*Official* England in West Indies

[Uppercut]

Because hardly anyone on here has ever seen him play. It is a bit hard to big a guy up when you don't even know for sure what he bowls - when Durham are on TV, Davies is nowhere to be seen.

His got some nice first class stats though and looks to have bowled well in the current A test between England and New Zealand.

There's one poster who has both seen him play and met him personally, I forget who. Davies himself considers swing his main weapon, with seam supplementing it. So the deck he plays on is secondary to atmospheric conditions. It seems his speed is generally around 78-82mph and he's extremely accurate (he'd have to be to have so much success bowling at that pace).

 

[GIMH]

I can and will.

Now this I can't understand

 

[Woodster]

He didn't have a solid season. He bowls most of the time gun barrel straight and the only thing of note he did was get carted for over 100 runs in a one day game and then duly get rewarded with a new contract. His cack but people like him because his quick and his got the Rana Naved habit of getting wickets with pies.

In the Pro40 Dernbach took 24 wickets (10 more than anyone else), admittedly in Division 2, but quite a feat regardless. His Championship form was also solid if unspectacular. He improved a lot last season, and not just down to his pace!

 

[Woodster]

With regards team selection for this final Test, will be interesting what XI England settle on. It seems Harmison's p*ssed on his chips for this tour, opening a door for Amjad Khan. Will it be too risky a policy for England to go in with 5 bowlers ? It's possible the top 6 will remain, with Prior replacing Ambrose, then Amjad, Rashid or Monty for Sidebottom ?

Presuming they will wait to have a look at the pitch before deciding on pace or spin.

 

[Uppercut]

England won't go in with five bowlers. It would involve dropping Bopara the match after his maiden test ton.

 

[Richard]

With regards team selection for this final Test, will be interesting what XI England settle on. It seems Harmison's p*ssed on his chips for this tour, opening a door for Amjad Khan. Will it be too risky a policy for England to go in with 5 bowlers ? It's possible the top 6 will remain, with Prior replacing Ambrose, then Amjad, Rashid or Monty for Sidebottom ?

Presuming they will wait to have a look at the pitch before deciding on pace or spin.

TBF, I'd hope for one thing that is not an option, and do one thing that does not seem remotely sensible in the circumstances.

Sidebottom being left-out seems an only-option scenario. I don't see Amjad Khan providing any useful option, but flukes (in terms of someone who's not that good and doesn't perform well terribly often performing well when most needed) can and do happen. Harmison playing seems to be certain not to happen.

Ideally, MSP would come back into the team to form a two-pronged spin attack with Swann on a pitch that typically assists spin plenty. However, we've seen MSP completely waste a turning pitch on at least a couple of occasions in recent memory. For all he was never the superman Murali\Warne some seemed to think, one thing he mostly could do was cash-in on a turning pitch. Currently, he seems unable even to do that. So his selection too would probably be completely pointless IMO.

Ideally, I'd go in with:
Strauss
Cook
Shah
Pietersen
Collingwood
Prior (he's definately going to replace Ambrose - no doubts about that one)
Swann
Broad
Sidebottom
Anderson
MSP

However, the selection of two of those bowlers seems, as I say above, almost completely pointless. So does that of Amjad Khan.

Maybe the best option would be to pick the batsmen who have earnt the chance and simply hope that enough runs can be scored on a pitch that does enough to force a favourable result.

Five bowlers is no use unless those five bowlers offer something. Right now, there are only three bowlers (at best) who hint at offering something: Swann, Anderson and Broad. If you pick a fifth bowler to come in and bowl a heap of crap, you may as well select Bopara or Bell to do that job and pack the batting.

If England could control pitch preparation, I'd simply leave a whole heap of grass on the surface and play eight batsmen (including the wicketkeeper) in these circumstances we're currently faced with. Sadly, when you're playing away, you don't have that choice.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Shah could potentially be dropped, with everyone obviously moving up a batting place.

EDIT - Cricinfo seems to be of the opinion of the 4 man attack of Broad, Anderson, Khan and Swann.

 

[Richard]

England won't go in with five bowlers. It would involve dropping Bopara the match after his maiden test ton.

If a bowler who offered good-figure-taking were to play instead of Bopara, dropping him would be eminently the right move.

However, given that there is no such bowler, keeping Bopara might be the more sensical move.

 

[Uppercut]

If a bowler who offered good-figure-taking were to play instead of Bopara, dropping him would be eminently the right move.

However, given that there is no such bowler, keeping Bopara might be the more sensical move.

Yeah, it's debateable whether it's the right idea. I guess it depends how highly you rate Rashid- he has a lot of admirers, and even an erratic leggie is a lot more acceptable as part of a five-man attack than a four-man one. I've never seen him so can't really say.

But i just don't see the selectors dropping Bopara after one game in the side where he scored 100. It's poor man-management. Even dropping Shah isn't likely, it would destabilise the batting lineup. And he's only had three innings since his recall. Although i guess he's one player they're not shy of treating badly.

 

[Woodster]

Think there's a good chance of us going in with 5 bowlers. Prior's inclusion important as he will be asked to bat at 6, should England take this option. Back the batsmen to get the runs, and pick the bowlers most likely to get 20 wickets, although imo, that depends of Harmys condition.

1. Strauss
2. Cook
3. Shah/Bopara
4. Pietersen
5. Collingwood
6. Prior
7. Broad
8. Swann
9. Anderson
10. Amjad/Harmison
11. Panesar

We can still have three pacemen and two spinners, although Shah or Bopara may unfortunately have to drop out.

