Graeme Swann: Great All-Rounder

I agree with Lever - Broad's a bit more solid. Having him at eight suits the balance of the lower order better as he's coming in to support the last of the batsmen who have been, until now, the attack-minded Prior and Flintoff - possibly Wright in the next Test.

Someone's got to play the support role. And Swanny has proven over his entire career that that's not what he's about.

With Stuart Broad, Swanny and Jimmy A at 8 -10, we've got a more than capable lower order - heck they've turned embarrassing scores into decent ones more often than we've really got a right to expect.

The first two can play shots in their own right, and Jimmy puts a high price on his wicket ..... brave batsman for a tailender. More importantly, at 180/6, with a strokeplaying top-order batsman still in at the other end, all three are capable of staying at the crease long enough for a 50+ partnership.

Move them all up a place, the batting looks a bit shaky. Where they are now, I'd say we have one of the stronger tails in world cricket.

Dello wrote:Suicide is painless.

Can we get Bucky or Sidhu to prove that?

Dello wrote:I agree with Lever - Broad's a bit more solid. Having him at eight suits the balance of the lower order better as he's coming in to support the last of the batsmen who have been, until now, the attack-minded Prior and Flintoff - possibly Wright in the next Test.

Someone's got to play the support role. And Swanny has proven over his entire career that that's not what he's about.

I don't think anyone would be outraged if Luke Sussex replaced Bell now for the rest of the series. The boy can't do worse with the bat, and would be able to put in a few overs to spell the other quicks.

Put Prior back up to No 6, with Wright at 7, Broad, Swanny & Jim where they are at 8 -10. That's as good a lower order as any in world cricket just now ....... almost 2 No 7s and 2 No 8s IMHO.

Or - with the form Swann's in with the bat - I wouldn't discount having him at 7 Broad at 8 and Wright at 9 for his debut.

OK wait, so the alternative to Bell is Luke Wright?

HAHAHHAAHAHA. No, seriously?

Zat wrote:

Dello wrote:Suicide is painless.

Can we get Bucky or Sidhu to prove that?

we follow in your footsteps O Great one.

I think Bell's replacement should be Plunkett. I've always rated him. He's just as dangerous as Anderson in favourable conditions, and he's a bit taller. His batting is handy aas well. A mddle lower order of-

Prior
Swann
Broad
Plunkett
Anderson
Onions

Is pretty solid.

Ashley Giles was like the kid who was shit at maths that you were proud of because he learnt the 7 times table. Swann's like the clever kid who always acted up. Swann is a better batsman than Broad. He has a better technique full stop. No question that as a batsman he is more talented. Broad just happens to dig in more and concentrate hard. They are perfect in the positions they are in, proximity-wise. I'd just go with Trev and stick Plunkett in at 9. He's also a reasonably talented batsman and would add to the tail. Again, I feel we could do with a 4th seamer here. Now the two opening bowlers have had their long spells, we could have done with keeping pace on for another half an hour.

We can't do any worse than Bell at six at the moment, any alternative would be better. We MAY get lucky in this current test but we aren't going to win the series with only 10 men.

vilkrang wrote:We can't do any worse than Bell at six at the moment, any alternative would be better. We MAY get lucky in this current test but we aren't going to win the series with only 10 men.

Prior at 6: Rashid at 7.

Don't think there's a need for two spinners personally. Rashid has been muntered all over the shop as well. He just isn't ready anyway. We're not missing any extra bowler at the minute, we're missing an extra seamer. I wouldn't disagree with you were we to be playing in a region that's conducive to spin. Facts are we're lucky this pitch is ripping, because of the heavy rainfall followed by the intense heat.

doremi wrote:OK wait, so the alternative to Bell is Luke Wright?

HAHAHHAAHAHA. No, seriously?

Tell me in all seriousness how Luke wright could be worse than Ian Bell was yesterday please ?

They may as well wheel out a cardboard cut out .......

