England have a dilemma or two, or even three.

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by Ernest

Panesar V Giles is interesting, Panesar could like Mahmood be a deciding factor in who wins this Ashes series,

What in the sense that if we play Panesar we could sneak a win, but if we are forced to play Mahmood we could end up losing?

[greg]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

What in the sense that if we play Panesar we could sneak a win, but if we are forced to play Mahmood we could end up losing?

Ern won't be happy with that.

[flanflinger]

I actually like Mahmood but if he is one of the top four seamers, we are in trouble!!!

For me we have to go with

Flintoff
Harmison
Hoggard
Anderson
Panesar

I know Mahmood has more potential with the bat, and can bowl with genuine pace, but I am really worried that having him and Harmison will mean we lose a huge amount of control.

For me Mahmood is competing with Harmison and if I was an Australian I would prefer to see Mahmood in the starting line up..

[Rachael]

A lot surely depends on form in the warm-up games: if Harmison finds form and Flintoff and Hoggard look OK I'd expect Fletcher to look to Collingwood and Panesar... but if anthing suggests lack of form on the part of the leading seamers then Collingwood and Panesar will make way for Giles and Anderson - because Fletcher will surely not play Hoggard at 8.

Oh - and if Harmison breaks down... what bets that Mahmood, Anderson and Panesar go down as the worst England tail since Mullally, Malcolm and Tufnell :-)

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by greg

Mahmood is too much of a risk at present so Anderson's extra experience gives him the nod.

Andersons extra 8 Test Matches makes the difference? I don't see that myself to be honest, in fact I think it's a self-perpetuating myth that Anderson is a better bowler than Mahmood, because their statistics simply don't support that viewpoint. Given, that neither has really played enough Test Matches to make a comparison in their Test statistics particularly meaningful, it's still very interesting viewing -

Anderson 13m 41 wickets @ 33.00 economy 3.65
Mahmood 5m 15 wickets @ 33.20 economy 3.63

In my mind their performances so far in Test Matches look almost identical, which does not in any way support the view that Anderson is either the better of the two, or his 8 extra Test Matches would make an awful lot of difference.

When you factor in how poor Mahmood has bowled in some of the Test Matches he's played (because that seems to be at the forefront of most peoples minds) yet still has Test Match bowling returns identical to Andersons, it just goes to show 1/ How well both of them have bowled in spells 2/ How poor both of them have bowled in spells and 3/ That Mahmoods recent performances seem to over-shadow everyones recollections of just how bad Anderson can be as well.

Now factor in that Anderson is primarily a 'swing bowler' who bowls at a slightly livelier pace than Hoggard but with less control and consistency and you really have to wonder what the logic is in having two swing bowlers in the England side bowling on what are predominantly flat bouncy wickets in Australia where swing doesn't really play a particularly big role. Now consider that Mahmood is the closest 'like for like' replacement to Simon Jones in the sense that he bowls at 90mph and has the ability to reverse swing the ball, bowls at a slightly fuller length than his counterparts, but with the same lack of control and consistency as Anderson, but has the potential to be a real No8 and it's not that hard to see why Mahmood adds 'far more value' to the side than Anderson would.

If England decide to go down the 5 bowler route and choose not to play Giles and Panesar together (which I'm pretty sure they will in 2 or 3 Tests) Mahmood will be the fifth specialist bowler and Anderson as reserve.

[greg]

The stats don't always show the full story though do they?

How often have we watched Mahmood bowl utter garbage which is too wide for the batsman to reach anyway,much like Harmison is capable of doing.Having 2 bowlers who have a wayward radar is too big a risk.Anderson generally bowls a good line but his length can go wrong but last winter he bowled well when called up so deserves the place more in my opinion.

[flanflinger]

The stats for Anderson don't take into account that for two years his bowling went AWOL, but if he is at his best (i.e. at the start of his career and in his last few Tests) then he is IMO the better of the two at this stage.

I see a time coming when both of these guys will open the attack for England, but this year in the Ashes I would hold off on Mahmood. I do agree that he has been ear-marked with the Jones role, but he is not there yet, and that is why I would opt for Anderson...

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Scott-Wozniak

If England decide to go down the 5 bowler route and choose not to play Giles and Panesar together (which I'm pretty sure they will in 2 or 3 Tests) Mahmood will be the fifth specialist bowler and Anderson as reserve.

I don't think England can play 2 spinners in any match Scott - Panesar is unknow as yet on the international scene, and Giles has been out far to long.

England IMO should line up with,

Harmison
Flintoff
Mahmood (who can also bat)
Hoggard/Anderson
Panesar/Giles.

Mahmood is the real dark horse - can go for runs - does get wickets.

My prediction Scott - England will retain the Ashes.

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by Ernest

I don't think England can play 2 spinners in any match Scott -

not even in Sydney and Adelaide when spin could be the difference between the two sides?

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

not even in Sydney and Adelaide when spin could be the difference between the two sides?

I really do take your point FF - but Panesar has played hardly any matches, and Giles form is really a big gamble, I think England should stick with their strengths - which is pace, i don't think playing 2 spinners has come of for England sinse Embury and Edmunds.