Today's Match Eng v WI 7th ODI

[Rachael]

Spot on re: Freddie and the ODI scene... the only player we've got who would walk into any team in the world (though Tresco, Collingwood, Read and Gough would probably be snapped up by most).

My own feeling is that he and Trescothick (and maybe Clarke, Collingwood and Read) should just specialise in the ODI stuff and stop splitting their attention with the Test stuff (where others are arguably better).

[Kirsty Harris]

Scott

I don't have anything AGAINST Clarke as such - I just don't think he has the quality to bat at 4 - number 6 seems the ideal spot for him. He isn't the kind of batsmen who can stick around for the best part of an innings, but sure he can get runs quickly later in the game...I feel it was an experiment doomed to fail from the minute he came out to bat. At the same time, I agree that this is a good time for the selectors to experiment with the team..just don't put him in at 4 again!!

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Spot on re: Freddie and the ODI scene... the only player we've got who would walk into any team in the world (though Tresco, Collingwood, Read and Gough would probably be snapped up by most).

My own feeling is that he and Trescothic specialise in the ODI stuff and stop splitting their attention with the Test stuff (where others are arguably better).

By he I think you mean Freddy,should specialise in the one day stuff,not sure about Tresco either,everyone was raving about him not long ago.

I cant think of one player who could fill his shoes at Test level as an all rounder,hoping I am reading your post right,but it does sound incredable.

I would like to hear who the ( others who arguably better) are.

My own feeling is that without Freddy int the team,we would not have beaten the Windies three nil...

[Whips_off_the_bails]

Rachael has a blind spot when it comes to recognizing Freddie's talent. Partly this is to do with stats, although the recent stats back Freddie (he averaged 50 with the bat and 27 with the ball in WI). However, the bare statistics are not a true gauge of Flintoff's contribution to the side in the past two years since coming back from injury.

After some early stick-and-carrot coaxing from the management, Freddie has jumped through hoops for the England cause, getting his weight down, building up his fitness as a bowler again (remember, at one point there was serious doubt that he would be able to bowl regularly because of injury), and improving his stamina (he is now able to see a series through without injury). He bowled all those overs in Sri Lanka in the searing heat because no one else could offer England the control they needed. He is England's best slip fielder since Botham (only Nick Knight even comes close in recent times). At the weekend he was still running in for England when suffering from cramp. He's pretty bloody marvellous, if you ask me.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Whips_off_the_bails

Rachael has a blind spot when it comes to recognizing Freddie's talent. Partly this is to do with stats, However, the bare statistics are not a true gauge of Flintoff's contribution to the side in the past two years since coming back from injury.

After some early stick-and-carrot coaxing from the management, Freddie has jumped through hoops for the England cause, He is England's best slip fielder since Botham . At the weekend he was still running in for England when suffering from cramp. He's pretty bloody marvellous, if you ask me.

Yes the team would be poorer without him,and if it came down to stats,anyone who has followed freddies progress will know his bowling stats,would be a lot better if fielders had held on to catches of his bowling,he must be the unluckiest bowler ever.

I believe,I know I have said this in other posts,England wouls not have won three nil against the Windies without Freddy.

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by Whips_off_the_bails

Rachael has a blind spot when it comes to recognizing Freddie's talent. Partly this is to do with stats, although the recent stats back Freddie (he averaged 50 with the bat and 27 with the ball in WI). However, the bare statistics are not a true gauge of Flintoff's contribution to the side in the past two years since coming back from injury.

Yet another example of how cannot rely on statistics to show a 'true' picture'. I really don't know how many more times this situation is going to crop up here before people start to look upon stats as being a mere guide to be interpretted correctly and used with other factors to shape an opinion or a viewpoint.

Scott

[Kirsty Harris]

Scott

Yep - I think your right about stats - they can be a usful guide, but are not necessarily a reflection on the current form of a player - Butcher and Flintoff are the two best examples of it from an England pont of view.

Lets face it, Flintoff has been England's best performer over the last 12 months, and is at least twice the player of a couple of years ago. Although Butcher should be looking to convert more starts to centurys, he has been a very reliable player in the last couple of years.

In both cases, their career averages don't do them justice.