BBC Home

Explore the BBC

Articles/ all comments

These 77 comments are related to an article called:

England's Bowling

Page 1 of 2

posted Dec 15, 2008

Personally I would like to see Hoggard back for the Ashes. Anyone out there agree with me ???

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

kivo, I wouldn't. He's lost a lot of pace for his swing to be dangerous.

He's now ended up below 80mph.

| complain about this comment

comment by Pete (U1618662)

posted Dec 15, 2008

On the contrary, I thought Hoggy was bowling quite well indeed towards the end of the season and he's done no less wrong than any other contender who might slip into the team.

Mind you, for Hoggy the writing is on the wall, especially if the ECB are going to call up Darren Pattinson ahead of him as they did during the summer.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

uh?

Bowling was excellent in the first innings. India batted out of their skins on the second. So I guess the bowling is woeful ...

can anyone say 'knee-jerk'?

| complain about this comment

comment by hainba (U1432550)

posted Dec 15, 2008

Where do we go now is the main question for the captain & Coach?

Do we give Bell & Panesar one last chance OR give Shah & Rashid a real chance to book a seat to the West Indies.

My money is on the safe option from Moores.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

Anderson and Harmy set the tone for the run chase. 60 runs in 6 overs got india off to a flyer and their work yesterday meant the like of Sachin and yuvraj could paly it easily. Monty got exposed again for being too one dimensional and not trying to buy a wicket with any change of pace or flight. He remains a worry because we have seen this before from him and he just aint learning. Maybe a break for him is the best option so he can go away from the game and seek the right help.

| complain about this comment

comment by mautan (U1734181)

posted Dec 15, 2008

Some days back I read an article on Panesar, with experts like Tufnell and Edmonds saying mildly that he has not improved at all...after seeing the way he bowled in this test match on this horrible, broken track, there is not doubt that the experts were so correct. One needs to add a lot of variety at this level. Saqlain Mustaq, I remember, single handedly defeated India in 1999 with ten wickets on a Chennai wicket much better than the one today. He had Tendulkar mistiming or rather misreading his doosra, same with three other batsman too.The point being that Panesar as a international bowler after this performance is almost done. He still remains the most unatheletic of international cricketers.
Swann was quite good though. Although, the sooner he adds a doosra or a effective floater the better, because on a easier batting track he might be hammered. But he was very good, very consistent.
Adil Rashid should be tried for the second test, England have nothing to lose, Adil can bat too. Panesar is not going to do anything by bowling spinners at an avg speed of 90kms! If not for that rough outside leg, Tendulkar would have feasted on him....Sehwag did even with the rough.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

It's hardly knee jerk in the summer we failed to bowl out SA when they needed a big score in the final innings and drew both games!

Personally i love Monty but the fact is he just doesn't learn! No variation whatsoever! Let Rashid have a go for one test whats the worst that could happen!

I am not a fan of Bell and would prefer to see Shah in at number 3.

Also Moores needs to give Harmy a quick chat and tell him he's gonna be rested for the next game and then get him fresh and raring to go and bounce the Windies out!

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

Strangely enough, one of the worst long term things to come out of this test is that Collingwood has saved his neck from the chopping board by getting his 100. Now people will try to shoot me down because he now has that score, but before that he was in very very poor knick, and I donít doubt he will go back to scratching about for 20 odd runs. He, like bell, scores some runs when one game from the chop, and then does nothing for a while till it happens again. His average in tests and odis has been poor, and was rightly criticised during the one day series. I feel the balance is wrong when he plays and shah would be a far better bet going into an ashes year.

It would not surprise me to see bell score well in one innings of the next game and then for commentators to start saying he is in good form and thus stay in the team.

England need to plan for the ashes and at the mo they are not doing this. Collingwood should not be playing, Anderson needs to be dropped as soon as possible. The lack of good pace bowling back-up has to be a massive worry however and the question is where are the players to come through. KP and moores are picking favourites (look at Stanford series and this tour) and this will not help England get a good long term test team.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

Mr Agnew says;

"To take only four wickets on the final day on a pitch offering the spinners enough assistance to be awkward was simply not good enough"

I actually only thought that England took 3 wickets on the last day or am i wrong??

