• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** South Africa in England

Should Freddy be included in team for the second Test?


  • Total voters
    44

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
There was no way to tell that Jones would go on to be better than Flintoff after the Ashes. Remember Flintoff was brilliant in that series too and had already proven that he could bowl effectively outside of England. Jones had, at that stage, not proven any such thing. It's one thing to steam in and swing the ball a mile when you're pumped up on adrenaline in an Ashes Test in front of one of the most engaged and vibrant audiences in the history of English cricket. That, particularly when you're the celebrity-prone type that Jones appears to be. It's entirely another to perform when momentum is not on your side.

You talk as though Flintoff did not prove himself after he matured into a quality bowler. The fact is that, when Flintoff went down, he had established himself as world class. Jones had done no such thing. I'm as big a fan of the guy as any non-English/Welshman, but Flintoff > Jones.
It was all a very long time ago i suppose.

I'll put it another way. Flintoff hasn't bowled in a very long time, and i'm not entirely sure of whether he'll ever reach the standard he was at. Jones has done a lot more to prove that he's still a quality bowler, and while he played for England, he was at Flintoff's level- if over a much shorter period of time.

It's a bit like if i were to say Dale Steyn is a better test bowler than Shaun Pollock. Probably true at the moment, but not at all true in the terms you're thinking of.
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
But it's not like Jones has bowled that much more than Flintoff. Neither has played even a full half of a season as yet.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
But it's not like Jones has bowled that much more than Flintoff. Neither has played even a full half of a season as yet.
No, but it's enough to make me think that for the purposes of the next test and the rest of the series, Jones would be at least as likely as Flintoff to take wickets.
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Probably, because I'm not convinced that Flintoff is match fit. But hey, at the core of the matter here is that Flintoff can, theoretically, bat better than Jones. Because whichever of Collingwood or Broad makes way, England would want someone who can handle a bat.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Probably, because I'm not convinced that Flintoff is match fit. But hey, at the core of the matter here is that Flintoff can, theoretically, bat better than Jones. Because whichever of Collingwood or Broad makes way, England would want someone who can handle a bat.
Certainly. Hence i voted 'yes' on this poll. Even if he isn't match fit they won't exactly be losing much by dropping Collingwood the way he's playing at the minute...
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Certainly. Hence i voted 'yes' on this poll. Even if he isn't match fit they won't exactly be losing much by dropping Collingwood the way he's playing at the minute...
Ah, but that's another issue. It's not about what England is losing based on previous results, because cricket isn't played in hindsight. It's about the moment when England needs runs from a 6th batsman, because that's what Collingwood is picked for. And in that moment will Flintoff rise to the challenge and score the runs of a more recognized batsman? Very unlikely, and if he does, it won't be very regularly.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Ah, but that's another issue. It's not about what England is losing based on previous results, because cricket isn't played in hindsight. It's about the moment when England needs runs from a 6th batsman, because that's what Collingwood is picked for. And in that moment will Flintoff rise to the challenge and score the runs of a more recognized batsman? Very unlikely, and if he does, it won't be very regularly.
Hmm but the choice is between one totally out of form batsman and another totally out of form batsman who can bowl exceptionally well. I like Collingwood, i do think he'll get back in form, but he doesn't have to do so in the England team.
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Hmm but the choice is between one totally out of form batsman and another totally out of form batsman who can bowl exceptionally well. I like Collingwood, i do think he'll get back in form, but he doesn't have to do so in the England team.
Ummm... not really. This is a home Test match. England has all of the country to call upon. And I guarantee you that not every batsman is in the rotten form that Collingwood is.

Simply put, if you're dropping Collingwood, bring in a batsman. Not a Flintoff. Freddie or otherwise.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Ummm... not really. This is a home Test match. England has all of the country to call upon. And I guarantee you that not every batsman is in the rotten form that Collingwood is.

Simply put, if you're dropping Collingwood, bring in a batsman. Not a Flintoff. Freddie or otherwise.
Hmm, see looking at the bowling lineup and the batting lineup, the former looks more in need of the extra man than the latter IMO. In any case, which batsman would you go for?
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
That's largely because of what England has done very recently in some good batting conditions and against some poor bowling. Since the Ashes win the batting has been far from secure, especially considering that Ambrose is very unconvincing at 7 right now.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
That's largely because of what England has done very recently in some good batting conditions and against some poor bowling. Since the Ashes the batting has been far from secure, especially considering that Ambrose is very unconvincing at 7 right now.
I'm not convinced by Broad or Anderson. Two weak links out of a four-man attack doesn't look so good. By contrast, out of Strauss, Cook, Vaughan, Pietersen and Bell, only Bell am i unsure of. And with the innings he just played, he may just convince me. That's why at 6 i would prefer a bowler who can bat rather than a batsman who can bowl.
 

