England v Bangladesh, 1st ODI, Trent Bridge, July 8, 2010

So you're using his stats from five years ago for this argument?

He played some vital innings in the winter. England would have lost the series against South Africa without his contributions under pressure.

Henry wrote:So you're using his stats from five years ago for this argument?

He played some vital innings in the winter. England would have lost the series against South Africa without his contributions under pressure.

Yep ... stats start at day one.

I note you found the ONE (SA) occasion where he finally did step up to the plate and score runs when needed and without the top order assisting. Any other momentous occasions like that ? I think you might have a job finding it.....

Far too many excuses have been used to Bell's benefit ... the latest being "Give him a break, he's scoring runs now" .. but, FFS, these are the Bangles - his most generous provider (check his averages) ever!

He reminds me of a pretty-boy Ramprakash ... "talented" and very elegant with the bat - but lacking balls when up against the best. That particular trait (cowardice) is in the genes, it cannot be ground out nor psyched out of the being.
I don't see Bell ever changing - because when the pressure's on, he invariably breaks down.
Sadly, whilst he continues to "please" the selectors (one in particular), he keeps other much more adaptable and talented batsmen - who DO have street fighting instincts - out of the England squad.
And THAT is f**king criminal.
Bell's had his numerous chances, it's now time for him to f**k off and leave others to do the job.

He reminds me of a pretty-boy Ramprakash ... "talented" and very elegant with the bat - but lacking balls when up against the best.

Even though Ramps averaged 40 against Aus compared to 27 overall?

On the back of that wonderful dead-rubber 133 when he really stood up on a dead flat track when the series was all over?

snigger

tac wrote:On the back of that wonderful dead-rubber 133 when he really stood up on a dead flat track when the series was all over?

snigger

Made quite a few 60s and 70s not out when England's middle and lower order collapsed around him in 1998-99.

Still , he was a bigger underachiever than Hick, imo. At least Hick was one of England's best ever ODI batsmen.

Wasn't Bell's last important Test series against the greatest bowlers the game has ever produced?


I think Merlin's five year dealy works okay.

Larwood, Voce, Lindwall, Trueman, Statham and Marshall (amongst several others) are all dead Smerky !

What's a five year dealy ??

Even though Ramps averaged 40 against Aus compared to 27 overall?

All the more reason to dump Bell ... at least Rampers faced some seriously hostile bowling in his time ... unlike Belf whose gorged on pies bowled on dead wickets whilst raping the minnows like the Bangles ...

Nice try Trev ...

Bell facing Lillee, can you imagine the carnage.

Bell would batter him.

Ian f*cking Bell, always there when you least need him.

Dello wrote:Is that back to back 70s for Jimmy?

Can't say I've been following the one-dayers too intently, but every time I tune in, he seems to have been hammered all around the pack in the Saj Mahmood stylee.

What a laugh that the LOP (leader of the pack) has been spending the past few months getting his blouse in a twist over Sidebottom's selection ahead of him in the limited overs stuff.

There you go - he's conceded more than 60 runs in four of his last five ODIs.

But Strauss is backing him, of course http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/8802850.stm as it's seemingly impossible for anyone within the England set-up to acknowledge what a pile of dog sh!t Anderson is in all formats (unless it's cloudy).

Looking forward to watching him push his overseas average of 44 up and over the 50 mark in this winter's Ashes - and no doubt all the accompanying talk of him being a world class bowler and the "leader" of the attack. Qunt.

Henry wrote:In test cricket, Bell has done well against all teams in all circumstances. Time to give him a break for a bit.

Certainly a very fine player

Amazingly he has already played 57 tests

Dello wrote:

Dello wrote:Is that back to back 70s for Jimmy?

Can't say I've been following the one-dayers too intently, but every time I tune in, he seems to have been hammered all around the pack in the Saj Mahmood stylee.

What a laugh that the LOP (leader of the pack) has been spending the past few months getting his blouse in a twist over Sidebottom's selection ahead of him in the limited overs stuff.

There you go - he's conceded more than 60 runs in four of his last five ODIs.

But Strauss is backing him, of course http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/8802850.stm as it's seemingly impossible for anyone within the England set-up to acknowledge what a pile of dog sh!t Anderson is in all formats (unless it's cloudy).

Looking forward to watching him push his overseas average of 44 up and over the 50 mark in this winter's Ashes - and no doubt all the accompanying talk of him being a world class bowler and the "leader" of the attack. Qunt.

Yeah, the absolute belief from England that he is the 'main man' is sickening. What's that assessment based on? The fact that he's been around the longest? Or because his hair looks nice? In all honesty he's no better than, say, Kabir Ali, or Glenn Chapple. It should be so simple with Anderson- Pick him if it's going to be overcast, don't even think about him if it's not. Classic horses for courses bowler. But of course England are going to kid themselves and say that he's "improved enormously" in recent times, and pick him on a hot sunny day in Brisbane in November. Only the England management will be surprised when he returns figures of 1/130.

Urgh.