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

you are right

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008


I think you are being a bit harsh on your bowling strength, though it is probably time for Monty. It does not matter if you can make the ball turn a mile if the batsman knows that the ball is going to turn a mile. Creating doubt is a spinner's biggest strength and unfortunately Monty has been found wanting. He needs to go back to the drawing board and figure it all out.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

I was watching the early part of Sehwag's assault on the England bowlers on Saturday. I was disappointed that England did not seem to make him work very hard for his runs - 2 balls out of every over (particularly from Anderson, Harmison, and Monty) were not on the money, allowing him to go on the attack. Is it that hard for English bowlers to put the ball on the spot 6 out of 6??

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

what happened to Simon Jones??

| complain about this comment

comment by svarada (U4777296)

posted Dec 15, 2008

Monty should stay away from his fellow sardar Bishen Bedi ! A few years ago, Maninder Singh similarly met Bedi and guess what happended.
- Sri (USA)

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

Before further critising England, how about some deserved praise for this brilliantly led, combatative, talented and determined Indian side? Since Dhoni became Captain, he has hardly put a foot wrong, and the team, so often previously fractured under other leaders, have followed him without dissent. As for the so-called delayed declaration, Pietersen was rightly frightened of the potential of the talented batting line up - potential which India once again turned into delivery. As for England, once again I mention 2 matters i have mentioned ad nauseam for nearly 2 years. One, occasional fine performances by individuals (eg Strauss) accompanied by dross from most of the others, is woefully short of what is needed to compete with the top teams. look again at the scorecard of England's second innings - Staruus, Collingwood (about time too) and then dross. I still say the 2005 Ashes is the most falsely overrated series ever. Two, Panesar - and I'm glad others are beginning to agree with me. What a hopeless, fragile competitor and please don't trot out the statistics again. No other top side would even pick him. And this ridiculous "cult" rubbish about him doesn't help for he even thinks/believes he is worth his place. Pity we can't insert some non-selected players for the second test - of the generally motley crew available, only Strauss, Pietersen, Collingwood, and Flintoff are even worthy of consideration and of the rest possibly Ambrose, Broad and Bopara (who is always worth a chance, and if given them, like some more senior payers, would be a solid fixture by now). I hope my views are bludgeoned home by this marvellous Indian side in the second Test, and that at last some fresh talent is considered and picked. The Ashes? Australia by at lest 4-0 from this far off. What a shame, and what a sad and disgraceful reflection upon the English Cricket system AND what poor reward for thousands of loyal, hard cash paying and fervent Supporters.

| complain about this comment

comment by Mike-V (U10767744)

posted Dec 15, 2008

Bit harsh on Colly to say another timely innings. This was his second ton in five innings

| complain about this comment

comment by Richard (U5494855)

posted Dec 15, 2008

The worrying thing for me that came out of England's bowling in the 2nd innings was that Flintoff had no plan B; after sheer effort didn't work, all he did was sledge. He didn't seem to think mixing it up & making the batsmen think might make a difference. Dumb bowling. England's bowlers need to use their heads more. I also think Pietersen should have bowled himself more. He probably turns it more than Swann or Panesar and it would have been worth at least a few overs of him. Harmison and anderson had no more variation to offer than Flintoff and weren't as accurate; would Broad have done better? I doubt it. But even if they'd all bowled better the result would probably have been the same. You can't make a plan for Hurricane Sehwag and by the time Tendulkar and Yuvraj got in it was too late; they knew Dhoni was next in and it would have taken a miracle for them not to win.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

I'm play at pub level and I have more variety than Monty!!!

We have often talked about talent being coached out of bowlers and once again we have a bowler with some talent, joins England and fails to develop.


| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

Get Allan Donald back as bowling coach!

