An open letter to Duncan Fletcher

[_Ed_]

sooooooooooo much evidence, when will the penny drop


*

It might just be my memory failing me, but the last time I remember him making a really meaningful contribution with the bat was against NZ in 2004?

 

[Top_Cat]

I think Giles and Panesar will both play in Perth. Fletcher will never drop Giles.

Anderson has to go though.

Aw come on man the ball he knocked over Glenn McGrath with was a Jaffa.

Seriously, for Perth, drop Anderson and pick Mahmood then tell him to try to knock Langer's block off and bowl yorkers at Ponting's off peg. I sense a stump cartwheeling back early in a Ponting knock if he did that. As for Panesar, unless a raging turner, I don't know if they should play in the same side. Panesar is an attacking bowler and if he goes for runs early, it would force Gilo to do the 'aim at leg-stump' thing and he's a far less effective wicket-taker when he does that. I say, either give him free reign to bowl like he did in Brisbane or strengthen the batting, drop Freddie and Jones down a spot each and pick Panesar. Do the job with four attacking bowlers. I have said it for a while and I maintain that Freddie should not be batting top-6, opening the bowling and captaining. He batted REALLY well in the Ashes but now we're seeing regression towards the mean.

 

[greg]

Fletcher has excelled himself in his latest comments:

Fletcher believed that Hoggard's success justified the selection of James Anderson ahead of the extra spinner. "We thought a skiddy bowler would probably play quite a big role on this wicket," he said. "It happened here when we played South Australia in the warm-up game, James Anderson bowled very well, as did Hoggard. Not every bowler is going to go and get the wickets every time. It was Hoggard's turn this time, but if we played it again, it would probably be Jimmy's turn."

It's no wonder he doesn't see any difference between the bowling of Panesar and Giles. He's just managed to run down one of the great English pace bowling performances of recent times (and implicitly all the years of hard work and experience that Hoggard has had to put in to be capable of a performance like that) and put it down effectively to "luck on the day". Another day, with a fair wind, it would have been Anderson.

 

[Scmods]

SCMODS: 1
Duncan Fletcher: 0.

Judging by the amount of "Sack Fletcher" threads appearing I'd say that I was right before any of you. Thankyou and goodnight.

 

[Matteh]

SCMODS: 1
Duncan Fletcher: 0.

Judging by the amount of "Sack Fletcher" threads appearing I'd say that I was right before any of you. Thankyou and goodnight.

1 has appeared, and that's by a forum tool, plus the Fletcher - Time to go poll was up before this thread. Your arrogance is unjustified.

 

[steds]

SCMODS: 1
Duncan Fletcher: 0.

Judging by the amount of "Sack Fletcher" threads appearing I'd say that I was right before any of you. Thankyou and goodnight.

I've been saying he should go since he picked Shaun Udal, actually.

 

[Matt79]

Udal > Giles tbh

 

[steds]

Not a chance.

 

[Laurrz]

Dustin is cool

 

[Matt79]

Not a chance.

Who is Udal btw?

 

[BingLeeElectric]

Fletcher has excelled himself in his latest comments:

Fletcher believed that Hoggard's success justified the selection of James Anderson ahead of the extra spinner. "We thought a skiddy bowler would probably play quite a big role on this wicket," he said. "It happened here when we played South Australia in the warm-up game, James Anderson bowled very well, as did Hoggard. Not every bowler is going to go and get the wickets every time. It was Hoggard's turn this time, but if we played it again, it would probably be Jimmy's turn."

It's no wonder he doesn't see any difference between the bowling of Panesar and Giles. He's just managed to run down one of the great English pace bowling performances of recent times (and implicitly all the years of hard work and experience that Hoggard has had to put in to be capable of a performance like that) and put it down effectively to "luck on the day". Another day, with a fair wind, it would have been Anderson.

My god, it gets worse.

Does this man have NO shame?

 

[techno t]

My god, it gets worse.

Does this man have NO shame?

no the ijoit dont, he's a useless ****ing ****!!

*

 

[Langeveldt]

drop Anderson and pick Mahmood

Look buddy I know you might be a true blue Aussie fan, but thats no way to take the piss....

 

[Arrow]

My god, it gets worse.

Does this man have NO shame?

People with absolute power dont really care about shame. Power is blinding. He gambled with Giles and lost about as badly as you can. He should be sacked.

 

[R_D]

Look buddy I know you might be a true blue Aussie fan, but thats no way to take the piss....

Surely Mahmood would be an improvement on Jimmy 'usless' Anderson ?
Mahmood's inconsistent but every now than he balls a amazing deliveries that jimmy can only dream of bowling....