The Hoggard factor

[Nostromo]

Now before everyone starts protesting, please consider what I have to say. Why cannot Matthew Hoggard be a normal part of England's ODI sqaud? I know that his limited ODI record thus far is not brilliant, but the guy is too good a bowler not to make an impression sooner than later. Unlike Harmison, I am not sure that Hoggard ever said that he did not want to be part of the ODI team; I think it has somehow been assumed that he is unsuitable and all concerned, including Hoggard himself, have accepted it without further consideration.

Hoggard's limited batting prowess should not really be a problem if he is permanently relegated to No:11 status in ODIs. But surely, he is a far better bowler than the likes of Mahmood ( ) and Lewis? Hoggard is basically a wicket-taker and might have got a few in the Caribbean wickets. A missed opportunity?

[darksideofthemoon]

Originally Posted by Nostromo

Now before everyone starts protesting, please consider what I have to say. Why cannot Matthew Hoggard be a normal part of England's ODI sqaud? I know that his limited ODI record thus far is not brilliant, but the guy is too good a bowler not to make an impression sooner than later. Unlike Harmison, I am not sure that Hoggard ever said that he did not want to be part of the ODI team; I think it has somehow been assumed that he is unsuitable and all concerned, including Hoggard himself, have accepted it without further consideration.

Hoggard's limited batting prowess should not really be a problem if he is permanently relegated to No:11 status in ODIs. But surely, he is a far better bowler than the likes of Mahmood ( ) and Lewis? Hoggard is basically a wicket-taker and might have got a few in the Caribbean wickets. A missed opportunity?

Well you won't be able to play Panesar, Anderson and Hoggard in the same team. At one stage when Anderson was taking more wickets than Harmison and Gough, Anderson was dropped for a bowler who could bat who was Wharf. Now England are talking about Panesar being the second spinner again because of the batting.

I think Hoggard has said that it is a mental thing with him and he wishes he was in the ODI team. In his last three games he didn't pick up any wickets. Hoggard is definitely a far better bowler than Mahmood but I think you have to be a bowler who gets angry with the batsmen when you get hit for runs rather than angry with yourself.

[EllN]

HOggard is now 30 why not stick with the likes of mahmood to make them great bowlers , we have a bowler here who can bowl 90 mph has a grat slower ball and has hight meanin bounce so lets turn him england great not treat him like past selectors have and not sticking with natural ability and jus paving over the cracks not filling them in,

[darksideofthemoon]

I think Mahmood needs to play a full season of county cricket with Lancs first and learn from the experienced bowlers rather than Shine.

The good thing about Hoggard only playing in Tests is that he will be fresh and not be so injury prone and will last much longer. I can see him still bowling in 5 years time with 450+ wickets. I see him opening the bowling with Broad.

[Nostromo]

Originally Posted by EllN

why not stick with the likes of mahmood to make them great bowlers , we have a bowler here who can bowl 90 mph has a grat slower ball and has hight meanin bounce so lets turn him england great not treat him like past selectors have and not sticking with natural ability and jus paving over the cracks not filling them in,

Mahmood is also a second rate bowler who seldom rises above third rate performances. IMO, he will never rise above mediocrity and should not come anywhere near the National XI in any type of cricket. To compare him with Hoggard is ridiculous. Hoggard is a genuine wicket taker and used properly, he can be a threat in Tests as well as ODIs.

[EllN]

never did i comopare hoggard to mahmood but hoggard is not the youngest player to grace the england side, an why a medocer player cant become a star is beyond me look at gayle he doesnt even turn the ball, if thats not medocer i dont know what is, yet he is very effective in the one day game so why cant mahmood be a great bowler he has all the attributes. also hoggard has had his chance and not once has he stood up and been counted also he is also englands least injured player, surely that has somrthing to do with not playing odi's would you not rather him play longer in the longer form of the game and the most consistant aswell ,he was deffeneltly one of the players who brought back the ashes to england 2005 and to take it out of perspetive it comes down would you rather win the ashes or the world cup

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Nostromo

Now before everyone starts protesting, please consider what I have to say. Why cannot Matthew Hoggard be a normal part of England's ODI sqaud?

Did Hoggard not retire from ODIs?

[Nostromo]

Originally Posted by EllN

hoggard has had his chance and not once has he stood up and been counted also he is also englands least injured player, surely that has somrthing to do with not playing odi's would you not rather him play longer in the longer form of the game and the most consistant aswell ,he was deffeneltly one of the players who brought back the ashes to england 2005 and to take it out of perspetive it comes down would you rather win the ashes or the world cup

I agree that Hoggard has had some cances at ODI level, but don't think it was sustained enough to do him or the team justice. As far as 'being uninjured' are concerned, I don't think any player, however important, can be protected that way. As a professional cricketer playing for his country, Hoggard should be prepared to offer his services at all levels of the game ( which I am sure he would be) and likewise, his country should be prepared to make the best use of him. If that meant ODI cricket matches in addition to Tests, then so be it. Sports injuries are part of the risk that all sportmen take and they cannot be overprotected because of that. McGrath for Australia and Pollock for South Africa are as important to their respective countries as Hoggard is to England; the other two have been used to their full potential in both forms of the game and are both a lot older than Hoggard. IMO, Hoggard is not inferior to either McGrath or Pollock in bowling talent; he just has not had as many chances to prove himself.

[Aussie-Yank]

To an extent I agree with you, however Shane Warne stopped playing ODI cricket to prolong his test career - a decision I am quite happy he made.

So I dont think that the situation in regards to protecting a player from injury is that black and white.

[darksideofthemoon]

Originally Posted by Nostromo

I agree that Hoggard has had some cances at ODI level, but don't think it was sustained enough to do him or the team justice. As far as 'being uninjured' are concerned, I don't think any player, however important, can be protected that way. As a professional cricketer playing for his country, Hoggard should be prepared to offer his services at all levels of the game ( which I am sure he would be) and likewise, his country should be prepared to make the best use of him. If that meant ODI cricket matches in addition to Tests, then so be it. Sports injuries are part of the risk that all sportmen take and they cannot be overprotected because of that. McGrath for Australia and Pollock for South Africa are as important to their respective countries as Hoggard is to England; the other two have been used to their full potential in both forms of the game and are both a lot older than Hoggard. IMO, Hoggard is not inferior to either McGrath or Pollock in bowling talent; he just has not had as many chances to prove himself.

26 matches 32 wickets at 36.00 econ 5.29 s/r 40.81
How many matches does he need?