England squad to South Africa to be announced today

Dello wrote:Seems bizarre that it looks like being a straight fight between Bell and Trott for the number three slot: don't think either of them are suited to it.

They should tell KP that he can either bat there or stay back in Yarpland! Bell's crap there, we already know that (well, he's crap anywhere but if we have to pick him then he's best with the pressure off him at number 6) and it's unfair to ask Trott to make his Test career there if it's not a familiar slot for him, though think he'd make a better go of it than Bopara.

I agree with the theory that if you don't have a genuine specialist number 3, and they are hard to find, then you pick three openers. But as I expected, they only pick two in the entire squad! We've had top threes of Strauss/Trescothick/Vaughan, Vaughan/Trescothick/Butcher etc. in years gone by, and I don't know why they don't identify someone who could form a similar trio with Strauss and Cook.

I actually think that is a decent effort from the selectors in terms of the test squad. Getting rid of Harmy is the right thing to do.

Obviously picking Wright is an utter travesty, but 1 travesty in a tour squad announcement is perfectly acceptable.

JKLever wrote:Steven Davies (Surrey),

beamer wrote:

Dello wrote:Seems bizarre that it looks like being a straight fight between Bell and Trott for the number three slot: don't think either of them are suited to it.

They should tell KP that he can either bat there or stay back in Yarpland! Bell's crap there, we already know that (well, he's crap anywhere but if we have to pick him then he's best with the pressure off him at number 6) and it's unfair to ask Trott to make his Test career there if it's not a familiar slot for him, though think he'd make a better go of it than Bopara.

I agree with the theory that if you don't have a genuine specialist number 3, and they are hard to find, then you pick three openers. But as I expected, they only pick two in the entire squad! We've had top threes of Strauss/Trescothick/Vaughan, Vaughan/Trescothick/Butcher etc. in years gone by, and I don't know why they don't identify someone who could form a similar trio with Strauss and Cook.

Carbs. Or Keysie. If Denly had gone a bit better in the ODIs perhaps he could've been an outside shot there.

I just don't fancy Pietersen facing the second ball of the innings. His technique is a bit dramatic...

Cook and Saj in the ODI squad. Plunkett and Luke Sussex in the test squad. Do you suppose they got the squads the wrong way round when they announced them?

Nah - they just didn't account for the cross-breeze when they were throwing their darts into the name-sheets.

Dello wrote:Carbs. Or Keysie. If Denly had gone a bit better in the ODIs perhaps he could've been an outside shot there.

I just don't fancy Pietersen facing the second ball of the innings. His technique is a bit dramatic...

I'd rather have an opener there, but given the fact that they haven't selected one in the squad I'd rather see KP doing something that's in the best interests of the team than putting Bell there again (in which case 0-1 becomes 0-2 more often than not) or risking Trott's development as a Test player by batting him out of his regular position.

Never been a great Blobert fan but think he would have done a job there, even as a short-term measure, if they didn't like the look of the uncapped alternatives.

Trott should really be locking down number five, but their loyalty to Collingwood - and his inability to bat any higher - will force them into compromising the order to accommodate him.

Pietersen, Trott, Prior, four, five and six, make for a nice-looking middle-order, with every one in their natural places (for now - Trott could work his way up the order in time).

Not for the first time, I don't think they've thought this through...

I think Collingwood could show his value on a tour like this, and they're not going to discard a senior player known for his battling qualities while bringing in new players at 3 and 5 as well as lengthening the tail. Would be good to have more options, though.

One thing that amazed me was the fact that Strauss was the only survivor from the Test touring squad five years ago - would have thought Collingwood, Bell and Anderson at least would have been around the setup then?

Pretty sure that Jimmykins got trashed all around the ground in one test out there in 2004, infact it might even have been 'Hoggards game'

Dello wrote:Trott should really be locking down number five, but their loyalty to Collingwood - and his inability to bat any higher - will force them into compromising the order to accommodate him.

Pietersen, Trott, Prior, four, five and six, make for a nice-looking middle-order, with every one in their natural places (for now - Trott could work his way up the order in time).

With no Fred at #7, that leaves a long tail a-winding. They might as well put Convictions at #7, have Jimmy, Draco, Onions and Swanneeee!!! to do most of the bowling, and give Wobbles ten overs a day.

(re: beamer's post)

Bell made his debut against WI in the summer before the tour, but missed out when the squad was announced, only to be recalled immediately after the tour finished for the Bangladesh series.

Seems like they recognised that he was a total pussy and let him wimp out of a difficult first tour.

I would imagine Collingwood was there as specialist 12th man - he seemed to own that job for a few years around that period.

Jimmy Anderson toured and played (really badly).

Rob I wrote:

Dello wrote:Trott should really be locking down number five, but their loyalty to Collingwood - and his inability to bat any higher - will force them into compromising the order to accommodate him.

Pietersen, Trott, Prior, four, five and six, make for a nice-looking middle-order, with every one in their natural places (for now - Trott could work his way up the order in time).

With no Fred at #7, that leaves a long tail a-winding.

Hardly. Flintoff was a shit batsman for the last few years. Broad is no worse. Swann is no worse. Rashid, if he plays, is no worse. Boycott's mum is no worse.

Tail's no more or less weak without him.

They've clearly committed to the five bowler strategy with the squad anyway, having picked only six specialist batsmen - if they planned to play all six they would have taken another, even with two batting keepers in the squad!