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

It is an English problem. It happens in Rugby and Football. Players are picked on reputation instead of form.

What selectors fail to recognise is that repeated failure destroys a player. Monty does not vary pace and length enough. Tell him that, send him back to county cricket and then when he has got it right have him back. Instead he is put into a position in which he cannot risk experimenting and fails some more. Not very clever.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

The problem is england do NOT have a top notch pace bowler. Look at the great teams from the last decade or two, and they have all had brilliant fast bowlers - Ambrose, Walsh, Donald, Pollock,McGrath, Akram,Younis etc....... England have not got a good enough opening attack, which you HAVE to have in order to beat the top teams. Gough and Caddick were alright but still not in that league. Ashes 2005 was built on a heroic a bowling display by Flintoff, backed up by unsung hero Simon Jones. Can't rely on freddie, his ankel is an injury waiting to happen.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

Come off it Aggers! England were on a hiding to nothing. Because of the Mumbai attrocity there was doubt the England players were in the right frame of mind despite the promised security. They had no competetive preparation for a test match. Those not in the one day side, for example Monty, played no competetive cricket at all since the summer. They were up against a top Indian side who had just whitewashed the England one day team and beaten the mighty Aussies. Who would have blamed England if they had decided discretion was the better part of valour and stayed at home? And yet, despite all of this, they competed with India until the final day. Let us praise this superb Indian side who, I'm sure, will soon be the number one team in the world. Another criticism I have of your cheap shots is this. Fair enough to give Monty stick, but surely the England coaches should be working with him to improve aspects of his game like variety and pace? I assume we have a spin bowling coach? If not we bloody should have, especially when we have known for ages we were going to play on the sub continent. It's too easy for you to sit in the commentary box and give us all this negative stuff. Try being constructive for a change.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

svarada can u tell us what happened between Bedi and Maninder,the last i heard was that Maninder was caught with hard drugs in his possesion,was that a Bedi's fault.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

dudepod45 (U11605219)

My understanding is that Mushtaq Ahmed is the one Moores wants as spin coach but problems with a passport have meant he was'nt able to travel (BCCI interference due to his IPL involvement have been mooted as the cause). David Parsons has kept this role on until his appointment. With Kevin Shine and Ottis Gibson as pace bowling coaches, i dont know how much knowledge of sub continent cricket they have, it appears it is the blind leading the blind at the top of English cricket and this is not good enough.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

Actually England have been completely outclassed.

No amount of spin or pace or what have you would have mattered against the form of the Indian batsmen.

Sehwag being Sehwag, just makes any bowler look less than average!

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

comment by billionplus (U9084264)
posted 33 Minutes Ago

Actually England have been completely outclassed.
-----------------------------------------
for 3 and half days it was very even, Sehwag took advantage of some distinctly average bowling and put you in pole position, and the little master finished it off.........on another day it could have been an England victory.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

Agree with the comment about picking on reputation and not form. It seems harder to get dropped than selected.

When has Bell contributed a decent score when the pressure is on against a half decent team?

And let's stop pretending that Freddie is a Test middle order batsman. Whenever there's a collapse, you know he is not going to bail us out. Accept he is a no. 8 at best for Test cricket and let him do what he does best - bowl with fire and field well.

The bowling seems to be going backwards - at least that has been reasonably consistent - as have the batting collapses. Give some young guys who really want to play a run and ditch the persistent failers until/unless they get back into form

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

The problem with the bowling today was no pressure was being created. The captain was setting fields for poor bowling, allowing Tendulker and Yuraj the opportunity to take singles at will. There seemed a lack of conviction in our bowling, and also a lack of variety. Monty has had his chance, if he cannot take wickets on a pitch that is turning and offering bounce to spinners, he must be replaced. Swann bowled well on debut, as always Freddie gave his all, but again lacked variety. We were spoilt with the class of 2005, what we have now is pretty average at best.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

Think at the back of his mind, Peterson was just happy to have contested, and also to have dominated the game for good enough time.

