It's not esc - but it has hardly prepared Rashid for the real world of facing the media - Yorkshire have IMO overprotected him, if he needs protection, then my opinion is he's not the finished article - and his county does not want him distracted.

So he will IMO be ready for a step up, when his county give him his head.

But that appart it's not a good idea to have two spinners because one may be able to bat at the higher level - I think it can't really be argued that Rashid could make the team before Swann, after how Swann has shown how he can perform at a higher level.
Next year may well be Rashid's year, but if it's achoice between him and Bopara - they it IMO can't be a contest, like Swan Bopara has proven he can play at the highest level.

__________________
Ern

Who said it should be a choice between the two? The one could bat at 4 or 5 and would unlikely to turn his arm over even if selected... whilst the other is already both a better batsman AND a better bowler than Flintoff was at the same stage in his career.

Edit: In 1998 Flintoff played a full season (15 games). His 22 innings produced just 591 runs at 26.86 (where Rashid, this year, managed 790 runs at 46.47). He also managed a whole 624 balls (as compared to Rashid's 2474 this year). He took 6 wickets at 52.83 where Rashid managed 40 wickets at 39.45.

That was the year of his Test debut: 2 home Tests.

Move on to 2001 (the season Flintoff started with 9 Test caps to his name) and Flintoff is still not doing as well as Rashid has just done: his 14 matches saw him bag 686 runs at 31.18 with the bat and whilst he managed 1473 balls (60% of Rashid's workload) he bagged about half as many wickets at a near-identical average (19 at 38.73).

After that season, Flintoff was considered good enough to tour (and play) in India and then in New Zealand.. and he retained his place for the subsequent home series against Sri Lanka: on the basis of a less convincing year than the one Rashid just had he established himself as a Test regular.

Now... Rashid bats at least as well.. and where Flintoff just added more of the same to England's seam-heavy bowling, Rashid offers a bowling style that England have sought for years and has just a couple of other slow bowlers for competition.

Rashid is at the very least ready for an 'A' side: in a perfect world he might get the chance to get more experience before getting a run in the Test side... but it's not a perfect world and England lack alternatives: if he bowled seam-up to the standard Flintoff did in 2001 he might well get another few years to develop... as England don't really need a 5th bowler now so long as Panesar remains fit (as there's no chance of HIM getting hit out of the attack).

That Rachael is pure conjecture on your part - it has to be at the stage of his career that Rashid is at.

Also if you are going down that road, and lets assume your assumption above is right - the same could be said of most of the county players in the early part of their career.

But even so, NONE had the potential that Flintoff had, only for injury he would have been up with the Bothams, the Imran Khan's and the Kapil Dev's.

I can see Yorkshires point to a degree - look what happened to Schofield ( just as bright a prospect as Rashid ), bringing him on to early wrecked his career.

Back to the thread - we have a spin bowler in Swann, I doubt anyone would put Rashid ahead of Swann, so rather than selecting two spinners in the hope that one will bat at the higher level, better we pick a batsman who if need be can turn his arm over.

If we pick him next year - it will IMO be a more sensible selection, the rise of Swann has saved us from having to select Rashid, because there was nobody else.

__________________
Ern

Don't we have one already in Bopara?

Most Test side have batsmen who could, in theory, be turned to for the occasional over... but if England's selectors started talking about Bell as England's 5th bowler (in the role that Flintoff has bagged this past few years) the response is likely to be ridicule (especially if they try it on the sub-continent with just two frontline seamers supporting the frontline spinners).

Now check out Bopara's bowling in domestic cricket (top) and compare it with Bell's (bottom):Note that Bell is the one with the respectable average, economy rate and strike rate... and that Bopara's expensive wickets, profligacy and dire strike rate are just plain dreadful: they achieve the rare feat of making Marcus Trescothick's bowling figures look pretty decent!

Players like Bell and Bopara (and Denly for that matter) are not batting all-rounders who can serve as a side's 5th bowler: they are middle order batsmen, period. Their bowling should not enter the equasion in discussing their selection.

Sadly, credible batting all-rounders are few and far between: if we are to have 5 bowling options in this side without Rashid I suggest we start looking very carefully at the merits of Ambrose at 6, Bresnan at 7, Swann and 8, Broad at 9 and Tremlett at 10.

I'm not keen on that idea but would be open to suggestions so long (and this is critical) as we start looking at a second specialist spinner, as there'd not be much point in picking another seam-up bowler in a side that already included Broad, Tremlett/Ali and Bresnan.

Yep - but he gets in on batting, the fact that he can turn his arm over is a bonus - not unlike Collingwood does for the senior side.

Are ther any real batting all rounders Rachael?, but even so it does not make sence to use a bowling all rounder instead, or we end up with another Freddie who can bat at times, or G O Jones the keeper all rounder who managed the same.

Swann, Broad and Tremlett look a good tail to me, not that keen on Broad the bowler (yet), but he can at least hold a bad and could inprove as a bowler - also the trio have experience at England level, which is a huge plus IMO.

__________________
Ern

There's one crucial difference... Note the "econ" figure: neither offer the "something different" that one gets from a player like Mahmood (pace) or Rashid (turn).. but Collingwood can do a job as a 5th bowler by giving the captain some control one end....

I'd like to see some clear evidence that Bopara merits comparison with Collingwood: right now he seems more comparable to Bell... whose bowling has never entered any selection discussion I've followed!

Collingwood is not the most consistant of bowlers, so it IMO makes little difference if Bopara is more comparable to Bell or Collingwood.

This is the beauty of selecting an A Team - we choose a players and look in 12 months time to see if that selection was vindicated or not.

Econ rate does not always matter - in particular with a part time bowler, a side can be bogged down - and what better than a captain being able to call on a players who might get a wicket, even if that means he might go for a few.

In time he should be more accurate in any case, and lets not forget Bopara is a batsman first, and a fifth bowler at best - like Collingwood.

__________________
Ern

Not the most consistent? He has a career economy rate that's better than Gough's or Harmison's, and last season his first class figure was significantly better than career first class figure... suggesting he's getting a better. Doesn't make him the next Kallis... but it's a step in the right directions.

The primary problem with regarding Collingwood as a bowler is the lack of experience... and that's down to the strength in depth of the seam bowling in his two sides: Durham have the best seam attack in County Cricket and England, in years of playing Flintoff at 6, have also, as a rule, had an excess of seam-bowling options.

In Flintoff's absense (or in the event of Flintoff playing as one of four specialist bowlers), Paul Collingwood could just about count as a batting all-rounder: like Giles, he's only going to offer penetration in helpful conditions... but (like Giles) he has the control to "do a job" (bottle up one end) in other conditions - you could just about argue for his bowling to get him into the side ahead of a slightly better batsman.

Of course.. if he could bowl leg-spin to anything like the same level he'd be a LOT more interesting...