Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Question Time

Some questions (Answers below) -

Do you bring back Flintoff, if he's fit, and let him bat at eight with Ambrose at seven?

How many overs a day can you expect Freddie to be able to bowl?

It's a bit tough, but do you drop Ambrose and bring Prior back in to bat at five or six so Freddie can go seven in a five man bowling attack?

Is it time to bring back Harmison to replace Anderson, Sidebottom or Broad?

When do you consider bringing back Simon Jones?

Drop one or both of Bell and Collingwood, thus giving them the same sort of 'kick up the arse' that worked for Strauss, and appears to have worked for Harmy?

Do you do the same with Cook?

Which batsmen do you bring in if you drop Bell and/or Collingwood? Carberry? Key? Denly? Ramprakash?

Can you continue with a four man bowling attack against South Africa?

Is it time to start thinking about Rashid?

And the answers -

MINUTES OF THE ENGLAND SELECTION COMMITTEE

Held at Lords Cricket Ground on Saturday 5th July, 2008

Meeting started at 10.00am

Present - Mr P Moores, Mr G Miller, Mr A Giles, Mr J Whittaker
Apologies for absence - None

1. Selection of team to face South Africa at Lords on July 9th.

Mr P Moores PROPOSED that the side remain the same as for the previous test.

MOTION CARRIED

There being no further business, the meeting closed at 10.01am

5 comments:

harry said...

Strauss
Key
Vaughan
Ramps
KP
Shah
Ambrose
Broad
Sidearse
Jimmy A
Monty.

Fred, Rachid, Prior all invited to nets as part of a 14-man squad.

I cannot, for the life of me, see what danger there is in dropping Cook, Bell & Colly. We can even call it "resting" if we must. Against the Kiwis, they averaged 50-odd between them - completely unacceptable for half our top 6 against a pop gun attack. Time for change.

Simon Jones' fitness is great news, let's have at least 2-3 months out of him before he gets looked at ... and, in fairness, Jimmy & Sidearse are swinging it and bowling well, there's no vacancy for a swing bowler just yet.

Harmison: there is a view that you never say "never".


But not in the case of that big girl's blouse.


There. Can I be a selector please?

Jrod said...

Seems simple enough.

Tybalt said...

I cannot, for the life of me, see what danger there is in dropping Cook, Bell & Colly.

Why would there need to be danger? Why seek danger at every turn? I back Owais Shah as much as anyone, but his Test average is 34, and that's better than either Key or Ramprakash.

Now apparently, Cook Bell and Collingwood are all struggling, right?

Since the end of last summer:

Cook averaged 46, 32 and 29 in the three series... an overall average of 41.9

Collingwood averaged 33, 41 and (ahem) 11 in the three series... an overall average of 36.8

Bell averaged 45, 50 and (ahem) 15... an overall average of 46.3

I'm the last guy to want to make a fetish of averages. But believe me, the frustration that everyone feels at Steve Harmison was tripled if not quadrupled back in my day, directed at Ramps. Why do it to ourselves all over again?

I think the batsmen in the side now are the ones that give England the best chance to win. Is it fair for them to monopolize all of the opportunities? Maybe not, and you can argue for rotating some other batsmen through the side to give them a chance to prove themselves against world-class opposition.

But Key and Ramprakash have been given plenty of opportunities to show what they can do. They have never delivered - do we need to relive this trip again? They're good cricketers, and they deserve a chance, but I don't see the point of playing them ahead of six batsmen who are better than they are.

harry said...

OK, so you're "the last guy to want to make a fetish of averages"

So let's talk about "form".
Those three are on a rotten run. They've all had dreadful seasons so far. So you simply cannot pick them on form.

Or, if you don't want to look at averages or form, what about being "matchwinners"?
Do you seriously believe that any of them are likely to take the Boks by the, err, boloks and turn a match around?

I'm afraid they cannot be picked on any of those criteria.

So, if not "averages", "form" or "being a matchwinner" .... what other criteria have you come up with to install any batsman, never mind half of our batting line-up?

I too am old enough to remember Ramps scratching around, bereft of confidence. That was so long ago. He's a changed man, in many ways. And the batsman that bowlers in England would certainly pick.
Key is an improved batsman, and an excellent cricketer. Would make Vaughan less complacent too. And I'd go for Shah ahead of Bopara, Carberry et al, but he's my third pick, so you can switch him if you like ..... but not for an incumbent thanks.

Definitely time for change.

Tybalt said...

The problem is that Key and Ramprakash are also having rather indifferent seasons. Not as poor as Collingwood, certainly not, but neither is setting the world alight.

If there was an obvious choice who was in a rich run of form in the CC, I'd be more inclined to change things.

Point taken about matchwinning - Key or Ramps are liable to go nuclear anytime (although Key's just as likely to scratch his way to 5 or 9 or something). Collingwood, though, has actually done this at Test level... Nagpur in 2006, Lord's in 2006, the Adelaide test when his contributions really should have won the game, a great innings in Durham last season to win that test, and top scorer in Wellington too... he's also the best fielder in the team.