four_or_six
Cricketer Of The Year
Lol, good for him.
Obviously I really really hope Flintoff is playing the next game. But if he's not going to, we need to get it well out of the way a couple of days beforehand because all hell will break loose.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
*Official* Fifth Test at The Oval
- Thread starter GIMH
- Start date
Obviously I really really hope Flintoff is playing the next game. But if he's not going to, we need to get it well out of the way a couple of days beforehand because all hell will break loose.
Stapel
International Regular
Well,
I would have sent Ramps an invitation far earlier; at least a year ago. That way, his mental abilities would have been proven.
But let's get real here: The form Bopara and Bell are showing simply means that even dropping them for my disabled grandmother wouldn't hurt England too much. And Mark Ramprakash has shown a very very consistent form now for over 3 years. Wouldn't it have been for his age and test history, he most defenitely would have been selected. Since in my strong opinion selection should NOT be about age or ancient statistics, it is a simple and obvioud choice: Pick Ramps, for he is the best batsman in England.
I would give Collingwood some more credits, but Bell and Bopara have failed. They will never ever win back the Ashes for England.
I cannot imagine that anyone would answer the question "Is Ramps more likely to win back the Ashes than either Bell or Bopara?" with no......
Oh, and Bopara won't be good at 5 either.
Last edited:
sledger
Spanish_Vicente
This pretty much sums up my thoughts entirely. Well said.
inbox24
International Debutant
Basically it's a case of you can't do worse really. Bell and 'Bops' should probably given a rest. Bell's career is at the stage that Ramps was about 7-8 years ago (without the domestic form) etc meaning that he has used up all his credits for at least 3-4 years. 'Bops' probably should have 1 more test in fairness given his Windies centuries although it's quite borderline. Thought he was going to come out and score centuries against us at every turn. Luckily he has proven me very wrong! Good lad.
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
I think it is now safe to say that Shah's test career is over, I have not heard a single person mention him as a candidate, surley England would not go back to him now?
If I had to pick a side now I would probably go with:
Strauss
Cook
Carberry
Ramprakash
Collingwood
Flintoff/ Trott (depending on fitness, obviously Fred would play 7)
Prior
Broad (guess he has to play after the last test)
Swann
Anderson (Sidebottom if Jimmy is injured)
Onions
If I had to pick a side now I would probably go with:
Strauss
Cook
Carberry
Ramprakash
Collingwood
Flintoff/ Trott (depending on fitness, obviously Fred would play 7)
Prior
Broad (guess he has to play after the last test)
Swann
Anderson (Sidebottom if Jimmy is injured)
Onions
Stapel
International Regular
Nearly being 40 hasn't stopped him from scoring 250+ innings, so that's hardly an arguement. Producing the goods in Div 2 might though.
Anyway, England should drop both Bops & Belly, so Trott & Ramps can both have a go.
pup11
International Coach
I have no problems in England axing both Bell and Bopara, and AFAIC they should have done that for the Headingley test itself, because in my book, now they have left it a bit too late to make a replacement, because it would be a pretty daunting task for anyone to come into an Ashes series, and get on with in the most important game of the series.
This is the team that England should play at the Oval:
1.Strauss
2.Cook
3.Key
4.Trott
5.Collingwood
6.Prior
7.Flintoff
8.Broad
9.Swann
10.Anderson
11.Onions
Not like he has not produced in Division one though, Ramps county performance of fitness is not an issue, the issue as always is his previous failure at test level and there is a good argument against picking him . I understand why people would not pick him but I am not convinced that any of the alternatives are better.
Manee
Cricketer Of The Year
Age is not going to hinder immediate stamina as much as the amount of fatigue after each passing day. The extra day in Test cricket is not to be underestimated.
