He hasn't shown it for far too long. Too many excuses are used with Harmison. I'm sure that they'll be used again and again if he fails to perform here.

For me, Hoggard is far more likely to prove to be our best bowler and has done so on more occasions than Harmison.

One thing I have found odd is that in Australia the Sri Lankans struggled against Lee but not Clark and Johnson. In the ODI Series against England they struggled against Sidebottom hugely. That suggests to me that when the conditions suit swing and bowlers who get the ball to move around the Sri Lankans will struggle. Harmison won't find the conditions to suit him which is why many of the so-called experts are saying he won't play.

Someone on this board once argued that Ambrose was the best helpful-pitch bowler he'd ever seen: this presumably referred to his ability to land the ball on the seam and get steepling bounce off a full length on any but the flattest pitches. The best of Harmison has been seen in exactly those conditions... and it has to be said that on less helpful pitches, Harmison has never adapted anything like as well as Ambrose did: he's tended to bowl shorter and be exposed as one-dimensional.

Hoggard and Sidebottom may not have the same natural advantages for fast, bouncy tracks... but they've shown an ability to adapt that Harmison has never shown: Hoggard's record in INdia is excellent... and his performance on the flat wicket at Adelaide in the last Ashes series was outstanding.... and Sidebottom's performance in the recent ODI series showed that he is also a much more accomplished bowler than Harmison.

This is the possible mix, and these are the problems IMO

Three Seamers

Hoggard, Sidebottom and Anderson - too predictable and too one paced
Hoggard, Sidebottom and Broad - less predictability but still a gamble on a débutante
Hoggard, Sidebottom and Harmison - again less predictability, but you at least have some pace there to get the batsmen on their toes

Two Seamers (keep in mind that it would mean Swann is playing and on début)

Hoggard and Sidebottom/Anderson - no variation at all apart from angle with the left hander - but is that enough?
Hoggard/Sidebottom and Broad - really a massive experince problem, particularly of Hoggard is the man to lose out
Hoggard/Sidebottom and Harmison - some variation there, and if Hoggard is the man, then 400+ Test wickets worth of experince can't be knocked

For me the choice isn't Sidebottom or Harmison, it is Harmison or Broad. For me 200+ wickets at 30, is a much better bet than a guy on début!!

A report in one paper the other day suggested that Sidebottom, aside from being a left-armer, could be counted on to extract a lot more bounce than Hoggard: he was apparently bowling at a lively enough pace in the ODI series and was basically doing what you want of Harmison.

Broad is also 6' 5" tall and has a high action... so if the management want height and Harmison is NOT bowling well in the next warm up... he might still enter the reckoning.

As I see it, the play off comes down to Swann, Harmison and Broad... with Anderson only coming in if Hoggard or Sidebottom are injured or if he's able to convince the management that he's the closest thing they've got to a reverse swing specialist.

I have bolded the stuff that I have problems with

1. What Report? By who, were they there?
2. Could is not good enough, there is no point after the end of the test saying "well he could have bowled liked that, but he didn't"
3. Apparently, it isn't definitely, it isn't even possibly!! I don't trust anything where someone is "apparently" able to do something

If you want a tall quick fast bowler, then you choose Harmison or Broad, you don't hope that someone else can do that role.

Rachael, I am also very surprised that you are championing the cause for Sidebottom based on him changing fudamentally what he is good at, and what you admire him for!!

Can't locate the article I was thinking of... and can't even recall what newspaper it was in... but I did just dig this up....Ryan Sidebottom in full swing for England - Telegraph

My take on the bowlers here.

Harmison needs fast bouncy wickets to get the best out of him, he will get sharp bounce on such tracks and be a very difficult prospect to deal with. He also needs overs under his belt, he is a rythm bowler and needs to have been bowling consistently for a while before he really gets dangerous. I would not play him in Sri-Lanka as the pitches will not suit him.
Hoggard can bowl all day on any pitch he will do as well as anyone in Sri Lanka and should be pick no1 of the seamers. An English Vaas effectively.
Sidebottoom has a lot of variation and should play although he may struggle with the older ball and we will need the spinners to be in form.
Broad is a decent batsman and is probably the best 3rd seamer option for pitches where we need a 3rd seamer and can't fall back on Colly, Bell and Bopara.

Batting - It is generally strong but we will need to be able to cope with Murali on pitches that have been specially prepared for him.

Keeper - Mustard is not a spin specialist as a batsman, he is much better attacking fast and medium paced bowlers. I don't think he is a good choice for Sri-Lanka at the moment.

I agree Anderson would only come in if Sidebottom or Hoggard were injured. Sidebottom is quite tall at 6'3 and does get more bounce that Hoggard. I think the three bowlers will be Hoggard, Sidebottom and Broad.

Disaster if this is so! - either Sidebottom or Hoggard should be in the side to back up strike bowlers, or in Hoggards case you can open with him.

Harmison should be in the side - he is the only genuine quick with Flintoff injured,

Hoggard
Harmison
Broad
Swann
Panesar.

I would not as a rule pick two spinners, but this is better than a one paced seam attack IMO.

The fact that Broad and Sidebottom are tall and get bounce makes little difference at their pace, in fact get the length a little wrong and the balls there to be smacked.

__________________
Ern

Come on Ern: as Atherton repeatedly showed... even Donald's pace doesn't stop loose deliveries getting smacked. Once you get past a military medium deliveries the pace is more than enough: what matters is not bowling those loose deliveries.

That said.. Sidebottom has shown himself quite capable of bowling at close to 90 mph.

On a more serious note.... Otis Gibson has had things to say that might interest you... The report concludes that "it looks as if England's pace attack for the first Test will be Ryan Sidebottom, Matthew Hoggard and one of Stuart Broad or James Anderson": exactly what most of us on this thread are suggesting.

Otis Gibson'd also got thoughts on Flintoff that should cheer you... Sounds pretty encouraging to me.... and those views certainly come as a blessed relief from the monotonous droning about pace that characterised the Fletcher years.

See Ingenious Ottis Gibson faces huge England test - Telegraph