 

[Woodster]

But i just don't see the selectors dropping Bopara after one game in the side where he scored 100. It's poor man-management. Even dropping Shah isn't likely, it would destabilise the batting lineup. And he's only had three innings since his recall. Although i guess he's one player they're not shy of treating badly.

Under normal circumstances it would be very difficult to leave either out, however, we need to pick the best side to win this one game. So purely on a tactical basis, we perhpas need to lose a batter to accommodate a specialist bowler. Not necessarily bad man-management, just need to select a side to give us the best chance of taking 20 wickets, and back our top 6 to do the business with the bat. It's not a balance of the side that I would like to see too often mind.

 

[Uppercut]

Under normal circumstances it would be very difficult to leave either out, however, we need to pick the best side to win this one game. So purely on a tactical basis, we perhpas need to lose a batter to accommodate a specialist bowler. Not necessarily bad man-management, just need to select a side to give us the best chance of taking 20 wickets, and back our top 6 to do the business with the bat. It's not a balance of the side that I would like to see too often mind.

Hmm. If the pitch is a really flat one, maybe. But on ridiculously flat pitches the leggie is probably more of an option. Especially since he's actually a batting all-rounder.

 

[Woodster]

Hmm. If the pitch is a really flat one, maybe. But on ridiculously flat pitches the leggie is probably more of an option. Especially since he's actually a batting all-rounder.

The inclusion of Rashid would be exciting, and as you say a leg-spinner may get more from the track, but I don't think he will be thrown in. He may be a surprise weapon for us, as WI are not going to know a great deal about him, but think Panesar would get the nod ahead of him, despite what Rashid has going for him.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Said in the paper today that the last ten tests at Queen's Park have all produced results with the Windies losing 7/10 so I would guess four bowlers is the way we'll go.

Prior for Tiny Tim & Amjad or Harmy for the clearly ailing Sid are the only changes I expect.

 

[Uppercut]

The inclusion of Rashid would be exciting, and as you say a leg-spinner may get more from the track, but I don't think he will be thrown in. He may be a surprise weapon for us, as WI are not going to know a great deal about him, but think Panesar would get the nod ahead of him, despite what Rashid has going for him.

I'm thinking they might go with him actually. When they picked him for the tour, they probably had a scenario in their head where he might play. Say, the key to their five-man attack breaks down, their lead spinner fails horribly, and they need to force a result in the last match on a pitch which threatens to be extremely flat (of course it might not, i'm just being hypothetical).

If they don't pick him now, why is he there? It surely can't be for the experience- there's an 'A' team tour on at the same time that would clearly serve him much better, not least because he'd get the chance to actually do a bit of bowling. Maybe they picked him then saw him the warm-up games and realised he's a bit ****? But then, Michael Atherton reported that he was hugely impressed with what he's seen of him this tour. The more i think about it the more i think they may just turn to him as a last throw of the dice at the end of the tour. Nothing to lose and all that jazz.

Of course, if the pitch is a result one, none of this is relevant. They'll just go Amjad in for Sidey and Prior back in the side and leave it at that.

 

[Richard]

Yeah, it's debateable whether it's the right idea. I guess it depends how highly you rate Rashid- he has a lot of admirers, and even an erratic leggie is a lot more acceptable as part of a five-man attack than a four-man one. I've never seen him so can't really say.

But i just don't see the selectors dropping Bopara after one game in the side where he scored 100. It's poor man-management. Even dropping Shah isn't likely, it would destabilise the batting lineup. And he's only had three innings since his recall. Although i guess he's one player they're not shy of treating badly.

Recall? Shah's never had a previous "call" (ie, as a first-choice) to be recalled! His only 2 Tests before this series have come as an injury replacement.

 

[FBU]

I'm thinking they might go with him actually. When they picked him for the tour, they probably had a scenario in their head where he might play. Say, the key to their five-man attack breaks down, their lead spinner fails horribly, and they need to force a result in the last match on a pitch which threatens to be extremely flat (of course it might not, i'm just being hypothetical).

If they don't pick him now, why is he there? It surely can't be for the experience- there's an 'A' team tour on at the same time that would clearly serve him much better, not least because he'd get the chance to actually do a bit of bowling. Maybe they picked him then saw him the warm-up games and realised he's a bit ****? But then, Michael Atherton reported that he was hugely impressed with what he's seen of him this tour. The more i think about it the more i think they may just turn to him as a last throw of the dice at the end of the tour. Nothing to lose and all that jazz.

Of course, if the pitch is a result one, none of this is relevant. They'll just go Amjad in for Sidey and Prior back in the side and leave it at that.

Well Strauss is thinking of 5 bowlers and I can't see them going for two debutants unfortunately. What kind of tail is this?

Broad
Swann
Khan
Anderson
Panesar

 

[roseboy64]

Benn out and Simmons in is a rumour.

 

[Richard]

Well Strauss is thinking of 5 bowlers and I can't see them going for two debutants unfortunately. What kind of tail is this?

Broad
Swann
Khan
Anderson
Panesar

Had never noticed Amjad Khan being much of a batsman TBH. If he bats ahead of Anderson there'd best be good reason.

Anyway, that tail is better than:
Prior
Sidebottom
Hoggard
Anderson \ Harmison
Panesar
and also:
Irani
Caddick
Mullally
Tufnell
Giddins

 

[four_or_six]

Had never noticed Amjad Khan being much of a batsman TBH. If he bats ahead of Anderson there'd best be good reason.

Anyway, that tail is better than:
Prior
Sidebottom
Hoggard
Anderson \ Harmison
Panesar
and also:
Irani
Caddick
Mullally
Tufnell
Giddins

There's no tail in the history of the world that can be worse than one with both Mullaly or Tufnell and neither are at 11.