Straussy "refreshed and reinvigorated"!

Yes, this is news.Link.

What a legend. Here's to another 6 years atop the English batting order! Straussy, Straussy, Straussy!

What will the line up for NZ be then?

Strauss
Cook
Vaughan
KP
Colly
Bell
Ambrose
Sidebottom
Hoggard
Harmison
Panesar

I think Sidebottom's proven that he is just about a good enough bat for number 8. Overall I think that line up looks stronger. I'd have Bell at 5 and Shah instead of Colly personally, but hey, whaddayagonnado?

It's our bowling that's the worry. With Hoggy going from the reliable, never breaks down, anti-Shoaib, legend, to shambling wreck in the Jones/Bond mould, and Harmy being on and off, we could end up with just two bowlers that can be trusted. That'd be a lot of overs for Sidebottom and Monty.

I don't see what Tremlett did wrong to be honest. 3 Tests vs a good India side. 13 wickets at 29.69. And as far as I know, he hasn't gotten himself injured since by shaving or whatever.

Our bowlings been fooked since the 4th test in 2005. Our batting was very consistent for a time but this has wavered as the bowlers haven't dismissed the opposition for the sort of scores we were used to.

Straussy "refreshed and reinvigorated" and out for between 30 and 40 having looked in good shape getting himself in.

He's a new man...

This ^ is a hater. Haters must be stoned.

I'm a lover not a hater. I'm glad Strauss is back.

I'd be gladder still if he could score some flipping runs...

Such is the obsession with the round figure of "100" in cricket, that I'm willing to bet that if Strauss had scored 4 more runs against India at Lord's, he'd have kept his place. It's ridiculous.

Hurrah for the return of the NLPL!

I'm not having Cook and Vaughan separated. Strauss will have to get more runs than Shah in the warm up games and if he does then it's down the bottom of the batting line up, number 6, for him. He will have to work his way up again. Every 100 he gets moves him up one place and the highest he can go will be number 3.

Agreed. Strauss and Cook don't work as an opening combination. Owais Shah deserves first crack at number 6 anyway. So imo Strauss has to carry the drinks for the first 2 tests at least.

This is crazy. The man has ten test hundreds in thirty-odd tests. His record is miles better than Shah's.

#3 for the NLPL!

But Shah is the one who was 'wronged'. I suppose there is a 'guilt factor' in all this.

they want to come out of his spell.

Rob I wrote:This is crazy. The man has ten test hundreds in thirty-odd tests. His record is miles better than Shah's.

#3 for the NLPL!

Well he's lucky that he's been given plenty of chances unlike Shah. Could explain his superior record. I'm not saying that Strauss isn't a good player, i'm just saying that Shah deserves first crack. If Strauss leap frogs him like Bopara did in Sri Lanka, then what is the point of them picking Owais Shah? What does he have to do to get a game? Does the whole top 6 have to come down with the plague before they consider giving him another chance? Does he mix an amazing gatorade?

Maybe Strauss IS a better test batsman than Owais Shah, but maybe not...........I don't really know.

Henry wrote:I don't really know.

Trev finally gets it ....

England certainly look stronger on paper with Straussy in the team. His poor run of form was really exacerbated by being sawn off a few times in Aus* and I rate really rate him.


*That said, he was either padding up or playing poor shots on all three occasions . . .

Why would you want to remove Vaughan from the opener position, which he seems to enjoy playing in?

We don't.