New Blood For England

[kriss]

Originally Posted by ernest

Kriss
We have a squad of players,and we should play them according to conditions,we are a specialist batsman short,we have an all-rounder in Flintoff.

key has no pretentions about playing at leeds,but his form has made the selectors at leasy take notice.

Ernest

I'm sorry Ernest I can't see a problem. Five batsmen ,a batting all rounder,a wicket keeper batsmen and a destructive batting all rounder in Flintoff. Just thinking about it is making me confident and usually i'm a bit guarded about Englands chances.

As for Key I want him in the side but someone has to fail for a couple of games to give him a chance.

-

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by kriss

I'm sorry Ernest I can't see a problem. Five batsmen ,a batting all rounder,a wicket keeper batsmen and a destructive batting all rounder in Flintoff. Just thinking about it is making me confident and usually i'm a bit guarded about Englands chances.

As for Key I want him in the side but someone has to fail for a couple of games to give him a chance.

-

To me it depends on Collingwoods bowling Kriss,because the way the team is shaping there does not seem much room for Giles.I agree key will have to take his chance,but he more of a like for like than Strauss,for Hussains place.we will have three left handers in the top 4,and left handers tend to play and miss a lot

Ernest

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by R W S

I like this reasoned thinking. Coupled with the series situation, one up with two to play, this makes sense to me. Also having PC in the team might just motivate Hoggard and the other front line bowlers.

It also shows that Team England is not just about the first XI but the whole squad.

I dont expect him to play in place of Ash though...

Hi R W S

I agree it shows that team England is not about only the 1st 11,but the squad as a whole.

I just posted to Kriss,there is something not right with the top 4 England batters,3 left handers,that means 3 players and missers.

I think we need a Right handed specialist at least in the squad,I have advocated Rob Key,others will have other players to put forward.

I cant for the life of me R W think why having Paul Collingwood in the team will motivate the likes of Hoggard,I am not a big fan of Hoggard,but he is senior to collingwood by far,I think.

Ernest

[R W S]

Originally Posted by ernest

I cant for the life of me R W think why having Paul Collingwood in the team will motivate the likes of Hoggard,I am not a big fan of Hoggard,but he is senior to collingwood by far,I think.

Ernest

Hi Ernest

If I was Hoggard and playing at home the last thing I'd want is to be standing down at long leg whilst a part-time seamer had his hands on the ball. The best answer would be to show the captain that he was not needed for his bowling.

It'd motivate me!

[Ernest]

Hi R W

hmmm, yes the way you put it,I suppose it could work both ways,if Hoggy had just bowel 6 overs no wickets for 28,he would be motivated.

I suppose he could have gone down to long leg for a well earned rest,after taking 4 for 18 in 9 overs.

Ernest

[kriss]

Originally Posted by ernest

To me it depends on Collingwoods bowling Kriss,because the way the team is shaping there does not seem much room for Giles.I agree key will have to take his chance,but he more of a like for like than Strauss,for Hussains place.we will have three left handers in the top 4,and left handers tend to play and miss a lot

Ernest

Originally Posted by RWS

If I was Hoggard and playing at home the last thing I'd want is to be standing down at long leg whilst a part-time seamer had his hands on the ball. The best answer would be to show the captain that he was not needed for his bowling.

Well the most I'd expect out of Collingwood is ten tight overs, the pressures on Hoggard and the others to get them out.
As for Hoggard's motivation it hadn't occurred to me that Collingwood would be an extra spur to get him bowling well so thats another reason for picking him.
I think just having Anderson up there at Leeds this week is going to give Hoggard the push he needs.

As for Strauss I said a similar thing ten days ago, 'pick Key not Strauss ' mainly on the grounds of experience and runs and that we'd have four LH's in the top five. Strauss blew my argument apart. All the LH's except Butcher scored.

What do you think of his form at the moment ? I mean if Strauss scores again this week and Butcher doesn't ,would they drop him or is he safe for the rest of this series.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by kriss

As for Strauss I said a similar thing ten days ago, 'pick Key not Strauss ' mainly on the grounds of experience and runs and that we'd have four LH's in the top five. Strauss blew my argument apart. All the LH's except Butcher scored.

What do you think of his form at the moment ? I mean if Strauss scores again this week and Butcher doesn't ,would they drop him or is he safe for the rest of this series.

kriss

Yes the left handers did play well,but I think in a Test Series though the bowlers would find so many left handers out,sooner or later better in combination I think.