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Bell wasn't going to be dropped after hitting 51 in his only innings after recall. Sure, it was lucky, but he was never going to have his place questioned for the next game. Ravi, however, well I agree.
pup11
International Coach
Look mate, as an Aussie fan I really won't mind seeing a mentally fragile individual like Ramps replacing either Bops or Bell, I think Ramps' ability to score runs at the FC level was never under any doubt, but his temperament at the top level definitely sucks.
Even if that's not the case anymore, I still can't see the English selectors going back to a 40 year old bloke, as it would be too much of an embarrassment for them to agree that, there aren't any decent youngish batsmen around in England atm.
pup11
International Coach
He shouldn't have made a comeback in the first place, if English selectors thought Trott was good enough to make it into the English squad for the Headingley test, then he should have been the one to replace KP.
nick-o
State 12th Man
I rather hope that Flintoff isn't picked. Rate the guy highly and all that, but he was sub-par in the Third test and I don't think there's any way he can perform for five days at the Oval. Doubtless he'll say he can, and doubtless England will want to give him a send off, but nevertheless I think it would be a mistake to pick him.
I'd also be tempted, if I were a selector, to exaggerate Jimmy's injury a bit and replace him. Exaggerating the injury means he doesn't get too demoralized, tell him he isn't being dropped, just rested till he's fully fit.
The priority has to be taking 20 wickets, so a five-man attack is needed: Sidebottom, Harmison, Broad and Onions as a four-pace attack, plus Swann.
That leaves Broad batting 7 and Swann 8, which isn't too hot, and Prior at 6.
I think Strauss, Cook and Collingwood are secure, and to me that means finding two batsmen of whom I want at least one to have experience -- two debutants doesn't work.
So I'd bring in Trott, and the final place is a choice between Key and Ramps as the only experienced guys left around; or stick with Bell.
To me, that says Ramps is the right man for the job. I find it quite shocking to find myself saying that...
I'd also be tempted, if I were a selector, to exaggerate Jimmy's injury a bit and replace him. Exaggerating the injury means he doesn't get too demoralized, tell him he isn't being dropped, just rested till he's fully fit.
The priority has to be taking 20 wickets, so a five-man attack is needed: Sidebottom, Harmison, Broad and Onions as a four-pace attack, plus Swann.
That leaves Broad batting 7 and Swann 8, which isn't too hot, and Prior at 6.
I think Strauss, Cook and Collingwood are secure, and to me that means finding two batsmen of whom I want at least one to have experience -- two debutants doesn't work.
So I'd bring in Trott, and the final place is a choice between Key and Ramps as the only experienced guys left around; or stick with Bell.
To me, that says Ramps is the right man for the job. I find it quite shocking to find myself saying that...
Son Of Coco
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Common sense and his previous record against half-decent teams suggested otherwise. I think rather than give him another test England would be wise to realise that his efforts against the WI have now been put in blinding perspective.
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
I want him out of the team more than anything (in fact I was bowling bouncers at him on Ashes Cricket yesterday, do dismayed am I with him
) but I don't think this is particularly fair. He had only played one 'half-decent team' beforehand and that was over a year before he went to the West Indies. He definitely appeared to have improved, as poor as the West Indies were. I think once he had scored three tons in three matches he had to play really; the opposition were poor, but none of our other bats managed as much. That being said, they have indeed now been put in perspective, just looks all at sea. Shouldn't be anywhere near the Test team in the next twelve months.
Stapel
International Regular
We cannot say what his temperament at the top level will be, since that was too long ago, imho. I might have changed a lot! Actually, it should have improved, I reckon.
That would be a false argument, I think. The procedure of picking a new batsman, if any spots become available (and we all agree there should be spots available), is that you invite your best first-class batsman who is not already in your test squad. That's what I think, at least. To determine who is the best, you should look at the figures at the last 2 or 3 years, not at age. Hence Ramprakash.
Anyway, as a neutral fan, I will simply support England if Flintoff plays
.As a cricket fan, I simply want the last game to be epic. To make that happen England needs to make 2 changes in the batting line up. They must pick batsmen that are MORE likely to get some runs on the board than B&B.