KP Out

[fredfertang]

Whoever we all might have hoped would get KP's spot we've got Bell - I hope he gets a rousing reception and proves me, and many others, totally wrong and that the selectors next dilemma is which batsman to leave out this winter

 

[Richard]

I've been hoping Bell is going to do something really noteworthy all his career personally, and continue to believe he can.

But I'm still waiting, and I get more impatient every time he gets the chance and flunks it.

 

[The Sean]

With all the criticism Bell continues to cop, to paraphrase Cardus I'd like nothing better than to see the little bloke make an unbeaten ton at Edgbaston.

In an England total of 130 all out.

 

[Richard]

I'd say it's legit to criticise him, and also legit to continue to hope he can eventually become a good Test batsman. Most of the criticism directed at him is still of the "failed to fulfull expectations" type rather than "useless waste of space, get him out never to be seen again" type.

By-and-large, his critics still back him to a fair extent.

Sadly though he's been damn lucky to get a shot ahead of Owais Shah here. That's not a criticism - that's telling it like it is.

 

[The Sean]

I'd say it's legit to criticise him, and also legit to continue to hope he can eventually become a good Test batsman. Most of the criticism directed at him is still of the "failed to fulfull expectations" type rather than "useless waste of space, get him out never to be seen again" type.

No disagreement there mate, I'm just being a softie and think it would be nice - within reason - for him to succeed.

 

[tooextracool]

Bell has only really ever scored runs when the going is easy. He isn't a terrible batsman, for certain, but he's good only at ramming home the advantage, and usually on flattish decks, and he's decent at hinting at wresting the advantage while failing to do so completely. But he has never once by himself made a big, really notable difference to a Test. For someone who's played 50-odd games, that's poor.

Never one to believe the whole 'he's soft' or that he cant perform under pressure etc. Bell has already scored some valuable runs for England, although almost all of them have ended up in losing causes thanks to the ineptness of others around him and as well as his own inabilities to finish the job off.

His performances in HowSTAT! Match Scorecard and HowSTAT! Match Scorecard were definitely not in easy situations.

My concern with Ian Bell is his conversion rate, not his ability to perform under pressure. Hes scored 7 100s, but most have come against nice-easy paced bowling attacks and far too often he scores attractive 20s,30s,50s,70s etc but hes seldom managed to convert them into big scores. I've always maintained that one should be more critical of players who get starts and fail to convert them into big scores and this is why I've lost a lot of confidence in Bell because he's struggled to convert his form into big scores for England.

 

[Uppercut]

Never one to believe the whole 'he's soft' or that he cant perform under pressure etc. Bell has already scored some valuable runs for England, although almost all of them have ended up in losing causes thanks to the ineptness of others around him and as well as his own inabilities to finish the job off.

His performances in HowSTAT! Match Scorecard and HowSTAT! Match Scorecard were definitely not in easy situations.

England were about 230 runs ahead with 7 wickets left when Bell arrived at the crease for that second knock, tbh. His second-innings knock here is a much better example.

All in all, i don't buy the mentally-weak theory either. He just makes too many mistakes, and hence isn't as good as he looks. Most obvious when bowlers are bowling well to him.

 

[tooextracool]

England were about 230 runs ahead with 7 wickets left when Bell arrived at the crease for that second knock, tbh. His second-innings knock here is a much better example.

You are right, although I don't think that example is a very good one either because everyone including the neighbor's dog knew that game was done well before Bell got that 50. Would add to the list of meaningless knocks devoid of pressure that he's played over his career.

Maybe his performance in the 3rd test in Pakistan would serve as a better example: HowSTAT! Match Scorecard

 

[BoyBrumby]

England were about 230 runs ahead with 7 wickets left when Bell arrived at the crease for that second knock, tbh. His second-innings knock here is a much better example.

All in all, i don't buy the mentally-weak theory either. He just makes too many mistakes, and hence isn't as good as he looks. Most obvious when bowlers are bowling well to him.

Isn't the latter a symptom of the former tho? The cut he played just before an interval in the Jamaican test would make even the stiffest upper lip quiver. It was a zero percentage shot yet he still went through with it. Whether you call it "weakness" or "flabbiness" or whatever, it isn't a sign of mental strength.

Also, worringly, he averages just 25.10 in 10 tests v Oz. Over 15 runs per innings down on his career figure. Admittedly the attacks he's faced before now were stronger tho.

 

[Richard]

Bell performed poorly in the 2005 series and decently in the 2006/07 one. I don't have any particular worries about his ability to perform just because the opposition happens to be Australia.

I've never bought the "mentally soft" stuff either, I simply don't have great confidence in him against good-quality bowling when the situation demands a game to be played to the situation. He's fine - excellent, in fact - when he can play his own game, when the bowling is moderate (and often has already gifted his side the advantage). The poor conversion-rate is obviously the problem, but a careless stroke on 20-odd, or 60-odd is no different to a careless stroke on 3 - it's still the same error. And Bell's problem is making his own errors too often, not that bowlers can utilise a chink in his technique.

 

[Jamee999]

Because against the worst Australian bowling attack I've ever seen, players who get themselves out are what we need

 

[neobuxadmin]

Big blow for england, he is one player who can win the match on his own, scores runs quickly which can put pressure on opposition.

Have to see how eng plays with out KP.

 

[Uppercut]

Because against the worst Australian bowling attack I've ever seen, players who get themselves out are what we need

It's a pretty good attack IMO.

 

[Uppercut]

Isn't the latter a symptom of the former tho? The cut he played just before an interval in the Jamaican test would make even the stiffest upper lip quiver. It was a zero percentage shot yet he still went through with it. Whether you call it "weakness" or "flabbiness" or whatever, it isn't a sign of mental strength.

Nobody thinks he's mentally strong, I just think his bigger problem is not being very good. There's the occasional shot like that, but usually he just nicks to the keeper, plays on, gets caught at slip. I.e. makes a mistake to a ball in a decent area, usually by playing the wrong line. Because his weaknesses don't include being a slow starter, he's just as likely to get out on 40 as he is on 0, and that's why you get so many in-and-out innings. But i don't think mental issues are his problem.

 

[DIRK-NANNES]

Holy crap, has anyone seen Ian Bell's haircut lately?
Saw him interviewed after some horse riding, but can't find a pic, flaming Google just keeps coming up with Ishant Sharma

 

[GIMH]

It's a pretty good attack IMO.

Yeah, but it's still worse than the attacks Jamee will have seen if you think about it

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah, but it's still worse than the attacks Jamee will have seen if you think about it

Yeah, but it's still pretty good. A lot of English fans seem to have decided it's a joke-attack on the back of one game.

 

[GIMH]

Two games tbh, failure to get Panesar out at the death played its part as well

 

[Uppercut]

The first 19 wickets no longer count I see .

In truth, Aussie did fantastically well to get the game to that stage given conditions. Check out how England's bowling fared in that match.

 

[GIMH]

I have no idea what you are talking about

I don't think this attack is 'poor' but as we have discussed, I also don't think we should fear it. All jokes aside, if there is anything in the pitch or the air then I'd pick our attack over theirs any day. They are better on flat decks, though.