I think Butcher would have to play very bad for him to be dropped,I think he would at least get a couple of tests at least.

I think we should have one eye on the Australians coming here next year.
Ernest

[high_on_linseed]

I can see all sides of the coin here.

Yes, you look at Collingwood's record, and you look at the (recent) record of guys like Key and Sales, and it seems to make no sense to have Collingwood in the side. You c ould name perhaps 30 Englsih-qualified playes who are more prolific at county level ( though not necessarily better) than Collingwood.

But, I personally think there is room, even possibly a necessity for him in the side, at least at the moment. I've heard him called a bits-and-pieces player which he is to some degree, but there are various levels and degrees of "bits and pieces" players. In Colly's case, he is abatsman of quite high quality, first and foremost, and in addition, a perfectly acceptable fifth bowler in the righ conditions. Last but not least a very fit, almost brilliant fielder.

Without having proved as much this far, I would compare him to the following players:
a) A young Steve Waugh b) Jonty Rhodes.

In their early career neither were very prolific as batsmen, but both brought an extra dimension to the side, and went on to be quality test batsmen. Likewise, they were guys you could depend on to grind out a few runs in a tight situation.

Finally, I'm not sure, but arent some of those Durham wickets a bit lively? Anyway, no-one up there, Peng included seems to average very high. It seems like a similar situation where Vaughan was brought into the side on the back of his obvious class, but relatively poor first-class average. If the pitch is not going to "grip" at Headingley, I cant see Giles getting much purchase from it, and I would rather we bat deep with Colly at 6, and turning his arm over if necessary. I think to go with five seamers (including Anderson) is overkill and would be a very unbalanced side.

As for the future middle-order, I have a feelng that it's going to be very different from what a lot of people here anticipate. I think the two most promising players are not yet england qualified - namely Pieterson, and Ed Joyce of Middlesex. Future England middle order (once Thorpe goes) might read: Butcher, Vaughan, Pieterson, and possibly Joyce or Afzaal. I also think Trescothick will feel the heat for his place from Key and maybe Scott Newman, unless he produces runs and inspires faith more consistently.

But, who knows, that's a long way down the line, and a lot can change by then....

PS: Hussain mentioned Ian Ward in his retirement speech. Surely, no-one is seriously contemplating bringing him back?

[R W S]

Originally Posted by high_on_linseed

.

As for the future middle-order, I have a feelng that it's going to be very different from what a lot of people here anticipate. I think the two most promising players are not yet england qualified - namely Pieterson, and Ed Joyce of Middlesex. Future England middle order (once Thorpe goes) might read: Butcher, Vaughan, Pieterson, and possibly Joyce or Afzaal. I also think Trescothick will feel the heat for his place from Key and maybe Scott Newman, unless he produces runs and inspires faith more consistently.

PS: Hussain mentioned Ian Ward in his retirement speech. Surely, no-one is seriously contemplating bringing him back?

Afternoon HOL

I strongly agree with your thoughts regarding the Irish born Joyce. Good call. I've suggested elsewhere that I rate him higher than Pieterson, whose temprement may not fit with the team ethic England are developing - time will tell. Once Joyce qualifies I would rush him into the England setup. I'd even consider havng him open the innings (although he rarely does for Middx). He is the best talent in the country to my mind.

re: the PS: - there must be at least half a dozen ahead of Ward !!

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by high_on_linseed

In their early career neither were very prolific as batsmen, but both brought an extra dimension to the side, and went on to be quality test batsmen. Likewise, they were guys you could depend on to grind out a few runs in a tight situation.

Hi HOL
If we play Collingwood it is the end of spin for England,i dont mean we would miss Giles that much,but we could do with a good spinner,keedy or someone.cant play Collingwood as well.

Acceptable bowler in the right conditions,scary that,we have Hoggard who needs the right conditions,people tell me Anderson needs the right conditions,I am not so sure,just a bit of confidence,the last thing England needs is a bowler who needs the right conditions,

You compare him to a young Steve waugh,well he was only a part time bowler,we have Butcher,Tresco who can bowl part time seam.

I was having a look at your middle order,cant see the selectors being so radical,we are a little appart here I call vaughan,Tresco,Butcher,and the new no 4,top order.

Like you sat HOL thats a way down the line.

Ernest