***Official*** Pakistan in England

[Scaly piscine]

Can Rob Key get out any other way?

lbw <medium pace part-timer> ~40 is a typical Key innings. If it's Test cricket then throw in a load of caught off wider ball for not many.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Flintoff gets another ex-Test player out, 4-0-10-2.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Plunkett's batting > Panesar's batting
Plunkett's fielding >>> Panesar's fielding
Plunkett's bowling > Panesar's bowling
Plunkett 3 years younger than Panesar

So obviously Panesar > Plunkett...

Hmm. Care to explain number 3?

Panesar was easily England's best bowler on the final day, and has taken a five wicket haul in tests, and while 17 @ 39 isn't particularly special, the guy he's replacing who is supposedly far superior is no better than that. While Panesar was causing trouble for all the batsmen, Plunkett did absolutely nothing for the whole test aside from one good over and bowling Inzy with a ball that kept low, and you think Panesar should be dropped? I don't think Monty is a world beater, but he's the best spin option you've got, and it'd be completely daft to play Plunkett ahead of him.

 

[Run like Inzy]

Yasir is currently playing for Sussex and has not done too badly so far. Got a five wicket haul and scored half century recently, also bowls with a fair lick but with Razzaq in the team I do not think or expect Pakistan will be looking at him any time soon. Considering Pakistan have always used him sparingly, usually with not much effect.

Surprised that Pakistan did not call up Yasir Hameed as a reserve opener. Firstly because his a right hander, secondly his a fine fielder and thirdly (and most importantly) his record opening the batting is not that shabby. One bad series in the West Indies and suddenly he was surplus to requirements when his record suggests he should still be considered as an integral part of the team.

Yasir hasn't done well in Patrons trophy (First Class) 05/06
Mat I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
3 5 0 198 139 39.60 1 - 2 -

And he keeps gettin starts and wasting them just like the others, the only difference is he has been tried more, failed more and is older (28) than the other young prospects
His record is misleading since both his Test hundred came against Bangladesh in his debut game after which has done almost nothing in Test Matches

 

[Scaly piscine]

Hmm. Care to explain number 3?

Panesar was easily England's best bowler on the final day, and has taken a five wicket haul in tests, and while 17 @ 39 isn't particularly special, the guy he's replacing who is supposedly far superior is no better than that. While Panesar was causing trouble for all the batsmen, Plunkett did absolutely nothing for the whole test aside from one good over and bowling Inzy with a ball that kept low, and you think Panesar should be dropped? I don't think Monty is a world beater, but he's the best spin option you've got, and it'd be completely daft to play Plunkett ahead of him.

Of course Panesar was causing trouble for batsmen, it was his umpteenth crumbling bunsen he's bowled on and as usual the figures show he was a bit toothless.

Stick Plunkett on a green uneven wicket and he'll take more than 2 wickets in 54 overs. Plunkett was also England's best bowler for a lot of the SL series, has had far less assistance from the conditions than Panesar but still has a better bowling average.

It'd be completely daft to play someone like Panesar when his contribution is always negative.

 

[Sanz]

Of course Panesar was causing trouble for batsmen, it was his umpteenth crumbling bunsen he's bowled on and as usual the figures show he was a bit toothless.

Stick Plunkett on a green uneven wicket and he'll take more than 2 wickets in 54 overs. Plunkett was also England's best bowler for a lot of the SL series, has had far less assistance from the conditions than Panesar but still has a better bowling average.

It'd be completely daft to play someone like Panesar when his contribution is always negative.

If Panesar was playing for Durham, Scalywhine would have claimed that Shane Warne learnt bowling from Monty.

Plunckette= Agarkara=Md.Sami

 

[marc71178]

Its harder, but there are a lot of lefties these days. Plus a 'steady contributor' is more than what England have had in a long time, so even if he becomes just a 'steady contributor', thats a big leap forward IMO.

Isn't Giles the definition of a steady contributor?

 

[marc71178]

Wonder if England will continue to really rush through their overs with these two and actually get in a couple or so more overs than the minimum - and thus get a new ball for a couple or so if needed... methinks pigs will fly before that we'll see that sort of professionalism from England.

It wouldn't have made a difference.

Even if they had rushed through the overs, they'd have needed to take wickets to keep the game going that long, and each wicket would mean more time is eaten away.

 

[marc71178]

I disagree with the analagy and the fact that it is not the best XI. 4 plus fill in is all that is ever needed unless in exceptional circumstances. The XI I named looked very strong.

England would've struggled to win even one game in the Ashes with 4 bowlers.

