Selection arguments

[Henners]

There is a lot of arguement over who should play where, who should be dropped, who should be put in...etc. The only positive thing from this is that we are agreed the squad needs to be changed. Even though we won, we did it with 3 parnerships and only 3 performing batsmen. the bowling wasn't the best either, but our fielding improved vastly.

I personally think we need some of our injured players back. Trescothick, Pieterson, S. Jones, Broad and we will have a more solid team. I don't think we should have Vaughan as his one-day batting is ordinary (Test-wise, he is ok) We should have Strauss as captain as he performed well in the Pakistan series and freddie will be relieevd of the pressure, but since he is doing a good job, we have to stick with him.

Many people have their own opinions. This is a post a found on a different message board:


First of all Vaughan is no quality player he's proved that with his recent laclustre displays, if he's injured he should just work on his fitness, if not he should try to score some runs 20+ would be good

Pietersen - Overrated

Harmison - Couldn't do anything with the whiteball that's why he had to retire from the one day game in other words he was a **** one day bowler. (shows you havn't been keeping up to date with news)

Anderson - Mahmood is better

Lewis - and you call me an idiot.

So please explain to me all this magical depth your team seems to have? Must be the reason they have a 36 year old wicket keeper.

Next thing you'll be saying "we've still got Darren Gough to come back"


Now I disagree with most of what is said here. Like Pieterson being over rated, despite having an average of around 50. Lewis has always been consistant enough for me to be in the squad. He might not have the pace, but he is accurate and doesn't give away the long hops as regulary as Mahmood, Anderson, Plunkett. And Paul
nixon has done well with the ball, now he has to perform with the bat and he has proved himself.

[originally from - http://www.imdb.com/board/bd0000055/...49515#66349515]

[Ernest]

Henners .
We all have our own ideas when posting on selection, we have a lot of players at the moment who are similer, that's one problem.

Like Lewis Broad and Onions in the medium pacers camp, and Mahmood Plunkett in the faster bowler camp.

Trescothick, Pieterson, will make a difference, I doubt England would have lost 5-0 had Trescothick been in the England team.

Pietersen and Flintoff in the same side without a Thorpe like player won't work IMO, so England need to look outside the present squad.

BTW you have to register to follow your link .

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Henners

There is a lot of arguement over who should play where, who should be dropped, who should be put in...etc.

How about focussing on where most folk (excepting Ern) DO agree....

1. Vaughan (captaincy, stacks of experience, consistently gets quick starts)
2. Joyce (newfound talent, can bat through)
3. Bell (established, can bat through)
4. Pietersen (obvious matchwinner)

Somewhere in 5-6-7

Collingwood (automatic selection, can bat anywhere)
Flintoff (automatic selection, great after 40th over)

7 / 8. <wicket-keeper>

9. Lewis / Plunkett / <other seamer>*

10. Panesar

11. Anderson

That's most of the side.... and aside from quibbles over the 'keeper the arguments really boil down to the one remaining spot.

Options:

{a} Strauss at 5
{b} Bopara / Dalrymple 7
{c} Plunkett at 8

All options strike me as credible... with {a} maximising the chance of getting 2-3 big scores (and forcing reliance on Collingwood, Pietersen and Vaughan for some bowling), {c} maximising the depth of the attack (5 specialists plus Collingwood & co) and {b} offering a compromise.

That's an awful lot of agreement... and sorts out MOST of the WC squad for most folk: if you ain't prepared to compromise around the options presented above I suggest you ain't really prepared to take selection matters seriously.

* I think most are even agreed as to the possible <other seamer> at 9: it's Broad or Mahmood.

[pie_chucker]

I think our best XII (depending on condtions) is pretty much sorted.

I would like to see Colly bowl a bit more and fill in more overs for the 5th bowler. After all, as i think Rachael stated, his stats when be bowls longish spells are pretty good. He has contributed to winning several games with the ball.

The one thing that the ease of selection for Englands team shows is, IMO that there isnt a great deal of strength in depth. Yes, we have some players that have potential but are unproven as yet.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Rachael

How about focussing on where most folk (excepting Ern) DO agree.

Most folk? - not what you said in another post .

Originally Posted by Racahel

1. Vaughan (captaincy, stacks of experience, consistently gets quick starts)
2. Joyce (newfound talent, can bat through)
3. Bell (established, can bat through)
4. Pietersen (obvious matchwinner)

OK one by one folks.
1) Vaughan ain't going to be around, I find it strange he went home like he did, if he breaks down this easy then he must be past mending - but I think more to it than that.
2) Joyce - yes but he is new, and his shot selection will get better with experience, but what when Trescothick returns? - Joyce or Trescothick?.
3 ) I am a great supporter of Bell in the one day side, and even in Test cricket anywhere other Australia, or in England against Australia - a must for the World Cup.
4) Pietersen like Rachael says "(obvious matchwinner)", but a reliable player is needed to seperate him from Flintoff, in the mould of Thorpe, Rachael though would waste him a t#7, good job that was not the case the other night.

Originally Posted by Rachael

Collingwood (automatic selection, can bat anywhere)
Flintoff (automatic selection, great after 40th over)

Yes Colly deserves a run - and I fully agree with rachael that Flintoff should not have to come in to bat before 40 overs - because if he does it means the top order has failed.

Wicket keeper has to be Read for Test cricket, Nixon is Ok for the PJ stuff, he has attitude.

Originally Posted by Rachael

9. Lewis / Plunkett / Mahmood/Broad/10.Paneasr 11. Anderson

No problems there - I am worried that Lewis may not be as accurate as first thought, time will tell as with Broad and Mahmood.

Originally Posted by Rachael

That's most of the side.... and aside from quibbles over the 'keeper the arguments really boil down to the one remaining spot.

Short term Ramp's - Medium term Rob key, long term I don't know, it should be a batsman that would stay at the wicket longer, for Test cricket drop bell and play Ramps and key until after Ashes 2009 is an option.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by pie_chucker

I think our best XII (depending on condtions) is pretty much sorted.

I'm struck that aside from the wicet-keeper it's not going to be too shabby in the field, either: Collingwood is outstanding, Dalrymple and Bell are excellent, Pietersen is decent, Flintoff's very reliable at slip, Plunkett's pretty good around the outfield....

Panesar (depite his blot in the last match) is shaping up as adequate... and so long as Mahmood is omitted or sticks to drinks-carrying the objective of two wickets a game from run-outs (and no silly drops) looks very much on the cards.

[greg]

Well i will pick 2 teams which i would play as a test side,1 with Vaughan the other without.

Strauss
Vaughan (capt)
Cook
Pietersen
Collingwood
Bell
Flintoff
Read
Plunkett
Panesar
Hoggard

or

Strauss (capt)
Cook
Bell
Pietersen
Collingwood
Joyce
Flintoff
Read
Plunkett
Panesar
Hoggard

For me the time has come to drop Harmison as he has underperformed for over 2 years and Plunkett deserves a chance as he is the brightest prospect of the young quicks.With Monty i think we have a bowler capable of bowling the long spells at one end in any conditions so we don't need 5 bowlers as Colly,Bell or KP can all do a job anyway if needed therefore Flintoff won't be overbowled.