• 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* England in West Indies

shivfan

shivfan

Banned
Okay, the full WI squad is Chris Gayle (capt), Dale Richards, Ramnaresh Sarwan, Devon Smith, Shivnarine Chanderpaul, Brendan Nash, Denesh Ramdin, Jerome Taylor, Fidel Edwards, Daren Powell, Sulieman Benn, Xavier Marshall, Lionel Baker, Amit Jaggernauth.

Which three players are likely to miss out for the first Test in two days' time?
 
shivfan

shivfan

Banned
superkingdave said:
Guy on another forum who's listening to Am in St Kitts gives the best updates...think thats where Caribbean Cricket gets the updates from as well
Click to expand...
Yeah, that was Ahmose....

He did a great job for everyone!
:)
Some of the members on CMS were also members on Caribbeancricket, and gave updates there....

Ahmose also gave us a good feel for the atmosphere there. He was impressed with the bowling of Jaggernauth, and enjoyed the batting of KP.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
BoyBrumby said:
Yeah, love caribbean tours. You can get a very decent amount of play in even without having days off work. Or skiving off lectures for the tax-dodging fraternity...

Anyway, this is how I think we'll line up (rather than who I'd pick):

Strauss*
Cook
Bell (groan)
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff
Prior+
Broad
Sidebottom
Harmison
Panesar

Harsh on Jimmy & Owais, but selectors are an inherently conservative bunch.
Click to expand...
Think you might be right, our best bowler of the home summer getting dropped would be such an awful call though
 
Manee

Manee

Cricketer Of The Year
BoyBrumby said:
Yeah, love caribbean tours. You can get a very decent amount of play in even without having days off work. Or skiving off lectures for the tax-dodging fraternity...

Anyway, this is how I think we'll line up (rather than who I'd pick):

Strauss*
Cook
Bell (groan)
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff
Prior+
Broad
Sidebottom
Harmison
Panesar

Harsh on Jimmy & Owais, but selectors are an inherently conservative bunch.
Click to expand...
I know that is not your choice but your expected XI but personally would go in with:

1. Strauss*
2. Cook
3. Bell
4. Pietersen
5. Collingwood
6. Prior+
7. Flintoff
8. Sidebottom
9. Anderson
10. Harmison
11. Panesar
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Manee said:
I know that is not your choice but your expected XI but personally would go in with:

1. Strauss*
2. Cook
3. Bell
4. Pietersen
5. Collingwood
6. Prior+
7. Flintoff
8. Sidebottom
9. Anderson
10. Harmison
11. Panesar
Click to expand...
I'd drop Harmison for Shah from that lineup. It's not going to happen though, obviously, so that's probably the best I can hope for.
 
Manee

Manee

Cricketer Of The Year
Prince EWS said:
I'd drop Harmison for Shah from that lineup. It's not going to happen though, obviously, so that's probably the best I can hope for.
Click to expand...
I think Harmison is worth a shot in the country where he has performed so well in, in the past. However, I did consider that swap while making that XI.
 
Manee

Manee

Cricketer Of The Year
four_or_six said:
Flintoff just can't be part of a four-man attack.
Click to expand...
I've heard this theory numerous times but never truly understood it. Flintoff is a bowler capable of bowling tremendous numbers of overs in an innings, so why can't he be part of a four man attack. The only reason I can think of is that it would cripple an attack if he got injured but he is hardly Shane Watson and since when do teams plan for a bowler getting injured?
 
four_or_six

four_or_six

Cricketer Of The Year
Manee said:
I've heard this theory numerous times but never truly understood it. Flintoff is a bowler capable of bowling tremendous numbers of overs in an innings, so why can't he be part of a four man attack. The only reason I can think of is that it would cripple an attack if he got injured but he is hardly Shane Watson and since when do teams plan for a bowler getting injured?
Click to expand...
Not that he might get injured during a match, but if we want him to back up through until September then we need to be careful how much he bowls. When he bowls a load of overs, he normally seems to do his ankle in and misses the next few months.

