*Official* England vs Pakistan, NatWest Challenge Thread

[Kimbo]

Wow - now that would be superb Kim! :O :O :O

Send them through to james.nixon@cricketweb.net

Look forward to receiving a huge email from you

i'm not sure when i will get the photos- patrick eagar is going to make a cd for me, then i will send them. im not sure when i get the cd, however the photos can go through to the archive cant they. actually i am probably buying sports photography gear in the next month or so... cannot wait!

 

[Neil Pickup]

Rikki Clarke needs to be dropped because he cannot cut it and has no sign of cutting it either and Jim Troughton did not do too well but i will stick by him he may come good.......

Originally posted by chris.hinton, 12:06 PM, 31/05/2003
http://forum.cricketweb.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3954&perpage=30&pagenumber=2
Rikki Clarke will be a great for England (Neil Pickup must be sick)

Why the change of heart?

 

[luckyeddie]

Why the change of heart?

Neil's obviously got better.

 

[luckyeddie]

Whilst I'm not normally in favour of changing a winning side, I'd like to see one (or even a couple) for Thursday's game.

After all, it's a squad.

 

[marc71178]

Why the change of heart?

He saw him attempt to play!

 

[Gotchya]

I thought the last hour was totally absorbing.

Funnily enough, the person I feel sorry for (well, just a bit) is Shoaib Akhtar - he bowled absolutely superbly today.

How he didn't clean Read up with that inswinger I will never know.

Trescothick may well go on to make more fluent hundreds (he could have been run out twice and should have been caught a couple of times too) but he demonstrated that he is much more than a banger today.

Good series.

Very Impressive innings from Trescothick. The chances did go, but still he made England win.

Akhtar is tasting some bad luck.

 

[marc71178]

At least it was bad luck this time, unlike in the first game!

They won without him, then lost twice with him...

 

[warrioryohannan]

I thought it was more than just a bad luck for Pak, they just gifted the match to England. If you field like that then you are certainly going to lose, no matter how good bowlers you have in your line up!

 

[Langeveldt]

Waqar having a go at Shoaib for being his usual loudmouth self..

Seems like handbags, they are just gutted because they have handed the series on a plate to England....

 

[Rik]

At least it was bad luck this time, unlike in the first game!

They won without him, then lost twice with him...

If I was Umer Gul I'd be feeling rather cheesed off, ok so he's not as quick or glamerous as Sami and Shoaib but he bowled very well in his only game, a very good delivery to get Troughton out. He did nothing wrong. Then Shoiab comes back and sprays it everywhere :rolleyes:

 

[marc71178]

He did?

Must say I can't remember him being that impressive, Sami looked a lot better (and quicker), but it was harsh to change a winning side for the man with pace but no direction at times.

 

[Bazza]

I thought Shoaib bowled really well in the third game.

Eddie you got your changes today. Johnson and Key getting a go in place of Anderson and Troughton. Personally I don't like Key but think there should be room for Johnson and Anderson, dropping Clarke. McGrath and Vaughan can provide back up but I think when we have an all rounder like Flintoff we shouldn't be relying on Clarke to bowl ten overs. :!(

Trescothick, Vaughan, Flintoff definites

Gough, Anderson, Johnson, Giles definites

Read definite

Leaves room for three batsmen - presumably at the moment Solanki, Troughton and McGrath though I am not a fan of Solanki. McGrath deserves a chance and Troughton should be a good bet long term.

 

[marc71178]

I think making Johnson a "definite" is a bit premature to be honest.

 

[Rik]

I think making Johnson a "definite" is a bit premature to be honest.

Why? Because he dared to do well?

 

[marc71178]

Because he's only played one Test and one ODI so far, both against one of the weakest batting line-ups in a long time, and there's at least 3 ODI bowlers for certain ahead of him, plus Freddie.

 

[Rik]

Because he's only played one Test and one ODI so far, both against one of the weakest batting line-ups in a long time, and there's at least 3 ODI bowlers for certain ahead of him, plus Freddie.

...and so far he's managed to out-perform nearly every England player he's played alongside in those limited oppertunities...

 

[marc71178]

Oh come on - you cannot call him a definite pick based on 2 sets of bowling against very weak batting.

 

[Bazza]

OK maybe I have phrased it badly. What I meant was this is the team I would pick for this series and assuming Johnson continues to perform he should be in this winter. I think that's a safer bet than Steve 'Wideboy' Harmison suddenly ripping through lineups, Zimbabwe or not.

For such a weak batting lineup they (well mostly Flower admittedly) made mincemeat of the likes of Clarke and McGrath.

Haven't thought this through in depth but my first choice side at the moment would be:

Trescothick
Vaughan
Flintoff
Thorpe
Collingwood
Troughton
Read
Croft
Johnson
Gough
Anderson

Though obviously I accept for this series other players are going to get chances (Solanki, Key, Clarke, McGrath, Harmison?).

To be fair the batting does look a little weak which is why I would still like Holliaoke to be around - he could bat 7 and interchange with Croft if a spinner isn't required or Johnson or if Anderson/Gough need a rest or if anyone is injured.

I know Marc you're going to defend Giles and that is fair enough but he just doesn't produce much for me. He bowls 10-0-45-1 every game and doesn't look like taking wickets - he just isn't threatening enough. I would prefer Croft who's more likely to take 3-40 and will probably score a few more runs, even though at 8/9 that isn't too vital.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

He bowls 10-0-45-1 every game and doesn't look like taking wickets - he just isn't threatening enough.

Wickets generally don't win ODI matches. IMO for a spinner, it's economy first and wickets second. For seamers, it's another scenario....

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Besides, how can you say that Croft would so drastically more penetrative. If memory serves correctly, doesn't he average around 38 in ODI's and Giles about 40?