Didnt try hard enough for the win. Typical mentality of loser teams - something which India is trying to break free from for some years.

Still appreciate their gumption to have come to India. I wish for cricket's sake, they win the next one (and get couple of marginal decisions go their way).

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

"comment by Lutherisalegend (U6968114)
posted 24 Minutes Ago

Agree with the comment about picking on reputation and not form. It seems harder to get dropped than selected.

When has Bell contributed a decent score when the pressure is on against a half decent team?"

How about his 115 coming in at 39/2 against Pakistan at Faisalabad in 2005.Or his 92 coming in at 30/2 in the 2nd innings at Lahore in the same series?
Or his 97, coming in at 132/4 against the WIndies at Old Trafford 2007. Or his 87 coming in at 0/1 in the second innings against Australia at Perth, 2006. Or his 2 50's in the draw with India at the Oval last year?


| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

Why do we pick the same group of players that cannot do the job. Refresh the England team by picking in form players or else we will get beat by the Aussies 5-0 on are home turf.

Other teams basically know how we train and how we play because we pick the same players whether we win, lose or get battered.

The team has changed much since the Ashes in 2005. Most of those players still cannot play well enough for the England team.

Sack the boardroom of the selection committee (SP) and bring in an England manager for cricket.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

India winning is not such a bitter pill to swallow when you look at how tremendously well they played in that fourth innings.

However, you can't help but feel that it's yet another case of "Only England", given that they seem to have a habit of either 1) losing badly or 2) getting into a great position and screwing it up big style.

I think it all boils down to the fact that India have the type of players England are sorely missing, especially a flamboyant hitter like Sehwag at the top of the order. Let's face it, could anyone see England initiating a lofty run chase which such a brutal statement of intent? I agree with Aggers when he says Shah should replace Bell - I doubt he'll ever be as good as Sehwag, but he could fill a gap England have been crying out for.

Time to be bold, not cautious. Obviously Test cricket isn't all about Afridi-style pinch-hitting, but England are far too cautious even on good batting pitches (remember Hamilton earlier this year?). Strauss, Cook and Bell are all quality batsmen but surely they can't all play together.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

The only changes I would make for the next test are Shah for Bell and possibly a seamer for Panesar if conditions dictate a fourth seamer.

Its high time Shah got a run in the side, persisting with the infuriating Bell does nothing for the England side or for the players doing their utmost to get into it. He lacks the required mental strength to go with his undeniable technical skills.

On the bowling side we have to accept that our bowlers seem to struggle away from home. Panesar and Swann are never going to rip through this indian team, the conditions don't favour Harmy and Freddie no matter how hard they try and Anderson, well he's only ever any good in one innings of 1 series and I fear a 2 test series is not enough time for him to put in a performance. Our attack in English conditions is actually very good, I'd back them to take 20 wickets at most grounds but away from home in conditions that don't suit we struggle.

This team has become used to carrying players, last summer it was Vaughan/Colly/Bell + keeper this winter its Bell/Anderson/Panesar. The fact is no team in the world is good enough to carry 3 players, so it should come as no suprise that we have lost to the best side in the world currently. The first few days got our hopes up for sure but to beat the indians you need all 11 players at the top of their games. That hasn't happened since 2005 and even then we carried Bell (again)

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

Bad as the bowling was is Stuart Broad the answer? He's worse than both Harmison and Anderson, although he can hold a bat.

Hoggard was discarded far too easily, one minute he has Sri Lanka 42-5, then one poor game in NZ and he is dumped. Very harsh, esp considering the amount of chances Bell, Collingwood and Vaughan get/got.

