person that Moores & Vaughan will not include is Stuart Broad.

Vaughan regards him as "a talent for the future", according to one of the interviews he gave.

As for Moores, Broad "has done very well and has a knack of taking wickets".

Considering the fact that Braod was the most economical bowler in the first game, took as many wickets as anyone and could have had two more - catches being held and umpires being on the ball - I should like to know what exactly the selectors think he has to do to be considered for the test side.

If Harmison has broken down, what odds are there on a re-call for Tremlett - again at the expense of Broad?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 25, 2007

They used to label Broad as the next Harmison should the latter not get his game going again. I would still take an on fire Harmison over an on fire Broad, I think we all would, but first we need an on fire Harmison again! Hasn't had the chance with these injuries, a shame.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 25, 2007

It is very sad to read the vitriol in some of the comments about Harmison. It is completely over the top and says more about the people who use it than it does about Harmison, a bowler with proven potential, but admittedly a player who has lost his way since 2005. He could always find it again though.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 25, 2007

I don't think England should risk him. Not because of form but because we cant risk a bowler breaking down in sapping conditions for a fast bowler, we'll need all our bowlers fully fit to get decent rotation in the hot conditions.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 25, 2007

Time to ditch Harmy, I'm afraid. if he was consistent when he was fit it would be a different matter, but he is rarely fit mentally (when on tour) or physically these days. Sri Lanka is the wrong place to try someone you can't rely on. Too big a gamble.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 25, 2007

i'd say that when they're fit, our quick bowlers fall into 2 categories.

----front-runners----
Harmison
Flintoff
SimonJones
Hoggard
Sidebottom

----back-up----
Tremlett
Plunkett
Anderson
Broad


problem is that Harmison hasn't been given enough time domestically to get his groove back. when he does have his mojo, he's without doubt in that first group

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 25, 2007

What is it with modern day England sportsmen. They come on the scene shine for a while and then go into oblivion either through loss of form or injury. But here's the trick, everybody still calls them Gifted players, players with class, players who are world beaters. And there is the Aussies, like them or loathe them they just keep on winning in specatacular fashion. They are truly world beaters. There has to be a long hard look at how so many top English sportsmen get injured so easily. Perhaps the old Jab in the bum with an extra long needle should be brought back by the medical staff. You really ( pardon the pun) get sick listening to England coaches, trainers, managers in all different sports moaning incessantly about their injury list. It is second only to their wish list.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 25, 2007

DL - the reason people are "jumping on the bandwagon" to demand Harmison is dropped is simple.

He is utterly hopeless. His record in the last two years has been pathetic. How much longer are we going to have to wait for form which has deserted him for several years?

People keep on about his Ashes performance - but this is another myth. He was the weakest pace bowler in 05 in England by a mile - Flintoff, Jones and Hoggard were comfortably better.

It isn't sad to suggest dropping him - it's common sense. He has already had far too many chances and now should be ditched for good.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 25, 2007

I’d be the first to agree about his performances since 2005, GP, and it’s probably more of a gamble to select Harmison to play ahead of a couple of others. It may be academic now after his back spasm, but if he’s fit, I wouldn’t criticise Moores and Vaughan if they took it.

As for the 2005 Ashes, of course it depends how you use the statistics to support your argument. Harmison took more wickets than Hoggard and was more economical than Hoggard and Jones and, at 3.41, only .03 runs per over more expensive than Flintoff.

I didn’t suggest it was sad to suggest dropping him, by the way. It was the unnecessary malice in some of the comments that I was criticising.

add comment | complain about this comment