*Official* England in South Africa

[marc71178]

And who should've missed out to allow him to play?

 

[GIMH]

One of the better bowlers, obviously.

TBF I probably wouldn't complain too much if he was picked ahead of Sidebottom, generally. But South Africa might suit Sidey.

 

[marc71178]

Something's got to - but I can't see that SA will be.

Give him a green pitch and weak opposition though and he'll take a bagful.

 

[Furball]

Backing Anderson to run riot personally.

 

[sparkey]

That seriously pissed me off at the time, if you remember. I'd cry for days with happiness if my country asked me to tour sunny South Africa in November and spend the entire time playing cricket. And the entire county circuit he's competing with probably feel the same.

Apart from which, he's a crap bowler. Think it's worth bringing up my pre-Ashes prediction again:

So true

 

[aussie]

And who should've missed out to allow him to play?

He should been in the test squad at least, Plunkett shoudn't have been picked.

I am all for 4-seamers playing in SA (given i dont like the look of Swann in a 4-man attack vs SA unless its a real turner). So with Anderson/Broad the only certainties IMO, Harmo should have been battling with Onions & Sidebottom for 1 of two places.

 

[marc71178]

The only one I'd have actually selected him ahead of would be Sidebottom - and that'd be as the last seamer to travel.

In that sort of circumstance neither would be likely to make the side so it's a moot point IMO. I don't think either would add a lot to the team ethic if they were travelling in that role though but there's nobody else around that springs to mind as an alternative.

 

[kingkallis]

Good players to watch out for in bold in the 50-over 'A' team. Of course you know about Amla, McLaren and Morne Morkel.

Strange that Theron gets the chance ahead of CJD

 

[four_or_six]

He should been in the test squad at least, Plunkett shoudn't have been picked.

I am all for 4-seamers playing in SA (given i dont like the look of Swann in a 4-man attack vs SA unless its a real turner). So with Anderson/Broad the only certainties IMO, Harmo should have been battling with Onions & Sidebottom for 1 of two places.

You have to say 'enough is enough' eventually. The guy has an absolutely atrocious away record.

02/03 (Aus) - 4 matches, 9 wickets @ 51
03/04 (Bang/WI) - 5 matches, 32 wickets @ 13
04/05 (SA) - 5 matches, 9 wickets @ 73
05/06 (WorldXI/Pak/India) - 6 matches, 21 wickets @ 33
06/07 (Aus) - 5 matches, 10 wickets @ 61
07/08 (SL/NZ) - 3 matches, 7 wickets @ 48
08/09 (India/WI) - 3 matches, 5 wickets @ 47

Taking him would be completely pointless.

 

[aussie]

You have to say 'enough is enough' eventually. The guy has an absolutely atrocious away record.

02/03 (Aus) - 4 matches, 9 wickets @ 51
03/04 (Bang/WI) - 5 matches, 32 wickets @ 13
04/05 (SA) - 5 matches, 9 wickets @ 73
05/06 (WorldXI/Pak/India) - 6 matches, 21 wickets @ 33
06/07 (Aus) - 5 matches, 10 wickets @ 61
07/08 (SL/NZ) - 3 matches, 7 wickets @ 48
08/09 (India/WI) - 3 matches, 5 wickets @ 47

Taking him would be completely pointless.

The MAIN argument IMO for taking Harmo to SA that Arthur also highlighted (which i don't believe us pre series mind games) is given that surfaces are VERY likely to assist Harmo given hi style of bowling. The way of Siddle & Johnson bowled in SA earlier this year further backs this claim.

His past overseas record thus is largely irrelevant since in none of those series where the pitches bowler friendly or assisted his back of the lenght style bowling. Which as i said is likely what ENG will get in SA this winter in Jo'Burg, Durban FOR SURE - Capetown could be a flat or helpul, while Centurion will be a road.

I like everyone else have given up on Harmo reaching back is WI/NZ 7 test performances of 2004. But given we have no Flintoff now - thus no intimidation in the bowling attack - the selectors have definately missed a trick by not picking him in the squad for reasons i just said.

