Twenty-20 England Vs Australia

[Maranello]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

Ponting acknowldged that Flintoff would be the only England player that would get into their World beating XI...

Sure, but isn't that because he can both bat and bowl? I doubt if it is because Flintoff outshines every other England bowler and every other England batsman. Yes, he does have obvious merits as a bowler, and as a batsman, and even as a fielder, but I don't think he is in the top strata of international players in either; it is the fact that he can do both that makes him a very valuable player. The other, more proper all-rounders I mentioned however did outshine their peers in one discipline, whether it was Sobers with the bat or Imran with the ball.

[Lemming]

Ponting would love Flintoff in his team. England have the perfect balance at the moment provided by Flintoff. Every team in the world would love to have 5 good bowling options as well as a good top 7 to bat with.

Having Flintoff is not an excuse to topple balance, but to cement it!

[Lemming]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

...and possibly also indicates that he [Ponting] would be very happy with a proper 5 man attack...

Spot on flanfinger, he definitely would. Australia are lucky because they have McGrath, Gillespie and Warne who are all vert penetrative, attacking bowlers who can all put in great performances anywhere in the world. They can get away with it.

[Lemming]

Originally Posted by Rachael

In theory you should only really need 3 bowlers to get through a Test: that's just an average of 30 overs a day each.. and if one of those is a quality spinner he ought to be good for 40+

3 bowlers?? I've never heard of a decent test team with only 3 bowlers.

To win a match you need 20 wickets. In test cricket a wicket, on average, falls every 9ish overs, so three bowlers need to bowl about 180 a match between them. That's an average of 60 each, 50-60% more than usual??? I can't see Hoggard, Harmison and Flintoff doing that each game, can you?

[Rachael]

How many overs a day do you think Flintoff would bowl if he was in the Aussie side? Would he take any of the 30 or so a day that Warne is likely to get through when he gets going? Not likely. Do you take the ball off McGrath, Gillespie or Kasprowicz before they've completed 20+ for the day? No way.

Nice insurance policy to have... but if Flintoff played for the Aussies he might get to the end of the Ashes series having had barely one short spell per innings!

ps. if you had Hadlee, Ambrose and Walsh in your side... and you were captain.. would you EVER toss the ball to a 4th bowler of the calibre of Hoggard / Jones? Probably.. for the odd over before lunch / tea.. but he wouldn't egt a serious workout!

[flanflinger]

Rachael,

You never cease to suprise or amaze...

If you were to have three bowlers - admitedly of the quality you mentioned, you would not flog them to death for 90 overs.. it would be stupid... you would have to give them a break to get the best out of them

what if one breaks down or is having a bad day...

Three bowlers is ridiculous...

Most Test teams would love four front line bowlers plus a qulaity all-rounder that is the ideal - and that is what we have got... enjoy it...

[Lemming]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

Most Test teams would love four front line bowlers plus a qulaity all-rounder that is the ideal - and that is what we have got... enjoy it...

Rachael, flanfinger is right. If we had Hadlee, Ambrose and Walsh, then maybe we could afford to only have 3 quicks. I would argue we definitely need a spinner also. Four of the best bowlers ever would suffice in a test team, meaning we could play 7 batsmen. Unfortunaltey we don't have even the best bowler in the world and so Flintoff's all-rounder status provided us with exceptional balance and options. It is the ideal and i'm going to enjoy it.

[Maranello]

FF and Lemming - Rachael did enumerate four bowlers in her example above; three quicks and a spinner.

[Lemming]

Maranello, I was referring to the comment

Originally Posted by Rachael

In theory you should only really need 3 bowlers to get through a Test: that's just an average of 30 overs a day each.. and if one of those is a quality spinner he ought to be good for 40+

[Rachael]

The key words there were "in theory": my point was that a 4 man attack DOES give you a fair bit of slack IF the bowlers are reliable.

If your spinner is happy bowling 30-40 overs a day (and when he's bowling well, even Giles would look to that sort of workload) and your seamers are up for 4-5 decent spells a day (say 30 overs a piece).. then you have the offer of 90 overs of seam bowling and 30-40 overs of spin before you consider a 5th bowler.

Of course... when you've got several bowlers who are candidates to get hit out of the attack and a guy who's prone to go AWOL at times... the cover is wonderful... but as Maranello says.. it's inconsistent to say this England attack is a great attack and to say at the same time it needs to be a 5 man attack!