I think we might regret dropping Harmy - I know he was particularly unimpressive last time in SA, but he was as quick in the fifth (Ashes Winning ) test as he has been for two or three years, and was worth a punt IMO.

Plunkett is not a test match bowler, never was and never will be.

Basil wrote:I think we might regret dropping Harmy - I know he was particularly unimpressive last time in SA, but he was as quick in the fifth (Ashes Winning ) test as he has been for two or three years, and was worth a punt IMO.

He's been "worth a punt" for every tour since WI 2004 where he made his name, and he's been shit every time he's toured since. He clearly didn't really want to go (particularly without his drinking companion Fredalo) and wasn't prepared to carry the drinks if he wasn't guaranteed a place in the side. I think he would have been a negative influence on the entire touring party, and that outweighs any possibility of him producing something with the ball.

Going to be interesting how they make up the test side.

Don't like the look of Broad at 7

JKLever wrote:Pretty sure that Jimmykins got trashed all around the ground in one test out there in 2004, infact it might even have been 'Hoggards game'

He did, JK - took 2 for about 140 in the game .. the only one he played in - 4th test instead of SiJo, who I think was injured.

It was his first test for 5 months, having last played v WI in august. You recall correctly about Hoggy - 5/144 and 7/61. Interestingly, Anderson went for 2/117 in 28, but in the same innings, Harmisons figures were 0/25 off just 12.5. WTF Vawn was doing is still beyond understanding ...... letting the new kid get flogged at almost 4/over while his strike bowler going for just 2 is in the field

JKLever wrote:Going to be interesting how they make up the test side.

Don't like the look of Broad at 7

Nope.

But eight at nine could be, say, Plunkett and Swann or Rashid and Swann or Rashid and Plunkett, so the lower-order depth is still pretty steady.

Oh f*ck, I forgot - Lukio is on board. Shit - he's going to play, isn't he? Forget what I said earlier. His selection is bollocks.

Prior +
Wright
Broad
Swann
Anderson
Onions

That's how it's going to go. Crumbs.

beamer wrote:They've clearly committed to the five bowler strategy with the squad anyway, having picked only six specialist batsmen - if they planned to play all six they would have taken another, even with two batting keepers in the squad!

I counted five, unless of course you're massaging the Bell ego!

Carberry or Keysie instead of Bell would've been my pick for the Test batsmen (Ramps made a valid observation re. the Bell/Piles duo - which has clearly been ignored by the ECB.)

Can't really do any better with the bowling.... though it would be refreshing if BOTH spinners are picked for all four tests with the quicks made up of Jimmy, Broadly and Onions/ Plunkett (bleah ... gash). Can't see Siders getting a look-in somehow.
I like the inclusion of Luke Sussex... early days yet, but he does have something that could be mistaken for potential.

This isn't the worst side the selectors could've chosen (bar myopically picking Bell) - there's hope ... not much, but hope nonetheless, that they may scrape through with a drawn test series.

ODI's ... really CGAF.

Merlin wrote:though it would be refreshing if BOTH spinners are picked for all four tests

One can but hope

Dello wrote:

JKLever wrote:Going to be interesting how they make up the test side.

Don't like the look of Broad at 7

Nope.

But eight at nine could be, say, Plunkett and Swann or Rashid and Swann or Rashid and Plunkett, so the lower-order depth is still pretty steady.

Oh f*ck, I forgot - Lukio is on board. Shit - he's going to play, isn't he? Forget what I said earlier. His selection is bollocks.

Looks like it.

We've found the new Derek Pringle.

JKLever wrote:

Dello wrote:

JKLever wrote:Going to be interesting how they make up the test side.

Don't like the look of Broad at 7

Nope.

But eight at nine could be, say, Plunkett and Swann or Rashid and Swann or Rashid and Plunkett, so the lower-order depth is still pretty steady.

Oh f*ck, I forgot - Lukio is on board. Shit - he's going to play, isn't he? Forget what I said earlier. His selection is bollocks.

Looks like it.

We've found the new Derek Pringle.

But with SA coming up....

Oh.

My.

God......

The New Gavin Hamilton.

Luke Wright's an interesting one. They've been pretty up front in saying he's not a Test class all rounder at the moment, but they obviously see something in him. Attitude can go a long way - in the purest terms I wouldn't think Dwayne Bravo is good enough in either discipline either, but he finds a way and is an impressive cricketer.

So it seems his selection is with an eye on the future. Give them the benefit of the doubt on this one and see if he can develop his game. I do think he has a bit about him, but I'd be hard pressed to identify quite what it is that makes him an interesting cricketer and one worth investing in.

Harmison has had more than enough chances. He's a diffident cricketer at best, and his touring record is abominable. His agent has said he's bitterly disappointed - well, this day has been coming, and maybe he should have thought about that when he turned up for tours unfit, and told everyone in earshot that he wasn't prepared to fight for his place like anyone else has to.

Now, he could react by saying that he's going to prove these bastards wrong, but I bet he won't - which sums him up. He'll retire from international cricket and think he's been hard done by. He hasn't. If he had an ounce of the balls of Paul Collingwood, he'd have been one of the best bowlers in the world for the last five years instead of being the fastest bowler ever to be a cowering mess.

Technically Bravo is streets ahead of Wright as a batsman imo.