He's done it! Nasser HUSSAIN!!!

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Scott-Wozniak

Come on Kirsty ! That wasn't Hussain's fault. The replays clearly show Strauss was at fault, he was caught napping, should have been backing up, wasn't, should have run when the call was made - didn't, ran, hesistate

Did not see it happen Scott,i found at the last minute I had a hospital appointment,they had a telly in the waiting area,and I kept putting C4 on,and if by magic it kept going back to some old black and white film,some sod had a remote I bet.


When I got home to the cricket ,they were talking about the run out,Boycot said it was Hussains fault,and compared it to when he ran D Randell out at Trent Bridge,then went on to make a ton like hussain did

Ernest

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by Kirsty Harris

That's intersting, Scott - I only saw the replay on the big screen once, and the general view was that it was down to Hussain calling for a run that wasn't there. It seems the genral view of Aggars and Stewert just now on Radio 5. I'll have to watch the highlights to see for myself.... my initial feeling WAS the same as yours, but I assumed I was wrong!!

Kirsty

Well I've seen the replay of this about a dozen times now and I'm convinced in my mind Strauss was at fault. Hussain called the run, now, if there wasn't a run there Strauss had the best view of it as Hussain was setting off - he should have shouted NO!!!! How many times do you see batsmen at the non-strikers end saying that? NO!!!! He should have sent Hussain back - he didn't - he let Hussain get halfway up the pitch before he did anything - by that time it was too late.

Also had he trusted Hussain's call - and been backing up, and took off immediately the call was made - I'm sure he would have made it ok. He didn't, he didn't shout no, he wasn't backing up, he didn't set off right way, he stopped, hesitated - only one result - he was going to get run out. I think its very unfair to blame Hussain for this.

Scott

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Richie Benauds Love Child

I dont think Scott wants butcher dropped because he didnt bat well (at least I dont think so - correct me if I'm worng Scott) its more a case that strauss was fantastic and we want him in the team (I'd open with him) and who can we move to accommodate him. Giles would be the answer but if its still dry headingly may take his kind of "spin".

What a great position to be in !

http://www.teletext.com/sport/generi...age=1&ref=7004

RBLC

Looks like nasa is sorting problem

See link

Ernest

[Kirsty Harris]

Originally Posted by Scott-Wozniak

Kirsty

Well I've seen the replay of this about a dozen times now and I'm convinced in my mind Strauss was at fault. Hussain called the run, now, if there wasn't a run there Strauss had the best view of it as Hussain was setting off - he should have shouted NO!!!! How many times do you see batsmen at the non-strikers end saying that? NO!!!! He should have sent Hussain back - he didn't - he let Hussain get halfway up the pitch before he did anything - by that time it was too late.

Also had he trusted Hussain's call - and been backing up, and took off immediately the call was made - I'm sure he would have made it ok. He didn't, he didn't shout no, he wasn't backing up, he didn't set off right way, he stopped, hesitated - only one result - he was going to get run out. I think its very unfair to blame Hussain for this.

Scott

After seeing it again, I think on balance I agree with you - it was one almighty ****-up, but Strauss seems to have caused the main problem - had he gone when called, then it was probably a single. Thorpe and Hussain ran several singles that were of similar. Of course, they know each other so well, it's probably instinctive..

Anyway, it didn't matter much in the end..alls well that ends welll!!!

[Whips_off_the_bails]

Strauss is still the first man since 1969 to score a century on debut and he's got his name on the famous board.

Notice how Nasser saves many of his best performances for Lords - remember 2002 v India, his finest match as captain.

[R W S]

Nas, bless him, has become prone to an emotional outburst of late. I find him more human now than when he was trying to drag English cricket out of the mire as a steely eyed skipper. He has laid the foundations for this teams success, although not singlehandedly as some may suggest. I'm not surprised the herculean effort has left him a little frayed!

He doesnt strike me as a guy working without a plan in mind but maybe the events of the day got the better of him. I also dont htink he'd chuck away the cash he gets from his central contract - which he would surely have to do if he removed himself from the England scene!

I hope his dad tells him to see the job through to end and he sees out his current year. At least.

If he's good enough I dont care how old he is.

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by R W S

If he's good enough I dont care how old he is.

