There must be a reason, even Cook got a bowl the other week. Maybe Bell has given up bowling completelyI still cant understand why Bell isnt bowled so much more. He always took wickets on a regular basis for Warks when he owned earlier on in his career.
my goodness, look get away from the computer son..No. He's not getting any younger, he'll be 33 by next summer, and I'm not often in favour of recalls for such players who I've never thought anything particularly special ITFP.
BTW, "should never play <insert level of cricket> again" generally refers to "under normal circumstances" - ie not if 5 or 6 players go down injured.
And one person in particular has been rather vocal in suggesting that they shouldn't.The second part is an interesting point, because in most other jobs you would be forced to take the decision most logical based on the information provided.
For example, if i worked for a trading company and decided to invest heavily in the flashy wildcard business Pattison Inc., who had just been set up by an unknown Australia consortium, instead of the tried-and-trusted Hoggard & Sons Ltd. whom we controversially withdrew funds from earlier that year, i'd fully expect to be fired. Selectors, it seems, can get away with it.
Hmm, but i think batting first will probably be the option here. If it's sunny, i can't see either captain putting the other team in.Well if the winning captain puts the opposition in, that would be three out of three this series where the tosswinner has bowled first. It seems quite the possibility.
I wonder if it has ever happened in every match of a series?>