***Official*** Pakistan and England in UAE

[Jacknife]

We all know that all the supposed top batsmen of the 90's & 00's have inflated averages because they weren't facing the great WI pace quartet of the late 70's & 80's when and only when you've faced them can you be considered top class.

 

[Furball]

Still too good for Bell. As I said before, what will you guys say if Bell continues to suck, and averages, as I predict, less than 20 for the series? "Bad luck, he was due a bad series?" LOL.

He failed against Warne and McGrath, and he has failed every time subsequently that he has encountered a balanced attack with decent spin and seam options. Not a single person that has disagreed has been able to point to Bell doing well against a well balanced attack with decent seam and spin threats. The one knock in SA is not really an exception because SA had little or nothing to back up Steyn and Morkel, and certainly no spin.

Nevertheless, doing well against that duo is nothing to sniff at; unfortunately for Bell, that performance is the exception that proves the rule.

I look forward to reading a lot of "gash" from you and other subscribers to the myth of Bell as a top class bat when this series is over and as I predict he ends up with a lower average than any of the specialist batsmen, Prior, Broad and Swann also. Rather than accepting this as yet more proof of what has been crystal clear since 2005 - that he doesn't have what it takes to succeed against well balanced attacks when the chips are down - discussion will conveniently be swerved to Ajmal's action or whether management has selected six specialist bats or not.

 

[Pothas]

Harsh, but he's not as good as Foxy Fowler was

My Dad tells me most his runs came through edges, big fan of his commentary though, TMS not the same without him.

 

[Pothas]

Was thinking the same thing. 10/10 for effort.

Agree, has that dismissive tone nailed down and not a smilie in site.

 

[Burgey]

If you think Bell has been the best batsman in the world, or even one of the best batsmen in the world, over the past year or at any stage of his career then you know little or nothing about cricket. He never makes runs when conditions are difficult or against strong well balanced attacks with potent seam and spin threats. Just because he has some ridiculous average over the past year, do you think it is because he is all of a sudden 2.5 times better as a batsman than he was before? Is the likelier explanation not that he has filled his boots against weak bowling, and will once again revert to mean as soon as he faces a strong attack?

Compare Bell with the likes of Sanga - who has averaged 70+ over the past 6-7 YEARS, and one begins to perceive how ludicrous it is to adjudge a Johnny Come Lately like Bell the best or anything like that on the strength of 12 months' form.

Let us see what happens in the rest of the series. If he continues to suck, will you say, "hard luck, he was due a bad series"? IMO that would be wrong. Because if that were to happen, as I am absolutely certain it is having watched most of Bell's innings since he made his debut in 2005, it would indicate that he has merely performed "as expected" against a well balanced attack. The implication would be that if England wishes to emulate the culture of continuous self-improvement that characterized the ruthless West Indian teams of the 80s and the Australians under Steve Waugh, they should find a replacement who can not only rack up daddy hundreds against Ishant Sharma and co but survive two sessions against decent quality Test attacks.

Been saying this for seven years mate. You're spot on. Keep fighting the good fight.

Bell's a joke, everyone knows it. He's washed up. Damaged goods. You can see the fear in his eyes when he bats and that twitch he gets - you know he's going out cheaply. Dire player.

-------------------------------------------

As for this venue, does it play in a similar vein to the first Test venue, or does it turn more?

 

[Faisal1985]

Been saying this for seven years mate. You're spot on. Keep fighting the good fight.

Bell's a joke, everyone knows it. He's washed up. Damaged goods. You can see the fear in his eyes when he bats and that twitch he gets - you know he's going out cheaply. Dire player.

-------------------------------------------

As for this venue, does it play in a similar vein to the first Test venue, or does it turn more?

You are not being sarcastic, are you?

 

[Black_Warrior]

You wrote that I had "conveniently ignored" a factor that I had in fact fully acknowledged in the post you were alluding to. Questioning your reading comprehension under those circumstances was IMO a more than reasonable thing to do.

You just came and owned everyone in the space of 7 posts

I love your posts even though I think Bell is a slightly better player than you say. Look forward to reading more of your posts.

 

[Spark]

For me Bell against an attack like this is a 15-20 average man. I don't rate Morgan or Bopara particularly highly but they have had less chances than Bell so there is the slight chance that one or both of them could step it up and average 30 or 40, which IMO is more than can be expected from Bell, who has always looked like a tailender against attacks like this and X factor bowlers like Ajmal. Perhaps Bopara will be just as clueless. But I find it impossible to believe he can do any worse, and the fact that Bell has had so many opportunities against attacks like these, and been found wanting every time, swings me in Bopara's favour.

FWIW, would you still consider what I am suggesting "ridiculous" if Bell is picked for the remaining matches and averages less than 20, as I expect him to? I expect Morgan to remain in the team for the rest of the series and comfortably outscore Bell, making a nonsense of the suggestion that it would be "ridiculous" to have him ahead of Bell. But is Bopara so nailed on in his cr*pness for you that a Bell averaging less than 20 would by default be better than anything he could offer?

