Let's hope that Dalrymple turns out to be a better batsman than I've given him credit for.

My guess is that we're all rather holding our breath on that one. That said, Foster is a solid bat at 7, Rashid has been talked about as a no 6/7 batsman, I believe Mahmood has batted at 8 in 3 of his 5 Tests, Tremlett was our no 8 last year (having averaged 25+), Broad is talked about as a no 8 and Smith is being talked about as a better bat than Broad (234 runs this season, including a 49, and that's in the first division).

This side is going to bat down to 11: Fletcher should be giving us a mighty cheer!

Compton
Newman
Joyce
Yardy
Smith
Dalrymple
Foster
Rashid
Mahmood
Tremelett
Smith/Broad

Playing Rashid and Dalrymple sems to me outlandish in the same 11, I don't see that Dalrymple will in the long run add much to the bowling, and he is not a specialist bat, neither is Rashid nor Foster.
To the bowling I think we must make up for the bits and peices players by adding some bite in the form of Mahmood, Ed Smith would add some experience in the middle order, to counter the likes of Dalrymple - Rashid and Foster batting so high.

Wr need balance, as it is the side looks weak both in batting and bowling.

__________________
Ern

Why three spinners? Surely we should replace Dalrymple with Clarke; the latter is the better batsman, which has to be all that matters given that we have six bowlers. Furthermore, I think a lively fourth seamer would be of more use than an orthodox third spinner.

And has everyone forgotten the ease with which Owais Shah took to test cricket?

__________________
third-umpire.com

I see several flaws in this argument.

{i} Clarke did well with the bat this season.... but on pitches so true (and against attacks so weak) that Ramps averaged over 100 and even Martin Bicknell (Test average 6.42) averaged 39!!! Mark Butcher has a first class average of 40 and yet averaged 60: Clarke's season does little to convince me that he's in the class of Shah and Sales.

Note: Statto is one of our keenest county-cricket watchers and he says "I dont think he will go any further than slotting 2nd rate teams around coming in at 350-3. I'd rather have a proper batsman in the side".

(ii) Dalrymple (with a first class 244 vs. Surrey to his name) is arguably the better batsman. Batting in division 1 this season he outperformed Rob Key and his average of just under 33 compares favourably with the average of 37 managed by his experienced Middlesex team-mates Ed Smith and Owais Shah.

Note: he also showed real class in ODIs against SL (playing Murali well) and Pak (playing Akhtar and Asif well).

{iii} Ricky Clarke is not a bowler. Period. He may be able to turn his arm over in the nets... and against truly appalling opposition he might even get away with bowling in the middle.... but he is no closer to being picked for England as a specialist bowler than Collingwood is: he's dire.

Note: Statto summed himup as follows: "As for his bowling, he wouldnt get a minor counties game for that alone". Even Ernest admitted "I don't think at International level his bowling will be good enough [...] if he gets in the side as a batsman only", a thought echoed by Andy Mellon (another of our keenest county-cricket followers) who said "He's in as a batsman alone, or not at all. I think he showed that against Pakistan in the ODI the other day".

{iv} Dalrymple is by far the better bowler. Just check out the stats: Clarke was trusted with just 188 overs in an entire season... that's 17 over per match. Dalrymple shouldered a FAR more respectable workload, bowling 31 overs / match. He took more wickets and at a better average. To cap it all, Clarke's economy was a match-losing 3.92 where Dalrymple's was apassable 3.05.With all that said... we couldeasily justify slotting Rashid in at 6: that's where he played for the Under 19s (where he scored a century and a half century in a single Test match) and that is apparently why he was called up for Yorkshire (following great form with the bat in the 2nd XI).

ps. delaying announcement of results from confidential poll in the hope Collisamackem and Flanflinger get back tome in the morning.

I'd support this XI:

Compton
Newman
Shah
Joyce
Yardy
Dalrymple
Foster+
Rashid
Tremlett
Broad
Smith

If Mahmood has to be in, fine. I've changed my mind about Clarke given the weight of opinion in favour of Dalrymple. I'd also rather have Shah in than Clarke to sure up the batting.

By the way, why is Sales continually being mentioned? He has about one or two supporters.

I'll vote in the poll tomorrow evening, I've just returned to Germany from the Alps and I'm knackered.

Rachael, Adil Rashid doesn't qualify as he only played 5 CC matches this year - well short of 8 which is the required minimum. The first part of the season he played 2nd XI cricket and some U19 Tests. The guy is just 18 years old! How can you say he is a better spin bowler than Doshi is right now? He was not on the list of qualifiers so you shouldn't have included him for consideration. Please stick to the rules.

Five first class games plus three U-19 Tests (surely equivalent to domestic cricket). More significantly, the rules allow players unavailable due to "international duty" (hence Mahmood's inclusion) and U-19 Test matches DO count as International duty: that's why his games were termed 'Test' matches!

His 5 county matches and 3 Test maches justified his nomination and we had a shortlist thread on spinners that ran for an entire month and showed UNIVERSAL support for advancing Rashid to the shortlist. The nomination was made by adamberry, Andy Mellon, Collyisamackem, darksideofthemoon, flanflinger, greg, Rachael, Statto, Vrock: that's virtually our entire selection panel.

The for registering objections was when that thread was active: that was a period of more than one month.

No objections were raised in that thread and as chairman of selectors I therefore had no qualms about advancing his name to the final selection stage, where a clear majority of our selectors then backed Rashid over Doshi: Rashid topped the poll 6-3.I'm still awaiting the final results of the poll but I can assure you that Sales is very much in the running: I don't think I'm revealing too much if I say Shah and Clarke polarise opinion... and that one or other COULD make it... but this is very much a three way race.

On the bowling front, Mahmood also polarises opinions: your argument to omit him means we currently have an even split between those who see him as an automatic selection and those who do not want him at all!

Rachael - There was a clear majority in favour of Mahmood, what was the point in this Mahmood - why is he not selected if the majority of sides included Mahmood?

Seven out of the eleven sides included Mahmood .

__________________
Ern

Rachael, only first-class matches are considered in the qualifying rules. I'm not here to double-check your qualifiers. As Chairman, it's your responsibility to make sure that all players you put up for consideration are qualified. Had you asked me for an opinion I would have suggested you look in the list of qualifiers for confirmation. I spent a lot of time doing that list and you've conveniently ignored it or not referenced it.

In the spinners thread Ernest warned you: