***Official*** Pakistan in England

[UncleTheOne]

Giles isnt a better bowler. Panesar has show some amazing improvement in his bowling in a very short period of time and it goes to show what putting in a lot of effort can do at the international level. He's starting to use drift in his bowling and hes also shown that he can now bowl an arm ball, which he used to get Younis Khan out to, both of which we havent seen from him until recently. Id say Giles was probably more adept at using variations of pace and flight though. However one cannot deny that the Old trafford pitch was a spinners paradise with turn AND bounce, and how in the world someone like Kaneria could bowl so poorly on it is unexplainable.

His action is awful at the moment, he really needs someone helping him with it, the ball is coming in at all sorts of dreadful angles, he really could do with some expert coaching.

 

[tooextracool]

I can't see they'd ever drop him - he kept his spot after the winter tours.

despite being amongst the worst batsmen on both tours.
How in the world can anyone justify dropping Cook, Collingwood or Bell(if he keeps scoring) over him?

 

[BoyBrumby]

Yes, it was broken on Friday, but I'm not sure how bad it is, since he kept yesterday, rather well (yet again) by all reports.

He did; his stumping of Yousuf was absolutely top draw. He out-kept Sangakarra earlier this year & is now well ahead of Akmal after two tests. It's just unfortunate that as his keeping has improved out of all recognition his batting has gone backwards at the same rate of knots.

I think tho that it would be a massive gamble to go into a test with a keeper with a broken bone in his hand when there's no need to. Moreover, there's a good case to be made for his dropping regardless of his injury; the argument for his retention has now come full circle. It would now be his nifty glovework that kept him in rather than his extra runs!

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Moreover, there's a good case to be made for his dropping regardless of his injury; the argument for his retention has now come full circle. It would now be his nifty glovework that kept him in rather than his extra runs!

David Graveney said that two weeks ago

 

[marc71178]

Surely if it's a broken finger it will affect his batting, but that doesn't seem to matter much as he spends very little time out in the middle anyway.

He was dismissed the ball after it happened I think - but how much of that is down to the initial shock and discomfort is disbateable.

 

[wpdavid]

Thats actually a very interesting theory and one that i hadnt considered myself. i think the major reason why England have tried to go in with 5 bowlers in recent years is due to the lack of faith in our spin bowlers- Giles/Panesar. in Giles' case outside the subcontinent they could never be assured of him bowling 20-25 overs or so in a day unless the pitch was turning and therefore needed 4 other bowlers to share the burden. However they now need to be able to lay trust in that Panesar can do that everyday, because the fact is that their unnecessarily sacrificing an extra batsman and going in with a very long tail to allay their fears.

I think the other important reason for the 5 bowlers is the lack of consistency from all of our quicks apart from Fred: ergo if we play 4 of them, hopefully a couple will bowl well. Yes, I know that they're different, and I understand that they're suited to different conditions, but I think it goes beyond that.

Now obviously playing only 3 quicks doesn't give us the luxury of carrying a couple that are out of sorts, but I've long wondered if some of them regularly suffered from diminished responsibility and insufficient overs under their belt. Exactly who our 3 quicks should be in Aus if they're all fit is another matter though.

 

[wpdavid]

Would anyone be surprised if our dim-witted England selectors end up picking James Foster? Certainly someone like Scyld Berry thinks so: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2006/07/30/scscyl30.xml

Why would that be such an outrageous pick?

 

[TT Boy]

Why would that be such an outrageous pick?

No, his a fine wicket keeper and his form with the bat this season has been good. Though it is rather left sided considering he has not been involved in the England set up for some time.

 

[superkingdave]

He was dismissed the ball after it happened I think - but how much of that is down to the initial shock and discomfort is disbateable.

apparently he broke it the first time he got hit on the finger, he then got hit on it again and it was the ball after that he got out.

 

[tooextracool]

I think the other important reason for the 5 bowlers is the lack of consistency from all of our quicks apart from Fred: ergo if we play 4 of them, hopefully a couple will bowl well. Yes, I know that they're different, and I understand that they're suited to different conditions, but I think it goes beyond that..

Our quicks are as consistent if not more consistent than any others in the world, including Australia. If England had a Warne, Murali or even Kaneria we would not be going in with more than 3 pace bowlers, that is my belief at least.

Now obviously playing only 3 quicks doesn't give us the luxury of carrying a couple that are out of sorts, but I've long wondered if some of them regularly suffered from diminished responsibility and insufficient overs under their belt. Exactly who our 3 quicks should be in Aus if they're all fit is another matter though.

If they're all fit, and i mean match fit, and im referring to Anderson not Jones then i would play all 4. Otherwise i think Ian Bell offers more to the England side than Plunkett/Mahmood/Lewis etc does.

 

[tooextracool]

Why would that be such an outrageous pick?

because Read has matched everything that Foster has ever done, and probably done it better. And what would be the point in playing Read in the A games for England if he wasnt the 2nd choice keeper?

 

[wpdavid]

Our quicks are as consistent if not more consistent than any others in the world, including Australia. If England had a Warne, Murali or even Kaneria we would not be going in with more than 3 pace bowlers, that is my belief at least.

