Cricket 24/7

Cricket 24/7 (http://www.cricket247.org/community/index.php)
-   England (http://www.cricket247.org/community/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Samit Patel (http://www.cricket247.org/community/showthread.php?t=6608)

geoff_boycotts_grandmother 26th June 2008 15:09

Samit Patel
 
Graeme Swann should never play for England again, the young leggies (Rashid, Marshall, Beer, Lawson, Munday and Salisbury etc) don't look quite ready, and outside of Monty, none of the orthodox spinners look remotely international class.

So in the absence of any spinners who look like regularly troubling international batsmen and instead just try and be economical. If that is the limit of their ambitions how about instead going down the route of a batsman who bowls a bit of spin? The West Indies with that waster Gayle, and Sri Lanka with Jayasuriya have employed this tactic to a fair bit of success.

In this respect Samit Patel intrigues me. I think England considered this type of option with Yardy, but I think Patel has far more potential as a batsman, and probably as a spinner as well. He's a player who has been earmarked as gifted for some time. He dominated u19 level and is putting in some impressive figures for Notts.

sharky 26th June 2008 15:29

Incredibly harsh on Swann. If Ambrose had held on to the chance yesterday then he would have been the match-winner long before the end of the match. An average of less than 30 with the ball is pretty good and better than we could expect from any other spinner in England at the moment. I don't think that Patel is anywhere near in contention for the spin bowler's spot. It needs to be filled by somebody who is paid by their county to spin the ball, which leaves Monty, Swann, Batty and Schofield, then the raw leg spinners you talk about. Out of those, it has to be Swann or Monty.

Patel, Godleman, Denly, Bopara, Prior and Hildreth are the outstanding batting talents in England and will all be in contention in the next 5 years

Fatslogger 26th June 2008 15:30

You forgot Gidman.

Aidan11 26th June 2008 15:34

Who?

Fatslogger 26th June 2008 15:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aidan11 (Post 188364)
Who?

You know, err, oh, sorry.

A Newbie 26th June 2008 15:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fatslogger (Post 188363)
You forgot Gidman.

The Durham one?

Fatslogger 26th June 2008 15:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Popodopolous (Post 188368)
The Durham one?

There's more than one? Oh God.

A Newbie 26th June 2008 15:40

Back on topic, and sSamit Patel is indeed a fine batting talent and troubled Durham with the ball in the ODIs recently.

Get him in, it can kill 2 birds with one stone.

Aidan11 26th June 2008 15:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fatslogger (Post 188370)
There's more than one? Oh God.

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/engla...yer/13826.html

geoff_boycotts_grandmother 26th June 2008 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharky (Post 188362)
Incredibly harsh on Swann. If Ambrose had held on to the chance yesterday then he would have been the match-winner long before the end of the match. An average of less than 30 with the ball is pretty good and better than we could expect from any other spinner in England at the moment. I don't think that Patel is anywhere near in contention for the spin bowler's spot. It needs to be filled by somebody who is paid by their county to spin the ball, which leaves Monty, Swann, Batty and Schofield, then the raw leg spinners you talk about. Out of those, it has to be Swann or Monty.

Patel, Godleman, Denly, Bopara, Prior and Hildreth are the outstanding batting talents in England and will all be in contention in the next 5 years

Why does it need to be filled by someone who is paid by their county to spin the ball?

If England had a Gayle or a Jayasuriya are you really saying you wouldn't play them?

England should try and develop such a player. As for Swann, he was already in my bad books for the worse fielding display I've ever witnessed (I'm including park cricket) out in Sri Lanka and has done little to change my opinion of him. Choking last night certainly didn't help.

Kim 26th June 2008 15:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother (Post 188375)
Why does it need to be filled by someone who is paid by their county to spin the ball?
If England had a Gayle or a Jayasuriya are you really saying you wouldn't play them?

England should try and develop such a player. As for Swann, he was already in my bad books for the worse fielding display I've ever witnessed (I'm including park cricket) out in Sri Lanka and has done little to change my opinion of him. Choking last night certainly didn't help.


Because we are already playing one part time bowler in the Colly/Wright/Bops combo.

Odd to concentrate on econpmy from our spin bowler - then want to drop Swann, our most economic OD bowler.

sharky 26th June 2008 15:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother (Post 188375)
Why does it need to be filled by someone who is paid by their county to spin the ball?

If England had a Gayle or a Jayasuriya are you really saying you wouldn't play them?

England should try and develop such a player. As for Swann, he was already in my bad books for the worse fielding display I've ever witnessed (I'm including park cricket) out in Sri Lanka and has done little to change my opinion of him. Choking last night certainly didn't help.

England are picking him as a spin bowler, not as an explosive opening batsman who can fill in the overs with the ball. England would dearly love a Gayle or Jayasuriya and pick them without hesitation, but there is a strong chance that Swann or Panesar would be picked in addition. From memory, Jayasuriya has never been picked as SL's sole spinner. If fielding is a major factor, Patel is one of the least mobile people on the county circuit

geoff_boycotts_grandmother 26th June 2008 15:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kim (Post 188378)
Because we are already playing one part time bowler in the Colly/Wright/Bops combo.

