LOL. Yes, India have Tendukar, Sehwag and doubtless others... the Aussies have Michael Clarke and Symonds for sure, and possibly Katich... and England have Vaughan, Pietersen and Collingwood... they can all turn their arm over as "spinners" without ANY of them being credible second spinners in Test cricket!

ps. I did get your point in your earlier post: I was just backing you up.

I can't belive I am typing this, but I fully agree with Rachael.

Look at someone like Jaysuriya, not even a good spinner, but he has regularly performed at ODI level. For years we have had players like Vaughan and Hick in the ODI side, who are in the side but underused with the ball. I would prefer to see Vaughan in the side then a bit's and pieces style player.

I do feel that Yardy and Dalyrimple should never be in the side as straight forward all-rounders. The should be in the side because they bat, but they should not be under-used with the ball.

A side with these two in, plus Bell and Collingwood, should mix and match them as needed. The fact that we could also have Flintoff, means we should have plenty of options with the ball.

I would be very reluctant to bowl Yardy and Dalyrimple much in Test, and the need for a proper front line spinner (Panesar or Giles) is a must. If they got into the side as batters, I would use them, but sparingly.

Rachael - Vaughan can't bowl, Pietersen can't bowl, well not in top company anyway, how many times have commentators moaned for Vaughan to put himself on, and when he does it is never for so long.

We don't want a bits and peices side in any case.
And Collingwood has little to do with the types of bowlers you have cited.

I will sort this adam, I don't have a date on mine - I was going to leave your titles blank, or put 2006, however I noticed Rachael and greg have 2005, and wondered why.

If you notice I word the title slightly different, because I cipied and pasted from my own title which was original.

__________________
Ern

I've long thought of Hick and Ramps as the two grossly under-utilised batsmen-who-can-bowl of recent times, the problem being the way they are under-utilised at county level: they were never going to be great bowlers.... but they could have done the sort of job Hooper went on to do... but they needed to be bowling spin week in, week out, not merely when on international duty!
Quite. They are second spinners, or dependable but unthreatening options to get the captain through a few overs before the new ball is taken.
First things first... Collingwood HAS bowled spin in an England shirt... but next up, I was making the same point as you: that not everyone who turns their arm over should be regarded as a frontline bowler.

This was in response to your own comment: Yardy is currently little better than Vaughan or Pietersen with the ball.... and Dalrymple, whilst better, is not a frontline Test spinner - he's a batsman who occasionally bowls well enough to be a credible second spinner, being only marginally better than Flintoff was throughout the first five years of his International career, when he averaged around 50 with the ball.

I would class a bits and pieces player as a player like Matthew Fleming, or Roni Irani (I would have regarded Colllingwood in this category when he set out, but not now). Players who if they could not get into the team with one facet of their game, but get in because they are adequate at two or three.

But if a player is in the team because he is Test level at one facet, then I have no problem with them, if they are OK, contributing with another skill.

So if Vaughan and KP can do a job, maybe not every ODI, but just when required to fill in a few overs I say why not. It is a tactic used by all the successful One Day teams. As Rachael pointed out India have Shewag and Tendulkar, Australia have Ponting and Clarke etc....

Sometimes it is a gamble, but you can always limit the damage by taking them out of the attack quickly, but sometimes it just causes a bit of a problem as the batter may look to "take advantage" or might find himself unable to adjust to a bowler he knows little about.

I believe ff that players like Sehwag - Jaysuriya - Sarwan are in a league of their own, in no way can Vaughan or KP be compared with trio IMO.

For a start Jaysuriya and Sehwag have been brought up on wickets that turn, so even though part time, they are as good as some England full time spin bowlers again IMO.

I really don't rate Tendulkar on the evidence of when I have seen him bowl, he may be better than I think, but I have yet to see that.

I remember when Atherton was England captain, being a Lancastrian I was aware that he could bowl Leg Spin, I was saying the same things about him that are said about Vaughan - the last time I saw him bowl, man did he get carted.

Ponting-Bell-Collingwood and Tresco are really only for bowling when things are so desperate, that there is no other option IMO.

We don't seem to be agreeing so much today but I thought that Collingwood when I heard he could bowl in the mid eighties would be a genuine change bowler, but watching him of recent times - if I was Fletcher I would advise him to concentrate on his batting only.

I think bits and pieces players have dragged England down particular in ODI PJ cricket, and that was what started the rot.

Irani and co

__________________
Ern

How about his 10-2-29-2 against Sri Lanka in the ODIs Ern? He played all but the last two games and bowled better than any of the others as far as I'm concerned. He's far better than Ponting and Trescothick, and has excellent county, ODI and Twenty20 career figures, and some excellent recent figures in ODIs. You're making this judgement on a few overs which he has been restricted to here and there in a few tests, aren't you?

Here are his recent international bowling performances:

Sri Lanka, ODIs 1-3 (he missed 4 and 5 through injury of course):

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/engvs...ch/225250.html
http://uk.cricinfo.com/engvsl/engine/match/225251.html
http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/engvs...ch/225252.html

Pakistan:

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/engvp...ch/225255.html (Tests)
http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/engvp...ch/225256.html
http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/engvp...ch/225257.html
http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/engvpak/engine/match/225258.html

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/engvp...ch/225263.html (Twenty20)

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/engvp...ch/225246.html (ODIs)
http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/engvp...ch/225247.html
http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/engvp...ch/225248.html
http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/engvp...ch/225249.html

Now, on which of those occasions did he really get carted?

No I am not saying he gets carted - what I am saying is that IMO he is not a specialist bowler, or even a genuine all rounder.
To me he is a specialist bat who would be better served going down that road, without distractions.

I would put him above Vaughan and Bell and all the other assorted part time bowlers, but that's not really saying much - is it?.

To me a team is 4 specialist bowlers - 6 specialist bats, and a keeper who can hold a bat.

But England are lucky with Flintoff, who is a specialist bowler - so England don't (or should not need) part time bowlers.

__________________
Ern

He is a genuine all-rounder, the problem is that all-rounders are now judged against Andrew Flintoff. Colly is nowhere near Freddie's league as an all-rounder, but his bowling is enough of a part of his game to substantiate his claims to be an all-rounder, especially when you add his expertise in the field. He is to us what Sehwag is to India as an all-rounder, and a better bowler in my opinion, and I have no qualms about stating that.

Theres a few of the players we have selected who played in the England warm up game today, and all contributed. Yardy 44 off 52 and 1-17 off 6, Dalrymple 79 off 69 and 2-29 off 6, Joyce 25 off 22 batting at 9, Saj Mahmood 3-22 off 5.3. Incedentally, Rikki Clarke batted 10 and didnt bowl, so it would appear he isnt earmarked for the early games.