This year's WAT England 'A' 2007 nominations thread has not produced a lot of action... and as a result it looks as if we have just nine candidates staking a claim as a bowler:This thread is for discussing the relative merits of each...

In due course (when the arguments for and against have been made) I shall open a poll to see which players have the requisite support to make a shortlist.

Personally Rashid should be in this list or in the allrounder list alongside Swann and Bresnan as he isn't a batsman.

My choices would be Broad,Tremlett,Kabir Ali and Swann.

Broad just looks made for international cricket and without injury and call ups to the one day side he would have had more wickets,Tremlett gets the nod for his international showing this summer as that beats anything anybody else did in county cricket and Kabir Ali carried a poor bowling attack in a poor side and still had respectable figures in the top division.The added bonus is all of them are decent bats too.

As for the spinner Swann has outbowled Rashid and with the strong lower order already in place you don't need Rashids extra batting ability.

Mine to... but I'd also include Rashid (either at 6 or or at 7).

If our "tail" were to be of batting muppets... a 21st century equivalent of Mullaly, Malcolm, Tuffers and Giddens... then that might be an issue... but Broad is a long term no 7 bat (albeit currently a potential Test no 8)... that Swann is a no 8 who could easily be a Test no 7... and that Tremlett would be more than capable of slotting in at 8 in the Test side (perhaps ahead of Hoggard, Harmison and Panesar).

Rashid brings a lot to the party... and with a batting average in the mid 40s as well as a stack of wickets to his name... he deserves to be penned in early.

I do not think Tremlett would be a good number 8! He looked out of his depth against Kumble at times, though he may have the talent to make a satisfactory number nine.

__________________
third-umpire.com

Based on Stats I dont think that Tremlett deserves selection!

Ali deserves a place as does Lungley (based purely on stats, personally i dont think either have what it takes to progress to the next level).

Swann should get the spinners slot. Broad should get a place (but his stats arent great either). As for medium pacers i still think that Mark Davies is one of the best around, though he did miss a bit of the season through injury.

__________________
Mark.

Well I won't mention Rashid again - exept to say we can't play him in the same team as Swann, I know some will make an argument otherwise - but an A Team would be expected to play on all surfaces, so 2 spinners IMO is just not on.

I can only nominate Tremlett and Swann, in all honesty I think the bowling options are the weakest we have had since we strarted selecting A Teams, so it's perm 2 with any other 2 or 3 as far as I am concerned.

__________________
Ern

Fair point: Tremlett couldn't really complain if omitted as he really didn't make his own case as strongly as he might have done in county cricket this season.

On the other hand... he's been putting in some encouraging performances that have earned major plaudits... and whilst it goes against the grain to let through a bowler so reliant on steepling bounce... none of the challengers present themselves as self-evidently better.

One of the perennial sticking points we seem to encounter with any A team selection is whether to include two front-line spinners. I recall this debate for a South Africa A team last year. For the purposes of this exercise I think we should select one front-line spinner and backup spin from a part-time bowler. The reason I want to limit our A Team to one front-line spinner is because few Test matches require two front-line spinners operating in tandem. I think it would be a mistake to drop our third seamer in favour of Rashid. I think Rashid should take a middle-order batting spot if he deserves to on merit. This year, I can't make a case for his batting to oust either Bopara, Sales or Carberry.

My thoughts... in no particular order...

1. At least one frontline spinner should be showcased if at all possible, both to the balance the attack and as Test squads need spinners.

2. If we play five bowlers, two should ideally be spinners (as a second spinner should offer more than a 4th seamer)

3. We should be offering challengers for every Test place... so two opening bats, two middle order bats, a wicketkeeper, two seamers and a spinner are a minimum... but the other 3 spots should be reserved for the three other players who offer most as potential England players.*

My inclination at this stage is to back the following:

1. Horton
2. Denly
3. Shah
4. Sales
5. Bopara
6. Rashid / Ambrose
7. Foster / Rashid
8. Swann
9. Broad
10. Tremlett
11. Ali

I'm not entirely convinced by several on that list... but the guys in bold strike me as essential.

*The side should obviously be balanced... but (for example) if Carberry cannot dislodge Shah or Sales... he's way down the pecking order; and if Shreck cannot dislodge Tremlett then he's even further down the pecking order.... but in the event of an injury to Panesar or Swann this winter... Rashid going to be in with a VERY good chance of a call up.

I think Davies needs to play a full season without injury. No Onions on that list? I like the combination of Shreck, Broad and Ali.