The 'key' To An Improved England Batting Line Up??.

[Ernest]

Well at last he has got some recognition.

Originally Posted by Cricinfo

Kent's captain, Robert Key, has had his prospects of an England recall enhanced after being named by the England & Wales Cricket Board in a 26-man Performance Squad for the 2008 international summer.

Good to see him in the frame.

Originally Posted by Cricinfo

The bulk of the Performance Squad is made up of familiar names, although three uncapped players have made the cut. Hampshire's opening batsman, Michael Carberry; Yorkshire's legspinning allrounder Adil Rashid and the Kent offspinner James Tredwell are also included.

Well both key and Carberry should be in the England squad breathing down the collective necks of Vaughan - and co.

In fact room should be made for both these players IMO - anyone else agree?. To bring live back into Englands jaded batting top order.Then maybe England could afford to chance Flintoff at 6 - a spot he MADE his own in 2004/05 until he was injured.

LINK: Cricinfo - Key given hope of England recall

[greg]

Good god i hope we don't resort to Key again.He had a chance and failed,next please.

[Rachael]

Why? England's top 4 of Vaughan, Cook, Bell and Pietersen is the strongest in Test cricket... and Collingwood's a better no 6 than most sides can produce. Quite why Bopara and Strauss have taken up the other spot in recent tours rather bemuses me given Shah's rather stronger claim... but with a host of strong wicket-keeper batsmen in the frame (Read, Foster, Mustard and Ambrose all being strong no 7 bats) and with the bowlers now all adding excellently to the depth of the England batting... the ability with the willow seems unquestionable.

What's been debateable for some time is simply the capacity of the bowlers to control OPPOSITION batsmen: Sidebottom, Hoggard, Flintoff and Panesar have all shown themselves more than capable of keeping opposing sides in check when fit and in form... but profligate disasters (like Anderson and Mahmood), and out of form but essentially competent bowlers who should do better (like Harmison, Hoggard and Panesar), when teamed up with inexperienced bowlers still learning their trade (Broad) and unfit bowlers who are not at their best (Flintoff) have periodically allowed opponents rather better results than should have been the case.

No big deal... and certainly no basis for suggesting Key is required (at least not ahead of Shah, Strauss, Bopara, Carberry, Joyce and half a dozen others).

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Why? England's top 4 of Vaughan, Cook, Bell and Pietersen is the strongest in Test cricket.[..] and Collingwood's a better no 6 than most sides can produce.

Not so sure Rachael - I have not got carried away with Englands win in New Zealand. None of Englands top 6 are really consistant.
Collingwood is probably better than a number 6, and in the long run much better than Bell.

Originally Posted by Rachael

No big deal... and certainly no basis for suggesting Key is required[...] (at least not ahead of Shah, Strauss, Bopara, Carberry, Joyce and half a dozen others).

I would say that key has just as much a claim as Bopara, Strauss, Joyce - not sure about Shah - he also deserves a chance.
It does no harm to have players like Key and Carberry in the squad to keep out fragile top order on their toes.

In fact I would have both Key and Ramp's in the side (to do a job in 2009), and then re-build.

Originally Posted by greg

Good god i hope we don't resort to Key again.He had a chance and failed,next please.

OK greg, if we are going down memory lane - what has Strauss - Bell - Vaughan and Joyce et al done when it really mattered? since 2005, not a lot IMO.
Bopara failed - does he not get back into the England side again?.

[greg]

Originally Posted by Ernest

OK greg, if we are going down memory lane - what has Strauss - Bell - Vaughan and Joyce et al done when it really mattered? since 2005, not a lot IMO.
Bopara failed - does he not get back into the England side again?.

Well seeing as Bopara has only had a couple of games and is only 22 he will get another chance sometime in the future,hopefully he will take it as i rate him.Key though is nearly 29 and averages 31 in 15 tests and that average is boosted up by a double hundred against a woeful West Indies side which isn't good enough.

At least Strauss,Bell and Vaughan average over 40 in tests over a long period of time so you can't question their ability and big up a failure like Key,but then again you wanted Mal Loye to get a chance and he was a roaring success wasn't he.

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by Ernest

Collingwood is probably better than a number 6, and in the long run much better than Bell.

Really.. a 31 year old is better in the long run than a 26 year old?? How does that work?

It's amazing that you still think this. I know Bell needs to get more hundreds, but the fact is that he averages 43 and is under achieving!! I would love to under achieve and average that.

In fact Wisden editor Scyld Berry recently claimed that he was 'on the cusp of greatness'. Is anyone saying that about Collingwood.