Yeah, but standards aren't great elsewhere at present! Looking at them, Harmison produces the goods about once a year nowadays, Hoggard only really damages the opposition 3 or 4 times a year, and, until last summer, Jones was there on potential more than performance. Beyond them Mumbai was Anderson's best performance probably ever in an England shirt, so I guess you don't mean him. They may or may not be more consistent than other countries' lineups at present, but that still doesn't make them consistent in my book.

If they're all fit, and i mean match fit, and im referring to Anderson not Jones then i would play all 4. Otherwise i think Ian Bell offers more to the England side than Plunkett/Mahmood/Lewis etc does.

Agreed 100% about Bell. Otherwise, that's a brave call to pick all 4 plus Panesar. Sounds like a recipe for 250 for 5 becoming 275 all out on a fairly regular basis in the winter.

 

[tooextracool]

Yeah, but standards aren't great elsewhere at present! Looking at them, Harmison produces the goods about once a year nowadays, Hoggard only really damages the opposition 3 or 4 times a year, and, until last summer, Jones was there on potential more than performance. Beyond them Mumbai was Anderson's best performance probably ever in an England shirt, so I guess you don't mean him. They may or may not be more consistent than other countries' lineups at present, but that still doesn't make them consistent in my book.

You are playing against those teams, and if your standard is better than theirs, then thats all that matters. I dont know how anyone can possibly complain about a Flintoff/Harmison/Hoggard lineup anyways, especially when you consider the options for bringing another bowler in.
I think you give Hoggard less credit than he deserves, hes easily been our best and most consistent bowler since the Ashes and hes definetly been running through sides more often than Freddie has been. Only Harmison can really claim to be inconsistent, and that is something that England will have to live with.

Agreed 100% about Bell. Otherwise, that's a brave call to pick all 4 plus Panesar. Sounds like a recipe for 250 for 5 becoming 275 all out on a fairly regular basis in the winter.

Which is why all the tailenders need to work extensively on their batting before the winter. Panesar isnt as bad as most people make him out to be, and i think he can make a very useful number 8 or 9 in the future. Hoggard also if he works on his batting can be a very handy lower order batsman. Only Harmison i cant see become anything other than an old fashioned tailend slogger.

 

[Goughy]

Which is why all the tailenders need to work extensively on their batting before the winter. Panesar isnt as bad as most people make him out to be, and i think he can make a very useful number 8 or 9 in the future. Hoggard also if he works on his batting can be a very handy lower order batsman. Only Harmison i cant see become anything other than an old fashioned tailend slogger.

They should be doing that anyway. Also it works both ways. Bell, Collingwood, KP and Tresco should be working on their bowling to become the best they can be and capable of doing a limited but required job.

 

[Scaly piscine]

I think Hoggard's batting has reached its full potential and he's not really improved over the last year or so, Harmison is a better batsman and could be better but he's extremely vulnerable early on - as shown by his high percentage of ducks.

I don't see much point in Tresco practising his bowling, he's too old now.

 

[greg]

He did; his stumping of Yousuf was absolutely top draw. He out-kept Sangakarra earlier this year & is now well ahead of Akmal after two tests. It's just unfortunate that as his keeping has improved out of all recognition his batting has gone backwards at the same rate of knots.

I think tho that it would be a massive gamble to go into a test with a keeper with a broken bone in his hand when there's no need to. Moreover, there's a good case to be made for his dropping regardless of his injury; the argument for his retention has now come full circle. It would now be his nifty glovework that kept him in rather than his extra runs!

What i think is really needed, but unfortunately would be very difficult for the selectors to do, is for Jones to be rested/dropped with the understanding that he will return for the Ashes. As has been noted his keeping has improved beyond all recognition and if he was performing anything like with the bat then there would be no debate about his place whatsover. The problem is that he is in woeful form, and there is arguably no position where it is harder to get back into form than no7. Top order batsmen can find form simply by trying to occupy the crease, but this is just not a luxury generally afforded someone in the lower order - and certainly not without putting their interests above those of the team. One only has to look at the length of Adam Gilchrist's poor run to see that elsewhere.

So what Jones really needs is a period in county cricket, batting up the order, where he can get his confidence back and find his form, so that he can return for the Ashes refreshed and renewed. But i don't think that is a risk that Fletcher will want to take.

 

[Armadillo]

Will Shoaib play in the next test? Will his inclusion bring a significant boost to the team?

 

[marc71178]

Only Harmison i cant see become anything other than an old fashioned tailend slogger.

But to be fair to him, he certainly stayed in this game.

 

[Goughy]

I don't see much point in Tresco practising his bowling, he's too old now.

Hes only 30 and he bowls at 120 kph. Its not going to kill him to work on that aspect of his game just in case.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Hes only 30 and he bowls at 120 kph. Its not going to kill him to work on that aspect of his game just in case.

It's pointless, even before his bowling was useless and there's already Collingwood, Bell etc. anyway. With his size and age he's just as likely to develop some stupid injury as get a useful wicket.