• 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 South Africa

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I can't agree. Dropping him isn't a knee-jerk reaction; he was only recalled because of Pietersen's injury and retained when the selectors decided to go with a 4 man attack. He's had 4 tests since he came back and it isn't pretty reading:
Hey, I'm on your side. I'd have had him him nowhere near the team itfp and the sooner they lose him the better. But given the other options on tour, I can understand if they stick with him for two more tests.

Plunkett seems a pretty good option.
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Indeed. Bell has to go. Cook is the one who could probably be given the rest of this series to prove himself, if not he will be facing the axe as soon as this tour is over.
Would agree with this if we had someone to replace him with honestly does anyone really think that Luke Wright would score more runs than Bell? No. There is an argument for playing another bowler, while I don't agree with this is would be understandable.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Would've been really nice if another actual batsman was on tour, or even Bresnan ahead of Wright. A 6-9 of Prior, Swann, Bresnan and Broad (with the last three in any order you like) is pretty decent and it still gives you five proper bowlers. Plunkett can bat a bit too but he's a just a good nine I reckon, and with a weak seven you need more than a good nine at nine, if that makes any sense at all.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Would agree with this if we had someone to replace him with honestly does anyone really think that Luke Wright would score more runs than Bell? No. There is an argument for playing another bowler, while I don't agree with this is would be understandable.
If the selectors had balls they would call up Morgan to bat @ 6. We dont need anymore Bell tortune his time is uppp..

Not sure what ENG can do with the bowling. We need 5 bowlers (4 proper quicks & Swann) to really test the SA batting line-up. But there is no way we can balance the side that way without Flintoff, so ENG are screwed either way.

All we can just hope for ENG to keep fighting & SA to make mistakes for us the have realistic chance of winning this series.
 

Jarquis

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Would agree with this if we had someone to replace him with honestly does anyone really think that Luke Wright would score more runs than Bell? No. There is an argument for playing another bowler, while I don't agree with this is would be understandable.
Using the numbers Brumby posted, since his recall Bell has averaged <22 with 11 runs in his last 3 knocks.
I don't think even Wright could manage much worse than that.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Would agree with this if we had someone to replace him with honestly does anyone really think that Luke Wright would score more runs than Bell? No. There is an argument for playing another bowler, while I don't agree with this is would be understandable.
I do for one.

If Morgan were in the squad I'd say play him, but he isn't and Wright is the best batting option available, Bell included.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Would've been really nice if another actual batsman was on tour, or even Bresnan ahead of Wright. A 6-9 of Prior, Swann, Bresnan and Broad (with the last three in any order you like) is pretty decent and it still gives you five proper bowlers. Plunkett can bat a bit too but he's a just a good nine I reckon, and with a weak seven you need more than a good nine at nine, if that makes any sense at all.
Doubt there's much between Plunkett and Bresnan as batsmen. Bresnan's superior overall record is offset a bit by Plunkett being in much better nick at the moment. Plunkett plays at Chester-le-Street too, notoriously bowler-friendly place.
 

zaremba

Cricketer Of The Year
I'm not optimistic about Wright as a Test prospect TBPH. If this was a home series there isn't a cat's chance in hell that he'd get a Test. However while Bell is mentally fragile, I do get the feeling that Wright really does have a bit about him: he's the type who, on the bigger stage, might over- rather than under-perform.

We shall see.

Personally I think we should all take a deep breath and give Bell a tiny bit of a break. He got runs at the Oval v the Crims, and he should get a proper run in the team before being jettisoned.

Edit: I would add that Wright is, to a pretty ludicrous degree, a front foot player, and I can't see him lasting long on a bouncy track against Snorkel. He is also a compulsive driver, and will keep the slips interested against Ratboy Steyn. As I say, I'm not overly optimistic.
 
Last edited:

King Pietersen

International Captain
I do for one.

If Morgan were in the squad I'd say play him, but he isn't and Wright is the best batting option available, Bell included.
Man, I've seen some harsh things written about Bell on here, but in terms of cricket related comments, this takes the biscuit. I'm seriously struggling to see how you expect Wright to be a better option than Bell. Bell's not got a great Test record, but down the order he's put in some very good performances, and at 4, 5 and 6 has more than respectable averages. Bell's also been a far better performer than Wright in ODi cricket, where Wright's looked nothing more than a hack on a pitch with any life in it. Then there's the fact that although Wright had a good season last year, Bell scored more championship runs, with double the amount of hundreds at an average 10 runs higher.

Sure Bell's not performed particularly well since he came back into the side, but to suggest that Wright's a better option is very bizarre. I fail to see how Wright is superior in any way, bar possibly mental strength. Bell's superior technically, has a better international record, is more experienced and performed better than Wright in the Championship last season. I wouldn't pick him in my XI if I got to pick the squad, but there's no doubt in my mind that Bell is the far superior batting option in this squad.

