So, Phil Mustard

Replacing Prior in the ODI squad for Sri Lanka - good choice?

Basil wrote:Replacing Prior in the ODI squad for Sri Lanka - good choice?

From what I have seen of him he is a good keeper and good at exploiting the powerplays. At least the English selectors are showing they take notice of county performances.

There's a witless quote on the BBC website where Collingwood mentions Mustard in the same sentence as Gilchrist. If he's that effing good why wasn't he effing picked in the first effing place? Eff Me!

What was the sentence?

"I wouldn't have minded being fined £1000 quid if the strippers were all stunners covered in whipped cream. But it really p!sses me off when they look about as seductive as Gilchrist covered in mustard..."

Is his nickname "Colonel"?

Nath wrote:Is his nickname "Colonel"?

No apparently it's "hotsausageand".

Davies would be the exciting risky choice, Ambrose would be the logical choice, Read would be the regressive choice, Jones would be the insane choice. That makes Mustard the compromise choice.

THICKEDGE wrote:Davies would be the exciting risky choice, Ambrose would be the logical choice, Read would be the regressive choice, Jones would be the insane choice. That makes Mustard the compromise choice.

Why would Mustard who has dashed at the top of the order and averaged 50 in the process be 'compromise' yet Davies who has been crap most of the season until coming good in the last few games be 'exciting' ?

Don't see why Davies would be the exciting choice. I'd rate Mustard as the second most 'exciting' wickie/bat on the circuit, behind Adshead.

Batfink Begins wrote:Don't see why Davies would be the exciting choice. I'd rate Mustard as the second most 'exciting' wickie/bat on the circuit, behind Adshead.

:lol!:

Never seen Adshead score a run. He's dump!!

oh dear...

Exactly, none of this hanging around. A quick exciting 0. Get the game moving. That's my main philosophy.

So what? Doesn't mean he's not 'exciting' when he's at the crease. Wasn't pushing for his selection. He's about 10th in my 'pecking order'.

I suppose Gary's right, a quick 0 is better than a sluggish, boring, 4 off 13 balls.

No, you're all right... I mean, he averages more than Mustard, but yeah.. I see what you're saying

BTW, I'm 'past' Davies. Not doing enough. The 'Next Big Wicketkeeping Hope' is Gareth Cross IMO. Lancs should f**k Sutton off, Cross is too good a batsman and too good a keeper to leave out IMO. Still, I've only seen him about 4 times so maybe he isn't.

*shouts drowned out by surrounding brick walls*

"Chris Read.... Chris Read....!"

Mustard not a bad shout for the ODI stuff, would maybe have gone for Nixon if not. Its our fragile lower order that lets us down time and time again - just like yesterday. That's not to say Mustard couldn't play as a biffer up the top as well. Though i'm still one of the minority that thinks Luke Wright will still come good.

Gary 111 wrote:That's not to say Mustard couldn't play as a biffer up the top as well.

Surely that's where we MUST play the lad?

Either theres a lot of NSR going on in this thread or there's none!

Maybe a bit too early for Mustard, imo. His overall career stats are as poor as Luke Wright's. James Foster has been excellent in one day cricket for the last 3-4 seasons, and deserves a chance not just for his cheeky lower order batting, but for his 'keeping, which has been as good as Read's for a long time now. but you get the feeling that because Mustard made runs in a televised final at Lords, and Warne compared him with Gilchrist, Graveney and co have jumped on the bandwagon.

I would have sent him to the Academy first. See what kind of temprement the lad has etc.

I hope Phil Mustard does well and actually gains a whole Year in the England side without 300 different Wicketkeepers taking his place.

Henry wrote: but you get the feeling that because Mustard made runs in a televised final at Lords

Or perhaps its because he scored his runs at an average of 50 this year and is one of the best dashers going around. Luke Wright isn't even in this lads class IMO.

As for Foster, he can't buy a run this year

You're all farking weird

Henry wrote:James Foster has been excellent in one day cricket for the last 3-4 seasons

**cough** James Foster 2003-2007: 1142 @ 24.14.... **cough**

JKLever wrote:

Gary 111 wrote:That's not to say Mustard couldn't play as a biffer up the top as well.

Surely that's where we MUST play the lad?

Either theres a lot of NSR going on in this thread or there's none!

Yes, i'm just saying a lower order with Nixon in it looks a lot more secure. I don't think he'd have stuffed up against New Zealand in the same way Mascarenhas / Schofield did.

Mustard is more of an opener, but if he's one of the best in the country at it there's no reason he couldn't play in the team as well as Nixon. Other teams play two keepers if they're both imortant batters: Flower / Taibu, Sangakkara / Jayawardena and Boucher / DeVilliers spring to mind.

Batfink Begins wrote:

Henry wrote:James Foster has been excellent in one day cricket for the last 3-4 seasons

**cough** James Foster 2003-2007: 1142 @ 24.14.... **cough**

I could tell you all the name of a wicket keeper who has averaged 45.47 in List A cricket from 2003-2007...