Who is for the chop?

[Goughy]

Facts dont tell the whole story. Yes his FC record may not be the greatest, but not all players who have had fantastic FC records have gotten picked immediately. Look at Panesar, Johnson for recent examples both were picked based on potential not fantastic FC stats and gradually the have shown they are capable of doing well on the international stage

Fair point, but Mahmood does have wicket-taking ability. Bowlers of his ilk who are bowl very quickly aren't the most accurate or economical, they make up for it throught their ability to take wickets i.e Akhtar vs England 2005. Yes Mahmood hasn't shown tremedous wicket-taking ability to date in his international career, but like Harmison who is a very similar type bowler to him, Mahmood just needs one major series to sringboard him into the right direction & he'll be fine IMO.

I ain't no expert on bowling actions, but i've seen worst than Mahmood, i.e Malinga, Tait, Edwards, Mohanty, Wickramesinghe to name a few off my head, Mahmood action looks fairly simple to me. He does deserve a place in the side because he is one of the best fast bowlers in the country even if his figures on the international stage don't justify his place in the side ATM. Just give him time..

Firstly how you can compare the pace of Akhtar and Saj is mindboggling. Saj can hit mid 140s. Good pace but not going to scare too many people.

Harmison and Saj are very different bowlers. Harmison hits the deck at lot harder and they bowl completely different lengths

You seem to ignore the fact that there isnt anything to back up Saj as being any good. The only evidence you seem to give is that others have not had stellar records or actions have done ok. Well that means nothing. There are plenty of bad bowlers who are exactly that. People fall in love with what Saj supposedly offers without realising that that is not what is important. Its about production and potential to produce and he doesnt have it in him and there is nothing to suggest he does.

The final statement is funny. How is he one of the best fast bowlers in the country? What has he ever done to deserve such recognition? It makes me wonder what people think the important aspects of being a successful bowler are.

 

[aussie]

After this shambolic Ashes tour, changes are inevitable. So who should get the chop from the Ashes tour party? A few ideas:
1. Giles. A no-brainer surely. Thank you and goodbye Ashley.

Really why is everone so hurry to give Gilo the axe?, yea he isn't going to be the first choice spinner now. But he can still be a very useful back-up option esepcially next winter when England go to SRI & we all know how good a bowler Gilo has been in the sub-continent over the years. But don't know if he'll be picked again though..

4.Plunkett: Why was he picked in the first place?.

Agreed he shouldn't have been picked, but he has some potential, he's very young, time at Durham will do very good. Could come back one day enhanced thus giving England a envious depth in quality fast bowling stocks in the coming years.

5.Joyce: The Theo Walcott of the Ashes? Why did Fletcher not give him a chance instead of Mahmood? Had he no faith in him?

Maybe he should have gotten a game, but that doesn't mean he should be axed.

6.Mahmood: If SJ and Tremlett get fit....

May be a bit off the mark ATM in his career, but his potential is there for everyone to see, just need to keep working with him

7.Anderson: ditto.

ha, Can't have that

8.Fletcher as coach : He's done a great job, but he's past his sell-by date. Moody or Woolmer please.

One bad series doesn't make him a bad coach, he's made some stupid decisions in the ashes that he'll regret but i don't think its fair to blame him for us losing the Ashes. I don't think think if he had picked Monty ahead of Giles, picked Read ahead of Jones, Strauss over Freddie as skipper of Broad/Tremlett over Plunkett the Ashes would not be lost. Australia should be given some credit for how well they played.

But Fletcher will be under-pressure in the VB series & WC to do something good. But for me i hope they give him a chance to go on since i think he's the best coach to help England reach the aim of being the best side in the World.

 

[aussie]

Firstly how you can compare the pace of Akhtar and Saj is mindboggling. Saj can hit mid 140s. Good pace but not going to scare too many people.

Fair enough bad example..

Harmison and Saj are very different bowlers. Harmison hits the deck at lot harder and they bowl completely different lengths.

