Simon Jones or James Anderson?

[Richard]

He certainly bowled a bit better than Flintoff and Hoggard.

 

[Tom Halsey]

and there are times when you bowl well and are unlucky, which seems to be the case here. needless to say that its quite impossible to expect 4 wicket hauls on the flattest slowest wicket of the tour. you yourself have said that he wont succeed at the international level if hes not accurate, yet when he has been accurate hes still being criticised.

This is far from the slowest wicket - although agreed it's probably been the flattest.

 

[marc71178]

And ITE I might just have been proven right, mightn't I?!!!!

Considering I posted after the first day, I can only have been talking about the first day.

So how does that make you right?

 

[Richard]

Because however well he may have bowled on the first day, he bowled a pile of sh*t on the second - something that's just a little familiar!

 

[marc71178]

And was I commenting on Day 2? NO

So how were you showing me to be wrong?

 

[Richard]

I wasn't showing you to be wrong - I was showing why what you were saying was irrelevant.

 

[marc71178]

How was it irrelevant?

 

[Richard]

Because of the fact it's irrelevant that he may have been perceived to have been the pick of the bowlers having come-up with nothing-special figures, then bowled a pile of rubbish and made those figures from OK into poor.

 

[tooextracool]

Because often he follows being accurate with going for 5-an-over.

and hence criticising him for times when he was accurate is what a fool with do, given that we know what he can do at his best.

 

[Richard]

And we know how often his best is followed by a pile of crap.

 

[tooextracool]

And we know how often his best is followed by a pile of crap.

and therefore you criticise the crap, not the times when he bowls accurately.

 

[Richard]

If the crap means the overall figures are poor, then yes, I do!

 

[sledger]

well in light of simon jones being severely under bowled in the third test does anyone think that there is reason for claims to put anderson back in the side to offer a fresh approach to the side?

 

[Marcus]

well in light of simon jones being severely under bowled in the third test does anyone think that there is reason for claims to put anderson back in the side to offer a fresh approach to the side?

i agree something needs to be done to freshen the side up.....and i agree that perhaps jones could be replaced...but anderson..its debatable...what about kabir Ali....in his only one test he got a 5 for....and hes been playing well for the academy this year and this winter.....for new ideas what about him.....i mean the south africans dont know the guy and would give Engalnd a edge.....Anderson the South Africans know of....and to be honest if you want to freshen the side up...try some new blood out....Anderson dodnt perform in Zimbarbwe and i dont believe a test run out vs a good south african side will be any good for the guy who needs to work on his game and perhaps work in the academy for a few months with the English coahes at Loughbourgh and with his county collegues at Lancashire...this may prepare him for the summer...and with Bangladesh in town...a Anderson re call would be a option...particullary since he would get wickets.....wickets that could boost his confidence and drive him firmly back into the england side.....at the moment anderson shouldnt be a option for England..and he needs a break from the international arena.

 

[Neil Pickup]

You know, you could use paragraphs

Minor point with Kabir, he didn't get a five-for on debut, it was five in the match.

 

[tooextracool]

If the crap means the overall figures are poor, then yes, I do!

rubbish you dont criticise a bowler when he actually bowls well. and as far as his figures being crap his concerned, hs averaged 27 this series, certainly not crap.

 

[tooextracool]

well in light of simon jones being severely under bowled in the third test does anyone think that there is reason for claims to put anderson back in the side to offer a fresh approach to the side?

err he was instrumental in the only test that england have won this series, and he was the best bowler for a large part of the first inning of the last test,without too much success unfortuantely and took 2/15 in the 2nd. and yet people want to drop him

 

[Richard]

Minor point with Kabir, he didn't get a five-for on debut, it was five in the match.

A five-wicket match-haul.
Which is a hell of a lot better than plenty of other individuals around at present.

 

[Richard]

rubbish you dont criticise a bowler when he actually bowls well. and as far as his figures being crap his concerned, hs averaged 27 this series, certainly not crap.

Nope, indeed - reliant on the most recent spell, a pile of rubbish that somehow ended-up with 9.3-15-2. Before that it was well over 30.
He's been under-bowled in this series and IMO he's benefited from it.

 

[tooextracool]

Nope, indeed - reliant on the most recent spell, a pile of rubbish that somehow ended-up with 9.3-15-2. Before that it was well over 30.
He's been under-bowled in this series and IMO he's benefited from it.

hardly surprising for you to say that either. of course the fact is that for the first half at least he was accurate and put the players under pressure, something that caused rudolph to get out. no surprise that he bowled 4 maidens either, something that you quite conveniently ignored.