Anyway, I'm not sure he is a whole lot fitter than Shane Watson. It's just that when he is fit, he's an automatic selection.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
four_or_six said:
Not that he might get injured during a match, but if we want him to back up through until September then we need to be careful how much he bowls. When he bowls a load of overs, he normally seems to do his ankle in and misses the next few months.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I hate this though. If he's not good enough to make the team as a top-6 batsman and he's not fit enough to bowl the overs of a frontline bowler, he really has no business being in the team at all. Now I'm not suggesting he should be dropped, but I don't think he brings so very much to the team that it should be changed to his specific wants and needs all the time.

AFAIC, he should be selected in the role that best suits the team for each game and then come what may for the next game regarding his fitness. If his workload is such a grave concern then he shouldn't be in the ODI team.
 
four_or_six

four_or_six

Cricketer Of The Year
Prince EWS said:
Yeah, I hate this though. If he's not good enough to make the team as a top-6 batsman and he's not fit enough to bowl the overs of a frontline bowler, he really has no business being in the team at all. Now I'm not suggesting he should be dropped, but I don't think he brings so very much to the team that it should be changed to his specific wants and needs all the time.

AFAIC, he should be selected in the role that best suits the team for each game and then come what may for the next game regarding his fitness. If his workload is such a grave concern then he shouldn't be in the ODI team.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree. But it is totally frustrating, and I would hate to see him not in the team.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
four_or_six said:
Agreed. And I suppose that's why 'balance of the side' might have Broad in there.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Prior at 6 and Flintoff at 7 isn't that bad if you have an above average #8, but Ryan Sidebottom certainly isn't that so Broad will probably play.. hopefully instead of Harmison and not Anderson. Despite showing batting potential and doing okay in Tests with the blad so far, though, Broad's First Class batting record isn't something you'd select him in a batting role based on, and he hasn't offered any more with the ball than Collingwood could since his Test introduction in all reality.

If Flintoff bowling as part of a four-man attack is such an impossibility (which I don't really think it should be) then I'd honestly rather see Collingwood bowl Broad's overs and have Shah add to the batting lineup than actually see Broad play. In essence, I suppose I'm saying is:
Collingwood's bowling + Shah's batting > Broad's bowling + Broad's batting.
 
Last edited:
four_or_six

four_or_six

Cricketer Of The Year
Prince EWS said:
Yeah, Prior at 6 and Flintoff at 7 isn't that bad if you have an above average #8, but Ryan Sidebottom certainly isn't that so Broad will probably play.. hopefully instead of Harmison and not Anderson. Despite showing batting potential and doing okay in Tests with the blad so far, though, Broad's First Class batting record isn't something you'd select him in a batting role based on, and he hasn't offered any more with the ball than Collingwood could since his Test introduction in all reality.

If Flintoff bowling as part of a four-man attack is such an impossibility (which I don't really think it should be) then I'd honestly rather see Collingwood bowl Broad's overs and have Shah add to the batting lineup than actually see Broad play. In essence, I suppose I'm saying is:
Collingwood's bowling + Shah's batting > Broad's bowling + Broad's batting.
Click to expand...
I can see your point. But I think Broad's definitely has some real potential, so playing him now against WI could reap rewards in the future, whereas Collingwood's test bowling is as good as it's ever going to be.

Personally, I'd have this team:

Strauss
Cook
Shah
Pietersen
Collingwood
Prior
Flintoff
Swann
Sidebottom
Anderson
Harmison

But that's just me. :)
 
Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'd say the perfect balance for the side has Swann at 8 and three quicks besides Flintoff. Something like:

Cook
Strauss
Shah
KP
Colly
Freddie
Prior
Swann
Sidebottom
Anderson
Harmison

Panesar's ineffective in the majority of conditions, so if you're sacrificing a bit of bowling for a decent batsman at 8 it makes more sense to do it with the spinner because 4 times out of 5 he won't play much of a role in deciding the game anyway.


EDIT: Hahaha, just realised FOS posted a clone of this team just before me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top