Sri Lanka v England, 1st Test, Kandy, 1st-5th Dec

the leggie that played a few JAMODIs in Oz the other year ...Bundara?

Henry wrote:An 8, 9, 10 and 11 of Sidebottom, Hoggard, Anderson, and Panesar?! When capable batsmen such as Broad and Swann are both in the squad?! Surely not. Murali will eat them alive. May as well declare at six down.

Also, I still cant believe that in Sri Lanka we will go into the first Test with just one specialist spinning option, but FIVE fast/medium pace options. This is in a Test match where Murali is looking to break the world wickets record, and Sri Lanka have just come off a heavy defeat against Australia. I very much doubt that they're going to be so hospitable as to prepare a green pitch for England.

Vaas: 163 wickets at 25 on his home turf - so much for the pitches not helping seamers then!

it's strange with Vaas though, he seems to struggle in places like england which should help him but his record on less helpful tracks is superb.

Play Swann and Panesar, and when you're picking only 4 bowlers, batting ability should have sfa to do with their selection.

Not sure if you've all just made assumptions, but Kandy's supposed to be a decent place for pace nowadays - there've been telling contributions in the last 10 Tests there apparently.

We simply can't go in with just two proper pace man with Bops/Colly 1st change. It isn't feasible in the supposed Kandy conditions.

Batfink Begins wrote:

We simply can't go in with just two proper pace man with Bops/Colly 1st change. It isn't feasible in the supposed Kandy conditions.

Probably true.

Seeing as the only time we usually turn to Colly is when we're in the shit then to see him on 1st change would be a bit deflating.

Still can't get away from the fact that our tail has that 'run through by Murali' look about it.

Even a battling score of say 270-4 on the 1st day could easily be 330 all out.

We'll only know after the event but if SL are going to cream it to all parts getting 600 while we struggle to pick up wickets, then those who say we should be batting deeper will be vindicated.

Suppose it all comes back to the virtue - pick your best bowlers.

To which my reply is 'only if those bowlers are so much better than whats available'

Is Anderson that good he demands inclusion? He's still very Sh!t or miss....

JKLever wrote:

Probably true.

Seeing as the only time we usually turn to Colly is when we're in the shit then to see him on 1st change would be a bit deflating.

Still can't get away from the fact that our tail has that 'run through by Murali' look about it.

Even a battling score of say 270-4 on the 1st day could easily be 330 all out.

We'll only know after the event but if SL are going to cream it to all parts getting 600 while we struggle to pick up wickets, then those who say we should be batting deeper will be vindicated.

Suppose it all comes back to the virtue - pick your best bowlers.

To which my reply is 'only if those bowlers are so much better than whats available'

Is Anderson that good he demands inclusion? He's still very Sh!t or miss....

Aye JKL, though what you'd say is that with 11 proper batsmen we could be 270-4 to 330ao. That will depend on the conditions IMO, it's much vaunted about Murali v England but what people forget to mention is that he needs his conditions. In anything other, he hasn't fared that well against us. Not likely to not be his conditions though eh? Even in England(1998 Oval, 2006 Trent Bridge - bang on for him).

So what we've got to do, as you say, is pick our best bowlers. Whether that's Anderson is beyond me, though I'd say that Augustus was being harsh on him IMO. He got murdered twice in the six innings against India, once when one was crocked and Monty couldn't particularly be trusted for a cheap spell in massively favourable batting conditions.

He'd have to be the man in possession and IMO it's not written in the stars that Broad would play Murali any better than SiBo et al.

Christopher Martin-Jenkins would go for Bopara but he thinks that Vaughan and the selectors will plump for "the conservative" option and pick Shah:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/cricket/article2963246.ece


I, personally, would go for Shah.

Might be getting him mixed up but shah is meant to be one of England's best players of spin isn't he?

Probably. Vaughan and Pietersen are good against spin too.

Let's hope Bell picks Murali's Flipper. Otherwise Ashes 2005 memories will come crashing back!

Monty has to play, he's there to stop the likes of Sangakkara and Jayawardene from smashing double Centuries, Swann may not keep his line and length as tight as the Monster does.

Cook, Peitersen and Collingwood I expect will do the best for England in the batting Stakes. Bopara will be a surprise Package with both a couple of wickets here and there and a couple of maiden half centuries. (On the Overall Tour)

Hoggard and SiBo will be key for England along with Panesar.

