*Official* England in Bangladesh

[Scaly piscine]

Yes Anderson is so much better he now averages over 33 with a hand-picked starting point.

Other that I can't be bothered replying, again, to stuff which patently displays aussie's inability to read.

 

[Goughy]

Other that I can't be bothered replying ,

Using the Unified CW Rules of Engagement, Aussie wins as he had the last word

 

[Uppercut]

Aussie always wins, it's not fair.

 

[aussie]

Yes Anderson is so much better he now averages over 33 with a hand-picked starting point.

Other that I can't be bothered replying, again, to stuff which patently displays aussie's inability to read.

That is not a hand-picked starting point sir. It should be fairly obvious for anyone who follows English cricket & Anderson career to date that since the 2007 home summer vs IND to SA 09/10, is when Anderson has held down a regular place in the ENG team injury free.

Between SA 03 to Ashes 06/07. He was in & out because he was crap & better bowlers where available. The fact that i have to explain this proves you dont know WTF you are talking about...


For the third time i ask. May i get the exact places where & when you have seen Mark Davies bowl???

 

[zaremba]

great discussion. anderson is englands number one pace bowler. remember mike smith the gloucester left arm seamer who had one test ? mark davies i would put into a similar catagory ditto jon lewis.

FTR Mike Smith was a seriously good swing bowler who never got a proper shot at Test cricket.

He played one Test, and bowled in only one innings, against an all-time great Australia team. This was in conditions that didn't favour his bowling. If you're a specialist swing bowler, as he was, you are at the mercy of conditions: sometimes it just doesn't swing, and if that happens you are likely to be ineffective. This was particularly unlucky for Smith, since in most other matches throughout his career he managed to get the ball to swing and therefore took lots of wickets cheaply (a little more expensively than Mark Davies, mind you).

In addition, he suffered a blow early on in that innings when Matt Elliott was badly dropped at slip off his bowling. Elliott went on to make 199. Things could have gone very differently had that catch been held.

Anyway Smith got the chop after that game. Test career over.

 

[aussie]

FTR Mike Smith was a seriously good swing bowler who never got a proper shot at Test cricket.

He played one Test, and bowled in only one innings, against an all-time great Australia team. This was in conditions that didn't favour his bowling. If you're a specialist swing bowler, as he was, you are at the mercy of conditions: sometimes it just doesn't swing, and if that happens you are likely to be ineffective. This was particularly unlucky for Smith, since in most other matches throughout his career he managed to get the ball to swing and therefore took lots of wickets cheaply (a little more expensively than Mark Davies, mind you).

In addition, he suffered a blow early on in that innings when Matt Elliott was badly dropped at slip off his bowling. Elliott went on to make 199. Things could have gone very differently had that catch been held.

Anyway Smith got the chop after that game. Test career over.

All true about Smith, remember him bowling in Ashes 97 although very vaguely. But i do agree with lockton2skipper that they are similarties between him, Lewis & Davies.

That is problem with such bowlers as you correctly highlighted, they are dependant on conditions. At county level thats good enough, but just like Lewis @ Trent Bridge 06 - Smtih @ Leeds 97 was picked on a supposedly bowler-friendly deck - it didn't swing as much as predicated & they failed to trouble test match quality batsmen.

History is a guide & not necessarily a determinant on future outcomes. But surely the ENG selectors should learn from what occured with Smith & Lewis & not consider picking Davies for tests..

 

[zaremba]

All true about Smith, remember him bowling in Ashes 97 although very vaguely. But i do agree with lockton2skipper that they are similarties between him, Lewis & Davies.

That is problem with such bowlers as you correctly highlighted, they are dependant on conditions. At county level thats good enough, but just like Lewis @ Trent Bridge 06 - Smtih @ Leeds 97 was picked on a supposedly bowler-friendly deck - it didn't swing as much as predicated & they failed to trouble test match quality batsmen.

History is a guide & not necessarily a determinant on future outcomes. But surely the ENG selectors should learn from what occured with Smith & Lewis & not consider picking Davies for tests..

Is Davies (at 6'3") as dependent on swing as Mike Smith was? I'd have thought he was more of a seam-and-swing merchant, ie with more strings to his bow than Smith who was basically a swing specialist IIRC. I'm not sure myself; perhaps Scaly is the best informed on this.

As for Mike Smith, the point I was making is that we can learn nothing from his Test experience because it was effectively non-existent. He bowled in one innings. The deck he played on is irrelevant - he's a swing bowler, and it didn't swing.

 

[NUFAN]

Is Davies (at 6'3") as dependent on swing as Mike Smith was? I'd have thought he was more of a seam-and-swing merchant, ie with more strings to his bow than Smith who was basically a swing specialist IIRC. I'm not sure myself; perhaps Scaly is the best informed on this.

As for Mike Smith, the point I was making is that we can learn nothing from his Test experience because it was effectively non-existent. He bowled in one innings. The deck he played on is irrelevant - he's a swing bowler, and it didn't swing.

Yeah, you've got to feel for the guy. From the almanack report

The first miss, when Elliott was on 29 and Australia still only 50, was a relatively easy chance to Thorpe at first slip off the bowling of Smith. It was deemed by many observers to be the sort of dropped catch that costs a Test series.

I watched the match, but can't remember Smith at all. Was he ever talked about as being close to another Test call up? It seems very harsh for him not to be given another chance, I guess Caddick came back and that was the end of Smith.

Feel sorry that he's finished his Test career level with me in terms of wickets.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

No tour thread yet, and this may have been mentioned on here before, but how bad is this comment by Paul Collingwood:

"It won't be easy to find a golf course in Bangladesh; if there is one, they'll probably have wooden clubs."

Borderline disgraceful.

 

[Jono]

Apparently not to some people here.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Can't see how anyone can defend that really. Extremely offensive.

 

[Craig]

Storm in a teacup IMO.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

See I don't mind the verbal jousting and mental disintegration before a series, but only when it's kept to business. This for me is insulting the country itself, and has nothing to do with cricket. Maybe it's a small/third world country syndrome on my part, but I find it very offensive.

 

[Jono]

Yeah, clearly is offensive in my view.

Anyone saying he's pointing it out because Bangladesh don't play much golf is kidding themselves.

 

[roseboy64]

Agreeing with Camps here.

 

[GIMH]

No tour thread yet, and this may have been mentioned on here before, but how bad is this comment by Paul Collingwood:

"It won't be easy to find a golf course in Bangladesh; if there is one, they'll probably have wooden clubs."

Borderline disgraceful.

There is a tour thread: http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/45316-official-england-bangladesh.html

 

[Craig]

See I don't mind the verbal jousting and mental disintegration before a series, but only when it's kept to business. This for me is insulting the country itself, and has nothing to do with cricket. Maybe it's a small/third world country syndrome on my part, but I find it very offensive.

Then you must of been outraged by Andrew Symonds "bombs going off in Pakistan" comments then? That to me would be more offensive then somebody sledging Bangladesh's golfing (or lack thereof) prowess.

 

[G.I.Joe]

It was a comment on their economic prowess (or lack of), not their golfing prowess.

 

[Craig]

And I hardly think Liam is hardly one to pass judgement on what is offensive to a Bangladeshi since he is not a Bangladeshi. And so what if it was on their economic status, they are hardly a super power like China.

 

[G.I.Joe]

They aren't, but you don't just pass comments to that effect without reason. Its basic manners.