 

[SeamUp]

I understand where you are coming from Aussie but in all honesty its the end of the road for Harmison. You cannot pick a bowler whose heart and mind isn't fully on the job and rather thinking of his family in Durham. The time has come for him to call it quits.

I think Mickey was playing a bit of Russian roulette though in all honesty but what he is saying is true in that you are missing a genuine quick who will bang it into our hard pitches and get rewards. It may necessarily not be Harmison though. But at the moment you don't have that bowler at the moment. The closest is Steve Finn and to me he had to come on this tour. Even if it was for experience because on the Australian roads of pitches you either need pace or bounce and Finn has both. Therefore it would have been good for him to come to SA in preparation for the Ashes.

 

[FBU]

He should been in the test squad at least, Plunkett shoudn't have been picked.

I.

First class 2009

513.1 overs 63 wickets at 23.85 - Harmison
409.3 overs 60 wickets at 23.35 - Plunkett

 

[aussie]

First class 2009

513.1 overs 63 wickets at 23.85 - Harmison
409.3 overs 60 wickets at 23.35 - Plunkett

Strongly believe those wickets by Plunkett is big abberation. Just like how Luke Wright's FC performances where, which the dumb selectors used as guide to pick him in the test squad as an "all-rounder".

Plus i saw him in two OD games for Durham on TV at the end of the season and i struggle to see what the selectors would have saw that would have suggested to them "yes Plunkett has improved".

 

[aussie]

I understand where you are coming from Aussie but in all honesty its the end of the road for Harmison. You cannot pick a bowler whose heart and mind isn't fully on the job and rather thinking of his family in Durham. The time has come for him to call it quits.

I think Mickey was playing a bit of Russian roulette though in all honesty but what he is saying is true in that you are missing a genuine quick who will bang it into our hard pitches and get rewards. It may necessarily not be Harmison though. But at the moment you don't have that bowler at the moment. The closest is Steve Finn and to me he had to come on this tour. Even if it was for experience because on the Australian roads of pitches you either need pace or bounce and Finn has both. Therefore it would have been good for him to come to SA in preparation for the Ashes.

Nah not him. He hasn't really stepped up this season. Harmison was the best man, the selectors just had to be smart about using him. For example clearly you wouldn't pick him for the 1st test in centurion, but he pretty much has to play in Jo'Burg & Durban.

 

[Flem274*]

Strongly believe those wickets by Plunkett is big abberation. Just like how Luke Wright's FC performances where, which the dumb selectors used as guide to pick him in the test squad as an "all-rounder".

Plus i saw him in two OD games for Durham on TV at the end of the season and i struggle to see what the selectors would have saw that would have suggested to them "yes Plunkett has improved".

You saw two list A games? You must be an expert.

I agree some players are just bad, but stats whilst they can be suspect, still provide a good guideline. Plunkett did well, he gets rewarded. Harmison sucks, he gets shafted. It's not that dificult.

 

[FBU]

Strongly believe those wickets by Plunkett is big abberation. Just like how Luke Wright's FC performances where, which the dumb selectors used as guide to pick him in the test squad as an "all-rounder".

Plus i saw him in two OD games for Durham on TV at the end of the season and i struggle to see what the selectors would have saw that would have suggested to them "yes Plunkett has improved".

Plunkett's one day cricket hasn't been very good this season and that is why Mahmood is in the one day side and Plunkett in the Test side.

Trescothick.. ..

'The best bowler I have faced this season is definitely Graham Onions. From the first ball of his spell he was quick - I nicked it straight to first slip actually, who couldn't hang on to it. But every ball he was at me. He bowled me in the end and I didn't get near hitting it. My bat was still way up in the air when the stumps went over. Everyone knows that Harmison is an attacking bowler, but he bowls a few more balls that you can let go on length, knowing they will bounce too high to hit the stumps, but with Onions it feels you have to play everything and that he's going to sneak one through on either side of the bat'.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Yep. Onions is ridiculously low in the pecking order, he should be an automatically pick in Tests and he rarely gets the new ball or bowls many overs when he's now arguably England's best Test bowler available.

