BBC Home

Explore the BBC

Articles/ all comments

These 54 comments are related to an article called:

Cook hints: 6 batsmen, 2 spinners 2 seamers

Page 1 of 2

posted Mar 11, 2010

Perhaps Broad isn't one of his seamers !

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

If Broad is declared fit he will certainly play. That was clear by the way Cook talked about him in this interview.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

OK
6 batsmen
2 seamers
2 spinners
Don't you need the eleventh guy?
You guys must be having an awfully strong team to manage that. :)

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Carberry to open then?
Looks like we were wrong hope.
I would doubt Broad will play if only two seamers are being used. If he breaks down the that leaves us with only one. <yikes>

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Its ihe right kind of balance under the circumstances. Its difficult for Cook to go in with only 5 batsmen when the out of form KP has to be included and a new cap in Carberry at the same time. Dropping a seamer may not hurt too much.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

The 11th guy is the WK, obviously.

| complain about this comment

comment by ark_28 (U2205532)

posted Mar 11, 2010

this is not a positive play from Cook, out in the terrain of Desh, you guy need to think outside the box and hit them with some firepower.
3 fast pithcers would have sealed the deal then you could have had 1 dude throwing slow curve balls.
Bresnan Broad, and Shahzhad can bring the heat and break the game open for you guys, but having 2 guys in the team throwing down slow curve balls, if going to allos the Desh batters to go on the offense and they are capable of hitting it out of the ball park, you guys will then have to play some good D, it won't be pretty.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

If you look up recent tests for Bangladesh, its seam bowling that has been more successful against them.
Four bowlers of which 2 are spinners is a complete break with England's tradition.
I fear that off-spin from each end will be a gift to the opposition batsmen. I hope I'm wrong.
This of course is only hinted at by Cook, the definite team might look quite different.

| complain about this comment

comment by ashl21 (U13848281)

posted Mar 11, 2010

cook
carberry
trott
pietersen
collingwood
bell
prior
broad
swann
tredwell
finn

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Playing for a draw in the first test and hope the injury situation improves for the second, maybe the plan.

Taking two openers and only playing one was always a bit suspect, so I am not that unhappy about Carberry playing.

| complain about this comment

comment by ark_28 (U2205532)

posted Mar 11, 2010

hopeforthebest
is bang on, I have said all along you guys on paper should own Desh, but you need to bring the heat.
Guys like Bresnan, and Broad have some serious pop in their pitching arm and that will force Bangladesh to play D while you guys an take control!
If you play 2 pitchers who throw in slow curve balls like Swann and Treadwell it is going to allow Desh a chance to change the pace of the game and go ont he offence in that part of the world they are pretty good at handling the slow pitchers. if you want to bring home the W you need to bring the heat.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

For Cook captaining his first test a draw would be the same as a defeat.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

I agree with ark.
Deffo need some heat :-)

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

6/4 was the preferred option in SA against much stronger opposition and a series draw was a great result.

Of course conditions are different in Bangladesh and we have front line bowlers out - however this is a chance for others to step up and for the more experienced players to help them.

I hope Carberry plays and we play 6 with Trott at 3 and Bell at 6 - at least that's some continuity.

We have enough back up bowling in Collingwood, Pietersen and Trott if we play 4 bowlers.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

hopefor thebest

Run that by me again.

A draw is the same as a defeat....how so ?

| complain about this comment

comment by ark_28 (U2205532)

posted Mar 11, 2010

French Fries leader,
Hope for the best is saying that in paper you guys should own Desh and he is right with that in mind a draw against them would be like tasting defeat! you need to being home the W but on their terrain it wont be easy if you guys go out their and start playing D from the get go.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Spin is king in Bangladesh. The batsmen are used to playing it all the time and are good at it. They don't get much practice playing seam bowling. So why go in with two spinners?
In 2003 it was fast bowling that won the two Tests. The first Test by Harmison - where is he now? Is Finn really considered a better bowler???
The second by Johnson a virtual unknown.
Bangladesh would much prefer to play spin. So why are we helping them?
Another Flower misjudgement?
Whether five or four bowlers we need seamers and one spinner.

Meanwhile Flower is still praising Kev for his attacking strokes in his innings of 20. Former coach Fletcher has the opposite advice in the Guardian today. Patience he said. Get yourself in! You heard it hear first because I used that very word in a post about Pietersen but I'm afraid KP is unlikely to read 606 but he is quite good at listening to Fletcher so here's hoping he ignores Flower. Ditto Carberry, Cook, Trott, Collingwood and Bell.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

4 bowlers is a very negative tactic, we wont win many series against te best sides by doing this. If we cant score enough runs with 5 batters against Bangladesh, we need to change the batting line up, not increase it!

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

if we were going to play 2 spinners why on earth has rashid not been taken?

to play swann + tredwell makes no sense, they both bowl exactly the same (apart from swann is 10 times better).

you can get decent overs from kp, colly etc so no 2nd spinner for me.

