Taunton.Compared to Ian Blackwell that averages 47.07
He averages 48 in FC at Taunton.
Hoggard's central contract was a waste of money last year, only played 4 games. Don't think we can read much into it either way.
Out of interest, why do you go for 5 alone, when 2001, 2002 and 2003 were all excellent for Shah too?
Me neither. Would pick Vaughan ahead of Hussain personally.
It's the short boundaries that count far more than the nature of the pitch, IMO.
Has it actually been specifically stated that Shah's supposed bowling skill (I've said before that I can bowl better than him and haven't yet seen anything to change my mind) actually played a part in his selection?
Because that was what the original statement was about. See below
Also its a nice round(ish) number and 5 years is more relevant to now than 7 but still gives a large sample size and body of work.
As would I.
I see. As I showed, though, he's actually been one of the best of the last 8. Though I agree that the happenings of 2001 aren't really all that relevant to today. Had Shah failed dismally that season as he had most of his previous ones, he'd have no less a case to be at the front of the queue now.
Would defo go for Hussain in the sub continent tbh. Thought he was always a decent enough player of spin, and unlike Vaughan he really dug in when the going was tough, would often put together a really ugly but really important innings, Vaughan is terrible at scrapping.
Im surprised at that tbh. In a big match situation or on a seamers paradise where the rest of the side is struggling I would pick Hussain anyday of the year. On a flat batting track where the emphasis is on scoring big runs, I might pick Vaughan. Hussain himself has stated in his autobiography that he felt more pressure when the rest of the team had scored runs rather than when he played on minefields with the rest of the side collapsing around him. Vaughan, as someone stated earlier, is incapable of scratching around in such circumstances as Hussain was.
Tbh I expect Monty Panesar to be as ordinary as he has been on his last 2 subcontinental tours. Not being able to toss the ball up is a crime when you bowl in the subcontinent and unless hes made some serious changes to his bowling I dont see him troubling too many batsmen. Similarly, theres little sense in picking 2 spinners when they are off the calibre of Monty and Swann, especially with the pace battery that England currently possess. Patel's role is to provide balance to the side, he will provide the backup to Monty Panesar while still allowing England to play their best bowlers in the side (Harmison, Flintoff, Anderson)
I'd hope he'd simply been picked because he's obviously a better batsman full-stop... but I'm not fool enough to believe that actually is the case. I'm just happier with the right decision being made for the wrong reasons than the wrong decision being made for the wrong reasons.
Hmmm, problem is though that if he has been selected on the basis of his bowling, he really will have to put in several very good innings with the bat so to make himself un-droppable. If for example he only scores an decent amount of runs rather than a really good amount and his bowling does not prove to be much use either, one fears that he will be dropped. I like you feel he should be put straight into the team on his batting alone, as have not really seen Bopara show anything to merit his inclusion.
Would have to disagree here. Atapattu had a very sound technique, and was a typical opening bat, in style and temperament. Even showed he still had it after being out of Test cricket for nearly two years, and passed 50 in both Tests in Australia.
Attapattu did have a good technique, although my argument is not that he was not talented (which Attapattu undoubtedly was), but that his performances at the test level were not very good. His record against all teams bar England is mediocre, failing to even average in the mid 30s against most teams.Attapattu will undoubtedly be on the list of players along with Hick and Ramprakash as players who underperformed significantly at the international level.
