Ian Bell for captain

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

he seems to ignore the fact that the 2005 Ashes was a big series for Bell, and actually although he didn't excel,[...] what he learned then will make him a better Cricketer. I for one fully expect him to be a key player in the 2009 Ashes.

Scuse me FF - what happened to 2006/07? - why did what he learned in 2005 come to fruition then?.

[Gremlin]

Interesting debate, I genuinely don't understand why Bell comes in for critisism - I was listening to Sir Viv on TMS today discussing the pitch at Old Trafford. He said that the wicket was fair to any player with good technique - they will make runs - on both sides Bell was the man with the required technique to score....(not an exact quote but approximately the gist of what he was saying.)

I'll go along with his experience. Whether Bell is leadership material time will tell but his place in the side should not be in doubt for the immediate future.

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Agnew

It is a pitch on which you need a strong technique, and of all the players in the match, Ian Bell’s is probably the best

Gremlin,

Aggers focuses on his technique as well, and I think sums up what you are trying to say.

As for Ern - I was quoting (and agreeing with) Alec Stewart, why don't you take it up with him?... as for the last Ashes, other than Pietersen, no batsman exactly covered themselves in Glory, but Bell did marginally better than most... Tendulkar, Dravid and Lara would have struggled to score runs against the highly motivated, focused and experienced bowling attack.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Gremlin

I was listening to Sir Viv on TMS today discussing the pitch at Old Trafford. He said that the wicket was fair to any player with good technique - they will make runs - on both sides Bell was the man with the required technique to score....(not an exact quote but approximately the gist of what he was saying.)

Yes, I also heard that conversation... which echoes what knowledgeable folk everywhere (including Rod Marsh and Geoffrey Boycott) have been saying since the first time they saw the kid: that's he makes life easy for himself by getting into good positions and by staying very compact..

Bell's technique gets hailed most notably when he is getting forward: he gets beautifully in position to drive... and plays the ball nice and high on the bat.... close to his hands.. and right under his nose: he's able to keep the ball on the ground when he goes through with the shot... has got bat and pad together when the ball devaites in... and is in great shape to adjust and/or drop his hands for the ball that moves away.

[Collyisamackem]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Bell's technique gets hailed most notably when he is getting forward...

Not so Rach, but also when he plays square of the wicket on the back foot as much as when he goes forward, in fact I would say more so. His cut shot is the best of any England batsman and his back foot driving looks effortless, such is the positioning of his feet and the timing of the stroke as the bat comes down into perfect position. In fact, Bell looks class when he goes forward and back, and only gets himself into trouble when he is not sure which one to do and is caught in-between. His decision-making and authority at the crease, two areas which are instrumental to rectifying that, have come on in leaps and bounds and were in evidence in Australia, where I felt he started well but was dragged down later on just as Colly was by poor bowling and others failing to make runs from the off. One thing more to say about Bell is that he plays the short ball far better than he did initially, keeping his eye on bouncers and getting on top of most of them - it is only when the ball is too leg-side/well-directed and he tries to pull or hook that he has a problem. I'd rather he cut those shots out until he gets them going in practice.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Collyisamackem

One thing more to say about Bell is that he plays the short ball far better than he did initially

At his best, Bell doesn't play the short ball at all: he's certainly not a compulsive hooker and is by far the most adept, in this side, at just restraining himself and watching the ball through to the 'keeper - which is exactly what you should do with short stuff!

I fully accept what you say about Bell's proficiency off the back foot and square of the wicket though: he's extremely competent. The only thing is... that doesn't stand out as much as others (like Strauss) are also comfortable off the back foot. it's the basics of playing through mid on and mid off that tend to let the others down!

[Rachael]

I think it was Colin Croft commentating / summarising when Bell was dismissed in this second innings. He was in fine form, noting that the WI had finally found a weakness in Bell's game, having got him out the same way in both innings: all they needed to do was produce an all but unplayable delivery that lifted sharply and darted away off a full length and he was struggling

[acker]

Originally Posted by Rachael

I think it was Colin Croft commentating / summarizing when Bell was dismissed in this second innings. He was in fine form, noting that the WI had finally found a weakness in Bell's game, having got him out the same way in both innings: all they needed to do was produce an all but unplayable delivery that lifted sharply and darted away off a full length and he was struggling

I think a player like Ian Bell who has survived two cracks at him by the Australian's and who is one of those rare birds that can step between Test cricket and One Day cricket and look equally at home in either has the skill set and determination to act on and eliminate weaknesses as they arise.
When I say Ian Bell should be captain, I am not just comparing with any of the Australian captains; I am comparing him at a similar stage of his career to those who I consider to be Australia's greatest modern day captains.
Ian Chappell and Allan Border.
Reason why I consider them Australia's greatest modern day captains is that they both took on a weak side and left with a legacy of a strong side. Ricky Ponting may add his name to those 2, time will tell as he is captaining a transitional side.
Mark Taylor and Steve Waugh I have left out as I consider they both captained (well) the strong legacy Allan Border left them.
For England I consider Michael Vaughan only did half a job, got the ashes at home but failed in the return (abet due to injury) and again in the World Cup. Obviously Michael did not leave Freddie much of a legacy or support to build on.
And Michael's career looks a lot closer to the end than it does to the start.
Strauss looks like a gap filler at best.
I just cannot see the logic in denying probably the one batsmen who does look comfortable in his own skin and has some battle scars against top flight opposition the opportunity to captain England.
Plus he is still young enough to make a significant long term impact.

[acker]

As for why Andrew Strauss should not be captain.
I cant leave this one alone. He answered it in Melbourne on Boxing day 2006.

If you were fishing for barramundi from the bank of a salt water estuary river in northern Australia and the natives warned you about a nasty old cantankerous crocodile who has a history of eating fisherman not only in the water but 20 meters outside the waterline as well. Would you after catching your prized fish continue to stay close to the waterline and devour 2 1/2 pints of lager and a packet of crisps before you moved 25 meters to safety.

Well at the MCG home ground of Shane Warne, Andrew Strauss decided to chance his luck and do just that. Having scored his "50" (his personal barrumundi) he unfortunately basked in his personal glory a few moments too long. And a big local crocodile, who had just happened to invite most of his family out to second/third cousins to the MCG that day (Shane Warne) ate him and spat out his polished bones. Not to mention a nation who went ballistic about the devouring as well.

700th victim of Shane Warne. Andrew Strauss will be immortalized for all the wrong reasons.

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by acker

700th victim of Shane Warne. Andrew Strauss will be immortalized for all the wrong reasons.

I had been waiting all day for that moment, sat on my seat at the MCG waiting for history to be made, it had been a tedious days cricket up till that point, I turned to my wife, for a second, to talk about something and the crowd went nuts. I turned round to see Warne running around with Strauss trudging off. Still can't believe I missed it! I can say that I was there though, which is a small compensation.

Must admit at the moment, with Flintoff unfit and Strauss so out of form it is untrue, if Vaughan breaks down the Captaincy issue is wide open.