Id go

1 Cook C
2 Trott
3 Bell
4 KP
5 Colly
6 Prior
7 Wright
8 Bresnan
9 Broad
10 Swann
11 Finn / Plunkett

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Cant believe we will go into the match with only two seamers; its just not Englands style. Can anyone remember the last time we did so? I certainly cant.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

I don't think England have done it since their last visit to Bangladesh. But it isn't that uncommon an approach in Bangladesh.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

If we don't have enough faith in 5 batsmen plus Prior (not forgetting that Broad, Bresnan and Swann are no slouches with the bat) to carry us through, I'll be worried. A tour of Bangladesh is not the place to be conservative because a truly good team shouldn't need to be.

Yes, Onions is missing and he's a big loss, but surely if Broad doesn't play that's even more of a reason to have more bowlers to cover for his loss. I still haven't seen much of Shahzad or Finn and I'd like to see at least one of them given a shot at a test match.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

In 2003 Ashley Giles was our spinner and didn't take many wickets. The wickets mostly fell to fast bowling.

| complain about this comment

comment by hoody7 (U14183144)

posted Mar 11, 2010

Carberry
Cook
Trott
KP
Colly
Bell
Prior
Broad
Plunkett
Swann
Tredwell.

Think that this may be the team... but means colly, kp and bell will be bowling. Makes more sense to play bresnan or wright, or even finn and drop carberry. What about Bell to open?

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Can't remember when Bell last bowled for England.

Are you serious - 53 Tests and 108 balls - average 76??

Colly, Trott, Pietersen will be used first.

Bell's there as a batsman.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

This strategy certainly solves the batting issues i.e. Trott opening etc.

However, i'm apprehensive about it being the right way to go, surely a third seamer is needed, especially when Broad is the senior bowler, talk about an inexperienced attack!

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

From the luxury of the arm-chair I think Mr Krinkle's got it spot on.
Also, its March, why risk Broad's back in this test?
To go in with four bowlers to accomodate KP's dip is crazy.
The fact is Prior / Swann / Tredwell / Shazad / Bresnan can all bat.
This is a perfect opportunity to give the young seamers(shazad and Finn) a taste. And if KP fails in the series then send him back to the counties to whack a few tons off a bit of mid pace pie chucking.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Reggieramjet

Agreed spot on, KP needs to find that form again.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

I think playing just four front-line bowlers including two spinners would be a big mistake. 3 seamers are needed, otherwise our seamers will be quickly be drained by the heat and we will have to play two spinners or Collingwood, which would be far from ideal! Are we really so scared of the Bangladesh bowling attack that we need the insurance of playing an extra batsman? We need 5 bowlers for this test in my opinion. This would be my team:

Cook (c)
Carberry
Trott
Pietersen
Collingwood
Prior (wk)
Bresnan
Broad
Swann
Tredwell
Shahzad (though I suspect Finn will be in the side ahead of him)

One plausible variation if we really wanted that extra batsman would be to play Bell ahead of Tredwell and use Pietersen's bowling, but is this really necessary?

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

I think that we should stop giving Luke Wright free holiday's and give him a chance to prove a spot in the test squad. with Broad not being 100% i think you have to play 5 bowlers just in case anyway and neither swann or broad are currently number 7's at this point in their careers so it would make sense for the all rounder to come in as the 3rd seamer and bat at 7 surely. if they arn't going to play Wright on this tour with no Anderson and the retirement of Flintoff they are never going to play him so should stop picking him in the squad. Give the lad a chance!
Cook,Trott,Bell,Pietersen,Collingwood, Prior, Wright, Broad (Finn if not fit), Bresnan, Swann, Tredwell.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

ZQLE170
Why would you drop our second best batsman from the last SA series - are there not other candidates?

What sort of message is that?

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Fairly arbitrarily. It's a bit harsh as Bell does merit a place in the side, but here's my reasoning:

We need two specialist openers, hence Cook and Carberry. I don't favour the whole play Trott at the top approach.

You could make an argument against Trott being in the side, but I think he deserves a good run in the side considering the promise of many of his performances for England. He's delivered more often than not so far.

Pietersen certainly does not merit a place in the side on current form, but given his ability should be in the team to help him regain form for the future. If he doesn't have a good knock in the series, however, I would think of sending him back to county cricket.

Collingwood could also be argued about, but he's been consistantly good recently.

In conclusion, Bell could come easily into the side for any of these players and could potentially do as good if not a better job. I simply favour the five I have picked at present. Who would you drop for Bell KipperJohn?

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Carberry is regarded by England as such a specialist opener that in SA he was drafted into the test squad as cover for Collingwood.
With the lions recently how often did he open?
The simple fact is that if they play only 5 batsmen, the most experienced must play. Carberry is not one of those.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Trott is the new Katich!

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Like hell he is.Trott has yet to prove himself capable of holding a bat.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Bell will definitely be playing as England put him up to front the media yesterday
when he talked about the players having faith in KP to come good.

