Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Maybe they're picking Wright as a death-bowling option...
His selection does seem to based on "well he bowled a decent last over six months ago...".
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
***Official*** South Africa in England
- Thread starter TT Boy
- Start date
His selection does seem to based on "well he bowled a decent last over six months ago...".
Langeveldt
Soutie
Pretty stunned to be honest, don't know what to say but I couldn't watch after we had lost 8 wickets.. No way could that ever have happened, but it did 
Worse than being beaten by Zimbabwe in the Olympics..
Worse than being beaten by Zimbabwe in the Olympics..
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
They really didn't, though. Gibbs and Kallis both played attacking shots to accurate bowling and got out, which happens in ODIs from time to time, and Smith, ABdeV, Duminy and Boucher were all beaten attempting to defend (though Smith at a ball he needn't have played at - again, that can happen in a ODI). Botha got a bad decision, Morkel had to throw the bat and it surprisingly enough didn't work, and you're never going to expect anything from Nel, Steyn and Ntini anyway - the drawbacks of picking three rank rabbits have been noted many times before and why Steyn seems an automatic ODI pick is beyond me as he's pretty well never done anything of note in the format. Nel and Ntini have been dreadful for ages too but at least they were once good, Nel for a short time, Ntini for quite a long one.
If Morne Morkel is fit for the next game I guess he should replace Steyn - he'll probably offer 1 or 2 more free-hits, you hope it won't be more than that, but he might take wickets, should be more awkward to score off on non-free-hits, and can score runs more often than Steyn can.
But SA didn't particularly bat poorly in the middle - they weren't getting out repeatedly to attacking shots.
superkingdave
Hall of Fame Member
I've done better floaters than Wright after a big Christmas dinner tbh
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
And as dav kinda alluded to in the post above, "floater"s can often be interpreted as "wastes of a place".
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Or, more commonly, "floaters" are interpreted to mean "turds".
Goughy
Hall of Fame Member
If we are returing to cricket terminology then he would be a good floater.
He has no key position in the order, the loss of his wicket doesnt derail the batting lineup, he is experienced in batting early or late in an innings and has had at least moderate success in a wide variety of roles.
The perfect floater. Aggressive, adaptable and expendable
pup11
International Coach
Yeah, that's fair enough.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Floaters, however, are only really something a good team can afford for mine if they're principally bowlers. The likes of Ashley Cowan, Rana Naved-ul-Hasan, James Hamblin and various others have of times performed this in televised day\night National League games in various seasons, and many others in other games.
Luke Wright, however, is nowhere near good enough to play county cricket as a bowler, never mind international. And I retain doubts over whether he's good enough to play county cricket as a batsman either.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Yeah, indeed. A specialist floater is a luxury I don't think England (or any team, really) can afford though. I think Swann would offer a lot more to a team than someone who is the 8th best batsman and 7th best bowler in the eleven.
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Personally I'd have Mascarenhas. The lower-order slogger is a role England have to fill and Mascarenhas is as good as they seem to have, and he's also a front-line bowler. Took five top-order wickets against Durham in CC this morning, i'm just reading.
You'd have Swann clearly on turning wickets, though. Horses for courses and all that jazz.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Yeah, I'd have no problems with DM as long as Pietersen had faith in his bowling. Collingwood seemed to rate DM's bowling a similar standard to his own for whatever reason and it made him about as useful as Luke Wright is now for most of his career which is why he eventually got dropped. If he was picked to bowl 7+ overs on average and be the "floater", that would be fine. I think Swann would add heaps to the team though - it'd give five genuine frontline bowlers, all with different styles and strengths.
Anderson/Sidebottom
Broad
Flintoff
Harmison/Sidebottom
Swann
+ Patel and Collingwood as backup options.
That looks like an attack with a lot of potential as a unit and you'd still have Collingwood batting 6 and Patel batting 7.
Last edited:
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Mascarenhas and Swann are both potentially two of England's best ODI bowlers, but before anyone gets too Mascarenhas-must-play-ish (and I'm one of his biggest advocates) look at his record this season:
I'm actually surprised it isn't higher than that. Either way, it's too high for someone who has international ambitions. Mascarenhas should be conceding less than 4-an-over.
Code:
2008 (England) 12 522 410 15 27.33 34.80 [B]4.71[/B]Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Nevertheless, Mascarenhas>>>Wright with the ball, and as a late-order hitter he's as good as pretty much anyone. Swann probably has greater middle-over economy (i'd stop well short of calling him the better bowler), but you'd much rather have Mascarenhas coming in at 7 with 45 overs played than Swann. Personally I'd consign Wright to the dustbin of history and alternate Swann and Mascarenhas depending on conditions.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
I just don't want Mascarenhas being brought in when he's done as poorly as he has this season. There's a reason he'll have done that poorly - he evidently hasn't bowled very well. If he plays ODIs now it's likely he'll once more not bowl well, and that could be the end of it. That'd be a disaster.
Rightly or wrongly (and yes, it's wrongly) Wright is the incumbant and I don't want someone who's done as badly as Mascarenhas has this year coming in to an England side.
As far as Mascarenhas and Swann's batting is concerned - there really isn't a hell of a lot in it for mine. I'd guess Mascarenhas is the better performed in recent years, but Swann can certainly hit the ball and is rightly a better batsman than Broad currently.
Rightly or wrongly (and yes, it's wrongly) Wright is the incumbant and I don't want someone who's done as badly as Mascarenhas has this year coming in to an England side.
As far as Mascarenhas and Swann's batting is concerned - there really isn't a hell of a lot in it for mine. I'd guess Mascarenhas is the better performed in recent years, but Swann can certainly hit the ball and is rightly a better batsman than Broad currently.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
I know I sound like a broken record, but seriously, Swann FTW!
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Aye you do have a point there. But in the greater scheme of things, he's still someone i'd want in the team.
As for comparing his batting with that of Swann's, there probably isn't much in it indeed. However, i can't imagine Swann ever scoring 30 runs off a single over in international cricket, so Mascarenhas is the man i'd prefer coming in late.