***Official*** South Africa in England

[Scaly piscine]

Fair play to the Saffies for coming back into this the way they have done. Apologies if it's been said (haven't read back, just this page) but surelythis is the excuse the selectors needed to pick Flintoff?

I would say it's the excuse the selectors needed to pick Simon Jones. He's the only one who could have won this game for England.

The selection is straight-forward if for some bizarre reason Monty 'toothless' Panesar wasn't inked in along with his baggage of inept batting/fielding. England must have 4 seamers to challenge the best sides and they also can't afford to have Flintoff or a wicket-keeper batting at 6.

But the way Bell curiously moved up to 5 and Colly to 6 shows the selectors wanted to make their life easier in the future.

 

[GIMH]

Bell has been at 5 all summer though?

 

[Scaly piscine]

Bell has been at 5 all summer though?

Yes but there was never any good reason for him swapping positions with Collingwood. They were both doing well in their respective positions.

 

[Richard]

Generally the better batsman bats at five rather than six. Not that there's any particularly enormous difference. If you can score runs at five you can score them at six, and vice-versa.

 

[Richard]

I think I've just heard the most clueless em@il ever too BTW - suggesting Philip Mustard play Tests. As if ODIs wasn't bad enough.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Poor form by Nasser during the lunch interval, suggesting that Flintoff has to be at 6 for the Ashes next year.

 

[steds]

I think I've just heard the most clueless em@il ever too BTW - suggesting Philip Mustard play Tests. As if ODIs wasn't bad enough.

Did I hear correct when they said it came from scrabble_Mast0r@hotmail.com?

 

[Dasa]

Poor form by Nasser during the lunch interval, suggesting that Flintoff has to be at 6 for the Ashes next year.

But they did it in 2005!!

 

[Richard]

Did I hear correct when they said it came from scrabble_Mast0r@hotmail.com?

Was listening intently for that myself TBH.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

But they did it in 2005!!

Sarcasm surely. Because a lot has happened since then.

 

[Richard]

Poor form by Nasser during the lunch interval, suggesting that Flintoff has to be at 6 for the Ashes next year.

But they did it in 2005!!

Might well be something in that. I think there's more a case of simply overrating Flintoff's skill though. He was up to six as far back as 2003. He's never been good enough for that IMO, and that's never changed.

 

[steds]

Bring back Alec Stewart!

 

[Richard]

Another wicket!

McKenzie finally gone.

 

[wpdavid]

McKenzie gone. Sounds like the shot of a tired man.

 

[Richard]

SA just need Kallis to bed in here to avoid any anxiety.

 

[George.Hinton]

Poor form by Nasser during the lunch interval, suggesting that Flintoff has to be at 6 for the Ashes next year.

I certainly think England are better off playing 5 bowlers. Wtether that means Freddy batting 6 or 7 I dunno, but IMO Collingwood is a fairly average batsman and I'm not sure England will be worse off to do a direct swap off Freddy for Collingwood.

 

[jammay123]

thank gawd for that. all england need is to get kallis prince and ab de villiears for ducks and victory is ours.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

I'm glad both wickets went to Anderson. He's bowled probably the best of the English bowlers this innings and has deserved it.

 

[steds]

thank gawd for that. all england need is to get kallis prince and ab de villiears for ducks and victory is ours.

Boucher, too.

 

[Speersy]

Hope the crown is cheering "we want a wicket, we want a wicket"