*Official* England in South Africa

[Goughy]

Where's Phillander in the ranks?

As a batsman, bowler or allrounder?

As a batsman he isnt close to being ready. He isnt a bad bat but needs to improve his performances

As a bowler he has a great record on paper and he has an action similar to Kallis but bowls the ball closer to Ian Bells pace. I cant (and I guess the selector see it the same) see him being a threat at Test level. However, if he continues to do well I expect people will throw his name out there for selection.

As an allrounder there may be a future but he will need to score some runs over couple of seasons to earn a place in the discussion let alone selection.

Philander is not right for the SA team at the moment and a selection like this (a player that is neither a good bat or bowler) would weaken the side. The possible role I see for him is the 'Giles' role of batting 8 for depth and bowling if and when needed, but it is difficult for a seamer to fill that role.

 

[jboss]

As a batsman, bowler or allrounder?

As a batsman he isnt close to being ready. He isnt a bad bat but needs to improve his performances

As a bowler he has a great record on paper and he has an action similar to Kallis but bowls the ball closer to Ian Bells pace. I cant (and I guess the selector see it the same) see him being a threat at Test level. However, if he continues to do well I expect people will throw his name out there for selection.

As an allrounder there may be a future but he will need to score some runs over couple of seasons to earn a place in the discussion let alone selection.

Philander is not right for the SA team at the moment and a selection like this (a player that is neither a good bat or bowler) would weaken the side. The possible role I see for him is the 'Giles' role of batting 8 for depth and bowling if and when needed, but it is difficult for a seamer to fill that role.

IMO he has taken 186 wickets in 5 seasons as a seamer and plays 50% of his mathces at newlands which has a poor history in aiding seamers. a 33 wicket haul per season and an econ rate of under 3 throughout his career speak a good deal in favour for him.

 

[Goughy]

IMO he has taken 186 wickets in 5 seasons as a seamer and plays 50% of his mathces at newlands which has a poor history in aiding seamers. a 33 wicket haul per season and an econ rate of under 3 throughout his career speak a good deal in favour for him.

but have you ever seen him bowl? EDIT- I should probably add that I have not seen him bowl for over a season so it is possible he has improved and added a couple of yards of pace (though unlikely)
If we are looking at stats then of bowlers with 10+ wickets in the Supersport Series he was 17th in av in 06/07, 2nd in 07/08 and 19th in 08/09 and is currenly 1st 09/10.

He had a very successful 07/08 and is doing well this season but unless a lot changes he is a medium pacer that the next step will struggle.

As I said I dont think his inclusion helps SA but I also beleive that continued good form deserves recognition. If he has another very good season 2010/11 then I think he will have earned a shot even though I think he will not make the transition successfuly. (I also dont think he will put pack to back big seasons together)

 

[Woodster]

As a batsman, bowler or allrounder?

As a batsman he isnt close to being ready. He isnt a bad bat but needs to improve his performances

As a bowler he has a great record on paper and he has an action similar to Kallis but bowls the ball closer to Ian Bells pace. I cant (and I guess the selector see it the same) see him being a threat at Test level. However, if he continues to do well I expect people will throw his name out there for selection.

As an allrounder there may be a future but he will need to score some runs over couple of seasons to earn a place in the discussion let alone selection.

Philander is not right for the SA team at the moment and a selection like this (a player that is neither a good bat or bowler) would weaken the side. The possible role I see for him is the 'Giles' role of batting 8 for depth and bowling if and when needed, but it is difficult for a seamer to fill that role.

Sounds like he would take on a Darren Sammy type role, although I expect Philander to have a little more penetration.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Not convinced by Carberry in the middle order, thought he was pretty well known for having lead feet against spinners??

Duminy doesn't bowl much...

To be honest, I don't see it being much of an issue who's called up: Colly will in all likelihood be fine.

 

[Woodster]

I thoguht Morkel bowled pretty well in the last Test, and was probably the main threat amongst the SA attack. He is generally a little bit short when the track is offering something and seemingly finds it difficult to hit a length around a yard fuller on a consistent basis.

His pace was decent throughout and his steep bounce presented some problems for England, but there was far from enough support for him by the rest of the attack to build any form of pressure.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Sounds like he would take on a Darren Sammy type role, although I expect Philander to have a little more penetration.

Sounds very much like Andrew McDonald to me. IIRC I have seen Philander twice, once in ODI cricket for SA when he dropped one of the easiest catches of all time, and once in the Devon League for Budleigh Salterton.

Please select him as soon as possible. Also please select Rudolph, who averages 22 in 19 innings against England. If you would like to recall Alan Dawson and Boeta Dippenaar that would also help.

 

[Goughy]

Sounds very much like Andrew McDonald to me. IIRC I have seen Philander twice, once in ODI cricket for SA when he dropped one of the easiest catches of all time, and once in the Devon League for Budleigh Salterton.

How does a medium pacer at the top level translate at the Devon League level?

 

[Neil Pickup]

I cannot admit to having paid a dramatic amount of attention, but Budleigh finished 8th out of 10, there wasn't any degree of buzz around the league about his involvement, he's not on any of the stat highlight archives, and he didn't seem any more impressive by any stretch from the boundary - quick, yeah, but not ****-pants quick.