We missed a great opportunity to win here but one (scant) consolation - it's not as horrible as Adelaide in 06.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

Agree completely about Hoggard. The guy has one bad test in several years and is dropped at the same time as Harmison, and yet Harmison is back, and back to his fickle best! The selectors need to swallow their pride and get Hoggard back, Hoggard, Flintoff, Sidebottom (when fit), that leaves spaces for 1 more seamer and a spinner, Panasar has been poor recently, but I don't think we have any spinners who are better. As for the final Seamer spot, if fit I'd have Jones, based on the fact I doubt he'll be fit ever again I'd give Bopora a go for 4/5 tests to see how he does!

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

Swann is a better batsman than Panesar.
Swann is a better fielder than Panesar.

And now, he's bowling better than him.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

If every time a team lost it was because the selectors got it wrong it would make life a lot easier but unfortunately they picked the strongest team we had available. Granted Shah was unlucky again to miss out, but in reality he would have come in for Collingwood if picked and Colly knocked another 100! If fit Sidebottom and Broad would both have been in contention but are they really that much better than Andersen and Harmison? The fact is India are a better cricket team than England, in all formats of the game. Credit to England for bossing the first 10 sessions but unfortunately it wasn't enough. Great credit to India for their fight back, perhaps soon they will be chasing down Australia for that number 1 spot in the rankings.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

I'm upset we lost.
The plus side is that this game can only have made test cricket stronger and in India, the financial heartland of cricket currently and devourer of the 20/20 'revolution', a great exhibition of Test cricket was on display.
The fact that India won can only have made people appreciate test cricket more and hopefully this will encourage their board to play more than a two game series next time around. Frankly India vs England being only two tests is ridiculous and slightly worrying. A minimum of three should be played.
With regards to England and their 4th innings bowling I think it is clear that a shake up of personnell is in order. I'm afraid Monty needs to make way at least temporarily. I would use Flintoff, Swann, Hoggard (why not?), Broad and either Rashid or Harmison.
It's a worrying trend that even with big third innings scores there seems to be such doubt from the supporters and the players themselves, that we are able to take 10 wickets. Our winning habit has deserted us. We should be winning any game against anyone with a lead of over 350.
Anyway- a great match it's a shame that there are not more than 2 tests so we can have a chance to win the series as opposed to just drawing it.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 15, 2008

England should never have declared on a gainable total. With india playing so well on the one day games,it doesn't take a maths teacher to point out that they could reach this total playing with the mindset they have when playing on the last day.

India played to win, but England opened the door for them to gain victory. You have to make two choices. Play to win or draw or play to loose. Unfortunately the captain made the wrong choice!

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 16, 2008

Its the central contract system that is wrong.
If you have 15 to 20 top class players then fine but we don't by a country mile.Thats why we continually select the same under achieving players.We need to get back to a system whereby we pick the players in form.
This defeat will shatter the moral of this poor squad of players.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 16, 2008

Test bowling is an art as Monty is finding out. Once your novelty wears off, you have to learn new tricks. Look at the likes of Gough, he toured India and came back with slower balls, reverse swing etc. You have to pick class bowlers and see if they can learn and adapt. We also need speed with reverse swing.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 16, 2008

The BBC website has an aricle headlined "Test fiasco inquiry to lay blame" which I thought would be about our bowling.

Actually it's about school SATs.

On point, I agree that India are the best test team but our bowling seems to have been pretty ineffectual.

I was never a great Panesar fan and agree he's not come on as was hoped; he's currently a liability and needs to learn to bowl slower and with more guile. Raschid should be a full squad member for the next series and be given a couple of tests to show what he can do. And while I like Jimmy Anderson, who seems an all round good bloke and is a good fielder, he's clearly not a test strike bowler except in very favourable swing conditions. The problem is that neither Broad or Hoggard are better.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 16, 2008

i don think there should be panic in england team,they played well,infact more than anyone expected,but they r outplayed my indian team who r in peak form now,

coming to monty,we must consider these points 1)indians r best players of spin,2)even bajji was not that effective

i think england should bring in shaw in place of bell and he should be batting at 3.cook,strauss and bell r all same gear players.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 16, 2008

"And while I like Jimmy Anderson, who seems an all round good bloke and is a good fielder, he's clearly not a test strike bowler except in very favourable swing conditions. The problem is that neither Broad or Hoggard are better."