 

[marc71178]

Hmm lets see... 2 wickets off 27 overs on a crumbling bunsen...

And since when was it a crumbling bunsen?

 

[marc71178]

If Panesar was playing for Durham, Scalywhine would have claimed that Shane Warne learnt bowling from Monty.

Plunckette= Agarkara=Md.Sami

Don't you dare drag AA down to that level.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Agarkar gets more ducks than Plunkett, just about.

 

[Scaly piscine]

And since when was it a crumbling bunsen?

What else is it when Monty actually turns the ball more than an inch?

 

[marc71178]

What else is it when Monty actually turns the ball more than an inch?

By the same token, Plunkett only gets movement on a greentop.

 

[Scaly piscine]

By the same token, Plunkett only gets movement on a greentop.

Err no, Plunkett is actually quite good at getting movement out of a pitch, he just lacks the 100s/1000s of overs under his belt that would give him far better control.

 

[silentstriker]

Isn't Giles the definition of a steady contributor?

No. His bowling average is almost 40.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Of course Panesar was causing trouble for batsmen, it was his umpteenth crumbling bunsen he's bowled on and as usual the figures show he was a bit toothless.

Crumbling bunsen? Come off it. It was a pitch with a bit of turn, but nothing more than you'd expect for the 5th day on anything other than an absolute road. Panesar will bowl on wickets like that fairly often in his career, especially with the recent trends of English wickets to be a little more spin-friendly, so if he bowls well on them obviously that's good. It's not comparable to putting Plunkett on a "green uneven wicket" at all, because you almost never see uneven seamers in world cricket these days. I can think of maybe 2 or 3 in the last few years of test cricket, while pitches which turn a fair amount on the 5th day are a dime a dozen.

The comparison in rarity for uneven seamers from a spin bowling perspective would be raging turners like Mumbai 2004 or the last pitch in the recent West Indies/India series, and given that Michael Clarke took 6/9 on one of those wickets, this was hardly comparable.

As far as his "always negative" contributions are concerned, I hardly see how being the best bowler in the side on a day, taking a couple of wickets and creating several other good chances is a "negative" contribution. Getting hammered at 4-5 and over and not troubling anyone would be poor, Panesar was perfectly decent.

 

[grecian]

What else is it when Monty actually turns the ball more than an inch?

So Scalys definition of a "bunsen", is one that Monty turns it on

Theres nowt like an unbiased opinion of a player, and that is nowt like.......

The wickets Monty have played on have hardly been killers, Muralis genius caused a result in the last SL match, otherwise they've been pretty good batting wickets.

 

[wpdavid]

England would've struggled to win even one game in the Ashes with 4 bowlers.

Depends which 4 they picked. With hindsight, I could name an XI with only 4 bowlers that would have been just as likely to manage the wins at Edgbaston & Trent Bridge, although admittedly I wouldn't have been brave enough to choose them at the time.

The situation is different now though. Given Giles' absence, Jones' inability to buy a score & Fred returning with next-to-no batting under his belt, would you really pick 5 bowlers? If so, who?

 

[Scaly piscine]

Crumbling bunsen? Come off it. It was a pitch with a bit of turn, but nothing more than you'd expect for the 5th day on anything other than an absolute road. Panesar will bowl on wickets like that fairly often in his career, especially with the recent trends of English wickets to be a little more spin-friendly, so if he bowls well on them obviously that's good. It's not comparable to putting Plunkett on a "green uneven wicket" at all, because you almost never see uneven seamers in world cricket these days. I can think of maybe 2 or 3 in the last few years of test cricket, while pitches which turn a fair amount on the 5th day are a dime a dozen.

The comparison in rarity for uneven seamers from a spin bowling perspective would be raging turners like Mumbai 2004 or the last pitch in the recent West Indies/India series, and given that Michael Clarke took 6/9 on one of those wickets, this was hardly comparable.

As far as his "always negative" contributions are concerned, I hardly see how being the best bowler in the side on a day, taking a couple of wickets and creating several other good chances is a "negative" contribution. Getting hammered at 4-5 and over and not troubling anyone would be poor, Panesar was perfectly decent.

Monty will rarely get to bowl on the 5th day of a Test on pitches that spin so much as the last one. He's unlikely to see anything so helpful in an Ashes series. When he does get some assistance in Asia you'll then say 'oh well he's up against the best players of spin' when he does sweet FA (again). He's very unlikely to see anything so helpful again in England (although given the generosity of English groundsmen towards tourists you never know). Taking two wickets off 54 overs on what will likely be the best pitch for him he'll get to bowl on for over a year just doesn't cut it. Especially when you're rubbish at batting and fielding.