Murali's got a flipper? Blimey, he's really outdone himself. Shah is one of England's best players of spin. Sales being well up there as well. (gratuitous Jamble comment #921)

With Hoggy, SiBo and Punessr's unerring line-and-length, I would've liked the 'crackerjack' selection of GBH though the state he's in I don't think it's feasible

Bopara won't score a run on debut, too soon for him.

Bell, on the other hand will kick on this tour and dominate to such an extent that Murali will invite him round his place to play Boggle and down a few beers.

JKLever wrote:Bopara won't score a run on debut, too soon for him.

Bell, on the other hand will kick on this tour and dominate to such an extent that Murali will invite him round his place to play Boggle and down a few beers.

More likely that Bobo will precipitate the first 'Clown Stopped Play' instance in First Class cricket.

Wasnt Swann picked for the squad because he is now considered to be the second best spin bowler in England? His batting and good fielding is a bonus, not the reason he was picked.

Henry wrote:Wasnt Swann picked for the squad because he is now considered to be the second best spin bowler in England? His batting and good fielding is a bonus, not the reason he was picked.

Not sure. I mean, it's much of a muchness after Punessr IMO. If you're talking ODs, he's the best bar none. As a pure spinner Keedy's probably second, though too similar to Monty in many ways. Think his all-round game, good daring flight and arm-ball are the reason he's been chosen. Well, it's not. He was picked on the back of his ODI performances, but you know what I mean.

Swann bowled in a 'Test' style manner in the ODI's- Flight, drift, spin...... It's not like he fired in darts to keep the runs down. Cant see why he cant do the same in the Tests and be successful.

I guess another option would be to bat Prior at 6, Swann at 7, and Broad at 8. The team being-

Cook
Vaughan
Shah
Pietersen
Collingwood
Prior
Swann
Broad
Hoggard
Sidebottom
Panesar

Covers all options. Batting might be a bit weak, but Broad is still at 8.

Yeah, looks a good team Triv. Wouldn't mind that team turning up. Alas, Bell will play and I can't see us picking 5 specialist bowlers.

If we going to have any chance in this series, I think we're going to have to play some boring, old-fashioned, attrtional cricket.

Basil wrote:If we going to have any chance in this series, I think we're going to have to play some boring, old-fashioned, attrtional cricket.

Don't see why. We'll have to nullify Murali with sedate batting, but I don't see why the pacers have to be treated with much respect unless they're in the middle of a good spell. As for the bowlers, I suppose line and length is a bit attritional but I don't see why Hog,Sibo and Mont can't make regular incisions.

Predictions time people.

Let's have:

a) Your top run scorer for the series (overall top scorer and England's top scorer)

b) Your top wicket taker (overall and England)

c) How many chances Prior will drop

Batfink Begins wrote:

Basil wrote:If we going to have any chance in this series, I think we're going to have to play some boring, old-fashioned, attrtional cricket.

Don't see why. We'll have to nullify Murali with sedate batting, but I don't see why the pacers have to be treated with much respect unless they're in the middle of a good spell. As for the bowlers, I suppose line and length is a bit attritional but I don't see why Hog,Sibo and Mont can't make regular incisions.

Once the ball stops swinging (conventionally that is) we will have to be patient and make sure their batsmen don't take the game completely away from us.

Lara Lara Laughs wrote:Predictions time people.

Let's have:

a) Your top run scorer for the series (overall top scorer and England's top scorer)

b) Your top wicket taker (overall and England)

c) How many chances Prior will drop

a) Ian Bell.

b) Ian Bell.

c) Ian Bell.

Batfink Begins wrote:

Lara Lara Laughs wrote:Predictions time people.

Let's have:

a) Your top run scorer for the series (overall top scorer and England's top scorer)

b) Your top wicket taker (overall and England)

c) How many chances Prior will drop

a) Ian Bell.

b) Ian Bell.

c) Ian Bell.

If Ian Bell is our leading wicket taker - we shall have been royally farked in all three tests!

Basil wrote:Once the ball stops swinging (conventionally that is) we will have to be patient and make sure their batsmen don't take the game completely away from us.

Not sure. Ball didn't swing much in India but Hoggard could be banked on for a wicket in a spell. His mastery of cutters and a surprise bouncer makes him a threat. Just hope he's in good form. SiBo has been so unlucky about 4 times in his Test career to finish up an innings with less than two wickets, I'm certain that if he's not unlucky he'll be near (hopefully)Hoggard for quality.