... or Geoffrey Boycott's mum

Brass Monkey wrote:Ashley Giles was like the kid who was shit at maths that you were proud of because he learnt the 7 times table. Swann's like the clever kid who always acted up. Swann is a better batsman than Broad. He has a better technique full stop. No question that as a batsman he is more talented. Broad just happens to dig in more and concentrate hard.

Hmmm. When Broad plays that cover drive everyone goes Ooooooh!!! because he looks imperious like Clive Lloyd. There is elegance to his play which excites people hence the talk of 'potential'. But what matters is runs on the board and Swanny is getting more at the moment.

Rob I wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:Ashley Giles was like the kid who was shit at maths that you were proud of because he learnt the 7 times table. Swann's like the clever kid who always acted up. Swann is a better batsman than Broad. He has a better technique full stop. No question that as a batsman he is more talented. Broad just happens to dig in more and concentrate hard.

Hmmm. When Broad plays that cover drive everyone goes Ooooooh!!! because he looks imperious like his Dad. There is elegance to his play which excites people hence the talk of 'potential'. But what matters is runs on the board and Swanny is getting more at the moment.

Fixed.

He has nowhere near the amount of shots that Swann has, not in propensity of use anyway. As I say, Swann ends up playing too many shots which has contributed to his downfall quite a few times.

Well, the number of shots is never really the issue with a batsman, it's how they're executed. Strauss only have the cut, pull and punch down the ground, he just plays them brilliantly.

England's tail is perfectly balanced at the moment with the right mix between quality and aggression. Swann is probably a number 8 but he scores so quickly from 9 that it doesn't really matter. The problem that will soon come up is when England start messing around with the tail because everyone's doing so well, and all of a sudden they stop doing so well because their runs become a necessity rather than a bonus. The current tail has dug England out of holes in most of the last half a dozen Test Matches - it is (quite literally) the strongest part of our batting line-up in terms of consistency and positivity.

Shoeshine wrote:Well, the number of shots is never really the issue with a batsman, it's how they're executed. Strauss only have the cut, pull and punch down the ground, he just plays them brilliantly.

Sure, and Tugga didn't have much range of shot either. It's about knowing your strengths and playing the percentages.

Rob I wrote:

Shoeshine wrote:Well, the number of shots is never really the issue with a batsman, it's how they're executed. Strauss only have the cut, pull and punch down the ground, he just plays them brilliantly.

Sure, and Tugga didn't have much range of shot either. It's about knowing your strengths and playing the percentages.

I was having a chat with Murray Goodwin (sorry about the name drop, but it's relevant) about this very subject. I asked him why it was that he was so much better than me (didn't quite put it like that - but you know what I mean). You see, I've seen myself on video, I do more or less the same things as he does, yet he's a million times better. His answer was interesting, he said that it's all about the ball you choose to hit, and the shot you choose to play. That the best players limit their shots, and pick the right one for the right ball, whereas the likes of me do not. Food for thought.

shoeshine wrote:Well, the number of shots is never really the issue with a batsman, it's how they're executed. Strauss only have the cut, pull and punch down the ground, he just plays them brilliantly.

OK. Swann executes his 8 shots better than Broad executes his 3 shots.

Shoeshine wrote:

Rob I wrote:
Hmmm. When Broad plays that cover drive everyone goes Ooooooh!!! because he looks imperious like his Dad.

Fixed.

Be nice if Draco gets three centuries against Australia.....

I am starting to develop a healthy respect for Swanny. He could develop into a really good spinning all rounder. His batting technique seems to be good enough to be in the top 7 of some teams.

So - now that Swann's retired, should he have batted above Broad, or even in the top 7?

It's a long time since he could be arsed to try and do anything properly with the bat. When he came in at 9 or 10 he played like someone who belongs at that position, trying to hit it out of the ground from the first ball.

Probably could have averaged 30 in Tests, ended up not much over 20.

All-rounder:

batting average > bowling average
Bowling average < 30

… discuss.