**Official** England in New Zealand

[Steulen]

Think you're mixing-up tourneys in the 2002\03 season. Anderson's game in WC2003 against Australia produced figures of 9-66-0. It was in the preceding VB Series in which he turned-out the remarkable 10-12-1.

Damn tourneys all over the place

 

[Richard]

I wouldn't even put him ahead of Trescothick atm. He's had the flying start, let's see if he can make a career worthy of 14 years of Tests.

I've been 100% convinced after he'd played no more than 2 or 3 Tests that he was almost certain to be better than Trescothick. In fact, TBH I think he already is. More successful on the scorebook? Not yet. But better, yes.

 

[Steulen]

He's definitely a more versatile / adaptive player than Trescothick ever was, but he has been part of the England batting slump of 2007-2008.

As an opener you get the chance to start afresh with no "match situation" to take into account on a regular basis, so he should start leading the way now if he is as good as you think he is.

 

[Richard]

But equally, as an opener you are more likely to get the sort of deliveries that can get you out inspite of doing all you can realistically be expected to do to survive.

Cook, for mine, has done all that I'd expect of him and more so far in his career. If he gets anything from now on, it should be better.

 

[Shoggz]

I've been mulling over the decsion to drop Hoggard and I can only think of one possible reason for it..

With the Basin Reserve seemingly going to have something on offer for the seamers, maybe England's selectors feel that it would be an ideal opportunity to give one of the two younger newcomers a confidence boost? Hoggard is a known quantity and will try his hardest on whatever pitch he rolls up on.. Let's save him for if the conditions are back to sub-continental for the 3rd test.

It's all I can come up with and it's pretty weak I know!

My own feeling is that they've made changes (well in Hoggard's case anyway) as a knee-jerk reaction to try and prove they are doing something to turn things around.

 

[Richard]

I know you've said it's a pretty awful idea if it is what they're considering, but just to re-emphasise, let's also remember this: we're 1-0 down in a series. A series we were expected to win, what's more. Now is possibly the worst time ever to sacrifice one of the best chances of getting the result we desire in order to aim for a confidence-boost for fringe players.

 

[JHutch]

There cannot be any serious suggestion that any of the batsmen should be dropped.

Strauss should not be batting three, and probably should not be playing. But surprise surprise, he is.

So really, no changes can be justified here.

Um, so do you think Strauss should be playing or not? And if he shouldnt then why shouldnt he?

 

[wpdavid]

Umm... Vaughan dropped before Strauss?

Anyway, at risk of making CW sound like a broken record, Hoggard's dropping is pure insanity. Can't remember a worse decision from the England management, regarding Test-matches (have been plenty for ODIs), probably in the entire time I've been watching. Considerably worse than leaving-out MSP for Anderson and Giles last winter, and I hope there's as much of an outcry now as there was then.

I mean, surely there must be more to it than simply two bad Tests (let's not forget he was poor at Galle in his previous outing before this tour), surely? I can only hope. Hoggard has been England's best bowler for pretty much the entirity of the last 2 years now. No-one, no matter how stupid, can possibly make this decision, surely?

I really am struggling to comprehend this. Will there be one single voice of assent? I hope not.

Not from me. I can see that there's doubts as to whether Hoggie will still be a serious force in 18 months time, especially as he already seems not to be what he was, but now is not the time for him to go. Not on what looks like a wicket that is ideally suited to him. Not when the replacement is Anderson, anyway.

Almost as dispiriting were the pieces I read the other day about issues with Broad's action. wtf???? Now we find this out? What on earth goes on at the counties nowadays?

 

[aussie]

I wouldn't even put him ahead of Trescothick atm. He's had the flying start, let's see if he can make a career worthy of 14 years of Tests.

Cook definately looks more solid ATS of career than Trescothick did ATS of his career. They would make the perfect opening combination for England if Tres ever returns though with Tres being the aggressor & Cook to draw anchor.

 

[aussie]

Worst possible scenario for England is that they lose the game and Anderson does well.

1 good performance may pursuade them to keep him in the team long term and that is nothing but bad news.

, Fellas you are cracking me up how the hell could that be bad news. If now such a performance is the confidence boosting one in the test arena that he needs after 4 years where he was non-preffered to other better options & injury plagued?. It really seems as if you guys have forgotten how Anderson's career has gone since his 2002/03 explotion & are bashing him based on nothing at all.

 

[Goughy]

Almost as dispiriting were the pieces I read the other day about issues with Broad's action. wtf???? Now we find this out? What on earth goes on at the counties nowadays?

Id be interested in seeing a link or article as its something Ive believed and Id like to see someone elses take on it

, Fellas you are cracking me up how the hell could that be bad news. If now such a performance is the confidence boosting one in the test arena that he needs after 4 years where he was non-preffered to other better options & injury plagued?. It really seems as if you guys have forgotten how Anderson's career has gone since his 2002/03 explotion & are bashing him based on nothing at all.

He is being bashed because he inst very good. He isnt as good a bowler as he was 5 years ago and he will do nothing but struggle in the long term in Test cricket.

 

[wpdavid]

Id be interested in seeing a link or article as its something Ive believed and Id like to see someone elses take on it

There weren't any specific details, but the pieces I read were on the guardian unlimited site.

 

[Goughy]

There weren't any specific details, but the pieces I read were on the guardian unlimited site.

