England's Test squad for SL...

On the bowlers - I'd go for both Panesar and Swann. You need a second slow bowler in Sri Lanka - Croft and Giles were both essential to the win in 2001. A third seamer isn't likely to be much more threatening than Collingwood on those pitches. Jimmikins and Hoggard can open the bowling.

Oh, that's interesting - Berry thinks Tim Ambrose is in the frame as the second keeper.

The Sussexification of England continues apace...

Leo wrote:On the bowlers - Jimmikins and Hoggard can open the bowling.

I bet ODI 'Man of the Series' Ryan Sidebottom would love that.

I think Sidebottom has moved to the very front of the queue as far as the swing bowlers are concerned.

I think the seam attack will be him, either Anderson or Hoggard, and Harmison.

A bit of everything. Left arm in-swing to the RHBs, right arm out-swing to the RHBs and tall, bouncy fast random lucky-dipping from Harmison.

Throw in a spinner - Panesar bowling SLA, complimented by, say, Vaughan's off-spin - and you've got pretty much the most balanced attack imaginable.

Not that that's the be all and end all...

I can't believe we wont go in with 2 front line spinners given the heat we'll be playing in.

And I can't believe they'll select five fast bowlers to tour if they're only planning on picking two per game.

And I really can't believe they'll bat Prior at six with Swanny at seven. Not if they're planning on winning any games.

Tough to balance the side without a genuine (fit) all-rounder.

Batsmen-

Cook
Vaughan
Shah
Pietersen
Collingwood
Bell
Strauss

'Keepers-

Prior
Mustard

Fast Bowlers-

Hoggard
Sidebottom
Tremlett
Anderson
Broad

Spinners-

Panesar
Swann

Aye, I'll give you that.

Prior/Swann combo at 6/7 looks like a disaster waiting to happen

The first 6 are automatic choices - Vaughan, Cook, Shah, KP, Colly, Bell. Possibly Shah and Bell to swap positions there, but Bell's best has been at 6.

Bopara will definitely be in the squad, and will also probably play in the first test too at number 7. Strauss will probably be in the squad, but only as reserve opener and first reserve fielder. Ramps will go as replacement non-opening batsman.

There's absolutely no reason to take 2 keepers. I really don't care which of them get the nod.

As Swann has shown some promise and form, he'll be in the starting XI at number 8. Obviously Monty will also be there at 11.

On form, our best 2 pace bowlers are Sidebottom and Broad, and as Broad can hold a bat he gets the number 9 position.

Reserve bowlers are Hoggy, Harmi and either Tremlett or another spinner.

Anderson flatters to deceive and must work on consistency on an A tour or with the academy.

They can't and won't pick an attack of Broad, Sidebottom, Swann and Panesar.

Two debutants and a guy with seven caps whilst two blokes with over 200 Test wickets each sit on the sidelines? Dream on.

Hoggard will play, Broad won't (unless Swann is still unfit) ... surely?

If there's any kind of method to their selection policy, Broad won't even be in the squad.

Chris Tremlett was picked for the last Test series in preference to him, and bowled very well indeed.

Yes, Broad's settling in well to one-day cricket, and Tremlett looks a bit awkward in that format of the game. But that doesn't count for anything when you're picking a Test squad.

Or, at least, it shouldn't.

Logic plays lttle part in English selections?

Sidebottom's screwed, then.

I wouldn't have Prior or Mustard in the squad as keepers- the pitches will more than likely be slow, low and slovenly and their slightly dubious cavalry charge batting is not going to come off.

Go with someone who can graft a bit and be boring like Jon Batty or James Foster.

Eric Air Emu wrote:I wouldn't have Prior or Mustard in the squad as keepers- the pitches will more than likely be slow, low and slovenly and their slightly dubious cavalry charge batting is not going to come off.

Go with someone who can graft a bit and be boring like Jon Batty or James Foster.

Yeah, actually I'd prefer Foster - I'm allying this to the fact that Prior's hands are as hard as granite and he'll drop all of the, no doubt, stack of thin edges Monty and Swann will produce. Moutard I wouldn't mind keeping-wise but the fact is his FC batting needs some work.

I remember Foster being a pleasant surprise when he toured India a few years ago now- batted time for a respectable score or two and he was only 12 at the time.

If SiBo doesn't start I may have to personally think about hunting DaveGrave down!

My squad:

Vaughan, Cook, Shah, KP, Colly, Bell, Ramps

Bopara

Mustard

SiBo, Panesar, Swann, Hoggard, Harmison

You just can't leave out Hoggard, though.

Not only is he very consistent, and it seems that once every winter, against the odds, he puts in a super-human performance that either wins the match, or would have done were it not for the rest of the tems incompetence.

I refer you to:

Hat-trick vs West Indies, Barbados, 2004
7-61 vs South Africa, Johannesburg, 2005
6-57 vs India, Nagpur, 2006
7-112 vs Australia, Adelaide, 2006

You just can't leave someone like that out. Especially on flat tracks in the subcontinent in the blazing heat where an 80mph swing bowler won't do anything. It's when he's at his best.

Winkle Spinner wrote:You just can't leave out Hoggard, though.

Not only is he very consistent, and it seems that once every winter, against the odds, he puts in a super-human performance that either wins the match, or would have done were it not for the rest of the tems incompetence.

I refer you to:

Hat-trick vs West Indies, Barbados, 2004
7-61 vs South Africa, Johannesburg, 2005
6-57 vs India, Nagpur, 2006
7-112 vs Australia, Adelaide, 2006

You just can't leave someone like that out. Especially on flat tracks in the subcontinent in the blazing heat where an 80mph swing bowler won't do anything. It's when he's at his best.

So true it's unbelievable. His 7-63 against NZ at Christchurch was also a bit of a good spell.

Not only that, but his average away against equal to his home record pretty much and that he was the total stand out performer in the India series.

Makes him the first or second pick of the bowlers. Still, SiBo's third for me. So that leaves one more pacer and possibly a spinner. Just would probably leave us a little lightweight batting. I'd like to have Harmy as well and Swann for back up. But, I suppose we may not need a second spinner were SiBo and Hoggy used as probing stock type bowlers and Monty controlling an end would leave GBH short spells giving it his all.

Batfink Begins wrote:.......would leave GBH short spells giving it his all.

Oh dear, England.....FARKED!

Dello wrote:If there's any kind of method to their selection policy.........

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Added to the dictionary definition for Non sequitur

re GBH 'giving his all' ... that'd be a first

lardbucket wrote:re GBH 'giving his all' ... that'd be a first

Maybe he just doesn't have much . . .

Peregrine Periwinkle wrote:The first 6 are automatic choices - Vaughan, Cook, Shah, KP, Colly, Bell. Possibly Shah and Bell to swap positions there, but Bell's best has been at 6.

Bopara will definitely be in the squad, and will also probably play in the first test too at number 7. Strauss will probably be in the squad, but only as reserve opener and first reserve fielder. Ramps will go as replacement non-opening batsman.

There's absolutely no reason to take 2 keepers. I really don't care which of them get the nod.

9 batsmen and 1 keeper?! What happens if the chosen keeper gets injured on the morning of a Test, we have to play for 5 days with a makeshift keeper and concede 50+ byes in each innings? It would be like going to a football World Cup with one goalkeeper in your squad.

And if Bopara bats at 7, then your keeper at 8, that's a three-man attack - even England wouldn't be that negative. I see little point in taking 9 batsmen when 2 or 3 of them are only likely to carry the drinks, and batsmen are generally less injury-prone than bowlers.

lardbucket wrote:re GBH 'giving his all' ... that'd be a first

Not at all. It's common knowledge that when he's uber-sh!te he's still working the hardest in the nets. He'll bowl any time any captain asks. Just so happens that when he's sh!t, they go nowhere near him.