***Official*** Pakistan in England

[social]

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.

Depth of batting is always more important than depth of bowling as everyone has to bat and an extra bowler can often be like carrying a passenger and playing with 10. Also a long tail allows momentum to swing quickly to the opposition and is a major weakness.

The Eng bowling line-up for the first test was pretty weak IMO and it was no surprise that Pak finished on at least even terms.

Hoggard and Harmy are fine bowlers but not match fit.

Plunkett and Monty are inexperienced.

The rest are rubbish.

Eng are crippled by injuries to Jones and Flintoff - with the attack used in the first test, they'll struggle to bowl anyone out twice on a good wicket.

 

[tooextracool]

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.

My do you excel yourself. Id really love to hear how Plunkett has proven himself to be a better batsman than Panesar so far at the test level given his mediocrity with the bat at a lower average. Further i wonder if you will ever realise that on a turner, Panesar is one of the better options available in the side,(being the only spinner in the side) while on an uneven wicket Plunkett wouldnt even be required given all of the other 3 England seamers are far far better at exploiting the conditions than he is.
I must say though that only a fool would string the words 'green' and 'uneven' given the clear paradox when it comes to them in terms of cricketing pitches. Incase you still havent realised, grass binds the pitch together and prevents it from crumbling, as such if you've ever seen a green uneven wicket in your lifetime let me know.
As far as Lords being a crumbling bunsen is concerned, Lords has never been a crumbling bunsen. Look at the games played over there over the last 5 years and you will see that batting has never gotten significantly more difficult on the last day than it was on previous days. and the fact that Kaneria and Afridi shared 4 wickets against significantly worse players of spin the day before only proves that further.
As far as a direct argument between Plunkett and Panesar is concerned, it is equivalent to a comparison between Nathan Hauritz and Ian Salisbury to find out who sucks more. Neither of them are test class, that i am completely sure off, but at least Panesars selection is justifiable given other spin options in England. Plunkett even being given a shot in the England side is a joke of the highest order, and the fact that he is still playing makes the selectors look even more ridiculous.

 

[FRAZ]

As far as a direct argument between Plunkett and Panesar is concerned, it is equivalent to a comparison between Nathan Hauritz and Ian Salisbury to find out who sucks more. .

 

[marc71178]

The Eng bowling line-up for the first test was pretty weak IMO and it was no surprise that Pak finished on at least even terms.

Hoggard and Harmy are fine bowlers but not match fit.

Plunkett and Monty are inexperienced.

The rest are rubbish.

What rest?

It was a 4 man attack.

 

[BoyBrumby]

What rest?

It was a 4 man attack.

Our new gun off-spinner; Kevin somebody?

 

[tooextracool]

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.

the 100/1000s of tripe that should be put in for durham, not for England. If hes inexperienced then why pick him in the England side? an evaluation of Plunkett's goes like this:
Accuracy? No
Variety? No
Experience? No
Domestic Success? No
Cricketing Brain? No
Pace? Barely
Height? Yes

Any surprises as to why Duncan Fletcher likes him?

 

[FRAZ]

Plunkett definately is an asset .Plunkett does have an easy to go action and that is a fact and such bowlers can easily get the control on the length . (Not saying if Plunkett knows how to do it ) .
But I will stick with my statement that he does have an easy to go action which may give him the liberty to bowl at the spot where he wants . He lacks pace and brain thats what I agree but so do Sami (now)and AA I guess . He falls into the category of "skid bowlers" which is quite true infact, and their leader of the clan "Wasim Akram" .
Plunkett has a plus which is his height and he should know how to use it . It is too early to say that he sucks or whatever . I see a lot of potential in him just because of his "action" which is like of such bowlers in the past who were able to elongate their careers as much as they wanted . And that is what we need . Because offcourse no body wants another Shoaib .

 

[BoyBrumby]

the 100/1000s of tripe that should be put in for durham, not for England. If hes inexperienced then why pick him in the England side? an evaluation of Plunkett's goes like this:
Accuracy? No
Variety? No
Experience? No
Domestic Success? No
Cricketing Brain? No
Pace? Barely
Height? Yes

Any surprises as to why Duncan Fletcher likes him?

You are being unduly hard on the boy IMHO. He is only 21 after all. He a very, very long way from the finished article but he does have the ability to touch 90mph, is a decent fielder & (although we've seen precious little evidence) can supposedly hold a bat the right way up too.

Is he a test player? Not as of now, no. But he does have the raw materials to make one.

 

[tooextracool]

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.

while it maybe argued that England could have done without Hoggard at Edgbaston, who would you have dropped at Trent bridge? One would think that the worst bowler in the game was Flintoff, and theres no way you would have dropped him.
Everytime i look at that Edgbaston scorecard, i marvel at how stupid it was for Vaughan to give Simon Jones only 5 overs in the 2nd inning. Nearly cost England the game.

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?

Given the options of Plunkett and Mahmood who offer nothing with ball, bat or in the field, i propose that the best option would be to go in with 4 bowlers and strengthen the batting. so that we at least bat till number 7, as opposed to batting down till number 6 as we have been recently.

