Flintoff had to go off injured today after 4 overs. Harmison's radar is a worry. For my money england had to play an extra seamer, as hoggy cannot bowl from both ends. Based on that logic, Giles had to play in the first test.

As to the second test, england have always in recent times kept faith with the team that lose a test (this tactic has meant that they have not lost successive test matches since the last ashes tour.)

Is Panesar a better bowler than Giles? It's highly probable. But giles outbowled panesar in the warm-up games, can bat and field to a higher standard, has valuable experience in aussie and is a good team man, he also has 100 test wickets.

I cant agree with the portrayal of Giles as absolutely rubbish. It always seems to be the case that england fans, when favouring one option, have to dismiss the other as utterly useless (see Jones, G.O, Mahmood,S and Key, Rob) rather than be fair-minded in their appraisals.

Most of us would accept that Warne's a better bowler than Giles... and just how much impact has he had in this Test? Compare the stats after the two had bowled a similar number of deliveries....

SK Warne 42-8-129-0

AF Giles 42-7-103-1

Now... if Warne's impact was of about the same proportions as Giles'.... why should anyone think Panesar would have made a huge difference?

Interesting logic as aways.

So if Hoggard had been dropped you would assume he would have done nothing because McGrath, Anderson, Harmison and Lee didn't?

LOL. I'm going first and foremost on Boycott's argument that the pitch is one on which finger-spinners can do no more than play an important containing role and do a job: not a role to be sniffed at.... but a very different role to the one seemingly envisaged by the army of Panesar-advocates.

Incidentally.. Boycott would have played Panesar as "the better bowler".. but he doesn't think the difference between Panesar and Giles would have made one jot of difference.

ps. On the seamer-front... I'd not judge against Hoggard on the simple basis that I've a long-standing regard for his ability with the new ball and a keen appreciation of the quality of his recently-refined cutters (as seen so impressively in India).

I think Australia hae again proved that they have a lot of fight left in them!!!!

the way Clarke and Warne battled was excellent to see.. they saved the match for Aus

__________________

As it happens Rach, I dont think Panesar playing would have changed the result here, though its a good job he wasn't the one who dropped Ponting, can you imagine the stick hed have got?

All I'm saying is I think it would have given us a better chance thats all.

On another issue, do we think this clear lack of faith shown in Panesar will effect him if he does get his chance?

Maybe we shall find out when england tour srilanka... it wont happen in the ashes that is for sure.

__________________

I for one am not portraying Giles as "absolute rubbish" (although anyone trying to convince me that he is in the side as an attacking rather than containing/defensive option will find it hard work to do so) - and besides, the second test issue was not Giles v Panesar but Anderson v Panesar. If Harmison's radar was off in the first test (thankfully it appears to be coming back), has Jimmy Anderson's shown any glimpse of improvement?

What I find annoying, and probably a lot of Jones' detractors do as well, is the way Panesar and Read were discarded by Fletcher at the first opportunity (when he was free of the shackles of Graveney and Miller) after both had excelled in the team during the summer. I refer you to an article by Mike Atherton pre-Brisbane which pretty much sums up the situation. Pay particular attention with respect to the manner in which Chris Reid's international career was consigned to the dustbin for good. While I am critical of the Aussie selectors for not bringing new talent through, would they ever drop a player and at the same time give him such a good public kick in the teeth as Fletcher did to Read? It just wouldn't be "cricket" now, would it? Everyone says England were unprepared for Brisbane and it showed on the first 3 days. What no one has asked is what effect Duncan's actions with respect to Reid pre-toss had on morale amongst the players.

On the Panesar v Giles issue read the last line of that article written by someone who has a far vaster knowledge of the game than you, me or Rachael.

I have never said Giles is rubbish but previously there has been no alternative.Now that we have a spinner with far more ability i think we should utilise him so anything Giles does wrong will always be magnified in my eyes,much the same as Jones mistakes are picked up on by staunch Read followers.

This is my position, I am big fan of Giles (I ever have a KoS mug), but Panesar is the better spinner and so should get a chance ahead of Giles.. IMO