I think all this talk of Jimmy needing a rest will look very silly come the end of the next test. He has had one bad match, that is all.
-
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* Fourth Test at Chester-le-Street
- Thread starter Spark
- Start date
Maximas
Cricketer Of The Year
Yeah what bull****, he's your best pacer easily and he is as fit as anyone, he would also get really pissed off if he got rested (see 3rd test against WI 2012), no need to rest him. England have decent fast bowling depth, but Jimmy Anderson is something quite special, he can't simply be replaced IMO
flibbertyjibber
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I can't see any of the England pace boys wanting to miss out at Durham, having flogged themselves into the ground on three dry tracks offering them little why would they pass up the chance to cash in at Durham which is usually a seamers track. Wouldn't be surprised to see an unchanged bowling attack as they have hardly bowled since Friday anyway but i'd drop Bairstow and pick Taylor.
Adders
Cricketer Of The Year
I'm not basing my opinion on his performance at OT, yeah it's one bad test and that happens to the best of them. He just looked spent to me.
He could well take another 10 fer at CLS....wouldn't surprise me in the least, but he is our most valuable player and we need to make sure he is going to get through not just this series unscathed but the next as well.
At the end of the day though I'm (like all of us) just calling it as I see it from the couch......Jimmy and the selectors will know how he is travelling and if they deem him good to play the next 2 I certainly won't complain. Still think he should sit out a big chunk of the one dayers though if not all of them.
Maximas
Cricketer Of The Year
Jimmy and Steyn are two examples of excellent fast bowling management, they can pretty much play every game, even though they exert themselves an incredible amount. I'd say Jimmy can handle this after barely bowling after the first innings, short turnaround shouldn't be a problem, especially given the wicket will be seaming (?) and the match might end a bit quicker.
Maximas
Cricketer Of The Year
I know nothing, but I heard Bumble saying it would be a result pitch that would assist the quicks, of all the pitches people seem to think this will be the least Swann doctored
Tangles
International Vice-Captain
Dropped for X man is as bad. They had backed him but that was until he went to India. Hauritz didnt survive his trip to India and im hoping they arent going down the same path.
Swingpanzee
International Regular
Tbf England's bowlers were good enough on a pitch which was initially very flat, and Jimmy while not so good on day, looked a wee bit better on day 4 (though the wickets he got were more due to the Aussie batsmen playing ****). I'm only really concerned on Jimmy's fitness considering the workload he's got, if he's fit enough I'd definitely play him (who wouldn't?) Same goes for Harris. In fact Jimmy Broad Onions could be good but I don't know whether the selectors would be dropping Bresnan, he bowled well enough and he also has the potential to be a good lower order batsman so Onions' chance look a bit dim here.
Maximas
Cricketer Of The Year
Oh **** yeah, I forgot that's who they brought in, but that was more due to absolutely ****ty squad selections leaving the selectors with little other options given they were determined to give Lyon some time-out, even though he still publicly stated he felt confident.
Maximas
Cricketer Of The Year
Despite England conceding a massive lead to an inferior batting line-up? (tbf the pitch was much better day 1-2 than 3-4 but still)
Howe_zat
Audio File
Wasn't any point in dropping him for a hope and a prayer in the first two tests.
To be fair we call pretty much every ptch a road.
I am sure it will not be a minefield or anything but given the respective strengths of the batting and bowling lineups I am not expecting a high scoring game.
Maximas
Cricketer Of The Year
I read an article by Ashley Mallet who said Agar looked a better bowler than Lyon in the pre-Ashes nets up at the centre of excellence. Also, throughout the A tour and other tour games, Agar probably had the edge on Lyon, mainly cos he bats but he matched him with the ball at least. Agar was also very good in the SS, while Lyon was **** in the SS games he played. There was some merit to the selection (not that it should have happened) beyond hope and praying.
Swingpanzee
International Regular
I don't know about inferior batting line up, man. Australia have Clarke who is world class, Smith can be a tough nut, and Rogers looked good that day. England did not bowl magnificently but they weren't at much fault really imo. England's batting definitely deserves more criticism than their bowling.
Maximas
Cricketer Of The Year
arguably or batsmen simply allowed the English bowlers to dish up filth and they put it away, Rogers for instance wasn't playing ridiculously aggressively, just putting away crap balls, with a line-up containing Cook, Trott, KP and Bell, I would certainly be saying Australia have an inferior batting line-up, however our bowlers out-performed yours quite spectacularly IMO.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
They also said Old Trafford would be an excellent cricket wicket with something for everyone.
Maximas
Cricketer Of The Year
Well, it seamed at times, had uneven bounce, was a road at the start and turned the whole game, it sorta did, if we had a full last day you may have found our seamers would have taken the wickets, so while I get your point I actually think your example isn't too good.
EDIT: read your post again, excellent you said, I agree it wasn't quite that