 

[tooextracool]

Plunkett definately is an asset .Plunkett does have an easy to go action and that is a fact and such bowlers can easily get the control on the length . (Not saying if Plunkett knows how to do it ) .
But I will stick with my statement that he does have an easy to go action which may give him the liberty to bowl at the spot where he wants . He lacks pace and brain thats what I agree but so do Sami (now)and AA I guess . He falls into the category of "skid bowlers" which is quite true infact, and their leader of the clan "Wasim Akram" .
Plunkett has a plus which is his height and he should know how to use it . It is too early to say that he sucks or whatever . I see a lot of potential in him just because of his "action" which is like of such bowlers in the past who were able to elongate their careers as much as they wanted . And that is what we need . Because offcourse no body wants another Shoaib .

you cannot pick someone based solely on his action. He has a flowing action yes, but it cannot camouflage all the rubbish that he throws up day in and day out in both forms of the game. You dont pick players, especially bowlers until they start performing in domestic cricket, that is an extremely logical fact. If plunkett does indeed have all of this potential hed be far better off getting all of the assets that he doesnt have at the moment at durham first instead of costing England games at the international level.

 

[tooextracool]

You are being unduly hard on the boy IMHO. He is only 21 after all. He a very, very long way from the finished article but he does have the ability to touch 90mph, is a decent fielder & (although we've seen precious little evidence) can supposedly hold a bat the right way up too.

Is he a test player? Not as of now, no. But he does have the raw materials to make one.

If he does i havent seen any evidence of it. Yes he is only 21, yes he has pace, but that is all he has. I am not suggesting that he has no chance of ever being test class but hes clearly not good enough to be in the side right now, not as an asset at least, but if he can build on his positives and learn how to swing the ball consistently or get the ball to reverse, not to mention work on his accuracy, he might actually be something. Players dont learn by throwing them in the deep end when they are not ready for it, they learn only when they are playing at a level which they are good enough to be playing at.

 

[FRAZ]

you cannot pick someone based solely on his action. He has a flowing action yes, but it cannot camouflage all the rubbish that he throws up day in and day out in both forms of the game. You dont pick players, especially bowlers until they start performing in domestic cricket, that is an extremely logical fact. If plunkett does indeed have all of this potential hed be far better off getting all of the assets that he doesnt have at the moment at durham first instead of costing England games at the international level.

You know what I have to disagree and agree with you on several counts. Pakistan had the habbit of shoving the bowler without even letting him play the league for a while . Its just a lucky one caught by some expereinced eye at some lucky time . Wasim came into the team like this .Tauseef came into the team like this . hmmm I have many examples to give.This strategy worked most of the times for Pakistan. I agree that he(Plunkett) doesn't even fit in most of the set county teams . Look at his age man . And I guess that getting some international exposure earlier on can help you atleast a bit . The experts know that, because they saw the ingredients in Plunkett and definately his action too . He has a MATURE action and I never said that this is the key to get into the international cricket . But he has a future. Plunkett may well be dropped in the future but I guess he is one of those pawns who become queen in the future. He should know the spots where to bowl (Wasim was a master when he started his career) . He(Plunkett) should get the idea of the batting (schools) .Because different batsmen require different balls to be bowled at them .

 

[tooextracool]

As far as Yousuf and inzy are concerned, id certainly like to see our bowlers pitching it up a lot more. Both have the tendency to fall over and are major lbw candidates when they first come into bat. Certainly there is no point in trying to bounce either of them because they are both extremely capable hookers.

 

[BoyBrumby]

If he does i havent seen any evidence of it. Yes he is only 21, yes he has pace, but that is all he has. I am not suggesting that he has no chance of ever being test class but hes clearly not good enough to be in the side right now, not as an asset at least, but if he can build on his positives and learn how to swing the ball consistently or get the ball to reverse, not to mention work on his accuracy, he might actually be something. Players dont learn by throwing them in the deep end when they are not ready for it, they learn only when they are playing at a level which they are good enough to be playing at.

TBF he's probably about our 7th or 8th choice seamer. If we hadn't had the injuries to Jones, Anderson, Harmison & (laterly) Fred he ideally wouldn't have played. IIRC he wasn't even named in the original squad for Pakistan.

& the ability to bowl quickly is a pretty decent commodity to have for any seamer. I think one could make a case for a horses-for-courses pick for Lewis in the early summer over here, but I dread to think of the carnage in Oz at his pace. Again, ideally Plunkett won't be bowling in Oz either, but if the worst comes to the worst he just might have to.

 

[FRAZ]

As far as Yousuf and inzy are concerned, id certainly like to see our bowlers pitching it up a lot more. Both have the tendency to fall over and are major lbw candidates when they first come into bat. Certainly there is no point in trying to bounce either of them because they are both extremely capable hookers.

For Inzamam you can say that but still I guess they should apply this strategy when they just arrive on the crease but pitching up when they are set is not a very good idea . I guess Off stump line with some pace and varied length for Yousaf and yes I agree Inzi has a tendency to fall over but not all the time .