Can't see how different they are. Both are tall, like to bowl back-of a lenght, both bowl full very sparingly, both rely on extra bounce. Only difference is that Mahmood has some ability to reverse swing it, Harmison can't.

People fall in love with what Saj supposedly offers without realising that that is not what is important. Its about production and potential to produce and he doesnt have it in him and there is nothing to suggest he does.

This piece is where your wrong IMO. Its not like Mahmood hasn't done anything good for England that you can say that ``People fall in love with what Saj supposedly offers``, the 4 for 22 he took vs Pakistan @ Leeds was a pretty solid spell, his opening burst vs AUS in the CT was a top new ball spell as well, his 4 for @ MCG wasn't too bad either all showing that he has the tools to cut it at this level just needs to put it together. 4 years ago people were saying the same things about Harmison look how well he has come on (baring one or two hiccups since then.

The final statement is funny. How is he one of the best fast bowlers in the country? What has he ever done to deserve such recognition? It makes me wonder what people think the important aspects of being a successful bowler are.

Talk to county bastmen not only in England but on recent A tours he went on i'm very sure they'll tell you he's one of the better bowlers they have faced in recent years/

 

[Goughy]

My final thoughts on the matter.

We have a technical term, in cricketing circles, for a player that is erratic, expensive, struggles to bowl to a plan and struggles to take wickets. Its called a 'bad bowler'

 

[steds]

We have a technical term, in cricketing circles, for a player that is erratic, expensive, struggles to bowl to a plan and struggles to take wickets. Its called a 'bad bowler'

 

[Barney Rubble]

My final thoughts on the matter.

We have a technical term, in cricketing circles, for a player that is erratic, expensive, struggles to bowl to a plan and struggles to take wickets. Its called a 'bad bowler'

 

[PhoenixFire]

You can't drop Mahmood, Plunkett or Anderson. One bad series doesn't make Anderson a bad bowler overnight, Mahmood has potential, and Plunkett is too young to be written off just yet.

 

[The Baconator]

I'd like to see them in County Cricket for this season to make sure they get plenty of overs under their belt before we even think about picking them again.

 

[superkingdave]

Mahmood wouldn't get into my first choice Lancashire side (excluding Flintoff), and it was only the 2005 season where he was regularly left out. If Jimmy hadn't been injured all last year he mightnt have got in the side then.

 

[Bob Bamber]

Mahmood - needs a year of bowling for Lancs. And he needs to get some good overs under his belt.
Giles - Just needs to retire really. Internationally anyway. He doesn't offer enough will the ball to justify selection.
Plunkett - Nothing against him. But he sort of lost out in the pecking order when he wasn't picked for the 1st/3rd test. I wonder why he didn't play because appererntly he can bat.
Read - This is the end I believe. Nothing against the man , but he needed a performance and although he was under immense pressure. He didn't perform. Hes going to have to score big , and improve his confidence really.
Trescothick - Cook and Strauss don't need disrupting at the top. It would be a bad move if he comes back.
Vaughan - As much as he offers as captain. I believe that Strauss would be a better option. Vaughany just doesn't offer enough with the bat.
Nixon - He'll get 2 ODI series. Unless he hits about 7-8 hundreds then I doubt he'll be considered again .
Fletcher - England need a new impotess. Fletcher is a little to defensive for my liking. We need someone with ruthlessness (Not with selection mind you).And someone who can improve the ODI team.
Flintoff - Get the captaincy of him. Strauss needs it. Flintoff needs (PROPER) time to re-cooperate on his ankle. If that means missing half of the summer (again) then so be it. And he needs to take a break from ODI cricket. As much as it effects the side it doesn't help his Ankle.

So the team for me next year -

1) Strauss (Captain)
2) Cook
3) Bell
4) Pietersen
5) Collingwood
6) Pothas
7) Flintoff (Or extra batsman if he isn't fit).
8) Panesar (He will be a number 8 in the future , why not now)
9) Harmison
10) Jones / Tremlett ( If Jones isn't fit move Tremlett to 8)
11) Hoggard

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

You can't drop Mahmood, Plunkett or Anderson. One bad series doesn't make Anderson a bad bowler overnight, Mahmood has potential, and Plunkett is too young to be written off just yet.

