SL A vs Eng A, Columbo, 7-10 March

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Bell really should be a our number 3 anyway, and in ahead of peitersen, but thats really another argument. As far as the seamer go, we need someone that vaughan has faith in, and, in apart from the odd decent spell in SA, vaughan doesnt bowl him enough. Couple with that harmo is all at sea, and i still need convincing he can come back from that, it wouldnt surprise me if mahmood or harrison made an appearance at some stage.

Swann should easily replace batty now unless there a quality leg spinner I dont know about.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Richie Benauds Love Child

i still need convincing he can come back from that, it wouldnt surprise me if mahmood or harrison made an appearance at some stage.

Forget Mahmood.. it's been a great day for England A but Mahmood was his old profligate self. England surely can't afford his tendency to go at 4-5-6 an over when playing the Aussies. I'm sure his name will come up (as I don't doubt for one moment that at least one bowler will miss at least one Test) but that would be a desperate punt.

One chap who might be thinking this could be his summer is Caddick: he's got no pressure on him and has faded into the background recently.. but if he can light up the county circuit in the first part of the season then the chances of him getting one last swansong have to be pretty high - up to him, really.

If all else fails I wouldn't bet against Gough having one final outing: very much knee dependent... but the idea of an heoic final fling against his Aussie mates must be an outside possibility.

Failing that... at least for Old Trafford, Lords and the Oval... maybe three seamers plus Keedy and Giles (with Bell as a 4th seamer). At least that way you get a bowler with some quality: a slow bowler who knows what he's doing is surely better than a fast bowler who doesn't!

[Milo]

Everyone goes at 4 an over when playing the Aussies. What we need is someone who can take their wickets in the process. Who cares if Australia have 280 on the board at tea on the first day, if they are 9 down.

[Chuck Palumbo]

Going back to Caddick and Gough would be a huge backwards step. They are both finished as England test players and we need to move on.
Lewis looks like a capable replacement as he can bowl a good line while being a wicket threat. We'll have to see how Anderson and Mahmood get on in county cricket before we can consider whether they are ready to come back on to the international scene but they are still young and have huge potential. Harrison has also showed his abilities during this A team match.
Playing two spinners in England is out of the question, I doubt we will even play 2 spinners in the subcontinent next winter. Can you really see Keedy ripping through the Aussies or any other international team at that? I personally can't, plus playing two left arm spinners is not very good for the balance of the team...if we are going to play a second spinner alongside Giles, they would have to be an off spinner or even better a leg spinner, but I can't see many good ones of them about in England at the moment.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Milo

Everyone goes at 4 an over when playing the Aussies.

Hmm.. so how come when I find this:

(6 ball overs) Mat O R W BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10
overall 93 3518.2 8218 377 7/87 10/147 21.79 2.33 55.9 16 1
v Australia 8 304 774 28 7/87 9/148 27.64 2.54 65.1 1 0

Or This

(6 ball overs) Mat O R W BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10
overall 82 3022 8045 269 7/71 14/191 29.90 2.66 67.4 9 2
v Australia 11 404.1 1127 37 5/31 7/82 30.45 2.78 65.5 1 0

Or This:

(6 ball overs) Mat O R W BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10
overall 92 4835.5 12371 444 10/74 14/149 27.86 2.55 65.3 28 6
v Australia 14 806 2391 88 8/141 13/181 27.17 2.96 54.9 9 2

Just a few initial searches off the top of my head: Pollock, Vaas and Kumble.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Wouldnt rule out caddick or gough if injuries/form started to stack up. Mahmood i dont know enough about but, without sounding like BBC favourite MARTIN T, a bit of pace might be of a bit more use than Jon Lweis's trundlers. We've got hoggy doing military medium and when conditions dont suit he's in trouble we dont need another like him. Keedy cant bat or field as far as i know so I dont think he'll end getting a game - woulnt rule out Swann though IF and its a big IF we feel the need for 2 spinners

[Milo]

OK Rach, I should have added an almost in there. The point still remains the same. Wicket takers are what we need when playing the Australians. You do mention Pollock, and he is an obvious exception, but he still struggles to take Australians wickets regardless of his run-rate. In fact, his last series against them (the only one against the modern Aussies) they lost 3-0.

As for Kumble, he has gone at almost 3.5 in the last two Australian series, a run rate you claim Kasprowicz was found out over earlier today.

2003-2004 AUS v IND 206.1 28 710 24 3 1 8/141 29.58 51.54 3.44
2004-2005 Border-Gavaskar Trophy 197.3 29 685 27 3 1 7/48 25.37 43.89 3.47

I'll still take a wicket taker in the Ashes over the Angus Fraser type bowler who used to excel in regularly seeing the Aussies pick off 400 (at 2.8 an over) without a worry in the world (and there was the odd exception so please don't trail through cricinfo to find them).

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Actually you two we need both. Gillespie is world class, but with Mcgrath at the other end isnt the same player. Ntini - would he have as many wickets if he had steyne bowling at the other end instead of pollock?? Highly unlikely. At the moment, like as not , our 3 strike bowlers are in niether camp, harmo come closest in economy stakes but aint very threatening at the moment. Freddie can nearly do both but not quite.

[Milo]

[quote=Richie Benauds Love Child ]Actually you two we need both. QUOTE]

I know RBLC. I just took exception of Rachael's rubbishing of a player that took FIVE top order wickets in the match because he went for a few runs. I need to stop rising to her clear bait.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Milo

OK Rach, I should have added an almost in there. The point still remains the same. Wicket takers are what we need when playing the Australians.

Surely that depends on the balance of the attack? Vaughan's going to want at least one guy to be seriously threatening in any given situation... so ideally:

New Ball / new batsman: Harmsion
Swinging Ball: Hoggard
Turning pitch: Giles
Reverse Swinging ball: Jones
Uneven bounce / Two paced pitch: Flintoff

Thing is.. the ball's only new for a few overs.. it will not swing in all sessions... and turn, reverse swing and uneven bounce is likely to come later in the match: odds are that in between (i.e. during most of the series) Vaughan will have to be patient and wait for wickets to come to him.

Harmison should do a job of containing the Aussies in those dead periods... as should Hoggard.. as should Giles.. and as should (in particular) Flintoff... but let's face it: when the Aussies have posted 450.. the two not out batsmen have both got their eye in... and everyone's out of ideas - does Vaughan want to see a Fraser prowling the boundary or a Jimmy Anderson prowling the boundary?

Ok - not fair.. Fraser.. or Fidel Edwards... or Steyn... or Sami... or Brett Lee...

More to the point.. think back to just WHY England have been desperate for an all-rounder in recent years.. think back to Nasser Hussain having just 4 bowlers to play with and them all getting carted - the 5th was needed in the hope that SOMEONE could contain the damage.

I don't recall anyone ever wanting an all-rounder to increase the attacking edge: it was 'cos captains need options when it's all going pear shaped and the game is getting away from them.