 

[tooextracool]

You know what I have to disagree and agree with you on several counts. Pakistan had the habbit of shoving the bowler without even letting him play the league for a while . Its just a lucky one caught by some expereinced eye at some lucky time . Wasim came into the team like this .Tauseef came into the team like this . hmmm I have many examples to give.This strategy worked most of the times for Pakistan. I agree that he(Plunkett) doesn't even fit in most of the set county teams . Look at his age man . And I guess that getting some international exposure earlier on can help you atleast a bit . The experts know that, because they saw the ingredients in Plunkett and definately his action too . He has a MATURE action and I never said that this is the key to get into the international cricket . But he has a future. Plunkett may well be dropped in the future but I guess he is one of those pawns who become queen in the future. He should know the spots where to bowl (Wasim was a master when he started his career) . He(Plunkett) should get the idea of the batting (schools) .Because different batsmen require different balls to be bowled at them .

i didnt get to watch what Wasim was like when he made his international debut.As such it probably wouldnt have mattered much had he been picked a year or so later after proving himself at the domestic level anyways. I wouldnt be surprised though if when he was picked he actually had plenty of assets even without the experience and hence his selection would not have been completely astounding. I have no problems with Simon Jones being picked when he was despite his inexperience simply because he had something different- the ability to reverse swing the ball at pace, that has been incredibly obvious from a while ago. With Plunkett however its more a case of picking a player who is faster than medium pace and has nothing else to offer other than age on his side.

 

[FRAZ]

i didnt get to watch what Wasim was like when he made his international debut.As such it probably wouldnt have mattered much had he been picked a year or so later after proving himself at the domestic level anyways. I wouldnt be surprised though if when he was picked he actually had plenty of assets even without the experience and hence his selection would not have been completely astounding. I have no problems with Simon Jones being picked when he was despite his inexperience simply because he had something different- the ability to reverse swing the ball at pace, that has been incredibly obvious from a while ago. With Plunkett however its more a case of picking a player who is faster than medium pace and has nothing else to offer other than age on his side.

Wasim had a few performances and then he was immediately given the chance . And yes Simon Jones is one of those guys who are ESPECIAL . Simon Jones ability to do the thing (swing) is great. I do not think that Plunkett has that sort of a super pace that he should be given any prefference over any other deserving bowler. The simple thing is "If he wants to change the length then he can do that , If he is required to pitch at a certain spot for several times then he can do it " . He should do many things to carry on his career and that is to learn reverse swing , learn the bowling STRATEGY to different batsmen and he should remain POSITIVE . Lad has a future . Let us see if I am wrong .

 

[tooextracool]

TBF he's probably about our 7th or 8th choice seamer. If we hadn't had the injuries to Jones, Anderson, Harmison & (laterly) Fred he ideally wouldn't have played. IIRC he wasn't even named in the original squad for Pakistan.

Plunkett was on the tour to Pakistan and it could be argued that the only player missing then was Simon Jones. He then made the tour to India as well ahead of Anderson who didnt even make the squad initially. Therefore he must have been ahead of Anderson in the pecking order until after the India tour.
And plunkett was in the original squad for the series against Pakistan this summer.

& the ability to bowl quickly is a pretty decent commodity to have for any seamer. I think one could make a case for a horses-for-courses pick for Lewis in the early summer over here, but I dread to think of the carnage in Oz at his pace. Again, ideally Plunkett won't be bowling in Oz either, but if the worst comes to the worst he just might have to.

the ability to bowl quick can only ever be a decent commodity when it is supplemented with accuracy and/or variety. Nantie Hayward may have had plenty of pace, but he was clearly never good enough for the international level, same with dilhara fernando and Lasith Malinga. Arguably all these bowlers were much faster than Plunkett too who can only claim to be fast medium.
Ideally Anderson or maybe even Jones will be playing in the Ashes this winter. If not, id much rather see someone else who isnt Lewis, Mahmood or Plunkett in the side. How is tremlett doing by and chance?

 

[tooextracool]

Wasim had a few performances and then he was immediately given the chance . And yes Simon Jones is one of those guys who are ESPECIAL . Simon Jones ability to do the thing (swing) is great. I do not think that Plunkett has that sort of a super pace that he should be given any prefference over any other deserving bowler. The simple thing is "If he wants to change the length then he can do that , If he is required to pitch at a certain spot for several times then he can do it " . He should do many things to carry on his career and that is to learn reverse swing , learn the bowling STRATEGY to different batsmen and he should remain POSITIVE . Lad has a future . Let us see if I am wrong .

yes and this learning should come in domestic cricket, for England A or even at the Academy. Hes simply not ready at the moment.

 

[FRAZ]

yes and this learning should come in domestic cricket, for England A or even at the Academy. Hes simply not ready at the moment.

Right but working straight up in the top level does give an idea to learn how it is done there once I am "fully" capable enough to carry on the stuff there then what should I have to do to keep up the "standard".
Take a very good example of M Zahid (although poor guy had a very bad injury) .