As for the game today, nice result for the lads. Wasn't expecting to come home to a draw, after seeing us crawling alone at 1.85 runs an over when I turned on before work this morning, but I was pleasantly surprised. It was nice to see KP finally get some runs of note, been a while since he looked remotely convincing at the crease, just a shame he was run out before he could make a ton. Nice few runs from Trott, and a typically gritty knock from Colly as well. Good result, was expecting a loss in the first game.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
I'm not optimistic about Wright as a Test prospect TBPH. If this was a home series there isn't a cat's chance in hell that he'd get a Test. However while Bell is mentally fragile, I do get the feeling that Wright really does have a bit about him: he's the type who, on the bigger stage, might over- rather than under-perform.

We shall see.

Personally I think we should all take a deep breath and give Bell a tiny bit of a break. He got runs at the Oval v the Crims, and he should get a proper run in the team before being jettisoned.
He onlly played in the Ashes because KP was injured. Lets not forget he was dropped after the first test in the Windies last winter after a string bad performances vs SA/WI/IND

When he made that 199 vs SA at Lords on that road last summer, once felt he MAY have turned a corner, but he continued to look inept afterwards. He has done nothing to deserve being persisted with further.
 

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
As I said previously. If we must drop Bell and there are no other options available, Id rather see Davis take the gloves and Prior bat 6 than let Wright play. He is not a Test cricketer. I will genuinely upset me to see such a limited player (in terms of technique and prospect) play.
 

HeathDavisSpeed

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I fail to see how Wright is superior in any way, bar possibly mental strength.
This is key, isn't it. For all of Bell's technique, he's got the mental strength of a wet paper towel. Even Mark Vermeulen has less mental issues to work on within the game of cricket than Ian Bell.
 

zaremba

Cricketer Of The Year
Mrs Z's theory is that when Bell is playing well he's the best player in our team. All my experience of married life tells me not to disagree with her.

And there we have it.
 

HeathDavisSpeed

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Ian Bell. Matthew Bell.

Not sure who's worse. A battle of the mediocre if ever there was one.

Ian may win due to his dibbly-dobbly medium pacers. Matthew may lose due to his at times inept captaincy.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
As I said previously. If we must drop Bell and there are no other options available, Id rather see Davis take the gloves and Prior bat 6 than let Wright play. He is not a Test cricketer. I will genuinely upset me to see such a limited player (in terms of technique and prospect) play.
The Davies keeping idea is the best option indeed. But it still leaves doesn't help balance the bowling since ENG need 5 bowlers (4 quicks & Swann). Can't do that without Flintoff anymore..
 

ozone

First Class Debutant
As I said previously. If we must drop Bell and there are no other options available, Id rather see Davis take the gloves and Prior bat 6 than let Wright play. He is not a Test cricketer. I will genuinely upset me to see such a limited player (in terms of technique and prospect) play.
Interesting point, kinda dismisses the bowling of Wright completely. If Wright were to play, he should bat 7 anyway, but would Davis score any more runs than Wright.

Personally would drop Bell and pick Sidebottom or Plunkett. Then go with Prior/Swann/Broad at 6/7/8 and depend on the batsmen to score runs.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Man, I've seen some harsh things written about Bell on here, but in terms of cricket related comments, this takes the biscuit. I'm seriously struggling to see how you expect Wright to be a better option than Bell. Bell's not got a great Test record, but down the order he's put in some very good performances, and at 4, 5 and 6 has more than respectable averages. Bell's also been a far better performer than Wright in ODi cricket, where Wright's looked nothing more than a hack on a pitch with any life in it. Then there's the fact that although Wright had a good season last year, Bell scored more championship runs, with double the amount of hundreds at an average 10 runs higher.

Sure Bell's not performed particularly well since he came back into the side, but to suggest that Wright's a better option is very bizarre. I fail to see how Wright is superior in any way, bar possibly mental strength. Bell's superior technically, has a better international record, is more experienced and performed better than Wright in the Championship last season. I wouldn't pick him in my XI if I got to pick the squad, but there's no doubt in my mind that Bell is the far superior batting option in this squad.

As for the game today, nice result for the lads. Wasn't expecting to come home to a draw, after seeing us crawling alone at 1.85 runs an over when I turned on before work this morning, but I was pleasantly surprised. It was nice to see KP finally get some runs of note, been a while since he looked remotely convincing at the crease, just a shame he was run out before he could make a ton. Nice few runs from Trott, and a typically gritty knock from Colly as well. Good result, was expecting a loss in the first game.
Think that's overstating Bell's performance wildly. Since his return he averages 21. The question for me is how many more chances does he deserve? It wasn't like he was harshly jettisoned initially anyway, it was the culmination of not fulfilling his undoubted promise over a sustained period. He'll be 28 in April, he should be bloosoming now not regressing.

& you dismiss superior mental strength like it's a mere technicality. Bell has a superior batting techique, yes, but he the same is also true when one compares him to Collingwood and I know who I'd want in my team first. &, incidentally, Wright averages more in FC cricket than Collingwood did when he was first called into the test squad.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Interesting point, kinda dismisses the bowling of Wright completely.
Which is basically what one should always do IMO. His bowling's about on par with Colly's for mine and their relative First Class records suggest I'm being generous in saying that.
 

zaremba

Cricketer Of The Year
Collingwood is stunningly ineffective as a Test wicket taker. If you're after someone to pick up the odd wicket, Wright is a better bet without question. Although he's likely to be expensive.
 

Top