posted Jan 27, 2008

You're right that it's premature to judge the Vaughan-Cook partnership. So why do you want to dipose of it so quickly? My comment was regardless of their performances in SL. I think they are a well assorted pair, they complement themselves well.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 27, 2008

MarzyHyper,

Even if Strauss does play in all three Tests and doesn't score a run he could still hang around for a few overs so Vaughan wouldn't necessarily have to come in straight away. It wasn't a problem last summer when Strauss was out of form. Vaughan scored one hundred against the West Indies and one against India batting at three.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 27, 2008

MarzyHyper,

I'm not saying Cook and Vaughan shouldn't open together. I would be quite happy for them to open together if Vaughan wasn't captain but as you have pointed out in one of your previous posts the stats suggest that Vaughan struggles to successfully combine the captaincy with opening the batting.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 27, 2008

OldRegret,

There's a big difference between a cricketer being proven to be on a steady downward slide and out of form. Strauss got off to such a fantastic start to his Test career ( ten hundreds in his first thirty Tests ) that even the slightest dip in form was going to look spectacular. I don't believe that any player can score ten hundreds in his first thirty Tests if he's not good enough. He just wouldn't get that lucky. Strauss proved himself in his first thirty Tests and doesn't need to prove himself again in my opinion. I'm not saying he should be an automatic selection but if he's going to be replaced it should be by another opener. If he's replaced by Shah it weakens Vaughan and Bell's positions.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 27, 2008

I understand and partly agree with your point of view, mrnoneofyourbusiness. Vaughan himself has admitted he doesn't feel totally confortable opening and captaining.

However I don't think that's a valid enough reason to bring back an out-of-form batsman who has done nothing to deserve a recall, ahead of an in-form batsman who thoroughly deserves a run in the England side.

The stats aren't conclusive. Vaughan has captained and opened in just 17 tests, that's not enough to draw a conclusion, IMO. Things may change. He's a born opener (he averages 48 in that role), so it seems to be mainly a psychological problem. He may get over it.

But if you really think Vaughan should bat at 3, then I would prefer Shah to open. He's done it before and I don't think he's do any worse than Mr. Strauss.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 27, 2008

"There's a big difference between a cricketer being proven to be on a steady downward slide and out of form. "

Steady downward slide or out of form? You decide!

http://www.iamsilk.com/strauss.PNG

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 27, 2008

Silk,

Isn't it all a matter of opinion at the end of the day? Your opinion of Strauss is clouded because you quite clearly don't like him. If he's as third rate as you so obviously think he is how do you explain the fact that he's scored ten Test hundreds? I find it hard to believe that a third rate cricketer would take so long to be found out. I'm sure it won't take the overrated Shah so long to be found out. His fans like to rave about his succesful Test debut in India but they just make excuses for his two cheap dismissals against a moderate West Indies team last summer.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 27, 2008

"Your opinion of Strauss is clouded because you quite clearly don't like him."

That statement is manifestly untrue.

If you READ my comments you will note I have repeatedly said "I hope Strauss regains his form" and "He's clearly a good player"

Shah is over-rated? On what evidence do you base that opinion?

OF COURSE it's all a matter of opinion, but as much as there can be a FACT in such a discussion, it is a FACT that Strauss performed poorly with the bat in 2007 in 5 out of the last 9 series he has played, and can only be said to have excelled (i.e. averaged over 40) in one of them.

You put this down to poor form. I put this down to a deeper problem with technique.

You think the solution is to get him back in the side. I think the solution is to rest him and force him to prove his for at Middlesex.

I'm just full of graphs tonight

http://www.iamsilk.com/strauss2.PNG

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 27, 2008

I have seen Strauss a lot in the past year and he is hopeless! I always get the feeling he'll go on the next 10 minutes he is just a bag of nerves. Even when Strauss manages to get his eye in he'll try a attempt some cut shot and will go out.

After a year of such performances I just lost patience with him! Bring anyone but Strauss as opener hell put Sidebottom as opener if you must! He'll probably be able to block more deliveries than Strauss and take the shine of the ball.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 28, 2008

Silk,

"Shah is overrated? On what evidence do you base that opinion?".

I base that opinion on the fact that he has only ever played two Tests. He did reasonably well in the first and everybody was talking about him as if he was the next Bradman and he was a spectacular failure in the second and the same people who had been raving about him since his first Test appearence just made excuses for him. There are far too many people on this forum talking about him as if he is established in Test cricket, which he is not. I'm not saying he's not good enough but I don't think we should get carried away about him. I think we're making the same mistake with Shah as we did with Hick a few years ago. He was hyped up for years before he made his Test debut and never justified the hype.

As for Strauss, I'm not saying he's done anything to deserve a recall, just that it's in the best interests of the team ( particularly Vaughan and Bell ) if he plays instead of Shah. All this talk of Shah opening is ridiculous. He might have opened in the odd one day game for Middlesex but to the best of my knowledge he's never opened for them in first class cricket. Do you think he would want to open? Personally I think he'd be horrified by the idea. As far as I'm concerned there are only two possible batting orders. Either:

Strauss
Cook
Vaughan
Pietersen
Collingwood
Bell

or:

Cook
Vaughan
Bell
Pietersen
Collingwood
Shah

With the latter I believe Vaughan and Bell's positions are weakened and I believe that has to be taken into consideration. It isn't simply a case of deciding which one of Strauss and Shah is the best player or which of them is in the best form.

add comment | complain about this comment