Damed if you do, damed if you don't

[flanflinger]

When England selected their Twenty20 squad, most commentators commended them on picking "specialists", Maddy, Kirtley, Snape and Schofield.

The argument that they were not quite up to international quality was washed aside. As soon as the tournament started and the specialist on the whole failed to perform, the tide turned, and the selectors who picked specialist over proven internationals were criticised.

In the first tour match in Sri Lanka, Ian Bell cruised to a run a ball hundred, I can guarantee that the sports media will be asking the question "where was he?" but this would be the same media that called for specialist to be selected!!

As it is, I am of the firm belief that the best players can adapt, I feel that the likes of Ian Bell should have been there from the beginning. The press will always question the selectors, I do think they (the selectors) made a mistake, and that mistake was listening to the press.

[greg]

I am pleased that the likes of Bell weren't involved in Twenty20 as the couple of weeks off is needed,i just feel sorry for KP and Colly who get no break at all.

[Seamer]

The prospect of Bell playing 20/20 is laughable. Have you already forgotten the embarrassment he heaped on himself and England during the WC. If England will be satisfied with scores on the realm of 110-130 then Bell is your man. If England actually wish to win the odd 20/20, then i would leave him playing tests

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by Seamer

If England will be satisfied with scores on the realm of 110-130 then Bell is your man. If England actually wish to win the odd 20/20, then i would leave him playing tests

A comment I would have agreed with after the WC, but you obviously have paid no attention to his strike rate during the India ODI series.

I think Ian Bell is the type of player - like Flintoff - that needs to learn to play at each level. He struggled when he first played county cricket, struggled in his first few Test series and is doing the same in ODI's. I feel though that once he has got used to the level, he will thrive.

I would personally have preferred to see Bell opening in Twenty20's than Maddy!!

[Seamer]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

I think Ian Bell is the type of player - like Flintoff - that needs to learn to play at each level. He struggled when he first played county cricket, struggled in his first few Test series and is doing the same in ODI's. I feel though that once he has got used to the level, he will thrive.

The Eng/Ind ODI series was not covered down here so i did not actually see those knocks of his. I will admit i was surprised.
Now i rate the guy as a test batsman - certainly above, say, Micheal Clarke. But i suspect those knocks against India are not going to be replicated on a regular basis. And for his sake i hope he doesn't, because if he does, it will likely ruin him as a test batsman.

[pie_chucker]

I've never had a problem with picking the odd specialist, but some of our selections were jokes (i.e Kirtley) and their lack of class showed.

I recall reading a quote from an interantional player - it may have been KP, who when asked about Englands so called county specialists made the comment that it was one thing to slog a county trundler around but it was another to bat against the likes of Brett Lee.....

I suppose the same applies to the bowling. Its one thing to trundle in to a no9 bat who has been promoted to pinch hit and getting him out. Its completely differant trundling in to Gilchrist, Yuvraj, Ponting......

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by greg

I am pleased that the likes of Bell weren't involved in Twenty20 as the couple of weeks off is needed,i just feel sorry for KP and Colly who get no break at all.

I agree but go further - why just feel sorry for KP and Colly, the idea of picking specialists was right IMO, and sooner or later would have paid off, trying that plan for just one series is no good at all - just retyrning to the days of panic after a couple of bad results.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Seamer

The Eng/Ind ODI series was not covered down here so i did not actually see those knocks of his.

I've long defended Bell against detractors... but in truth... his ODI series was SERIOUSLY mixed. The good was very, very good... and what stood out was an ability to rotate the strike where mere sloggers would have been trying for too much and achieving too little. Sadly, he clearly approached the series determined to throw the bat at anything and everything... and to say he rode his look would be understatement.

He needs to take a leaf out of Pietersen's book and focus on making a steady start in the sure knowledge that he can up the run rate later: better fielding sides will NOT let him get away with so much whilst he's feeling his way into an innings!

[Speedboy Salesman]

I would prefer Bell just to play test cricket myself, he is a fine 5 day player, but he can have trouble with ODIs.