Odd to concentrate on econpmy from our spin bowler - then want to drop Swann, our most economic OD bowler.

Playing a batsman who bowls economical spin would allows us to change the balance of the team and include a 4th proper seamer, in order to give us that extra wicket-taking threat.

If Swann is only offering economy, then we would be better off opting for a batsman who offers economical spin/darts plus offer a hell of a lot more with the bat.

sharky 26th June 2008 16:01

Shah is a batsman who can offer some decent spin. For me, the biggest problem is having to hide the keeper down the batting order

geoff_boycotts_grandmother 26th June 2008 16:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharky (Post 188381)
England are picking him as a spin bowler, not as an explosive opening batsman who can fill in the overs with the ball. England would dearly love a Gayle or Jayasuriya and pick them without hesitation, but there is a strong chance that Swann or Panesar would be picked in addition. From memory, Jayasuriya has never been picked as SL's sole spinner. If fielding is a major factor, Patel is one of the least mobile people on the county circuit

My argument is that Swann is offering little more with the ball than a proper batsman who can fill in overs with the ball. In that case, it makes sense to pick a proper batsman than a player who isn't good enough with bat nor ball, nor in the field.

Sri Lanka have the best bowler in the world, so of course they are going to pick both Jayasuriya and Murali. Gayle would be a better comparison - the WIndies, lacking a class spinner, have often gone in with just the one spin option in Gayle (at least when he can be arsed to bowl) plus maybe a few occasional overs from Sarwan.

Samit Patel's fielding is however a very valid concern.

Kim 26th June 2008 16:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother (Post 188391)
My argument is that Swann is offering little more with the ball than a proper batsman who can fill in overs with the ball. In that case, it makes sense to pick a proper batsman than a player who isn't good enough with bat nor ball, nor in the field.

Sri Lanka have the best bowler in the world, so of course they are going to pick both Jayasuriya and Murali. Gayle would be a better comparison - the WIndies, lacking a class spinner, have often gone in with just the one spin option in Gayle (at least when he can be arsed to bowl) plus maybe a few occasional overs from Sarwan.

Samit Patel's fielding is however a very valid concern.

he has the best strike rate of all our regular bowlers in this series and the best career ODI economy rate.

What esle do you expect him to offer

geoff_boycotts_grandmother 26th June 2008 16:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharky (Post 188389)
Shah is a batsman who can offer some decent spin. For me, the biggest problem is having to hide the keeper down the batting order

I certainly think in the absence of a class spin option, the 5 seamer attack with Shah (and indeed KP, who I consider to be the more talented bowler) offering some occasional overs of spin, is something England should be looking to do more often.

geoff_boycotts_grandmother 26th June 2008 16:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kim (Post 188393)
he has the best strike rate of all our regular bowlers in this series and the best career ODI economy rate.

What esle do you expect him to offer

Yes, but Ed Giddins takes his test wickets at 20 a piece and Anthony McGrath averages 40 with the bat and 14 with the ball in test cricket and I wouldn't want either of those near my test side either. Michael Yardy is another one with a better ODI economy rate who I wouldn't pick either.

Swann has had one good game in which he took 4 wickets against the Sri Lankan lower order/tail. Otherwise he has taken 4 wicket in 10 games.
Throwing away the chance of a series victory just re-inforces my impression that he isn't what England need.


Anyone got any views on Samit Patel?

sharky 26th June 2008 16:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kim (Post 188393)
he has the best strike rate of all our regular bowlers in this series and the best career ODI economy rate.

What esle do you expect him to offer

Exactly, he is performing surprisingly well in an important role in the team as far as I'm concerned. I don't completely disagree with GBG and England definitely have to tweak a few things, but Swann isn't top of the list. The make-up of the team will definitely shift when Flintoff returns

Bell
Prior/Mustard
Pietersen
Colly
Shah
Patel
Wright
Flintoff
Broad
Sidebottom
Anderson

GBG, I guess that's the kind of team you'd would like to see with 5 seamers and a couple of part-time spin options, and I have no real problem with it. Possibly Swann or Monty to come in on bunsens, at the expense of Wright. My main problem is saying that he hasn't done well in the role he has been given

1000yardstare 26th June 2008 16:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother (Post 188387)
Playing a batsman who bowls economical spin would allows us to change the balance of the team and include a 4th proper seamer, in order to give us that extra wicket-taking threat.

If Swann is only offering economy, then we would be better off opting for a batsman who offers economical spin/darts plus offer a hell of a lot more with the bat.

Swann's strike rate in this series is 34.80 compared to Vettori's of 96.00. :)
Collingwood needs to make sure he always gets his 10 overs.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:59.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Cricket247.org