Or it would be if McGrath was picked as a batsman, but he's not, he's picked as an all-rounder and even Mark Butcher is bowling ahead of him at the moment. Good innings, Fletcher seems to stand by the rule of "underachiever in county cricket = International star"luckyeddie said:
Unless they secretly intended for this scenario all along. They told the press that McGrath was the 5th bowler but the real 5th bowler was Buthcer (their secret weapon) and McGrath was drafted in as a batsman. Perhaps.......unlikely but perhaps......Rik said:
Won't go overboard just yet, but Fletcher does have this habit at looking beyond the figures when he looks for players, and as with others, this is one of those cases.luckyeddie said:
Butcher bowled ahead of McGrath because Hoggard was swinging it and Butcher swings it more than McGrath does - and this was justified by Butcher's 5-2-8-1 removing Ebrahim on 68.Rik said:
Nope it doesn't, because McGrath bowls swing and did not bowl in swing friendly conditions. Giles is in there as the spinning option, rarely will a team go into a match without a spinner, whatever the conditions. Giles is there for the last few days when the pitch cracks. He might not be required too much but it makes sense to pick him. Picking a swing bowler then bowling a part-timer in his place does not.Neil Pickup said:
Butcher swings it more than McGrath, therefore was more suitable for a short spell whilst resting the three main seamers, that was the point...Rik said:
To get 69 well played runs.Rik said:
When England were cruising along. If he's not going to bowl then why claim he will? If your going to pick a batsman why not pick a younger player and give him the luxury of a pressure-free debut? The runs were nice but I feel this is just a wasted selection.Mr Mxyzptlk said:
Ok I said to Bazza on MSN yesterday, why the age thing in Tests? Ok ODI i understand your building for the next major comp... you don't want to get there and 7 players retire, but Tests are completly differnet your not playing for anything as such just the next series and now that every test counts towards the Tests rankings you want to field the best side, so why does it matter if one guy is slightly older.. and I think Mcgrath is about 27.. Ok say 28 at worse, 7-8 years still only makes him 5 years younger than Stewy at 35. And all the claim why can't Troughton play instead, his only like 2 years younger than Mcgrath anyway.Rik said:
Good point too.Neil Pickup said:
One COULD argue that, but equally one COULD argue that we haven't thus far needed a spinner. The fact that England rolled Zimbabwe over so comprehensively in the first innings helped a great deal.Rik said:
I think it is because everyone is building towards trying to beat the Australians especially us with the Ashes. We have to aim towards next series. If a team plays together for a longer period of time then there may be a team spirit, know each others' games inside out. For example, Tresco and Vaughan know each other games and so don't have to call for quick singles. However it may not such a big thing but it is still a factor.Rich2001 said:
