Are we all prepared to agree that the following deserve a place irrespective of other selection decisions? I'm not saying they are beyond dispute (I'm actually doubtful of Newman and wonder if Ali is getting in as a bits and pieces candidate)... but I suspect we can all see that solid cases can be made in each case.

1. Cook
2. Newman
3. ?
4. Joyce
5. Shah
6. Collingwood
7. ?
8. Kabir Ali
9. Davies
10. Tremlett
11. ?

Please inducicate any aversion to anyone from this core of 8 players.

All eight are in my proposed team Rachael, so no objections or aversion from me!

__________________
A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes
Mark Twain

Not so sure about Davies, the 0thers seem ok at the moment.

If we have say "Prior" at 7, who could fill the 11 spot, I can't see a way in for a spinner, a SLA spinner, with Collingwood at 6, and Ali at 8.

__________________
Ern

If Kabir Ali bats at 8 then we definitely need a keeper-batsman like Prior. If you also include a spinner at 11 then we need Mascarenhas or the keper to bat at 6 and either drop Collingwood or move him up the order if we think he can score big runs. I'm not averse to Kabir Ali but I think if he bats at 8 it will weaken the batting strength of the tail.

Mascarenhas nor Collingwood are quick enough to be considered as front line bowlers, so if -

6) Collingwood
7)Prior
8) Ali
9)Tremlett
10 Swann
11) Sidebotton/Davies.

Not a lot in the way of Pace, yet a spinner is needed in any side, the problem as see it is Collingwood at 6 (Flintoff's Spot) making us a front line pace bowler short.

__________________
Ern

Is this right, not his fault he was injured, the best spinner by far over the last 3 years.

__________________
Ern

Problem solved - ditch the spinner. It would be extremely unfair to drop Collingwood in favour of an average spinner who is just along for the ride. Ditch the spinner and we can have more pace and Collingwood's utility services.

Yes that would help the batting, but Collingwood is not really a cutting edge bowler, and could not dry the runs up like a spinner.
Collingwood could hold his place as a batter who could bowl a "bit".

__________________
Ern

I'm not sure what your question is ern but Keedy is 30 so falls out of qualification for our team. The other spinners came no where near the form Keedy showed last year so I can't have them in our team on merit. Sorry.

I'm hearing the not fast enough debate. The stats in the circumstances of Mark Davies and Dimi Mascarenhas state that despite their lack of pace, they take plenty of wickets at very good averages. I reckon Davies could fulfill a Naved-ul-Hasan bowling role, which would be a very good option for this level!!

Also, I'd like to replace Steve Adshead with Jamie Foster. Fozzie is a bit of a halfway house between Prior and Read. A better keeper than Prior, but a different kind of batsman. More of an accumulator than explosive. Foster averaged 25 for England full team at the age of 20 and has a first class double hundred to his name, as well as a decent number of 50s and 100s for a keeper who often bats at 7 or 8 in a very deep Essex batting line up. I reckon that Foster is more than a capable batsman, but because he's not so explosive as Prior or Jones, his batting gets dismissed.

From Rachael's team, i'd like to hear the alternatives to Kabir Ali (whose form in internationals has been woeful of late) and Scott Newman.

Also, I'd like to think of the fielding. With a batting line-up of Cook, Newman, Joyce, Shah and Collingwood, who are the slippers? I don't recall seeing Ali Cook in the slips, Colly is a point man, and as I recall Scott Newman isn't a slipper either. We definately need to consider whether this line up has a couple of 'safe pairs of hands' to field at slip!