Since when do bowlers with potential learn to bowl at international level? Or rather, since when is that a good idea?

 

[Stumped]

thats alot to give the chop, agree with some but not others

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Plunkett - Nothing against him. But he sort of lost out in the pecking order when he wasn't picked for the 1st/3rd test. I wonder why he didn't play because appererntly he can bat.

Because apparently Mahmood can bat too.

Trescothick - Cook and Strauss don't need disrupting at the top. It would be a bad move if he comes back.

Not sure that the Strauss-Cook partnership has been successful enough to call settled or anything close to it. I wouldn't mind seeing Cook at 3 again. But I also wouldn't want Trescothick in the team again until he scores big in County cricket.

Vaughan - As much as he offers as captain. I believe that Strauss would be a better option. Vaughany just doesn't offer enough with the bat.

Vaughan is such a good captain that I'd keep him as long as he's guiding England well. I'm not sold on Strauss as captain, and as far as I'm concerned, you don't make someone captain by default. A captain shouldn't be there simply because "he's in the team anyway."

Nixon - He'll get 2 ODI series. Unless he hits about 7-8 hundreds then I doubt he'll be considered again .

Solid wicketkeeping and a high20s average would be enough to get him through the World Cup IMO.

So the team for me next year -

1) Strauss (Captain)
2) Cook
3) Bell
4) Pietersen
5) Collingwood
6) Pothas
7) Flintoff (Or extra batsman if he isn't fit).
8) Panesar (He will be a number 8 in the future , why not now)
9) Harmison
10) Jones / Tremlett ( If Jones isn't fit move Tremlett to 8)
11) Hoggard

Panesar at 8? Extremely scary. Especially with an untried wicketkeeper-batsman at number 6. Hoggard > Harmison and Panesar. Tremlett is definitely the best batsman of the 5 listed there and Jones actually has some good potential.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Perhaps, but remember they picked SJ and Tremlett ahead of him when they were fit, so by logic if those two ever recover they should be ahead of him.

Tremlett's been fit since April (with a short spell off in May) and no one's bothered to pick him.

Scandalous.

My XI:

*Strauss - does well on occasion
Cook - grit
Bell - has the technique, made some tough runs this tour
Joyce - hugely talented, has done nothing wrong so far
KP - only batsman in England who can end with a 50+ average
Collingwood - sticks in, does a job (mind, so does Key...)
+Davies - Plunkett, Cook and Mahmood have been picked on showing less (though I suppose it's +Nixon for the moment...)
Flintoff - can bat with more freedom at eight, needs to be relieved of responsibility
Tremlett - bowls quick, with bounce
Hoggard - only bowler to emerge with credit from the Ashes
Panesar - removes the need for the fifth bowler, since he's capable of bowling long spells

Not much genuine bowling threat, admittedly, but neither is an attack of Fred/Jimmy/Peaceo/Monty/Saj at present.

 

[superkingdave]

Tremlett's been fit since April (with a short spell off in May) and no one's bothered to pick him.

Scandalous.

My XI:

*Strauss - does well on occasion
Cook - grit
Bell - has the technique, made some tough runs this tour
Joyce - hugely talented, has done nothing wrong so far
KP - only batsman in England who can end with a 50+ average
Collingwood - sticks in, does a job (mind, so does Key...)
+Davies - Plunkett, Cook and Mahmood have been picked on showing less (though I suppose it's +Nixon for the moment...)
Flintoff - can bat with more freedom at eight, needs to be relieved of responsibility
Tremlett - bowls quick, with bounce
Hoggard - only bowler to emerge with credit from the Ashes
Panesar - removes the need for the fifth bowler, since he's capable of bowling long spells

Not much genuine bowling threat, admittedly, but neither is an attack of Fred/Jimmy/Peaceo/Monty/Saj at present.

