What changes would you make to the England squad?

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by greg

It is the first time i have wavered over Vaughan apart from worrying about his knee but he has batted poorly all winter and his captaincy in the India and Sri Lankan series was as poor as he has ever done.

The major problem is the precedent set with the dropping of Hoggard. Basically nobody is guaranteed a spot. I do hope we don't return to the bad old days of one bad game and your out, but by doing what they did for the second Test, that made a clear statement that nobody can be carried and reputation counts for nothing.

I wonder though if that also applies to the Captain, I doubt it though, IMO Vaughan is the best player in the top 3 (Cook stills has work to do, and Strauss was in last chance saloon) and I hope he does not get dropped prematurely.

[darksideofthemoon]

I think Hoggard will only get back in the team if there is an injury to Sidebottom.

[greg]

Originally Posted by darksideofthemoon

I think Hoggard will only get back in the team if there is an injury to Sidebottom.

So who replaces Anderson then?

[darksideofthemoon]

Originally Posted by greg

So who replaces Anderson then?

Tremlett should be the one.

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

The major problem is the precedent set with the dropping of Hoggard.

Isn't the dropping of Hoggard being blown a little out of proportion now? Hoggard was clearly 'under-cooked' in the first game he played - for whatever reason and I suspect we'll never know the real reason. A decision then needed to be taken by Moores, Vaughan and whoever the selector was as to whether to carry on with Hoggard in the hope he would produce the kind of performance we know he can produce. If the answer to the question was no, then the only option was to replace him with someone else - and that's exactly what they did.

Being one down in a three match series rather suggests that if players are not producing, then changes need to be made - and sooner rather than later. The decision to drop Hoggard and Harmison was the correct one and is vindicated by the results of the last two Test Matches.

If hoggard recaptures the form we know he can produce, what reason would there be for not selecting him? None that I can think of.

Personally I don't really see how Moores, Vaughan and whoever had any option but to drop Hoggard and Harmison, particularly if Hoggard was not match fit, which rather seemed to be the case.

Originally Posted by flanflinger

Basically nobody is guaranteed a spot.

And neither should they be - because that breeds complacency. I'm fully aware, that this is a rather large can of worms - but a balance needs to be achieved between continuity of selection and actual performance produced. Harmison and Anderson are classic examples of this. We all know what Harmison and Anderson are capable of producing when they get it right and both of them would not only command a place in that England side, but retain it if they consistently produced those kind of performances - but they don't - and that's the problem.

Enter Ryan Sidebottom. Now, Sidebottom isn't likely to run through too many Test quality batting lineups because unlike Harmison and Anderson, he simply doesn't have that 'special' ability that they have. But what he does do, he does extremely well and that is bowling accurately, being difficult to score off and basically building pressure. Let's be honest here, Sidebottom didn't bowl out the NZ side by bowling wicket taking balls, he bowled them out by building pressure and causing them to throw their wickets away with rash shots. That will work against sides like NZ and WI, but it isn't likely to work with sides like India and Australia.

So Moores and the selectors have to juggle that balance of talent and ability against consistency of performance - it's no good having a side full of gifted players if all of them only put in match winning performances once every half a dozen games - and that almost seems to be where England are at, at the moment.

So Moores needs to decide which of his current players is going to offer him that mix of talent and consistency of performance and stick with them, and which ones will not and discard them for someone else, or send them back to county cricket for a time. Whoever he replaces them with will need to be better - and demonstrate that by performance and that's why I beleive Hoggard will return, because at the moment Anderson is not doing any better - certainly in terms of consistency.

[darksideofthemoon]

From The Times -

But England could, potentially, have enough bowling options to pick a bowler for an individual ground based on a history of success on that particular pitch. "The first key is to make sure all those bowlers are bowling well and playing well in county cricket if they're not in the international set-up," Moores said. "We know certain bowlers have good records in certain places, so for instance Harmison has a good record at Old Trafford.

