***Official*** England in Pakistan

[wpdavid]

Considering Pak batsmen haven't played test cricket since a long time, they are very rusty these days, and i think English's brilliant pace attack won't find it all that difficult to dismiss pakistan twice ina test match.

Well, I hope you're right. But I think this one has 0-0 written all over it.

 

[wpdavid]

Did OK in India. And his job isn't just to take stacks of wickets. Bowl his share of the overs and pick up the odd one or 2 here or there.

I know that's what Hoggard did in India 4 years ago, but nowadays he hardly bowls when conditions don't suit. The absence of Jones will necessitate a complete rethink about how we're going to bowl them out. I fear that Hoggard & Harmison, for differing reasons, will be as effective as Caddick was out there 5 years ago.

 

[aussie]

but if we see the usual pakistan conditions, hoggard will struggle to bowl anyone out.

exactly, thats why i say pick the extra batsman...

 

[marc71178]

Which then leaves us with about 3 bowlers.

 

[tooextracool]

Did OK in India. And his job isn't just to take stacks of wickets. Bowl his share of the overs and pick up the odd one or 2 here or there.

i never understand this 'did OK in india' business. he did ok in india because he got to bowl in conditions that offered plenty of swing in bangalore and ironically in the 2 games when he didnt get the ball to swing, he averaged 40 odd with the ball.

 

[tooextracool]

exactly, thats why i say pick the extra batsman...

no, with jones out, england simply cannot afford to go in with just 2 fast bowlers. we saw how limited vaughan was with his bowling options when he lost jones at the oval, and i dont see the point of going through that again.

 

[aussie]

Which then leaves us with about 3 bowlers.

what dont you rate Udal chances of doing well over their...

 

[aussie]

no, with jones out, england simply cannot afford to go in with just 2 fast bowlers. we saw how limited vaughan was with his bowling options when he lost jones at the oval, and i dont see the point of going through that again.

well we are going to the sub-continent of potentially turning tracks & in the past India 2001 & SRI 2003 we went for the 2/2 split & it wasn't that tragic. I get the feeling that might be the case again because i do believe Harmy & Freddie (especially) with the new ball & can trouble the pakistani's, also once the conditions suit we know Gilo will be effective & probably even Udal.

 

[marc71178]

what dont you rate Udal chances of doing well over their...

He's going as like for like Giles back-up.

I can't see him and Giles playing together, and you're talking about bringing in a batsman for Hoggard, when we've already lost Jones.

 

[aussie]

He's going as like for like Giles back-up.

I can't see him and Giles playing together, and you're talking about bringing in a batsman for Hoggard, when we've already lost Jones.

here what if the 1st day of the 1st test we see a flat ptich that may turn later on & blazing hot conditions it would be better if Hoggard doesn't play because he wont get anyone out, but if conditions suit then i wont mind seeing him play, fair enough?

 

[chris.hinton]

I would play Udal in the first team for Jones as Giles is an All rounder anyway

 

[BoyBrumby]

Plunkett added to Test sqaud

From the beeb's website:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/4325768.stm

Given the speed (or lack of) with which he was called up I wonder if the prognosis for Tremlett's knee is worse than they're letting on. Think Plunkers (come on, it's inevitable! ) may be a replacement for Jonah and Tremlett.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Good to see the inevitable inclusion of 3 Durham players in the ODI and Test squads, more northerners and less southern ponces is the way to go if England want to be successful.

 

[Barney Rubble]

Plunkett is a fantastic young prospect and I'm pleased to see him called up - and I agree that he is probably a replacement for both Jones and Tremlett, I can't see Tremlett making the tour to be honest. The reason they named 17 in the party in the first place is so Tremlett could cover Jones' injury, and I think the reason they've called up Plunkett now is because they know that Tremlett is unlikely to be able to play.

If they are going to call up another bowler to replace Tremlett (which I can't see them doing, but still....), then surely it has to be Mark Davies, another Durham player - he's taken about 90 wickets at around 18 in the last two years, has to be worth consideration, even if he is only medium-paced. I just hope whoever it is, it isn't Jon Lewis!

 

[Barney Rubble]

Good to see the inevitable inclusion of 3 Durham players in the ODI and Test squads, more northerners and less southern ponces is the way to go if England want to be successful.

Personally, I think the further south, the better - about South Africa kind of area sounds right.

 

[wpdavid]

Good to see the inevitable inclusion of 3 Durham players in the ODI and Test squads, more northerners and less southern ponces is the way to go if England want to be successful.

Yeah, Harmison's been a real factor in our test wins this year.

Actually, if Plunkett does do well, maybe he'll be replacing his county colleague in the England side by the next ashes series after all.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Yeah, Harmison's been a real factor in our test wins this year.

Actually, if Plunkett does do well, maybe he'll be replacing his county colleague in the England side by the next ashes series after all.

Harmison started the England's spell of domination by virtually single-handedly annihilating WI in WI - without this England might have still been a mediocre side even now. I think you'll also find he took 2 absolutely crucial wickets (Clarke and Kasper) in what turned out to be the critical point in the Ashes - when England won by 2 runs.

 

[wpdavid]

Harmison started the England's spell of domination by virtually single-handedly annihilating WI in WI and I think you'll find he took 2 absolutely crucial wickets (Clarke and Kasper) in what turned out to be the critical point in the Ashes - when England won by 2 runs.

Very quick mate. No, you'll get no argument from me about his contribution in WI, but you need to keep performing to justify staying in the side. And I think you'll find that his poor bowling was one of the reasons the 2nd test went to the wire on the final morning. Yes, it was a gem of a ball to shift Clarke, but they were very few & very far between after Lord's. Now he's facing the bigger boys, we've had one good test out of 10. Call me ungrateful, but I'm looking for more than that.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Very quick mate. No, you'll get no argument from me about his contribution in WI, but you need to keep performing to justify staying in the side. And I think you'll find that his poor bowling was one of the reasons the 2nd test went to the wire on the final morning. Yes, it was a gem of a ball to shift Clarke, but they were very few & very far between after Lord's. Now he's facing the bigger boys, we've had one good test out of 10. Call me ungrateful, but I'm looking for more than that.

No the 2nd Test went down to the wire because of Giles' poor display when virtually every other finger spinner on the planet would have been looking for a five-for in Australia's run chase.

 

[wpdavid]

No the 2nd Test went down to the wire because of Giles' poor display when virtually every other finger spinner on the planet would have been looking for a five-for in Australia's run chase.

Whereas Harmison bowled like a god on the final morning? Hardly. (Although Giles was rubbish too, to be fair.) For all the talk of Vaughan's Brearleyesque captaincy, his sticking with those two instead of Jones was not the brightest thing we've ever seen. Like I said, I'll happily give Harmison credit if & when he bowls well, but he's been chucking pies for most of 2005, and he's got away with it because others have done the job and there aren't any viable alternatives for his place. Yet. Which could change if Plunkett, Tremlett or whoever comes through like Jones has in the last 12 months.