***Official*** South Africa in England

[Richard]

Anderson was persevered with for the opening Test of the NZ series through bad selection. No more. Same thing that somehow resulted in Shah losing-out to his vast inferior Bopara.

 

[Langeveldt]

2-0 to SA.. Unless England pick Hoggard and Harmison in which case 2-1 or 2-2..

 

[andruid]

2-0 to SA.. Unless England pick Hoggard and Harmison in which case 2-1 or 2-2..

Even with Hoggard and Harmison I still expect S.A to see off England fairly easily

 

[wpdavid]

Even with Hoggard and Harmison I still expect S.A to see off England fairly easily

Harmison would be a complete irrelevance. Hoggard might possibly make a difference, though I doubt it.

 

[GIMH]

Just can’t see England winning the test series if they select the side which is currently playing against New Zealand.

Who you supporting anyway?

 

[Richard]

2-0 to SA.. Unless England pick Hoggard and Harmison in which case 2-1 or 2-2..

One to improve the chances and one to cancel-out that improvement you reckon?

 

[Langeveldt]

One to improve the chances and one to cancel-out that improvement you reckon?

Harmison, for all his flaws and rank rubbishness, we know can bowl out quality batsmen.. Although he'd probably be a complete flop as usual, i'd be slightly more nervous about him being in the England lineup than an Anderson or a Broad, or, dare I say it, a Mahmood.. Hoggard should be in by default because of his dominance over Smith..

 

[Richard]

For all Harmison's supposed ability to bowl-out quality batsmen, it's always been crap batsmen (and very occasionally excellent batsmen playing craply for the odd one-off Test) who've ended-up getting out to him...

He's never done a thing against good batting-line-ups in good nick.

In any case, if we're really lucky England might end-up having none of Harmison, Anderson, Broad (or Mahmood) in the line-up. If Hoggard were to play, and Flintoff were to be fit, it'd be a decent unit.

 

[wpdavid]

For all Harmison's supposed ability to bowl-out quality batsmen, it's always been crap batsmen (and very occasionally excellent batsmen playing craply for the odd one-off Test) who've ended-up getting out to him...

He's never done a thing against good batting-line-ups in good nick.

In any case, if we're really lucky England might end-up having none of Harmison, Anderson, Broad (or Mahmood) in the line-up. If Hoggard were to play, and Flintoff were to be fit, it'd be a decent unit.

Well, quite. Maybe Langers is trying to talk GBH back into the test side: based on his previous record against SA, you could understand why.

 

[Top 6 on paper]

Assuming umpiring is fair and balanced and weather doesn't play a significant role, I would expect SA to do a pretty comprehensive job on England overall.

2-1, With England winning a close final test when the series is gone as opposed to two dominant SA wins.

 

[gettingbetter]

Indeed he is, but Bell is obviously a far better batsman than Collingwood and his recent form has been better. Collingwood despite being a fixture ever since the Third Test in Pakistan has always been playing for his place, always just a few failures away from the axe being over his head. Even he himself has admitted this.

I am starting to doubt this now. I will admit, that Collingwood is punching above his weight, but Bell just doesn't seem to be taking any steps. I really don't know how long we have to wait for Bell to become an above average batsman. He won't be dropped, but he probably should be given a wake up call with Shah and Bopara in such good form.

 

[Richard]

There is absolutely no way in several million years that Bopara currently has any case whatsoever for Test selection above Bell. Shah would be fair enough in some ways, but he alone is.

Joyce, as mentioned, is the only batsman outside the current Test team currently with even an half-decent case for selection IMO.

 

[gettingbetter]

I know you have been a Bell fan for sometime now. but honestly, how important has he been in England's Tests? Not as many as Collingwood. Its one thing being potentially good and its another thing to act upon that potential. As of yet, Bell has fell short in that department. Many of us are beckoning for his coming as a young international player alongside Clarke, G. Smith and of late, Taylor, de Villiers and you could even say Amla.

As for Bopara:

RS Bopara 4 7 1 503 150 83.83 753 66.79 2 3 1 66 3

I know he failed in Sri Lanka and the SA series shouldn't be his calling card, but in a year or two, if Bell doesn't improve, Bopara might dislodge him.

 

[Richard]

In a year or two, yes. Now? Not the slightest chance.

And yes, I have indeed been a Bell fan for a while. I still am. He's an excellent batsman. Yes, so far in his career he's disappointed quite a bit, but he's also done a damn sight better than most others would.

1. Excellent Test debut.
2. Awful second series, which involved more good bowling than bad batting.
3. Decent, if rather lucky on some occasions, time in Pakistan.
4. One poor, one decent Test in India, plus one as an opener which matters not a jot.
5. Superb series the first time he batted in his best position in 2006.
6. Pushed back up to three in Australia and had an OK time all things considered.
7. Decent series against West Indies and poor one against India.
8. Back in un-ideal position in Sri Lanka but still did a decent-ish job.
9. Pretty poor series in New Zealand.
10. Poor so far at home to New Zealand in 2007.

Not as bad as some would like to be. I maintain, had Bell not got the "soft" cosmetic look, he'd not be criticised as much as he has been.

 

[Top 6 on paper]

There is absolutely no way in several million years that Bopara currently has any case whatsoever for Test selection above Bell..

Agree wholeheartedly. Absolutely absurd to propose otherwise.

Bopara is hideously overrated in general IMO. It's a joke that his name even comes up as it all seems to stem from that one knock against SL in the World Cup which he then bottled at the death anyway. I've never understood the hype and don't consider him remotely of international class, which Bell is although I am no great fan.

- Alex.

 

[gettingbetter]

Nothing amazing from Bell so far, nothing even to say that he is better than the other batsmen in CC (Shah, Joyce, Bopara and co). Also, I don't think people have criticized Bell due to cosmetics, mainly due him being blown up and not doing anything of note.

 

[Richard]

Plenty in his own domestic career to suggest he's better than Bopara; a decent bit to suggest he's better than Joyce. Shah? Maybe not. But he has not done sufficiently poorly to be excluded in favour of anyone - Shah included - IMO.

 

[gettingbetter]

You don't seem to be budging on Bell. Simply, if his career were to continue as it is, should he remain in the English side? Becuase he doesn't appear to be getting better.

 

[Richard]

No, he shouldn't. But it's not like he's never got any better - not at all, in fact. And it'll take at least another couple of series of this sort of stuff (the sort of stuff we saw at home to India and in New Zealand - nothing else is of relevance) for me to decide I don't want him in the side.

 

[wpdavid]

My one piece of sympathy for Bell is that he spent a year and a half alternating between 6 & 3 in the batting order, which is no way to build a test career. Even so, there's no getting away from the fact that we're lacking a decent return on the time that's been invested in him. Only one test hundred against decent attacks. Way too many failures when the pressure's on. I've read so many pieces in the last year or so along the lines of "now being the time to step up a gear" that you have to wonder whether it will ever happen.