posted Feb 29, 2008

That 50 will have cemented Straus's place in the team. He's a decent slip fielder too...

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 29, 2008

The worst news is the injury to Collingwood. Will he miss the first Test? If so the Shah v Strauss debate will be put on hold as both will get a chance.
As for Bell bowling he just hasn't been thrown the ball. Whereas Shah, Pietersen and Vaughan all get to bowl.
Bell had a name and record as a very useful bowler so why hasn't he been asked? He says himself that he doesn't know.
One thing that hasn't been discussed is our weak tail.
Ambrose is unproven. The other bowlers can't bat much, apart from Broad? Sidebottom can also stick in but he may be injured still. If it is Anderson, Harmy, Hoggy and Panesar, then you have four No 11s.
Everyone talks about you only need six batsmen, but 5/6 need partners to make a score. That is why Giles was so useful. And without Prior the tail is looking pretty thin.
The loss of Flintoff is crucial to the problem. There has been no-one to replace him as an all-rounder.
It might sound against the run of all current cricketing wisdom but I believe a weak tail puts our Test side in jeopardy. Other teams encourage cricketers to have additional skills so that partnerships can go right down the order.
NZ must know that once they've got into the tail it is virtually over, no matter how good the batsman is the other end.
I think this is the source of the wicket keeper dilemma. It is simply that our bowlers can't bat leaving the top order exposed too early.
So Ambrose has to deliver with the bat as well as behind the stumps.
Do we know yet what are NZ's weaknesses as a Test side? Not enough bowlers? Not enough batsmen? Good wicket keeper obviously.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 29, 2008

Vaughan is a class player he will come good and anyway he is a great captain!!

------------------------------------------------

Vaughan is a great captain.......................against cr ap teams. Yet to beat a (decent) Asian team in a Test and loves beating the wind-ups and bungles. Where was this "great man" when we were losing in Pakistan,down under and at home to India? We beat the Pakistanis well enough without him. He must influence selections to some degree, I doubt he'd sit and quietly accept having a naff bowling attack.

Strauss should be captain, his form was bad for a while but he's hardly going to find it again if he's picked, dropped, picked, dropped and basically given the Hick treatment

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 29, 2008

Vaughan will be fine - as has been said before he is a big match player and since he retired from ODI's his form has been good if not great.

I would like to see Shah given a run in the team but all the talk is that Strauss will play - what has he done to justify this and where is the continuity of selection?? The selectors are setting themselves up for a fall if he fails.

Why are people still going on about Giles and Flintoff? Yes they were good in their day but that is nearly 3 years ago and times change. We need to pick a team that can win this series. As for Prior i'm glad he has been given the boot and rightly so - his keeping was woeful. End of.

Ambrose is a highly rated batsman/wicketkeeper who I hope will be the answer to our prayers, only time will tell just how useful he is.

I don't think Broad's quite ready for test cricket - he bowled well in the one dayers but i would be concerned about him in the longer form of the game. Certainly if he keeps developing that no. 8 spot looks his in the future.

As for the Kiwis they are weaker in tests than ODI's. For a start if McCullum plays at everything he won't last too long; Vettori is class and should be the main threat; Martin is pretty good but don't think the England top order will be quaking in their boots facing him. Their batting line up were blown away in S. Africa and looked ordinary.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 29, 2008

“Vaughan is a class player he will come good and anyway he is a great captain!!”

In truth, Vaughan is a run of the mill top order test batsman and a lesser one for his county. In modern international cricket, any captaincy skills he may have count for very little.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 29, 2008

DL

What you on about?
Vaughan is a stylish classy batsman for England.
And as for been a "lesser" run of the mill top order batsman for Yorkshire ......He hardly ever plays for Yorkshire these days.
Captaincy "counts for very little". Captaincy is an art form, the same as batting, bowling and fielding. Keeping 10 men happy and playing as a unit as well as constantly thinking about strategies in the field. It counts for a lot, England have had very few "great" captains but Vaughan is up there in the top 10 for sure.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 29, 2008

Top 10 captains doesn't sound that impressive, how many captains have there been (not counting guys who have just covered for the odd test)?

Think DLs point is that captaincy presents completely different challenges to what it did years back as much of the work captains used to do has been taken over by the coach and backroom staff. Partly agree with that, but would suggests some things are more difficult nowadays, such as the media spotlight.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 29, 2008

Captaincy if anything has got harder in the last 20 years.
As you say the media spotlight.
Everything that the team does now is watched and written about, as Freddie will tell you.
Top ten ain`t bad, England have had 77 captains(and if you take out the one hit wonders it`ll be around 60 plus) so to be top 10 out of 60 plus...I call that good.
I was defending the Vaughans batting criticism which is totally unjustified.
And to have a go at his recent Yorkshire record when he has only played a handful of games, and most of those will be games when he`s been out for a while and still rusty, is rubbish also.
Give Vaughan (and Hussain also) credit for turning England from Test match dross to a hard to beat team and finally into a good outfit.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 29, 2008

I agree with battingforbell. I just hope that England do not take a risk with Colly. If he is not 100% he must not play. If he aggrevates the injury, he will not be allowed a runner or substitute fielder. Surely this is not a risk worth taking when Shah made 96 in the previous game. If this forces Bell, KP & Shah to bowl some overs so much the better.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 29, 2008

Vaughan has said he wants to bat at three as long as he is captain and he has a better record at three as captain than he does opening as captain. I'm not happy with a top three of Cook, Vaughan and Strauss. I've never been in favour of Vaughan opening when he's burdened with the captaincy and I don't accept that Cook and Strauss can't open together. If they can't open together how come when they did open together it was Strauss who was out of form and not Cook? And what if Vaughan is out cheaply? Cook and Strauss will effectively be opening then.

I'm in favour of Strauss's recall but he should be opening with Cook. Before the Sri Lanka series Vaughan had an average of 34.03 opening as captain and 62.33 opening without being captain. He averages 47.04 batting at three as captain. The sooner we stop asking him to open the batting on top of captaining the team the better. If Cook and Vaughan open in all three Tests I will be interested to compare how they have done at the end of the series. I confidently expect Cook to outscore Vaughan as he did in Sri Lanka. Hopefully Strauss will regain his form and confidence at three and he can swap places with Vaughan in the summer. I'm sure a confident and in form Strauss would be able to open with anyone. If he does regain form he wouldn't be the first opener who had to drop down the order to do so.

add comment | complain about this comment