What Tim Bresnan brings to the England team...

At the start of this Test here's what the England XI contribute, per Test, in terms of runs and wickets:

Cook, 80.7 runs, -
Root, 74.0 runs, 0.3 wickets
Trott, 77.7 runs, 0.1 wickets
Pietersen, 79.4 runs, 0.1 wickets
Bell, 69.3 runs, 0.0 wickets
Bairstow, 45.6 runs, -
Prior, 53.6 runs, -
Bresnan, 24.2 runs, 3.2 wickets
Broad, 30.5 runs, 3.4 wickets
Swann, 22.9 runs, 4.4 wickets
Anderson, 9.0 runs, 3.8 wickets

Leaving aside Bairstow for a second, lets focus on Bresnan. I suggest from the above his much vaunted batting doesn't offer much - only 15 runs per Test more than a tailender like Anderson. And in a 4 man bowling attack where we need to take 20 wickets I'm not sure he offers enough with the ball. All our other squad bowlers offer many more wickets:

Tremlett, 8.9 runs, 4.5 wickets
Finn, 7.3 runs, 3.9 wickets
Onions, 3.3 runs, 3.6 wickets
Panesar, 4.5 runs, 3.4 wickets

Nice stats. I dread to think of what some of our batsmen's stats look like.

In addition, here's a comparison between Bresnan and other legendary England bowling all-rounders of recent years:

Tim Bresnan, 24.2 runs, 3.2 wickets
Phil DeFreitas, 21.2 runs, 3.2 wickets
Chris Lewis, 34.5 runs, 2.9 wickets
Dominic Cork, 23.4 runs, 3.5 wickets
Ashley Giles, 26.3 runs, 2.6 wickets
Robert Croft, 20.0 runs, 2.3 wickets

Cork stands out as a front line bowler, but is Bresnan our new Lewis or DeFreitas (and do we need a new Lewis or DeFreitas?)

Gary 111 wrote:In addition, here's a comparison between Bresnan and other legendary England bowling all-rounders of recent years:

Tim Bresnan, 24.2 runs, 3.2 wickets
Phil DeFreitas, 21.2 runs, 3.2 wickets
Chris Lewis, 34.5 runs, 2.9 wickets
Dominic Cork, 23.4 runs, 3.5 wickets
Ashley Giles, 26.3 runs, 2.6 wickets
Robert Croft, 20.0 runs, 2.3 wickets

Cork stands out as a front line bowler, but is Bresnan our new Lewis or DeFreitas (and do we need a new Lewis or DeFreitas?)

You are viewing Freddie as a batting allrounder?

I think he's trying to highlight the fact that Bresnan is either no better, or not much better than past English bowling all rounders who were widely considered completely shit.

He's got the nicest bum.

taipan wrote:

Gary 111 wrote:In addition, here's a comparison between Bresnan and other legendary England bowling all-rounders of recent years:

Tim Bresnan, 24.2 runs, 3.2 wickets
Phil DeFreitas, 21.2 runs, 3.2 wickets
Chris Lewis, 34.5 runs, 2.9 wickets
Dominic Cork, 23.4 runs, 3.5 wickets
Ashley Giles, 26.3 runs, 2.6 wickets
Robert Croft, 20.0 runs, 2.3 wickets

Cork stands out as a front line bowler, but is Bresnan our new Lewis or DeFreitas (and do we need a new Lewis or DeFreitas?)

You are viewing Freddie as a batting allrounder?

I'm not sure Flintoff was quite as legendary as the names quoted above.

As he batted at 6 and was always part of a 5 man attack its not a like for like with BressyLad, but here they are:

Flintoff, 48.7 runs, 2.9 wickets
Bresnan, 24.2 runs, 3.2 wickets

eowyn wrote:He's got the nicest bum.

But Lewis had the shiniest head, Croft the saggiest chin and Gilo the most trendy highlights.

Maybe we can amalgamate them, Frankenstein style, into some lower order behemoth? Bresnan's bum trundling in to the crease with Cork's funny chicken run steps.