I agree with those who say it's risky to play just 4 bowlers when Broad is just coming back from injury. If the workload is too much for him England will be in a mess. If they give him some back up it's likely that Carberry's debut will be deferred and someone else opens with Cook, e.g. Trott possibly. Once again though that would mess about with the batting line up and who knows where KP would bat.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

ZQLE170 .. It's a bit harsh as Bell does merit a place in the side .......

Pietersen certainly does not merit a place in the side on current form, but given his ability should be in the team to help him regain form for the future.
--------------------------------------
Oh, great. Once again Bell is the sacrificial lamb?? Bell has been messed about in many ways, shunted up and down the order; but leaving him out so that KP can get back into form takes the biscuit.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Four bowlers is one thing, two being BOTH off spin bowlers is another.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

ZQLE170

Trott may have "delivered" in a single test at five & two ODIs as an opener, but he didn't "deliver" at three in South Africa.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

If Four bowlers are going to be used, I think it's a better option to go in with three seamers and a spinner. If Tredwell were a different type of bowler to swann then 2 spinners might have been an option to go with. Saying that here would be my team:

Cook
Carberry
Trott
Pietersen
Collingwood
Bell
Prior
Bresnan
Broad (if fit)
Swann
Finn

Reserve for Broad: Shazad

Personally I think that tredwell should play only if england go with 5 bowlers. Carberry would have to make way for him.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Ulidian - who would you play at no. 3 then, because remember Bell has played there a great deal more than Trott for England and has almost never "delivered". Trott deserves another chance. Remember, this was only his second Test series and it was against South Africa, which has added personal pressure for someone like Trott.

Battingwitharunner - I don't really think it's fair either, but Pietersen is the most talented batsman we have and if there is any chance he can find some form then he's worth persevering for now. We can't be afford to be too short-sighted. Do you think we should drop Pietersen?

| complain about this comment

comment by JeffFew (U9446749)

posted Mar 11, 2010

2 seamers is far too much of a risk - spin can only be used in bursts, since as soon as the batsmen start reading the spin your spinners become unusable and you are left with a 2 man attack. The only time you can win anyting with 2 seamers is if you are India playing at home - since India are so adept at playing spin visiting teams need to rely on pace too.

Also pitch reading is an innacturate science - remember that game at Perth where the Aussies were three nil up against India and went in with four express pacemen thinking the pitch didnt spin at all, India turned up with two spinners and destroyed them...

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Don't you need the eleventh guy?
=================

have you never heard of a goal keeper ? <doh>

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

ZQLE170

To be frank, Pietersen, though his form looks pretty rubbish at the moment. I don't see why Trott "deserves another chance". On balance, he deserves a run in the team, but his claims on the number three position look pretty modest to me.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

From the mindset of a selector...

They did not bring Carberry to rest him. He is filling in for the "Jaded" Strauss. Tredwell has bowled himself into the side.

I think this will be the team they select. I think the only area of controversy in the heads of the selector's is to play Finn or Bresnan. As Bresnan bowled more overs in the warm up game I beleive that is an indication they will give him the nod.

1)Cook
2)Carberry
3)Trott
4)Peitersen
5)Collingwood
6)Bell
7)Prior
8)Broad
9)Swann
10)Treadwell
11)Bresnan

12)Finn

If Broad is not fit Finn will come in. England revolve round a six batsman setup now. I think its unlikely they will break it up for Bangladesh, even with freedom to experiment.

ps. Anyone who thinks Luke Wright Should be near the test side at all are fools.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Boooo to that six batsman policy, spoils all the fun.
Good call though, given the choice of not losing and the possibility of losing - in his first test match as Captain! - It could be the former - with that batting line up with Bresnan at 11!
If its a flat one and we can't get them out - I pity the two fools charging in!

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

With all due respect to Bangladesh, do we really need 7 batsmen? And don't think we can go in with just 4 bowlers, as Broad looks like playing and there must still be a question mark about him.
Also, not keen on the idea of moving Trott up to open, as I think he looks a good solid number 3 and think he needs to bed down there for the long term. Would open with either Bell(my choice) or Carberry. Also, Swann, Broad, Tredwell and Bresnan can all bat so think going in with 6 batsman and Prior is a negative move.
My team in batting order:
Bell (or Carberry)
Cook
Trott
Pietersen
Collingwood
Prior
Broad
Swann
Bresnan
Tredwell
Finn

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Ok I know we've 'lost' a couple of our best bowlers, but here we are all getting our knickers twisted about playing Bangladesh.

It's a banana skin anyway - do well and it will be said it's only Bangadesh.

Lose and 606 will drop half the team straightaway! <smiley>

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Kipper - 606 have already dropped half the team, we don't wait for a result.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 11, 2010

Please no Bresnan.

He must be the most innocous seamer to have ever played for England. I would even rather Pattinson than him and he was awful.

| 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