2nd Test: England v Bangladesh: Chester-le-Street 2-6 June

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Originally Posted by Mongoose

Rich, why are your tits getting worrying? Do you scratch them every time Strauss gets hit on the pads?!

Alas my tits are getting bigger in "Rob Key man boob" stylee because everytime I think of england batting failures I eat cake.

[Kirsty Harris]

Originally Posted by Richie Benauds Love Child

Ok, tomorrow he could turn a corner or maybe next week or the week after that. He could sail through the ODIs and score sod all. Then we are at the ashes.

To be honest, I don't see it as any different to the situation a few months ago when loads of people were saying that perhaps Trescothick's place was under threat because of his dodgy footwork, and before that it was, of course, poor old Ashley Giles A.K.A the worst spin bowler in test cricket! Oh, and hoggard has had his share of stick too. There always seems to be one test player who's place is under threat, but generally the players in this squad turn things around when things are looking less than rosey for them.

There is always going to be one player that under performs at one time or another, unless it does become a longer-term form problem I wouldn't worry to much about it. Besides which, lets just say he does poorly in the ODI and is replaced - there is no gaurentee his replacement will cut the mustard. This is the first lull in form we have seen from Strauss - could it not be that we just expect too much from him?

[Moss]

Strauss has shown that he's a quality player, capable of performing under pressure.
Even the best have slumps, so I won't get too agitated.

Although - why does he have to have a slump right now?!

[Moss]

I'm still not entirely convinced by Bell. Although he is good, but just how good.
His test average of 290 odd is of course a little bit flattering!

I'd love to see him perform when the sitution is more terrifying i.e. not against Bangladesh and not in a dead rubber.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Bell I like the look of. Very good technique. Whether he's got it up top when the aussies arrive is a different matter.

Kirsty - you are right most of englands players have recovered from poor form, your beloved Gilo the best example. Point being in the other matches, its ben a seaming pitch which has helped the other bowlers, or another bat has come to the fore ie the team has rallied round and covered up the cracks. In the last 12 odd months there has been a passenger in pretty much every single game I can think of i harmo in SA (and anderso nfor that matter) tresco in WI, Simon Jones (often through no fault of his own) but against the aussies we cant have a passenger.

If we had any other series at home I wouldnt be bothered.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Kirsty Harris

This is the first lull in form we have seen from Strauss - could it not be that we just expect too much from him?

Nah. But we must be allowed to critisise them when they do wrong. If they want praise when they do well they must expect and deal with the critisism when they don't do so well.

You know what I mean? Now England have performed better over the past year or so it's like there's an excuse lined up when someone plays badly instead of some critisism.

[Kirsty Harris]

Originally Posted by Pete

Nah. But we must be allowed to critisise them when they do wrong. If they want praise when they do well they must expect and deal with the critisism when they don't do so well.

I have no problem with critisising players who are under perfoming - Strauss hasn't played well this season to date, and he admits that himself. My point is that I don't agree that Strauss should feel his place is under threat if he doesn't perform in the ODI. He's efforts so far have indicated he is a very good prospect, and as such he is entitled to a fair chance before his place is under any threat. I remeber with Trecothick, how he got a ton in one match and then didn't do so well in the following test match and there were people suggesting (both here and in the media) he should be dropped or sent in lower down the order because of his footwork.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Mongoose

OK, England's quicks all offer something slightly different, but I'd still have a spinner in the team every time.

How far do you take that mantra? I'd agree that it makes sense with Giles... and Batty.. because they can both bat and do OK with the ball... but how would you feel if it was a straight choice between Salisbury and Pietersen to compliment Harmison, Hoggard, Jones and Flintoff?

Where do you draw the line? If you have the equivalent of Holding, Roberts, Marshall and Ambrose... do you drop one to play Batty?

At one time it seemed the obsession with variety DID seem to become entrenched: England ended up playing a lest arm seamer at all times just (as far as I could see) because that was different from another right-arm seamer. Ultimately, variety is OK.. but you really want quality 1st and variety second.

[Trescothick]

Originally Posted by Rachael

How far do you take that mantra? I'd agree that it makes sense with Giles... and Batty.. because they can both bat and do OK with the ball...

Giles does OK with the ball?? Thats a little bit of an understatement really.. What are you expecting from him? He reguilary picks up wickets with not giving away too many runs. You can't expect miracles from players EVERY game.

[Mongoose]

Originally Posted by Rachael

How far do you take that mantra? I'd agree that it makes sense with Giles... and Batty.. because they can both bat and do OK with the ball... but how would you feel if it was a straight choice between Salisbury and Pietersen to compliment Harmison, Hoggard, Jones and Flintoff? ... At one time it seemed the obsession with variety DID seem to become entrenched: England ended up playing a lest arm seamer at all times just (as far as I could see) because that was different from another right-arm seamer. Ultimately, variety is OK.. but you really want quality 1st and variety second.

Obviously if the best spinners available were pie chuckers, you'd have to go with a much better seamer than plonk a spinner in for the sake of it. But there should always be spinners of a good enough quality for that not to become an issue. You have to judge each case on its merits i.e. the quality of the spinner; the quality of the seamer(s) who would replace him; the condition of the wicket; the opposition. I don't want to generalise too much, but as I indicated, about 98% of the time you need a spinner. So if you were playing a team from Asia, who were much more comfortable against spin than pace, on a green top in England in May, you might go in with an all-seam attack. But those occasions will be rare indeed.