Collingwood is a solid and tight performer, and probably punches above hie weight. Bell is possibly the most gifted batsmen of his generation, Bell needs to make the most of his talent, and the fact is that if he was to realise his talent, he will be a fearsome prospect for most bowlers.

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by greg

At least Strauss,Bell and Vaughan average over 40 in tests over a long period of time so you can't question their ability and big up a failure like Key,but then again you wanted Mal Loye to get a chance and he was a roaring success wasn't he.

I have nothing much against Key as a player, I just don't see why he would do any better than Strauss, Bell and Vaughan. If anything his career so far demonstrates that he probably wouldn't do any better.

As for Ramps, I really don't see why he will do any better either, why Ern, do you keep mentioning guys who just can't cut it at the top level, and have had their chances and failed, and think that they will do any better than players who are at that level and have managed to succeed?

I really don't understand why you think Key and Ramps, both with averages well under 40 over a number of Tests, (Ramps averages just 27!!!) would do any better than guys who have played a good number of Tests and average 40+?

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by greg

At least Strauss,Bell and Vaughan average over 40 in tests over a long period of time so you can't question their ability and big up a failure like Key

I can question their recent form, none have been consistent enough if the last year or so - not long agao both Bell and Vaughans place was in danger - well at least the commentators were asking questions.
As for Loye you are mistaken on both counts.

Must be years since I mentioned him as a Test player, that's if I ever did.

Originally Posted by greg

but then again you wanted Mal Loye to get a chance and he was a roaring success wasn't he.

Yes he was a roasing success in Australia when he finaly got a chance in the 'one day side' (pretty obvious he was not a Test player) - through his efforts being the only one able to stay at the crease, and score some runs. England lifted the only bit of silver in the ODI's in 2006.Forgot about that greg??.
He should on the back of that have gone to the WC, and we all know what rubbish England played out there.

Originally Posted by flanflinger

I really don't understand why you think Key and Ramps, both with averages well under 40 over a number of Tests, (Ramps averages just 27!!!) would do any better than guys who have played a good number of Tests and average 40+?

Purely on prolonged county form in Ramp's case FF, more impressive that all the current England players put together.
As for Key - Unlike Bell who had not done much better after 15 matches (bar one score if my memory is correct), Key never got another chance unlike Bell who would have been dropped in Pakistan in 2005 only for Vaughan being injured, and again not long before the series in New Zealand.
Even though Bell has an average over 40, he never cut it when it mattered - July in England 2005, and again in Australia 2006.
To be honest FF - anyone who thinks everything is hunky dory with the England batting after New Zealand are in for a big shock IMO, when England meet a side with hostile bowling, or decent spin bowling.
Vettori nor Panesar shined in New Zealand, simply because the piches were not suitable for spinners, but that sooner that rather will change - and IMO without strengthening the batting - England will flounder.
There is potential in the England batting, I won't deny that - but I think Ramp's in the short term would be an asset, the same with Key if he was given a chance and it came off.

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by Ernest

Even though Bell has an average over 40, he never cut it when it mattered - July in England 2005,

Blimey you really don't know when to give up... Australia are not the only Test team!!! In any case Ashes 05 was probably a little to early for Bell, and was his first full series.. how many players have excelled in the first full series against the World Number One???

Originally Posted by Ernest

and again in Australia 2006..

He may not have scored a hundred, but he was the third highest England run scorer on that series with 4 50's in the series, he was probably the most consistent of all England's batsmen over the series.

As it is despite those two poor series, he still averages 12 runs per inning higher than Key, and if he hasn't cut it when it mattered, then Key has not managed to cut at all.

In terms of Ramps, yes he has had a superb two years in County Cricket, and has done better than the rest of the England squad, but in the last five years, how often have England players consistently appeared at County level??

As it is Ramps was always good at County level, and never turned that ability into Test match runs, I very much doubt much has changed. He is too old, and his chance has gone.

Time to move on Ern, for all your dislike of Bell, he is possibly one of the first names on the team sheet these days.
I also get the fleeing that Key is well behind the current top 6, Bopara and Shah. Lot of injuries before we see him play for England again.

[Notts Exile]

Originally Posted by Ernest

Yes he was a roasing success in Australia when he finaly got a chance in the 'one day side' (pretty obvious he was not a Test player) - through his efforts being the only one able to stay at the crease, and score some runs. England lifted the only bit of silver in the ODI's in 2006.Forgot about that greg??.

7 matches. 142 runs. A highest score of 45. Average 20.28. A rousing success ?

No wonder he was dropped for the World Cup squad.

Not sure how you can term anyone else a failure if that's how you define success!!

Key must be well behind the other batsmen in there. However, should he score heavily in the meantime then he must have a chance once they've all failed!