Howzatone

School Boy/Girl Cricketer
I'm not convinced by Broad or Anderson. Two weak links out of a four-man attack doesn't look so good. By contrast, out of Strauss, Cook, Vaughan, Pietersen and Bell, only Bell am i unsure of. And with the innings he just played, he may just convince me. That's why at 6 i would prefer a bowler who can bat rather than a batsman who can bowl.
I'd say out of those 5 Bell has to be one of the strongest at the moment, along with Pietersen. Vaughan would be the one I am most unsure of out of those 5.
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'm not convinced by Broad or Anderson. Two weak links out of a four-man attack doesn't look so good. By contrast, out of Strauss, Cook, Vaughan, Pietersen and Bell, only Bell am i unsure of. And with the innings he just played, he may just convince me. That's why at 6 i would prefer a bowler who can bat rather than a batsman who can bowl.
But Pietersen has been missing a lot more than hitting this year, though his most recent innings and his South African history anticipates a big series. Still, he's not done a whole lot to inspire great confidence this year. Then Cook and Vaughan are hardly any better. Neither has scored heavily and the former has looked shaky at times even when he is scoring. Vaughan, on the other hand, looks like a walking wicket against Steyn at times. Bell, for obvious reasons, is not a reliable force. Of that bunch then, it's only Strauss who has done anything to strongly inspire confidence in his batting.

Even if Flintoff replaces Collingwood, what's the point in keeping Broad in? Surely there are better bowlers who can bat as handily. Heck, I'd back even Mascarenhas to do more than Broad has. And the Hampshire man appears very much short of Test class. That's how little an impression Broad has made in my estimation. More so than a question of "Who does Flintoff replace?" it's a question of "Does Broad deserve to be retained? Does Collingwood deserve to be retained?" The answer to both of those questions in "No", and considering that Flintoff is the likeliest person to come into the side for the next Test, you'd think he would logically replace the bowler of the two.
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'd say out of those 5 Bell has to be one of the strongest at the moment, along with Pietersen. Vaughan would be the one I am most unsure of out of those 5.
Another strange call. Strauss has done infinitely more than Bell this year. Bell has been very poor until that 199. And one innings on that pitch against that bowling does not a batsman make.
 

TT Boy

Hall of Fame Member
Is Simon Jones still having ‘Carte Blanche’ treatment and getting the majority of his wickets against hapless tailenders?

Flintoff looks ready; from all reports Jones is still being 'protected'.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
If he's match fit and can bowl lengthy spells, he's a walk up start, isn't he? England's best bowler if he's fit.
Why wouldn't they frop one of the bowlers and bat him at 7 with the keeper at 8?

All this assumes he's up to being part of a four man attack. Otherwise, if he plays in lieu of Collingwood, you have a 5 man attack, but what happens if SA make inroads early at Headingly? England batted very well at Lords, but surely SA can't bowl as badly again?
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
But Pietersen has been missing a lot more than hitting this year, though his most recent innings and his South African history anticipates a big series. Still, he's not done a whole lot to inspire great confidence this year. Then Cook and Vaughan are hardly any better. Neither has scored heavily and the former has looked shaky at times even when he is scoring. Vaughan, on the other hand, looks like a walking wicket against Steyn at times. Bell, for obvious reasons, is not a reliable force. Of that bunch then, it's only Strauss who has done anything to strongly inspire confidence in his batting.

Even if Flintoff replaces Collingwood, what's the point in keeping Broad in? Surely there are better bowlers who can bat as handily. Heck, I'd back even Mascarenhas to do more than Broad has. And the Hampshire man appears very much short of Test class. That's how little an impression Broad has made in my estimation. More so than a question of "Who does Flintoff replace?" it's a question of "Does Broad deserve to be retained? Does Collingwood deserve to be retained?" The answer to both of those questions in "No", and considering that Flintoff is the likeliest person to come into the side for the next Test, you'd think he would logically replace the bowler of the two.
Broad should never have been selected, and i don't rate him at all. The problem, however, arises then with having a half-fit Flintoff in a four-man attack. If he was to prove he can stay fit and bowl well, then Flintoff as a direct replacement for Broad would be the solution. As for the next test, Flintoff in for Collingwood is probably the way to go. If there are, as you say, better bowlers who are as handy with the bat, and there probably are, one of those could replace Broad too.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Is Simon Jones still having ‘Carte Blanche’ treatment and getting the majority of his wickets against hapless tailenders?

Flintoff looks ready; from all reports Jones is still being 'protected'.
I can't vouch for Simon Jones's consistency and the quality of his wickets, but i've watched enough of him this year to know THAT isn't true.
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Is Simon Jones still having ‘Carte Blanche’ treatment and getting the majority of his wickets against hapless tailenders?

Flintoff looks ready; from all reports Jones is still being 'protected'.
Is Simon Jones still having ‘Carte Blanche’ treatment and getting the majority of his wickets against hapless tailenders?

Flintoff looks ready; from all reports Jones is still being 'protected'.

DL Maddy
GP Hodnett
CM Spearman
SD Snell

RN ten Doeschate x 2
SD Stubbings
R Clarke
WW Hinds
DJ Pipe

MAG Boyce
J Allenby x 2
HH Dippenaar
L Klusener

MA Hardinges
AJ Ireland
AJ Tudor x 2
DD Masters
Danish Kaneria x 2
AD Palladino
JL Clare
TC Smith
CW Henderson
MN Malik
DH Wigley
JF Brown

Roughly half his wickets are top 7 batsmen.
 

TT Boy

Hall of Fame Member
If he's match fit and can bowl lengthy spells, he's a walk up start, isn't he? England's best bowler if he's fit.
Why wouldn't they frop one of the bowlers and bat him at 7 with the keeper at 8?

All this assumes he's up to being part of a four man attack. Otherwise, if he plays in lieu of Collingwood, you have a 5 man attack, but what happens if SA make inroads early at Headingly? England batted very well at Lords, but surely SA can't bowl as badly again?
I’ll fancy Ntini having another mare or two.
 

Top