R W S

I don't think it's an emotional thing at all. From the interviews I've seen him give, he's been pondering on this since the Carribbean and spoke to Duncan Fletcher about it last night - before this innings.

What I think he is conscious of, is a desire to go out at the top of his game. Knowing the way Leeds and Trent Bridge pitches play, with the track being very bowler friendly, he's rightly concerned that if he fails on those two pitches, he may well have lost the chance to go out with a great innings and an England win. What better way to bow out of the game than a match winning Century at the home of Cricket - the mighty Lords? I think this is very much a factor in his decision making.

Scott

[R W S]

Originally Posted by Scott-Wozniak

I don't think it's an emotional thing at all. From the interviews I've seen him give, he's been pondering on this since the Carribbean and spoke to Duncan Fletcher about it last night - before this innings.

Three quarters of the way through a test match - what a strange time to talk to the manager about retiring!

[high_on_linseed]

Scott, Australia do occassionally drop players that's true. But they wouldnt, for example, drop Ricky Ponting after one bad innings, even before he was made captain. Although Butcher is not in Ponting's league, he plays the same role for England, as an established no. 3. In fact, he's been our most consistent player for the last three years.

In fact, were we to do it the Aussie way, Strauss would make way, being the new guy just as Katich in Sri Lanka, despite being arguably their best batsman against India.

Now, let me get one thing straight, I think dropping players after a bad run is only fair, especially in this time of central contracts which offer dropped players more security. But dropping players after one bad game only destabilizes the team, and has good players looking over their shoulder if they should happen to have a poor, or even unlucky game. What if we drop Butcher for Headingley, and Thorpes bags a pair? Do we then drop Thorpe and drag Butcher back in. Aren't we then going back to the old unsuccessful, revolving door policy of old? Do you see my point?

I also find it odd that for the last month or so, people including your good self have been vehemently campaigning for Trescothick's removal. Now, after one good innings, Tres is suddenly safe again, and peoples sights are trained on Butcher. Are Trescothick and Butcher suddenly radically different players after Lords? I dont think so. And I dont think Butcher is in bad form either, as he made a century for Surrey immediately prior to the Lord's test. So, if any batsman should be dropped it should be Tres. Nothing has really changed about his batting since the West Indies tour. Just, back their the bowling was a bit better to tell the truth and he had a bad trot. So far, the Kiwis have (on the whole bowled) worse than West Indies and Tres had found the middle of the bat a bit more often. That's all.

In fact, I think both Butcher and Tres should stay. It is very easy to spot the passenger in the side. Yes, he made a great effort on day 4, but Ashley Giles is simply not all that talented. As for making the bowling light. It doesnt. Hoggard and Harmi bowl for 12-14 overs between them, then you rotate it with Flintoff and Jones bowling the same. Then Vaughan fill in two or three before the end of a session. If one of the bowlers breaks down, that's tough but we'll have to live with that. It's unlikely, and you may as well say what if one of the batsman gets an injury? Does that then leave us light in batting?

I find it odd that some are even suggesting Anderson for Hoggard after one mediocre game. Anderson has had one good test in his career. Am I wrong? Hoggard had at least three in the Caribbean alone, and if Headingley was made for anyone, it is Matthew Hoggard.

This is not just directed at you Scott, but everyone who cares to read it. I usually respect your views, but this one has me a bit peeved!

[Kirsty Harris]

Originally Posted by Scott-Wozniak

R W S

I don't think it's an emotional thing at all. From the interviews I've seen him give, he's been pondering on this since the Carribbean and spoke to Duncan Fletcher about it last night - before this innings.

What I think he is conscious of, is a desire to go out at the top of his game. Knowing the way Leeds and Trent Bridge pitches play, with the track being very bowler friendly, he's rightly concerned that if he fails on those two pitches, he may well have lost the chance to go out with a great innings and an England win. What better way to bow out of the game than a match winning Century at the home of Cricket - the mighty Lords? I think this is very much a factor in his decision making.

Scott

I agree - it doesn't strike me as just his emotions talking. He has clearly been thinking about his future since the WI tour. However, I also feel he is hurting from all the speculation that he is too old and not good enough anymore

I saw him quoted in The Times as stating 'I only want to play in a side and for a country that wants me to play'. I think it's really sad if Hussain has been made to feel like he is not wanted anymore... especially as he has given so much to turn England around.