 

[Furball]

Strongly believe those wickets by Plunkett is big abberation. Just like how Luke Wright's FC performances where, which the dumb selectors used as guide to pick him in the test squad as an "all-rounder".

Plus i saw him in two OD games for Durham on TV at the end of the season and i struggle to see what the selectors would have saw that would have suggested to them "yes Plunkett has improved".

Irrelevant.

You're picking a squad, you pick the players who have shown good domestic form if there's a spot available. Not a guy who once took 7 poles in a Test almost 6 years ago.

 

[analyst]

It isn't so much a strong case for Bell, certainly in terms of ODI cricket, Test cricket I would make more of a case. I was suggesting a possibility that his role may not have necessarily been clearly defined, judging by where he bats, and how at times, how he plays. I am not saying he should be an automatic limited-overs selection.

I would question whether Collingwood shies away from responsibility in the batting line-up, I thought he looked excellent at 4 during the Champs Trophy while KP was out. Also, the batting order is generally left to the skipper, and although he had brief spell doing it himself, they must feel that his best position is 5.

I would certainly say that Tests are more important and, if at times, the one-day games may occasionally be used to get the Test players adjusted to conditions due to a lack of warm-up games. I'm all for it.

Well I beg to differ, how could he have looked excellent when he scored two half centuries in the last five games. Unless there are different standards for different players. He averages 35 in his career, not bad for an England ODI international and also has a moderate career strike rate in the early 70's. It is nothing really to write home about.

And I don't think any supporter from any country would agree that you ignore one format of cricket because another is more important. No one genuinely considers losing acceptable, I doubt England are actually putting out their best team, they are hopeless at putting together a long term strategy, hopeless at understanding modern ODI cricket. Everytime they lose, they completely tear the whole team apart, it shows little or no confidence in the team, total insecurity.

So definitely don't agree that English cricket is headed in any positive direction right now. It has been sold very well in the short form to you though it seems, but I am a cynic so feel free to ignore if you will.

 

[analyst]

And he will fail when he plays without a doubt this winter..



I also have little faith in the ENG selectors when it comes to ODI cricket, who wouldn't after more than almost 2 decades of poor ODI performances.




But Cook in his last stint in the ODI set-up proved very clearly he is not an ODI cricketer, he is the 2009 version of Atherton opening in ODIs. So recalling him based on two domestic hundreds againts attacks of 2nd division attack standard, just defies logic.

Denly yes ATM has alot to prove but at least he has shown in phases in the ODIs he has played has has some raw material & deserves persisting with for the near future.





Agreed. England like most nations have tried to get that copy AUS with the keeper opening the batting. But at the same time since the Trescothick/Knight partnership has broken up & Trescothick retiring for obvious reasons. The top order really has had no one capable of being aggressive (at international quality) as openers, so in a SMALL way you can understand why various players have being experimented at the top by the selectors.

Its all about balance. Davies & Kieswetter have done well opening domestically so if they even play for ENG they should open. Prior or Foster should bat down the order.

Right now with Flintoff out i'd happy to let Strauss & Denly open.



As i said all talk about the ODI team for now should focus on the 2011 WC. Right now Cook should not be in those plans - period.

Funnily I don't agree with Flintoff opening what so ever, I never have done. He is no Botham. He is a spectacular cricketer of this era, he however is no longer a batsman capable of batting in the top 4.

Davies seems like a more solid option than Kieswatter, given Worcester's success in the shorter formats and his contribution to it. Flintoff is ideally suited to setting up the score or chasing a total coming in at 5 or 6, perfect IMO.

I doubt we will agree with Cook or Denly atm, considering both have a lot to prove themselves, I am sure they are under pressure to deliver. So I presume the results will show for themselves. I do think Cook is perhaps as bad he appears in limited overs and I do think he will be capable of delivering on his promise of flaying the Aussie bowlers to all parts even if it was a first class game way back in 2005 at Chelmsford, it should come to fruition sometime soon.