Two things to get off my chest...
1. Ravi Bopara is NOT a test cricketer. He may become one eventually, but at the present time - 22nd December 2007, he is not of sufficient quality to justify his place in the England side. Neither his batting or bowling are up to test standard - so why on earth did Moores persist in picking him ahead of Shah, especially when you have other batsmen in the side (Collingwood for example) who can bowl the bits and pieces overs equally effectively as Essex-Boy.
England need to accept that we haven't got an all-rounder to replace Freddie, stop trying to pretend that we have and balance the side accordingly.
When Bopara was batting and bowling I was reminded of Ian Greig - and that's not a compliment.
2. Everyone has fallen bigtime for the Monty Panesar schtik now, so it might seem a bit churlish to start slagging the guy off - but should our 'hearts really be in our mouths' (Copyright - every Sky commentator) every time a catch goes in his direction?
Yes, his primary skill is his bowling, so he can be forgiven for a certain level of incompetence with the bat - but fielding is something that you can improve with regular practice. it was all smiles when he held the skyer, but in the field he still comes across like Bambi on ice.
Duncan Fletcher made the point in his recent book - what were Northants playing at in letting him reach the England squad without being able to field?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
If a county wants to play a slow left-armer who can't field, that's their business. Indeed, time was when it was all but compulsory.
If England choose to pick him, that's hardly the county's fault.
But these days, when they are effectively kept financially afloat by the ECB hand-out, don't counties have a responsibility to produce cricketers ready for the test squad with a decent skill set?
England had to teach Panesar to field when the time might have been better spent talking bowling tactics.
That can't be right.
Bopara reminds me of Derek Crookes.
Post a Comment