posted Sep 4, 2008

Purley on the basis of bowling, my choice would be Swann too, but how do they both rate as a batsman?

If we were just picking one spinner, then I'd go for the best one, but picking a second spinner to bat as well, then maybe not.

I'm working on the assumption that Patel is the better batsman of the two, and so allows the four bowlers that I named, would picking Swann mean that Broad has to come into contention too?

Basically I'm comparing two different lower orders:

Patel
Flintoff
Prior
Harmison
Anderson
Panesar

Prior
Flintoff
Swann
Broad
Harmison
Panesar

Admittedly, I may be under-rating Swann's batting compared to Patel, and please correct me if so, I just feel that on balance the first one is better, but would prefer it with Swann in there for the bowling.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 4, 2008

Brandy, I believe you are being overly harsh.

3rd ODI, Bell and Prior score a 100 partnership in 16 overs, and you only give it 7.5?

1st ODI, 70 odd partnership at a decent rate, again, you don't rate it highly.

The average opening partnership in an ODI is less than 40. Bell and Prior in partnership this series averaged 90, featuring three of the top four partnerships of the series.

You should also note that Bell's SR was brought down a fair bit by the second ODI, where England had 50 overs to score 80. He dropped anchor because there was no hurry. His 70s both came at much higher SRs than his series SR.

Prior's technique may be found out in future series, but you're rating him on this one.

Bell was in the team to provide a solid foundation of runs, blunt the new ball attack and provide a platform for KP and co. to attack. He performed that job admirably.

I really hate it when someone outscores everyone else in the team (bar one - Freddie), and people get on his back for not going on. Why not pick on Shah, Colly, KP on every occasion bar one. Why pick on one of only two players to pass 50 twice and say he should have made more?

So Bell is no Sehwag or Hayden. No kidding. But he still performed better as a batsman than anyone bar KP or Freddie, and deserves much higher than a 6 as a result, even if a 10 is some mythic perfection whereby he scores an unbeaten run a ball 180 in all four games.

I also find it extremely disingenous that people are downplaying the batsmen's achievement, as they always do when England bat well, by rubbishing the bowling. This is a Saffer attack that has recently beaten India, Pakistan and the West Indies; they're not bad. They may not have been on top of their game, but they weren't bowling dross (possible exception of Ntini), and England's batsmen should get some credit for batting well against them.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 4, 2008

jovialStelladave, I think you're spot on.

I can't see the selectors sacking themselves somehow though, as with many areas of professional cricket in England, it's too cosy a job to do yourself out of it!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 4, 2008

I'm not into 'rankings' - the whole side played well as a unit and some individuals played key innings, some had key bowling spells, and the ground fielding and catching were excellent. There were some brilliant run outs - one of which changed the whole 'tone' of the series.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 4, 2008

you gave bell a 6!!!!! you fool he scored more runs than prior, shah, pietersen, collingwood, patel and wright. Give him an 8!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 4, 2008

I'm shellshocked. This series was the first time since the summer of 2005 that England actually looked like a truly formidable, solid, decent cricket team. Key word there, TEAM.
Impressive stuff, long may it continue!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 4, 2008

freddiefanforever I'd knock a point off each consevatively; England did really well, but I think they can do better. ie more ODI centuries. Excellent but not outstandingly lethal.

1 Ian Bell - 6
2 Matt Prior (wk) - 6
3 Owais Shah - 7.5
4 Kevin Pietersen (capt) - 8
5 Andrew Flintoff - 8.5
6 Paul Collingwood - 5
7 Samit Patel - 7
8 Luke Wright - 5
9 Stuart Broad - 7
10 Steve Harmison - 7
11 James Anderson - 5.5

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 4, 2008

Prior and Bell are a pair of 8s both had a cracking series. Prior kept well too maybe the break from international cricket did him good. Does KP not get a 10? New life has been breathed into England.

Patel looks a really good cricketer does he spin it enough to take test wickets? I don't know but he's young and looks a clever bowler to me. He can bat and field as well and I wouldn't dismiss him out of hand as a test performer. With Broad, Fred and Prior a 5 man bowling attack looks a sustainable long term option.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 4, 2008

ermm how can ff do better!

i he can i wanna see!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 14, 2008

I do not go for the rating system but do believe that the team as a whole performed better than we have seen them do in a very long time. I feel a lot of the credit must go to KP who has apparently built up a very healthy rapport with the rest of the team as evidenced by the positive reactions by IB, AF, SP, SH, SB, and JA in general. I just wish to watch many more Tests and ODI's played with the same spirit and dedication and wish Kevin and the Team all the very best in the future.

add comment | complain about this comment