I'm afraid it might be abscene makes the heart grow fonder with Tremlett, don't think he's any more accurate or threatening than Anderson/Mahmood and is slower than both. Nixon isn't anywhere near in the frame for the test side, he's just a one day stop gap.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

I'm afraid it might be abscene makes the heart grow fonder with Tremlett, don't think he's any more accurate or threatening than Anderson/Mahmood and is slower than both.

Possibly. Did well when given the go tho. And he was twelfth man ahead of all of these in 2005 (though Jimmy was injured then?).

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I'm afraid it might be abscene makes the heart grow fonder with Tremlett, don't think he's any more accurate or threatening than Anderson/Mahmood and is slower than both. Nixon isn't anywhere near in the frame for the test side, he's just a one day stop gap.

Tremlett is definitely a better bowler than Mahmood in what I've seen of both of them. He's a more developed bowler. And I don't just mean height-wise.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Yeah I think Tremlett would be a much better option than Mahmood, and from what I've seen of him he seems much more accurate. Quite limited exposure to him though, so I might have just seen some good spells.

The reason people think Mahmood has potential is because he's fairly quick and moves the ball quite a lot through the air, and both ways, both conventional and reverse. As soon as people see a bowler with good pace who swings it, the automatic assumption is that he could be very good. Obviously Mahmood isn't very good, as you can see from his record, so he's given the "potential" label. People from outside of Australia might not have seen this, but Mahmood was talked up hugely here as a major threat for the Ashes, before the series began. In the Champions Trophy he took a couple of wickets against us, including bowling Gilchrist through the gate, and was thereafter talked up by Australian pundits and former players in the papers and on shows like Inside Cricket and so on. Obviously Harmison and Flintoff got attention too, but Panesar and Mahmood were considered England's big trump cards and surprise matchwinners right up until the PM's XI game.

I do think that Mahmood could be a good bowler if he managed to be consistent. He's certainly capable of bowling wicket taking deliveries, and that's part of the package, but I don't think it's likely that he'll ever be accurate enough, and he's never going to be anything special the way he is bowling at the moment. England would be better off picking someone different for now.

It's too bad as well, I really like watching him bowl.

 

[Craig]

When I first saw Saj Mahmood, I thought this guy looks like cannon fodder, he hasn't done much to prove it. Haven't seen a great deal of Liam Plunkett to comment a great deal.

Listening to Ian Chappell and reckons James Anderson has the talent to be a very good bowler, and he needs to do just that, just bowl, bowl, bowl, and bowl in matches (not the nets) and he can improve a lot and increase his confidence. He also questioned whether or not England really need Steve Harmison in the team, and if he isn't going to take the new ball, what does he offer to the team?

Geriant Jones and Chris Read are the two English wicket keepers I have seen play in the last few years (aside from James Foster and when Marcus Trescothick had a spell as a 'keeper in ODIs), and Read looks a superior gloveman but he and Jones look pretty equal with the bat.

 

[Craig]

Tremlett's been fit since April (with a short spell off in May) and no one's bothered to pick him.

Scandalous.

My XI:

*Strauss - does well on occasion
Cook - grit
Bell - has the technique, made some tough runs this tour
Joyce - hugely talented, has done nothing wrong so far
KP - only batsman in England who can end with a 50+ average
Collingwood - sticks in, does a job (mind, so does Key...)
+Davies - Plunkett, Cook and Mahmood have been picked on showing less (though I suppose it's +Nixon for the moment...)
Flintoff - can bat with more freedom at eight, needs to be relieved of responsibility
Tremlett - bowls quick, with bounce
Hoggard - only bowler to emerge with credit from the Ashes
Panesar - removes the need for the fifth bowler, since he's capable of bowling long spells

Not much genuine bowling threat, admittedly, but neither is an attack of Fred/Jimmy/Peaceo/Monty/Saj at present.

Now I'm only simple with a limited knowledge of the game, but if Vaughan if fit and in form, would he be in the place of Joyce and be captain as well?