Bothan says,Hussain out Colly,or Strauss in

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

If nass did end up in a commentry box with gatting you can be sure that gatting would be leaving said box via the window and via nass's boot !

[Occasional Fan]

Originally Posted by Richie Benauds Love Child

prescadent (is that spelt right ?).

No. It's "precedent". Have that one on me!

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Originally Posted by Occasional Fan

No. It's "precedent". Have that one on me!

Thank you OC. I'm sure I've spelt it right somewhere on these boards (its a great word) but I've had a banging headache all day and just couldnt work it out !

[high_on_linseed]

I think all players should be selected on merit. What we define as merit may differ. But for me its a combination of talent, form, fitness, mental fitness, past experience, and what they bring to the side. I might have left a few other factors out too. Most importantly it is are they likely to get runs or take wickets against the opposition put before them.

Obviously, individual bias cannot be eliminated either. i notice, for example, Scott that you were just itching...aching even...to get Tres (who averages 41) out of the side after a few bad innings. But Nas should be kept on just out of sentiment it seems.

Bothams job is to stir the pot. Create some snappy headlines. Be a bit of a big-mouth. And unless he goes down th Ron Atkinson route, he should be indulged.
After all, someone has to do it, and why not Englands greatest all-rounder. Better he than, say, Davina McCall ( ;

But, in this case, I dont really agree with Botham. I think the way Hussain tends to play in tests these days - play and miss a lot, grind it out (rachael) will work to some extent against the Kiwis. I dont think the pressure on him is very helpful. But neither is it particuarly unhelpful, as when youre out in the middle you should be so focussed on the job in hand that Beefy, the mass media, Mugabe, KR Sundaram even are not even in the frame. I think Nasser is fit enough, and mentally fit enough, and seems in pretty good knick. So, given his wealth of experience, hes a pretty good choice.

The other options - Strauss, Collingwood - may be as good but are not obviously better.

Of course, we have to think of the future too, but the players he mentioned - Thorpe and Butcher are subject to the same criteria as all other. Are they in form, the right frame of mind, fit, likely to score runs? All of this could change before the next Ashes series.

One thing I do feel, is that based on the above criteria England should not be playing Giles, and they should be playing six specialist batsmen plus Freddie and Jones instead.
So it is quite possible to play Nas and Strauss/Colly.

[Kirsty Harris]

Originally Posted by ernest

Ian Botham wants Hussain dropped,according to the BBC sport news Full story here According to Botham,we should be looking forward to the ashes series against the Ausrailian`s.

He goes on to say we should adopt the Australian way,and say to Hussain.Thanks a lot Mas ,but we have to go forward.

Yawn!! Good for him - who cares what he thinks? Ernest, as we have agreed previously, Bothem was an awful captin, and lets face isn't really an expert in the selection field.

I think it's pretty clear Hussain isn't quite the player he was, but he is still making (just) enough runs to justify his place in the team. After all, he played a couple of vital knocks in the recent test series with WI. I would like to think he will make his 100 tests a bow out gracfully... as I've said before, if it's good enough for Stewert, it's good enough for Hussain.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Kirsty Harris

Yawn!! Good for him - who cares what he thinks? Ernest, as we have agreed previously, Bothem was an awful captin, and lets face isn't really an expert in the selection field.

Hi Kersty

To be fair to Botham on this one Kirsty,he has his eye on the Series with Australia in 05,I think his point is valid,we dont want to be blooding three young players,when you are about to start a series with Australia.

He was a bad captain,
histiry has proved that,but on this one I think he is only saying what a lot of other people are thinking

ernest

[Kirsty Harris]

Originally Posted by ernest

Hi Kersty

To be fair to Botham on this one Kirsty,he has his eye on the Series with Australia in 05,I think his point is valid,we dont want to be blooding three young players,when you are about to start a series with Australia.

He was a bad captain,
histiry has proved that,but on this one I think he is only saying what a lot of other people are thinking

ernest

Fair enough, we do need to look to the future, but surely Hussain being around at the moment has it's benefits to younger players - he has a lot of experience and ideas and so on...the general view seems to be that Gough should stay in thr one day side, in part for the same reason. I think that it will do no harm to keep Hussain on for one more summer, and could actually be beneficial...you can bet he will be wanting to beat NZ after what happpened the last time we played them at home - that's for sure. I think Strauss is clearly waiting in the wings, and lets hope he has a careeer half as good as Naz did!

I didn't see Bothem harping on about Stewert being dropped last year (sorry if I'm wrong) and you could argue Stewert had been struggling more than Hussain for runs...

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Kirsty Harris

Fair enough, we do need to look to the future, but surely Hussain being around at the moment has it's benefits to younger players - he has a lot of experience and ideas and so on

I didn't see Bothem harping on about Stewert being dropped last year (sorry if I'm wrong) and you could argue Stewert had been struggling more than Hussain for runs...

Dont Forget next year is 2005 if you are saying leave him in to play against the Australians,fair enough,but to my mind,if he is not in the selectors plans for 2005,he would be better going now,I take your point Kirsty but he has to be in for 2-3 years or go now.I dont mind I think he is class,lots of gets,

Lots of guts,same as Stewart,i am sure he retired,he played some good innings for England,and saved their blushes more than once,I recall he seemed to bat with the tail enders a lot,

Not with yu there Kirsty Top Chap,stewart....

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by Richie Benauds Love Child

But scott, doesnt it also point out our batting was too weak so we need an extra bat !?!?!!?

RBLC

No, it doesn't say that at all. What it does say is, some of the batsmen we have aren't pulling their weight, and you need to fix this, rather than just ignore it and slap a bandaid over it by bringing in another batsman.

Scott

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by Richie Benauds Love Child

Lets look to the aussies on this one, god knows we are always trying to base oursleves on them for everything else. They have 3 seamers and a (world class )spinner. The seamers are a bit fragile and two can barely hold a bat. warne can bat a bit but probably no better than giles. The rest of the overs are filled with the likes lehman, martyn, and previoulsy the waugh twins. Are they great bowlers ? Of course not. but they'll offer a bit of variety and relive the strike bowlers. As soon as we find our spinner that should be our model.

RBLC

Big difference here, Warne is a world class spin bowler - Giles is not. Which just adds strength to the view that we should play our best bowlers - if that doesn't include a spinner then it's because we don't have a World Class one. What's the point in pointing out Australia's bowlers can't bat? Australia's specialist batsmen more than make up for that shortfall - as they should - that's what they're there for.

Australia can more than compensate for not playing a 'strong' bowling attack (which I dispute anyway - they often play 3 specialist seamers, Warne and an allrounder seamer or spinner) because their batting is so strong - they can put runs on the board consistently - England cannot.

Scott