England ratings.

There's a difference between Cook and Bell. Cook has Steve Waugh type mentals. His problems seem to be technical and mainly outside off stump. Bell is sort of the opposite.

Sending Cook back to CC for a season can only help him (he's only 23!). I don't see how sending Bell back to an easier form of cricket can help him get that mental toughness at the top level.

Brass Monkey wrote:

holcs wrote:
Bingo!!!

That be the crux of it though Chas, we've never been complaining that 'oh, he looks shit with a bat in his hand' etc. etc. it's the lack of telling innings. The pro-Bells would point to a 60 in Aus or his tons against Pak, but they weren't battled match-winners - they were 'by-the-by'.

I actually think my dislike for him in the current batting line up is just that. He looks as if he could be very good, and its the lacklustre almost wimpish performances when we need a performance, follwed by a classy 100 when were in no trouble that really irks me.

As for Cook, he has the mental attributes to work out his technical difficulties and come back a better more complete player.

I believe that Bell, needs a kick up the arse to perhaps kick start him into proving he can do it at the top. At the moment he is all cosy in the England setup without as Danny has said doing anything of note. Sending him back will make him sort himself out IMO, and he'll have to score bagloads to do it.

Makaveli wrote:
Aye agree with you about the sh!te attack that series but in the last test when Asif was back he still batted well. And yes his series in Pak was his best, and it came in a time where imo Shoaib was at his best.

Cook is still young you need to give him time, i'm certain he will come conistantly good, infact imo he's in the pool of current young players who will go on and dominate the game for years to come.

Bell - I agree about the Shoaib thing, but I don't reckon the two single figure scores when Asif was playing is called good batting.

As for Cook - yeah, I don't know what I see in him that's too wrong.

Bell and Cook should be undropable. You simply don't drop a under 25 year old player who averages 40+. Someone has to get the bullet and this is quite likely if Flintoff comes back as part of a 5 man attack.

It has to be a senior player with fewer miles left in the tank. Strauss's career saving score may mean he displaces a 2nd England captain from the team - it was him who replaced Nasser remember.

THICKEDGE wrote:Bell and Cook should be undropable. You simply don't drop a under 25 year old player who averages 40+. Someone has to get the bullet and this is quite likely if Flintoff comes back as part of a 5 man attack.

It has to be a senior player with fewer miles left in the tank. Strauss's career saving score may mean he displaces a 2nd England captain from the team - it was him who replaced Nasser remember.

Aye, under 25. 40. Brilliant.

I love those young under-25s. Phwoar, it's starting me off... what shall I think about? Oooh, a 40 average.... phhhhhhhh I'm getting close.... OOOHHHH!!!! A 50 average against the teams below him... a 30 average versus the good teams.... ARRRGGHHHH think I just blew my load.

Yeah quite funny - well almost...

If you don't get long successful careers out of players your team doesn't get better.

Brass Monkey wrote:

THICKEDGE wrote:Bell and Cook should be undropable. You simply don't drop a under 25 year old player who averages 40+. Someone has to get the bullet and this is quite likely if Flintoff comes back as part of a 5 man attack.

It has to be a senior player with fewer miles left in the tank. Strauss's career saving score may mean he displaces a 2nd England captain from the team - it was him who replaced Nasser remember.

Aye, under 25. 40. Brilliant.

I love those young under-25s. Phwoar, it's starting me off... what shall I think about? Oooh, a 40 average.... phhhhhhhh I'm getting close.... OOOHHHH!!!! A 50 average against the teams below him... a 30 average versus the good teams.... ARRRGGHHHH think I just blew my load.

is an understatement when it comes to college boys with cricket bats or balls in their hands for Thicky!

Thicky, a long career of 50+ tests can be obtained by an England cricketer who starts his career at the age of 28 these days. Therefor your comment about long careers really are defunkt.

As for your team getting any better, I've always thought picking the best players available at the time did that.

THICKEDGE wrote:Yeah quite funny - well almost...

If you don't get long successful careers out of players your team doesn't get better.

Really? Australia were pretty alright with Darren '27 Tests' Lehmann in. SA were pretty alright with Fanie '18 Tests' De Villiers is. They were the best candidates and contributed in the Tests they played in. You're being a little bit of a clown but with a freakish twist... are you a Rakshasa?