*Official* England in South Africa

[aussie]

A fully fit Sidebottom is a decent albeit unremarkable bowler who gives a bit of variation.

Yea but Mascarenhas all-round package in full strenght ODI side, is better.

Mascarenhas on the other hand is like a specialist nothing bowler and barely does a better job than Colly would (and if you pick both you're basically wasting Colly's bowling because you'll very rarely want two dobbers rolling their arm over).

Mascarenhas is far superior medium pacer than Collingwood, come on man. England in full-strenght team just have to know how use him. If new ball bowlers get early wickets, Mascarenhas has he proved in this game & this game, he is very good & just tying down a batting side in the middle overs. of course that wont happen all the time, but at least you know for sure in what circumstances he can be effective.

Plus having his batting @ 8, we wont be putting too much pressure on him to be a consistent bat as the selectors have mistakenly done by batting him @ 6/7 in the past - & just give him a license to hit.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah, but he's "proved" in pretty much every other game that he's crap.

 

[aussie]

Clearly not. Those two where just his two best bowling performances for ENG, his bowling generally has ranged from decent to solid. The only ODI game where i can remember where he was smoked was in the WI when Gayle took 24 off him in an over - which even that was in a power-play.

 

[marc71178]

If he's "decent to solid" then we might as well give up. 13 wickets @ 48.76 is terrible, and compared to Collingwoods 97 @ 38.57, it's no contest.

Mascarenhas may get good figures once in a while if everything is put in his favour, but by doing that you then have to deprive a much better bowler of the helpful conditions.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Clearly not. Those two where just his two best bowling performances for ENG, his bowling generally has ranged from decent to solid. The only ODI game where i can remember where he was smoked was in the WI when Gayle took 24 off him in an over - which even that was in a power-play.

The guy averages 48.76 in ODIs. He's a total non-factor 90% of the time. At best he'll keep it tight *if* you bowl him at the right stage of the innings with the right field and with wickets pressure. So pretty much whenever any competent part-timer would bowl and go at 4-5 per over.

Why would you want an aging player like that in your side if you harbour any ambitions of winning something major?

 

[aussie]

If he's "decent to solid" then we might as well give up. 13 wickets @ 48.76 is terrible, and compared to Collingwoods 97 @ 38.57, it's no contest.

The guy averages 48.76 in ODIs. He's a total non-factor 90% of the time. At best he'll keep it tight *if* you bowl him at the right stage of the innings with the right field and with wickets pressure. So pretty much whenever any competent part-timer would bowl and go at 4-5 per over.

Just stats. Mascarenhas is clearly the better medium pacer.

Colly hasn't always been needed to bowl in maximum quota of 10 overs. The stats wont tell you that. Plus if Dimi where to play 150 ODIs as a main bowler (although this wont happen) - he would have a better record.

Mascarenhas may get good figures once in a while if everything is put in his favour, but by doing that you then have to deprive a much better bowler of the helpful conditions.

In a full strenght team their will be no better bowler though. If the bowling is Anderson/Broad/Flintoff/Dimi/Swann/Collingwood. Dimi fits into this attack quite well.

Why would you want an aging player like that in your side if you harbour any ambitions of winning something major?

Ha you make it sound like if he's closing in on 40. Fact is he aint never going to be a top quality ODI all-rounder, he is another bits an pieces county player. BUT unlike the Irani's, Fleming's, Brown's, Holliokes etc - he can have alot of use in full strenght ODI team. If the team doesn't have Freddie though i wont pick him.

 

[Goughy]

Clearly not. Those two where just his two best bowling performances for ENG, his bowling generally has ranged from decent to solid. The only ODI game where i can remember where he was smoked was in the WI when Gayle took 24 off him in an over - which even that was in a power-play.

He has not taken a wicket in 13 of the 20 games he has bowled in and at one point went 5 games without taking a wicket.

That is not someone who can be a frontline bowler.

 

[Jarquis]

Yeah but they're stats and stats don't count if you play for/in/against England/English Counties.

 

[Goughy]

Yeah but they're stats and stats don't count if you play for/in/against England/English Counties.

Actually they are not stats

 

[Jarquis]

Actually they are not stats

"Going wicketless in 13/20 games" isn't a statistic?

 

[aussie]

He has not taken a wicket in 13 of the 20 games he has bowled in and at one point went 5 games without taking a wicket.

That is not someone who can be a frontline bowler.

His strenght as bowler is not really to be a wicket-taker - Its to be ENGs Gavin Larsen. If he bowls 10-1-30-0 or 10-0-40-0 he has done his job - if he gets wickets due to pressure he builds thats a bonus.

Plus add his ability to be a hitter batting potentially @ 8 - he stenghtens the lower order a great deal in a Full strenght ODI XI (Flintoff playing).

Yeah but they're stats and stats don't count if you play for/in/against England/English Counties.

Weak.

 

[marc71178]

So we should pick him because every so often he keeps it tight (although only if he gets to bowl at the optimum time when better bowlers would actually threaten to take wickets if they bowled at that time) and because once in a blue moon he may score some runs.

I think not.

 

[Goughy]

His strenght as bowler is not really to be a wicket-taker - Its to be ENGs Gavin Larsen. If he bowls 10-1-30-0 or 10-0-40-0 he has done his job - if he gets wickets due to pressure he builds thats a bonus.

Going for 0-40 is exactly what the batting side wants in the middle overs. They can tick the score board over and save wickets for the final push towards the end.
Going wicketless in the middle gives the batting side exactly what they want and are trying to achieve.

Playing exactly into their gameplan.

 

[Goughy]

"Going wicketless in 13/20 games" isn't a statistic?

No

 

[aussie]

If the team is:

Strauss, Trott, KP, Colly, Flintoff, Morgan, Prior, Dimi, Broad, Swann, Anderson.

The wicket taking bowlers would clearly be the pacers & Swann. If you a situation where lets say Dimi & Flintoff are bowling in the middle overs - the pressure Dimi could build from one end, will surely help Flintoff get a wicket. Thats what Larsen did for NZ very effectively.

Plus picking another bowler like Sidebottom & Bresnan instead of Mascarenhas in such an XI wont make much sense anyway, since as i said before Dimi's all-round package is way better.

 

[Uppercut]

"Just stats" is often used as an attempt to act like the things that win cricket matches- runs and wickets- don't matter. It conveniently ignores the fact that at the end of the match, the team with the higher number next to their name is the team that wins. Numbers are the essence of cricket.

 

[Jarquis]

No

How isn't it?

 

[Nate]

Pretty keen to watch some of this tonight.

 

[Jarquis]

Will catch a stream when I'm back from school.
Seems as though Tredwell will play ahead of Rashid.

 

[Scaly piscine]

If the team is:

Strauss, Trott, KP, Colly, Flintoff, Morgan, Prior, Dimi, Broad, Swann, Anderson.

The wicket taking bowlers would clearly be the pacers & Swann. If you a situation where lets say Dimi & Flintoff are bowling in the middle overs - the pressure Dimi could build from one end, will surely help Flintoff get a wicket. Thats what Larsen did for NZ very effectively.

Plus picking another bowler like Sidebottom & Bresnan instead of Mascarenhas in such an XI wont make much sense anyway, since as i said before Dimi's all-round package is way better.

You're getting it the wrong way round. Dimi does not create pressure, the other bowlers create pressure for him which means the batsmen can't just slog him out of the park, the pitch/fielding positions also need to help him otherwise they'll still just slog him out of the park.

The dobbers in the past wouldn't work nearly as well in this era.