For me you have to take risks when faced with differentr challenges. Once the wickets start to fly the last man you want to come in is Bell. He has never done anything for England under those circumstances and even if it is not a question of temperament which I think it is there is an obvious problem picking Ajmal's variations. Going back to Hilfenhaus who had failed in the recent past was a risk for the Oz selectors, but they thought he would trouble the Indian batsmen with his movement and they were proved right. England has to start thinking in the same way and get guys like Bell who are simply not equipped to cope with the challenge posed by the Pakistan attack out of the firing line.

Not comparable. Hilfenhaus was literally our best bowler left standing after we had one-and-a-half attacks' worth of bowlers ruled out via injury.

Welcome to CW, though.

 

[CWB304]

Been saying this for seven years mate. You're spot on. Keep fighting the good fight.

Bell's a joke, everyone knows it. He's washed up. Damaged goods. You can see the fear in his eyes when he bats and that twitch he gets - you know he's going out cheaply. Dire player.

-------------------------------------------

As for this venue, does it play in a similar vein to the first Test venue, or does it turn more?

How about putting forward some arguments; explaining why you rate Bell or think that his performance in the last Test was an aberration; or expounding on how he's well equipped technically and temperamentally to master Ajmal and Gul in the next match?

Surely that would serve the forum better than the lame essay at sarcasm with which you've just embarrassed yourself above?

 

[Spark]

How about putting forward some arguments; explaining why you rate Bell or think that his performance in the last Test was an aberration; or expounding on how he's well equipped technically and temperamentally to master Ajmal and Gul in the next match?

Surely that would serve the forum better than the lame essay at sarcasm with which you've just embarrassed yourself above?

I see you're new.

Burgey wasn't being sarcastic. At all.

 

[Black_Warrior]

I don't think Burgey was being sarcastic there mate.

 

[amanuensis]

How about putting forward some arguments; explaining why you rate Bell or think that his performance in the last Test was an aberration; or expounding on how he's well equipped technically and temperamentally to master Ajmal and Gul in the next match?

Surely that would serve the forum better than the lame essay at sarcasm with which you've just embarrassed yourself above?

Gul isn't a particularly good test bowler. His strength lies in limited overs cricket, so I don't see the relevance of your argument - there simply isn't a really high class bowling attack around boasting the level of balance which you seek.

 

[fredfertang]

My Dad tells me most his runs came through edges, big fan of his commentary though, TMS not the same without him.

'tis true that Foxy's bat didn't have a middle, and he played and missed so often that sometimes it seemed it didn't have any edges either, but you couldn't fault him for courage or effort, and he could be a lucky bastard too, and an absolute hero to Lancastrians of a certain age

 

[Spark]

Gul isn't a particularly good test bowler. His strength lies in limited overs cricket, so I don't see the relevance of your argument - there simply isn't a really high class bowling attack around boasting the level of balance which you seek.

Well, there is, but it also happens to be the only attack he can't play.

 

[CWB304]

I don't think Burgey was being sarcastic there mate.

Apologies to Burgey!

 

[Howe_zat]

How about putting forward some arguments; explaining why you rate Bell or think that his performance in the last Test was an aberration; or expounding on how he's well equipped technically and temperamentally to master Ajmal and Gul in the next match?

Surely that would serve the forum better than the lame essay at sarcasm with which you've just embarrassed yourself above?

Rookie's mistake.

 

[fredfertang]

Nah - Burgey was being sarcastic - he always stands up to be counted when the mother country is getting any stick

 

[CWB304]

Well, there is, but it also happens to be the only attack he can't play.

I'm not saying Gul is at Ambrose/McGrath level or Ajmal is at Murali/Warne level. They don't need to be. The mere fact that there is decent quality and threatening seam and spin bowling on offer in the same attack means that it is good enough to expose Bell for what he is: a guy who looks as good as anyone when it comes to accumulating runs on batting paradises and putting bad attacks to the sword, but who is continually being shown up whenever he's asked to meet sterner challenges.

As for the person who dismissed Gul as merely an ODI bowler, mate, you simply don't know what you're talking about. Gul is one of the very best in the world at exploiting these sorts of conditions in Tests. But even if you were to be right in your assessment and I mistaken, your attitude in the debate would suggest that that you're falling into the old trap of playing the name rather than the performance.

I have never seen Hilfenhaus or Siddle perform as they have been performing recently, even though I had always known they were good bowlers and rated them more highly than most. If the Oz selectors took the attitude to them that you take to Gul, they would have pigeonholed them into some box and presumably discounted forever the possibility of their being able to improve/bowl better lines/add more pace/learn to swing the ball later etc. Big mistake. The Gul that bowled in Dubai and the Siddle and Hilfenhaus that have been bowling in the current series against India, are worthy Test match bowlers capable of taking out any batsman in the world.

I've asked this question before: if, as I've predicted, Bell averages less than 20 in this series, what would be the attitude of his many defenders on this forum? That that level of performance is an aberration? That would be a very unintelligent, nay, delusional way of interpreting the data, given what has gone before.

 

[biased indian]

Its hilarious when someone called biased indian votes for Pakistan in a poll

what so hilarious in it..i have always preferred Pakistan over England and Australia

 

[Black_Warrior]

what so hilarious in it..i have always preferred Pakistan over England and Australia

Nothing wrong with that my friend.. I am glad that you do.. why do you call yourself biased indian though