Tom Smith has done well this year, he is a big lad at 6'4, and bats left handed.

Tremlett has done enough this year IMO to be selected - an impressive strike rate in county cricket, a bowler also with true pace.

Mahmood I think is a must - if we don't select him I think there will be some red faces on WAT next year, not selecting a player that will probably bowl against Australia this winter, and will probably be amongst the wickets.

Dimitri Mascharenhas also picks himself - I wonder why we don't have a, all-rounder thread.

Short list.

*******
Tremlett

Mahmood

Lewis ( a need for a Hoggard like for like)

Mascharenhas
__________________________________
Possible

******
Tom Smith

__________________
Ern

Colly, please look at Onion's bowling figures against Yorkshire. Economy rate of 5! in a FC game.

__________________
Administrator

One game Mike? You really are trying to oust him and I don't understand why you are so determined. Look at Yorkshire's hot-shot leggies in the same game! Onions has made a strong case and I'll be dreadfully disappointed if we end up putting a medium pacer in to bowl with the new ball rather than a paceman with talent shown at the highest first class level.

Please don't be so narrow-minded as to dismiss his season-long performance on the basis of one innings! Rana Naved-ul-Hasan has just gone for 9.5 per over in Nottinghamshire's second innings but he is internationally know as a class bowler!

Colly, I gave my reasons against Onions in the other thread. I said in the other thread that while his overall season record may be okay his record against the best teams is below par and this recent match is further proof of that. I require players to have demonstrated that they can dominate county cricket for inclusion in the WAT team. If they can't cope with county cricket they aren't likely to make the next step up to Test cricket.

Yorkshire? One of the best? They're relegation candidates!

Mike, I think I'm just going to give up trying to convince you. I still don't understand but we are clearly opposed on this one.

That just strengthens my case! He can't bowl economically against a weak batting side.

My concern with Shreck has been his tendency to go AWOL: I recall a couple of games recently when Sidebottom appeared to have completely outbowled Shreck... and I suspect this has been the case all season... but one way or the other, Shreck has managed to redeem his figures somewhat with economical overs and cheap wickets when sorting out tailenders.

My fear with Onions is that he's more like Shreck than like Sidebottom... but the fact that he's been called up for international duty has to count for something: enough people have seen something they like for me to take his case very, very seriously indeed.

Of course... Broad and Tremlett look like dead certs, Kabir Ali and Mascarenhas have both performed excellently... leaving the competition for bowling places looking pretty tough!

Okay, so he can't bowl well against the best or the worst, yet he has 50-odd wickets this season. How remarkably strange! *Exasperation* Please don't make me laugh again.

Have you noticed the number of bowlers with absolutely awful figures in this round of games, and the number of massive totals? Let's have a look one of the other candidates (Tremlett did not play), who has just been tested against the champions:

I'm not sure what those figures are Colly but they look bad. But, then, I don't rate Shreck either. He is not in my preferred side.

All depends on what you are picking a side to do. I would say that Charlie is a good county bowler. Probably not quick enough for the higher level. Also not really consistent enough, has too many bad days for my liking. He will, along with Sidebottom, thoroughly enjoy Division 2 next season anyway!