Ok, Ill have a look. I hate the way his left arm come through in an arc rather than with purpose and he loses accuracy and speed because of it. Dont know if that is what they were looking at

 

[wpdavid]

Ok, Ill have a look. I hate the way his left arm come through in an arc rather than with purpose and he loses accuracy and speed because of it. Dont know if that is what they were looking at

Here's trhe piece I was talking about. Apparently the flaws are 'fundamental', which is really encouraging.

http://sport.guardian.co.uk/englandinnewzealand2008/story/0,,2264095,00.html

 

[Richard]

Um, so do you think Strauss should be playing or not? And if he shouldnt then why shouldnt he?

No, I don't think Strauss should be playing this series if he wasn't playing in Sri Lanka. And if he is going to play, he should be opening the batting.

I remain to be convinced as to whether Strauss is Test-class or not, whether he has ironed-out the problems which have caused his very poor form of the last 2 years (the driving in the air on the off-side), but if he is dropped for Sri Lanka he should not come back for New Zealand, because he had not played in the meantime and if one does not play they cannot justify a recall having been dropped.

And if Vaughan is going to open (which he shouldn't be), Strauss should not be in the side. Shah should be.

There's just so much which has been done badly with the Strauss case in recent times, from both himself and the selectors.

 

[Goughy]

No reason for putting this here but I dont know where else to put it.

Which England side had the most Test centuries at the time of the game?

Anyone know?

EDIT- Maybe one for ATS but Id rather not wait

 

[Richard]

I can probably put it in there anyway.

This is the XI players with the highest tally of centuries between them before they were all selected for a particular game, yes?

 

[aussie]

He is being bashed because he inst very good. He isnt as good a bowler as he was 5 years ago and he will do nothing but struggle in the long term in Test cricket.

I disagree, Anderson along with Harmison & Jones is easily one of those most naturally talented fast bowlers England have produced post Gough/Caddick & as i keep saying his test career as been interrupted by injuries etc let me give a run down of his career to date since i believe based on how you blokes can bold to say 1``he isnt very good`` lets take a walk back in time on the James Anderson journey..

- thrown into the deep in Aus in VB series 2002/03 as a raw 20 year old who hadn't played much lancashire and was basically playing his cricket for club but left with encouraging peformances i.e his superb spell of 10-12-1 in adelaide. Goes to the WC & has a superb tournament namely wrecking PAK in capetown.

- continues his superb start by wrecking the awful zimbabwe at home & many began to hail as the next great english fast-bowling hope. The South African's came to town & on some overall flat decks againts where he was almost the leader of a young average attack againts some flat-track bullys was brought down back to earth. Goes on tour to BAG & SRI is injured for most of tour plays one test in alien conditions does poorly. Which begins his plagued journey for the next 4 1/2 years.

- watches the entire tour of the WI & home series vs NZ on the sidelines, plays a few few county matches (dont know how much but valuable time there for him would have been interrupted given international commitments in the ODI arena). Get to play vs WI but is relatively unused in 3 test as Harmo/Giles/Hoggard & an injured Flintoff is used by Vaughan. Thus his season is wasted when he could have been at Lancashire properly learnning his trade to become a better in the long form of the game.

- goes to SA underbowled thrown into the crucial Jo'Burg test bowls poorly & spends the rest of the tour on the bench.

- Played no test or ODI's during the famous 2005 summer but had his 1st full county season where he did pretty well thus earning a call up for the 5th test @ the Oval & tour rights to Pakistan.

- Understandably overlooked for the test in PAK, but played in the ODI's has he continued to prove why along with Flintoff he was one of Englad's better modern day ODI bowlers. Went to India again overlooked for the test until Mumbai where he produced this which wasn't bad for a man who had spent most of that winter on the bench.

- Then just when the injury crisis began to get ugly & many would have been hoping Anderson would have gotten a good run in the side vs SRI & PAK he himself was a victim until late in the season until he played a few county games for Lancashire thus another season wasted.

- With the injury crisis very bad, having played a few conty games and 3 ODI's in the CT. Thrown into the Ashes series without playing a test for 8 months & is roughed up by the mighty Aussies.

- Continues his solid ODI bowling performances in the CB series through the WC. Injuries or another bowler being preffered can't remember exactly misses the WI test but comes back to have a very good encouraging test series vs IND (although many here reckoned he was poor). Tops that off with another solid ODI series performance agains them as well.

- Goes to SRI does poorly in conditions that he is alien to & has an average ODI series & to was awful in NZ to complete his first full year of international since his 2002/03 explosion.

All of this says that Anderson is a very talented bowler who was exposed way too early. When he could have been learning his trade in county cricket he has had to learn it at the highest level which has been pretty rough for him. His best years in test IMO are very much ahead of him just needs to stay fit & perform because the ability is very much there.

 

[Richard]

Goes to the WC & has a superb tournament namely wrecking PAK in capetown.

Wrecking Pakistan at Newlands isn't having a good tournament. Anderson played 2 other games of importance in WC2003, taking 10-61-1 and 9-66-0. That's 1 brilliant game and 2 abysmal ones. Hardly a superb tournament.

 

[wpdavid]

No reason for putting this here but I dont know where else to put it.

Which England side had the most Test centuries at the time of the game?

Anyone know?

EDIT- Maybe one for ATS but Id rather not wait

Maybe something very recent, like the 3rd test in Pakistan at the end of 2005? I'm trying to think how recently Tresco, Vaughan & Strauss all played in the same side. Plus KP would have had a couple by then, as would Bell. Fred would have had maybe 3 by then? And Jones 1.

That's my best shot, anyway.

EDIT
Turns out Strauss didn't play in that game.
Maybe the 2nd game of that series then, even though Bell & KP had a ton less at the start of that game?