From what I've seen of Stokes this season, he's a more penetrative bowler, and much more talented batsman than Bresnan.

But I guess he isn't a "good lad".

Gary 111 wrote:

eowyn wrote:He's got the nicest bum.

But Lewis had the shiniest head, Croft the saggiest chin and Gilo the most trendy highlights.

Maybe we can amalgamate them, Frankenstein style, into some lower order behemoth? Bresnan's bum trundling in to the crease with Cork's funny chicken run steps.

Might work, you'd have to add a Dirtbag tattoo sleeve to finish it off to perfection, though.

and frosted nostrils

What Tim Bresnan brings to the England team... ?

Very rarely gets important runs.

Cannot be trusted for penetrative bowling within a four-man attack. Easily the worst bowler on show thus far.

Answering the title:

Not enough at the mo.

But that is true of at least half of the side.

lardbucket wrote:Nice stats. I dread to think of what some of our batsmen's stats look like.

Not including this game:

Rogers, 51.0 runs, -
Warner, 65.5 runs, 0.2 wickets
Khawaja, 44.5 runs, -
Clarke, 79.9 runs, 0.3 wickets
Smith, 60.1 runs, 0.8 wickets
Watson, 62.0 runs, 1.4 wickets
Haddin, 52.5 runs, -
Siddle, 18.7 runs, 3.8 wickets
Harris, 17.0 runs, 4.1 wickets
Lyon, 10.1 runs, 3.3 wickets
Bird, 3 runs, 5.5 wickets

Other squad players:
Cowan, 55.6 runs, -
Hughes, 59.0 runs, -
Wade, 51.9 runs, -
Agar, 65 runs, 1.0 wickets
Starc, 36.8 runs, 3.5 wickets
Pattinson, 27.6 runs, 3.9 wickets

It's hard attach Cork legs to Brezzie's bum...

eowyn wrote:It's hard attach Cork legs to Brezzie's bum...

Whoazers. I don't know what I'm looking at.

It's the future of English/Welsh cricket.

PeterCS wrote:Answering the title:

Not enough at the mo.

But that is true of at least half of the side.

Most of the others have the talent to do a lot better though. Fatboy Tim seems to stick around due to his early career "good luck charm" status and the fact the batting line-up looks pretty solid on paper when Swann is down to come in at 10.

Whoa Ange - you've completely blown my mind

Thanks, I aim to please.

But can't you go and relax the young Yorkies in the Ashes a bit?

This post might look quite foolish by this time tomorrow if, Brezzie has belted a run-a-ball 50 and taken 5-30, but I think his place for the winter tour is in jeopardy as he's certainly not the bowler he was on the last tour to Oz.

Well, Anderson and Broad are certainties, Tremlett and Finn will be seen as suited to Australia's bouncier pitches. How many seamers do they usually take, 5 or 6? Can't see Onions being on the plane and the younger candidates are some way off.

beamer wrote:Well, Anderson and Broad are certainties, Tremlett and Finn will be seen as suited to Australia's bouncier pitches. How many seamers do they usually take, 5 or 6? Can't see Onions being on the plane and the younger candidates are some way off.

I'm sure it was six last time round, including Shazhad who I think we can agree will just miss out this time round! I think one of the younger bowlers will go and I think it will be either Overton or Jordan. Mills might be quick, but he doesn't appear to do anything with the ball and I think his stamina is suspect if England's warm-up game is anything to go by.

Basil wrote:

beamer wrote:Well, Anderson and Broad are certainties, Tremlett and Finn will be seen as suited to Australia's bouncier pitches. How many seamers do they usually take, 5 or 6? Can't see Onions being on the plane and the younger candidates are some way off.

I'm sure it was six last time round, including Shazhad who I think we can agree will just miss out this time round! I think one of the younger bowlers will go and I think it will be either Overton or Jordan. Mills might be quick, but he doesn't appear to do anything with the ball and I think his stamina is suspect if England's warm-up game is anything to go by.

I've got a vague idea Shahzad was a late call up to make up the numbers for a tour game and they just kept him on.

Bresnan will tour. He's the new Giles. England never leave home without him.