Who should be England's wicket-keeper?

[Notts Exile]

England's top three are all one paced batsmen. None of them ever really dominate attacks. There needs to be a real examination of the make up of the line up. No-one is really pressing to play in place of any of them, except maybe for Ed Joyce. If Tresco isn't going to come back then they need to find a new opener from somewhere, preferably a right-handed one. We cannot replace all of them but some of them need to be aware that their places aren't safe.

[Speedboy Salesman]

I think what we need is another opening batsman, and drop Cook down the order.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Thats the problem. Who do you pick ? Young davis has been touted for a new keeper but he's 20. How many young players have england picked and have actually performed at test level in the past 10 years ? Cooks been the closest but as the ashes have shown he's far from being complete ? How many others have been picked and become a liability and either disappeared or grown into the role at the expense of the team. Loads. England never have and never will find someone to come and perform consistantly at a young age. Stick Noxon in if he's any where near half decent for a year and then bring in davis if he's still looking good.

England cant find balance. Couple of years ago it was all flashing blades from strauss, tresco and vaughan, often chasing a wide one to the slips and trying to score at 5 an over. Now its tentative prods at 2 an over. Wheres the balance.

NEs right, heads need to roll, as they have done pretty much since the last ashes.

[first change]

Originally Posted by Notts Exile

The real problem England have is that their top six as a unit have failed miserably.

Not in this match - 240-4 is a good start. The reason we will lose this match is, solely, because of the vast difference between the lower orders of the two sides. Yes, absolutely, the top six need to be more consistent, but no side is going to make 500+ in every innings. The batsmen should take the blame when we are bowled out for under 200, but 6,7, and 8 need to stand up and be counted when we reach 200 odd for 4. I would be delighted (and amazed, if I'm honest) if Read pulled something out of the fire here. That England's top five have been inconsistent does not, and should not, excuse the fact that the lower order have been nothing short of a joke all tour. Incidentially, same goes for Mahmood. He can bat (he's not a Test number eight, but he can bat) and he needs to stand up and be counted with a thirty odd. England are in really serious strife, but are only a century and a fifty away from making this game competitive again. Everyone says how talented Read is (and I think they're right) - here is his chance to prove he's got some bottle too.

[Rachael]

Boycott is a pretty good judge of batting.. and he sees no great need for major changes: in his view the players are good enough.. they just need to go away, work hard and come back stronger.

Two have clear (but resolvable) issues to address... neither of which should take much sorting out:

1. Strauss' footwork needs work, both going forwards and playing back (where he's retreating, but not getting across far enough).

2. Cook's tendency to lead with his bat (whn he should be offerring bat and pad together) needs eradicating.

Boycott has not voiced any concerns whatsoever about Bell or Pietersen (who've been pretty well exemplary). I'm not sure he's fully convinced by Collingwood playing higher than at six... but where he saw issues to do with Collingwood's top elbow in the past he's been quiet this tour.

In fairness... Boycott's comparatively unconcerned when it comes to most of the rest of the side as well: he notes that Flintoff's just not had enough time in the middle since returning from injury... argued from the start that Read has been treated appallingly (not least by being given no parallel fixtures during the Test matches).. and refuses (rightly) to pass harsh judgement on most of the bowlers on the grounds that most have been asked to perform without matches under their belts - he reckons they primarily need to play for their counties week in, week out and get some overs under their belts.

I'm inclined to agree: Mahmood's the only player I'd single out as a flop.... and that's more, to my mind, a selection ****-up (as he's just no-where near ready for Test cricket yet).

ps. Boycott rates Anderson highly... but another (non-Boycott) observation in the night concerned his inability to swing the ball both ways: the recommendation was that he went and worked on an off-cutter instead. Hoggard cracked it... so I don't see why Anderson shouldn't.

[first change]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Bell or Pietersen (who've been pretty well exemplary).

Pietersen's been very good. Bell is going to be a fantastic Test match cricketer, but four fifties in five matches and never contributing twice in a match is about as far away as 'exemplary' than you can get. It was you who was banging on earlier about how you can't judge players when they get out early. Well, Bell didn't today, and his shot was a disgrace. If Flintoff had played it (or, God forbid, Symonds) you would have castigated them. What this series has been for Bell is a break-through. He has proved - as much to himself as others - that he can mix it with the best. But he needs to turn fifties into hundreds (big hundreds) - as he did against Pakistan.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Notts Exile

Read's surely playing his last Test. I don't believe that he'll be given another Ttest to prove himself.

Read is safe - he has played to well as a keeper to drop, he's not better than Jones as a batsman, but he does not make any mistakes behind the stumps.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by first change

What this series has been for Bell is a break-through. He has proved - as much to himself as others - that he can mix it with the best. But he needs to turn fifties into hundreds (big hundreds) - as he did against Pakistan.

Yup. Agreed. Thing is.. he's 24 years old and a comparative Test novice.. probably 5 years short of the beginning of his peak... and ten years short of senior-player status! If Bell is not converting 50s to 100s on a regular basis between the ages of 28 and 38 (generally the best years for a batsman) then let's start taking these concerns seriously... but why worry at this stage?

ps. I'd hope Flintoff would NOT get out to crummy shots: he's by some margin the most capped player in the side and has been around long enough to know better!

[first change]

Originally Posted by Rachael

but why worry at this stage?

Because he should (IMO) be the best batsman in the team. Yes, he's young, but then again, so is Cook. Absolutely agree that batsmen peak later, all I was stressing was that his performance over the Ashes has not been exemplary - if I were him I'd be happy that I'd proved that I was a fantastic batsman, and disappointed at the failure to convert. He should aim to average 55 against Aus, not be satisfied with 35.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Originally Posted by Ernest

Read is safe - he has played to well as a keeper to drop, he's not better than Jones as a batsman, but he does not make any mistakes behind the stumps.

Look how many cockups jones did before he had to hand over the gloves. Do you think the standard of keeping is anything more than 10% of fletchers reasons for who is behind the stumps. Read will be publicly flogged then dropped as soon as he returns to blighty. Fully expect Jones to be in the box seat for the world cup.