At least if it isn't swinging Hoggy can be relied on for consistent line and length.

That reminds me, I think this is my first post since the defeat. Well... obviously I'm frustrated about it. We should have won that. Depressing, really, after all of Strauss' hard work.

| complain about this comment

comment by dbs105 (U13746354)

posted Dec 16, 2008

I have to agree with Wolves83, Harmison and Anderson gave India the kick-start they needed all be it by some tremendous hitting by Sehwag - but just look at how Anderson got him out in the first innings, more of that line was needed. I think Harmison just doesn't have the aggression and mental strength needed when things don't quite go his way - Stuart Broad in my opinion is an ever improving bowler and his pace was up in the early nineties in the ODIs in India and he has the temperemant and aggression of Freddie and loves a battle. Just look at how he has responded from Singh's 6-sixes. We need this attitude when our backs are against the wall like Monday. I think if we could get a fit and in-form Simon Jones we would improve greatly, as for me Anderson doesn't seem to come to the party enough especially when the ball's not swinging around all over the place. England as a team seem to have stalled a little with the likes of Anderson, Bell and now even Panesar. The players need to be shown that regular under-performing will cost them their place in the team.

| complain about this comment

comment by dbs105 (U13746354)

posted Dec 16, 2008

I have to agree with Wolves83, Harmison and Anderson gave India the kick-start they needed all be it by some tremendous hitting by Sehwag - but just look at how Anderson got him out in the first innings, more of that line was needed. I think Harmison just doesn't have the aggression and mental strength needed when things don't quite go his way - Stuart Broad in my opinion is an ever improving bowler and his pace was up in the early nineties in the ODIs in India and he has the temperemant and aggression of Freddie and loves a battle. Just look at how he has responded from Singh's 6-sixes. We need this attitude when our backs are against the wall like Monday. I think if we could get a fit and in-form Simon Jones we would improve greatly, as for me Anderson doesn't seem to come to the party enough especially when the ball's not swinging around all over the place. England as a team seem to have stalled a little with the likes of Anderson, Bell and now even Panesar. The players need to be shown that regular under-performing will cost them their place in the team.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 16, 2008

Batsmen like Yuvraj Singh sometimes play an innings for the team. Against their instincts.
In this test example, with lots of support from Tendulkar to keep him 'in the zone'.
But they are in the team because of those natural skills.
Monty, I feel is given a field and asked to bowl to it.
Not once, when he needs to be in the zone, but each game.

'Leg stump young man'.

Stifling any variation he has. Also removing the chance to experiment in the middle and increasing variation.

May not be a skill problem, but more a team dynamic or confidence issue?

Day 5 is Monty's day.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 16, 2008

"At least if it isn't swinging Hoggy can be relied on for consistent line and length."

Wickets win matches, and I suspect Hoggy is no longer threatening at Test level. Anderson has also improved his accuracy recently - best economy rate in the first innings, although he was given some hammer as were the others apart from Flintoff in the second.

It's just that none of the 5 choices (Harmison, Anderson, Broad, Hoggard, Sidebottom) look like taking 4 or 5 wickets in an innings with any regularity.

| complain about this comment

posted Dec 16, 2008

I don't think it's all doom and gloom.

England had outperformed an in-from India up until the later half of day 4.

What can you do against a destructive batsmen like Sehwag who effectively set up the win by taking advantage of our poor batting at the end of our second innings?

Agree, on a day 5 pitch, it should have been down to our "premier" spinner to gag the Indian batsmen and as metioned by seemingly everyone Monty just isn't up to it!

| complain about this comment

Page 1 of 2

HINTS & TIPS

Deleting comments

You are in charge of your own space - if you see an offensive comment, you can delete it

Reasonable debate is allowed - please don't delete a comment just because you don't agree with it

If you are not sure, or feel a comment warrants further attention, you can refer it to a moderator instead