------

Lords
Anderson - 14 wickets at 25.21
Tremlett - 4 wickets at 26.00
Sidebottom - 6 wickets at 28.50
Hoggard - 37 wickets at 31.08
Harmison - 31 wickets at 31.45
Mahmood - 5 wickets at 33.60
Panesar - 12 wickets at 35.75
Flintoff - 25 wickets at 35.92
Plunkett - 5 wickets at 82.20

The Oval
Harmison - 18 wickets at 24.38
Flintoff - 9 wickets at 30.55
Anderson - 13 wickets at 34.23
Hoggard - 10 wickets at 39.90
Mahmood - 2 wickets at 50.50
Tremlett - 3 wickets at 63.33
Sidebottom - 1 wicket at 93.00
Panesar - 3 wickets at 106.66

Old Trafford
Panesar - 18 wickets at 15.15
Harmison - 24 wickets at 19.83
Flintoff - 13 wickets at 29.53
Hoggard - 17 wickets at 33.17
Sidebottom - 3 wickets at 33.66
Anderson - 1 wicket at 71.00
Plunkett - 1 wicket at 100.00

Headingley
Sidebottom - 6 wickets at 10.75
Plunkett - 4 wickets at 15.00
Mahmood - 6 wickets at 21.66
Panesar - 7 wickets at 26.71
Harmison - 13 wickets at 32.84
Flintoff - 8 wickets at 38.75
Hoggard - 9 wickets at 43.22
Anderson - 2 wickets at 59.50

Riverside
Panesar - 6 wickets at 13.13
Hoggard - 13 wickets at 14.07
Anderson - 6 wickets at 14.16
Harmison - 16 wickets at 23.18
Sidebottom - 5 wickets at 25.60

Trent Bridge
Tremlett - 6 wickets at 15.33
Panesar - 9 wickets at 20.22
Plunkett - 4 wickets at 25.25
Harmison - 17 wickets at 26.94
Anderson - 8 wickets at 34.50
Hoggard - 16 wickets at 37.62
Flintoff - 17 wickets at 44.76
Sidebottom - 1 wicket at 103.00

Edgbaston
Plunkett - 6 wickets at 10.00
Mahmood - 2 wickets at 22.00
Hoggard - 20 wickets at 23.15
Panesar - 3 wickets at 26.66
Flintoff - 16 wickets at 30.68
Anderson - 3 wickets at 63.00
Harmison - 5 wickets at 68.20

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Scott-Wozniak

If hoggard recaptures the form we know he can produce, what reason would there be for not selecting him? None that I can think of.

Asolutely. If fit and in form, Hoggard and Sidebottom should be amongst the first names on the team sheet for some time to come.

Originally Posted by Scott-Wozniak

Now, Sidebottom isn't likely to run through too many Test quality batting lineups because unlike Harmison and Anderson, he simply doesn't have that 'special' ability that they have. But what he does do, he does extremely well and that is bowling accurately, being difficult to score off and basically building pressure. Let's be honest here, Sidebottom didn't bowl out the NZ side by bowling wicket taking balls, he bowled them out by building pressure and causing them to throw their wickets away with rash shots. That will work against sides like NZ and WI, but it isn't likely to work with sides like India and Australia.

The strategy made McGrath the most successful seamer of his era, and served Hadlee and Statham well in the past. I see no issue with the approach.

Sidebottom's obviously not in the same class in terms of consistency (and isn't even as consistent as Hoggard or Fraser)... but he's surely got greater capacity for "special" deliveries than McGrath because he combines similar assets in terms of height, pace, bounce and movement off the seam with greater mastery of both conventional swing and reverse swing.

What Sidebottom needs is a little more guile. Bowling around the wicket is a start... but variations of pace (to match Fernando) would be good... and he could do with time with Hoggard on {a} cutting the amount of swing he looks for in the interests of ensuring the line is more predictable; and {b} mastering cutters as an occasional variation to his swinging deliveries and as a stock ball for situations where a Cairns / Underwood like diet of balls that are hard to get away is the best way to support the spinner the other end.

Originally Posted by darksideofthemoon

Moores said. "We know certain bowlers have good records in certain places, so for instance Harmison has a good record at Old Trafford.

What comes out of that analysis is just how diabolical the Oval pitches have been for far too long... and the imperative for getting Tests restricted to Headingly, The Riverside, The Rose Bowl and Trent Bridge until the others remember what it means to host a sporting contest.