Jones or Read

[Paul Collingwood]

If you think I have nothing better to do that listen to a load of insults, then you are mistaken. Apart from fielding at cover point, I also need to work on my one-handed tray carrying and get fitted for the waistcoat and bow tie Fletch has suggested might help me "raise my game".

And, for your information, I have a laptop I keep in my abdominal support.

Your identification of "Goats ****" is most persceptive, and if I may say, very appropriate!

[David W]

Do we necessarily need the BEST keeper now?

While the attack is seam dominated with a keeper way back from the stumps surely any adequate keeper will do. The quality of a keeper only becomes apparant standing up to the stumps with a spinner on giving it a real "rip". As we havent got one and, as far as i am aware none on the immediate horizon, should we not continue to select the best adequate batsman?

[Goatman]

Oi! I assume you manky sods are referring to me!

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by Teatime FatCat

I find it ironic that Wheelie Bin should obviously be replaced, yet there are no candidates - yet Jones shouldn't and people are touting options for him left, right and centre!

TFC

I think its partly because people can't/won't/don't want to see the bigger picture. In my mind the spinner slot and the Keeper slot are connected together. They couldn't do anything about the spinner slot with Read in the side, because his batting is so poor, and Giles is useful with the bat. Fletcher want's a long tail, he's said that, hence the replacement of Read with Jones, with the batting strengthened, they 'may' turn their attention to the spinner slot, at least they can now afford to bring in a spinner who can't bat, whereas with Read in the side they couldn't.

But is Giles really that bad? He did as well as, if not better than Vettori in the last test, and everyone hails Vettori as being a good lefty spinner. In my mind, Giles is as good a spinner as we have, bolstered by his improved batting. I wouldn't be surprised if Fletcher took Giles to one side one day and said - if you want to keep your place in the side in the longer term - improve your batting.

People will leap on this and say why play Giles for his batting? This is what I mean in my first sentence - people can't see the bigger picture. They're not playing Giles for his batting - they're playing him for his bowling, if they have to play a spinner, which it seems they do, they want one who can bat as well. All things being equal, they'll go for the better bat every time, and this policy fits in with Fletchers stated aim of batting down the order - England's batting goes down to No. 8 at the moment.

People keep hailing the next great spinner - Keedy seems to be the favourite at the moment, what people forget is, Keedy is taking wickets in County Cricket, Giles takes them (or has taken them) in the highest level of the game - International Test Cricket, and rarely plays in County Cricket any more - can you really make a comparison between Keedy and Giles when they don't play at the same level of the game? Who is better - Giles or Keedy? In my mind it has to be Giles, because Keedy is unproven in Test Cricket. If they want to see how good Keedy is - put him into the England A Side and lets see how he gets on in the step up to the next level of Cricket. But if people think that magically Keedy will step into Giles's shoes - they're mistaken - because it's not going to happen, nor is a the longer term dropping of Giles.

Scott

[Teatime FatCat]

Goaty, I have nothing but the greatest respect for your cricketing posts, and I am willing to overlook your unhealthy lust for the body of Banger Trescothick - but too allow Collingwood to openly discuss your ****? That's just outrageous - I think you should reprimand him most strongly, and report him to headmaster Fletcher!


But whilst we're on the subject - who had the biggest **** in international cricket? Trueman, Botham, Austin?

[Teatime FatCat]

Originally Posted by Scott-Wozniak

TFC

But is Giles really that bad? He did as well as, if not better than Vettori in the last test, and everyone hails Vettori as being a good lefty spinner. In my mind, Giles is as good a spinner as we have, bolstered by his improved batting. I wouldn't be surprised if Fletcher took Giles to one side one day and said - if you want to keep your place in the side in the longer term - improve your batting.

People keep hailing the next great spinner - Keedy seems to be the favourite at the moment, what people forget is, Keedy is taking wickets in County Cricket, Giles takes them (or has taken them) in the highest level of the game - International Test Cricket, and rarely plays in County Cricket any more - can you really make a comparison between Keedy and Giles when they don't play at the same level of the game? Who is better - Giles or Keedy? In my mind it has to be Giles, because Keedy is unproven in Test Cricket. If they want to see how good Keedy is - put him into the England A Side and lets see how he gets on in the step up to the next level of Cricket. But if people think that magically Keedy will step into Giles's shoes - they're mistaken - because it's not going to happen, nor is a the longer term dropping of Giles.

Scott

I don't think that Giles would get into any other test side in the world (not Zim or Bangladesh), I don't believe he is a good test spinner, I don't believe he's willing to attack, and I can't see him running through any test batting line-up. All of which indicates to me that he shouldn't be in the side.

However, depressingly, you are quite right - there just isnt anyone else, and England should be adressing this now, to have someone dragged up to standard by specialist coaching.

[kriss]

Originally Posted by Teatime FatCat

Well, it's a well known fact that the people of this board are all cricketing genius's and know a thing or two about the sport -

Well I don't know about that!!

Some food for thought on the debate though - Stewart was essentially and inferior keeper to Russell- yet in the long run it was proven that it was better for the side as a whole to play him. The more often he kept at test level the better he kept.

Stewart was a inadequate wicket keeper when he started but he did improve his skills. At his best he was a good keeper to the pace bowlers.
To the spinners he was only average. One of the TMS journalists estimated that he cost Croft and Giles 15-20 wickets each with his mistakes.

As it stands now, it's not such a great problem anyway, and he should be left alone to work on his game throughout the summer!

I agree,I feel that the selectors have found the best player for the present.

[Goatman]

I have already despatched a postcard, showing Utrechts most famous sights, to the ink monitor himself, Michael "Crusher" Vaughan.

As for biggest ****, I'd have to say Treuman but Botham must be coming a close second. Its was Austns gut - not his **** - that stood out in my mind.

[flanflinger]

I think SA might have him.


Zim (if they ever get their lives sorted out) have the vastly superior Ray Price.

Banglandesh have Rafique, who I would suggest is their best player.

I think though Giles is better than Vettori (in current form) and anything that the West Indies have.

I would go so far as to suggest that India did not have Kumble and Habarjan, would actually have a need for someone with Giles's ability?

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Rich Greenfield

Don't forget that Read's keeping was absolutely appalling in 1999

Rich

We have had the millenium since then