The End is Nigh - GBH recalled to the test squad

Demelza wrote:Tremlett's been badly treated hasn't he?

Dreadfully.

He's as tall and almost as quick as Harmison.

And he doesn't have a long history of falling to pieces in important test matches.

I can kind of see they went for horses for courses ahead of Tremlett at Headingley, even if it was a baffling choice of horse.

But if they want a tall bowler who hits the deck in the team, Harmison being ahead of Tremlett, who has done nothing wrong, is a bit crap.

Winkle Spinner wrote:

Demelza wrote:Tremlett's been badly treated hasn't he?

Dreadfully.

He's as tall and almost as quick as Harmison.

And he doesn't have a long history of falling to pieces in important test matches.

I can kind of see they went for horses for courses ahead of Tremlett at Headingley, even if it was a baffling choice of horse.

But if they want a tall bowler who hits the deck in the team, Harmison being ahead of Tremlett, who has done nothing wrong, is a bit crap.

Well it's perfectly logical. Harmison has a better Test record and a much better record this season

Trembles actually has a lower test average than Harmison - from three tests admittedly, but it's the right side of 30. Not to mention that Harmison's record since his golden year has been woeful. And from what I've heard, he's still spraying it all over the place - he's just getting wickets because his god balls are too god for county batsmen. I'd be happy to be proved wrong and for a five-fer from Harmy on his triumphant return, but it's certainly not logical.

He has 20 wickets @ 35 this season. Hardly screaming out for selection.

JKLever wrote:

Augustus wrote:

Will a four-man attack consisting of Sidebottom, Freddie, Harmless-son and Panesar be an improvement? Yes, but only because of Sidebottom.

I just can't see us dropping Anderson can you?

I forgot about Jimmy for a moment there - of course he'll play. So will the other four though, I expect. The only thing I can think of is dropping Panesar and playing four seamers with Collingwood bowling some overs. I don't think England will go into a Test without a spinner in the foreseeable future though. Likely team seems to be:

Cook
Strauss
Vaughan
Pietersen
Bell
Flintoff
Ambrose
Sidebottom
Anderson
Harmison
Panesar

At least to me. I don't see why they'd pick Harmison if they aren't going to play him. Colly was in the 13 last time and missed out, so he'll probably miss out again. Flintoff won't be dropped, Sidebottom will play if fit. That leaves Jimmy and Monty - of whom Jimmy should be a definite inclusion on his form so far this year. Like I say, only Panesar is left.

Looking at it, the 13's illogical and very hard to construct a decent team out of. You either have too long a tail or not enough bowling quality. In one case, you have both, in my humble opinion. I suppose Broad could keep his place instead of either Sidebottom or Harmison, now I think about it. Or maybe Broad instead of Panesar? That's the choice that I look at as the best...

...and even that's an unpleasant thought.

Winkle Spinner wrote: And from what I've heard, he's still spraying it all over the place - he's just getting wickets because his good balls are too god for county batsmen.

Sage.

Winkle Spinner wrote:I'd be happy to be proved wrong and for a five-fer from Harmy on his triumphant return

You and me both squire, but I still think his selection is wrong. If I had a ticket for the third test I'd be giving it away.

The team will be.

Strauss
Cook
Vaughan
Pietersen
Bell
Ambrose
Flintoff
Sidebottom
Anderson
Harmison
Panesar

JKLever wrote:Harmison & Sidebottom in the squad for Pattinson/Tremlett
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/7525893.stm

Classic England: can't bat for shit - drop two bowlers.

They did the same thing in New Zealand when the batting imploded in a risible puddle of mush during the first Test.

If in doubt, blame the bowlers.

That said, Pattinson is mince.

Two bowlers haven't been dropped though, yet. Two passengers have simply been dispensed with. In the case of Tremlett, it's harsh, but there'd have been outrage if Pattinson hadn't been removed. I'm as concerned about the batting as I ever have been, but I think you've been Vaughanenomical with the truth there. Something needs to be done about the top six, as soon as possible, absolutely.

beamer wrote:This is his last chance, we know what he's capable of at his best and he has to show that here.

Not quite sure who misses out, ideally we'd play 12 here - Colly at 6 and five bowlers! (Can we just put a dustbin behind the stumps or something? )

Nah. Prior's not been selected.

beamer wrote:This is his last chance, we know what he's capable of at his best and he has to show that here.

Not quite sure who misses out, ideally we'd play 12 here - Colly at 6 and five bowlers! (Can we just put a dustbin behind the stumps or something? )

3.4 overs for 47 in the T20 finals. Quite extravagant.

Where's the Smithness in that post?

Red is tired and emotional from a big night on the tiles and forgot to sledge the Sook.

Haven't thoroughly read the thread and it's probably already been mentioned etc....But Harmi ahead of Jonah?! FFS! Jonah has declared himself 100% fit, and he himself has been cautious about his fitness in the last 2-3 months. If he says he's fit and ready to go, then I believe him.

Edgbaston reverse swings, as well.....

Oh well. I give up. England's selection policies will ALWAYS be baffling. It's become a fact of life. Harmi needed a bigger kick up the backside, imo. Poor old Jonah and Hoggy- Both have been working their butts off to get back into the England side, and imo deserve another chance more than Harmi does.

Not only did Jonah declare himself fit, but Kabir Ali declared his disbelief that England aren't selecting him, as he's both the bees' knees and that cats' pyjamas.

What were they thinking?

back from holiday already?

A week is long enough for me.

Geoff Miller is certainly a more pragmatic selector than Graveney was.

"Pattinson- Supposedly good in seaming conditions. Headingley. Pick him. Harmison- Pace. Bounce. Wickets in County Cricket. Pick him." Never mind about their loyalties/character on the big stage etc......

Get lucky?

Henry wrote:Geoff Miller is certainly a more pragmatic selector than Graveney was.

"Pattinson- Supposedly good in seaming conditions. Headingley. Pick him. Harmison- Pace. Bounce. Wickets in County Cricket. Pick him." Never mind about their loyalties/character on the big stage etc......

Geoff Miller has thus far been utterly useless, pragmatic or not.

taipan wrote:Get lucky?

Me? I was born lucky.

Miller did a good job convincing everyone that he was the quiet but knowledgeable one during the Graveney era.

Ah well. He's one of the boys. Even if he gets sacked in 3 months, he doesn't care. An apologetic ECB will offer one of their lads a cushy 'performance' role (Whatever the hell that entails), and Miller knows it. He'll be fine no matter what happens.

Henry wrote:Miller did a good job convincing everyone that he was the quiet but knowledgeable one during the Graveney era.

He was Andrew Ridgeley to Graveney's George Micheal.

Wham it up your arse.

Alec Stewart should be our chief selector. He's not that long out of the game, gets on well with pretty much everyone in English cricketing circles, and he is pretty well up to speed on the current talent in English cricket.

Henry wrote:Alec Stewart should be our chief selector. He's not that long out of the game, gets on well with pretty much everyone in English cricketing circles, and he is pretty well up to speed on the current talent in English cricket.

That'll be Matt Sussex behind the stumps then!