I almost wonder if I imagined it from the lack of stats, but I have found scorecards from the 2004 NatWest win for Devon over Leics when he cleaned up Brad Hodge, so it must have happened...

 

[Goughy]

I cannot admit to having paid a dramatic amount of attention, but Budleigh finished 8th out of 10, there wasn't any degree of buzz around the league about his involvement, he's not on any of the stat highlight archives, and he didn't seem any more impressive by any stretch from the boundary - quick, yeah, but not ****-pants quick.

I almost wonder if I imagined it from the lack of stats, but I have found scorecards from the 2004 NatWest win for Devon over Leics when he cleaned up Brad Hodge, so it must have happened...

Talking of Devon, do you know or have you heard of a guy called Nick Gaywood. He scored boatloads of runs for Devon but played his club cricket in the Yorkshire League. I knew him outside cricket but I think only played against him once or twice.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Talking of Devon, do you know or have you heard of a guy called Nick Gaywood. He scored boatloads of runs for Devon but played his club cricket in the Yorkshire League. I knew him outside cricket but I think only played against him once or twice.

Nope, can't say the name rings a bell at all. My Devon era was 2003/4-2007.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Sky Sports mentioned a strong rumour that Ntini is on the verge of signing as a Kolpak for an English county. If that's true, Test retirement beckons.

Interesting post-match interview with Mickey Arthur in which he seemed to be hinting pretty strongly that Ntini is for the chop. My money is on Ntini jumping before he's pushed.

Forced out by quotas, obv.

Duminy doesn't bowl much...

To be honest, I don't see it being much of an issue who's called up: Colly will in all likelihood be fine.

From the noises the English camp are making that would seem to be the case, but it does still grind my gears that the selection of the test squad was so arse-about-face we had to call up another player to an already 18-man squad. Surely to god a specialist bat might've been more use than a third spinner?

 

[jbb]

both are good teams.nut i think english is good and powerful team

 

[NUFAN]

Weren't they failed referrals though ?

Difference is that Hussey was given out both times by on-field umpires, and the decision was upheld by 3rd Umpire, while Boucher was given not out by on-field umpires, but was given out on review.

Oh yeah my bad, at the time I didn't interpret the referral part correctly. Yeah, I would say Boucher is the first.

 

[wpdavid]

From the noises the English camp are making that would seem to be the case, but it does still grind my gears that the selection of the test squad was so arse-about-face we had to call up another player to an already 18-man squad. Surely to god a specialist bat might've been more use than a third spinner?

It was very odd - especially as selection under Flower's tenure has struck me as increasingly sensible after one or two complete stabs in the dark earlier in his watch. It was almost as if they didn't have enough faith in anyone to book them a place a couple of months ago, so they thought they'd wait and see how the performance squad turned out. The 3rd spinner can only suggest that they've seen the selection of Rashid as a compete mistake at this point in time.

 

[Goughy]

Id love to know what hey see the role of Rashid as. Do they see him as a batsman that can bowl (ie top order), a young legspinner that has the bonus of batting, a player that can do a bit of both and could bat at 7 or 8 and add depth to both areas or just as a young kid brought along for the experience without any role or expectations?

I hope he can turn into a) but it doesnt seem they have a lot of faith in him at the moment and I dont think he should be included in the squad. The callup of Carberry makes the selection of non-specialist bats like Wright and Rashid look silly.

According to cricinfo there is now a 19 man squad

 

[wpdavid]

Id love to know what hey see the role of Rashid as. Do they see him as a batsman that can bowl (ie top order), a young legspinner that has the bonus of batting, a player that can do a bit of both and could bat at 7 or 8 and add depth to both areas or just as a young kid brought along for the experience without any role or expectations?

I hope he can turn into a) but it doesnt seem they have a lot of faith in him at the moment and I dont think he should be included in the squad. The callup of Carberry makes the selection of non-specialist bats like Wright and Rashid look silly.

Surely they see hom as option (b) - the young leggie who can bat a bit. And they seem to have lost faith in him following some expensive overs in the limited overs games, at which point I could repeat Scaly's point about it being absolutely daft to play him in those matches.

I don't think they had decided how many batsmen to play when they named the squad. Now, it looks daft to see Wright there, and some would say that it always did. I suppose had they gone into the last game of the series one-down and faced with an absolute road then he might have got a game. I suppose Rashid was initially different as Swann's stand-by.

 

[tooextracool]

I think the fact that we have more bowlers than batsmen in our squad says a little bit about the selection. I read an article that suggested that general opinion about Giles, Miller, Flower and Strauss should have reversed since the start of the year, however I strongly disagree with the former 2 whilst I have always had faith in the latter.

 

[wpdavid]

I think the fact that we have more bowlers than batsmen in our squad says a little bit about the selection. I read an article that suggested that general opinion about Giles, Miller, Flower and Strauss should have reversed since the start of the year, however I strongly disagree with the former 2 whilst I have always had faith in the latter.

Yes, the number of bowlers struck me when I looked at the squad that Goughy posted. All being well, there will be five who don't play a single test, which is surely excessive, even allowing for the fact that two of them weren't originally selected.

 

[GIMH]

Seems a waste of money to me