Cricket 24/7  

Welcome to the Cricket 24/7.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. There are also more forums available to members, such as the Lounge - where members chat about just about anything under the sun except cricket!

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   Cricket 24/7 > Cricket Discussion Forums > England
Register FAQDonate Members List Calendar Casino Articles Terms of Use Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 13th October 2007, 21:28   #1
Minor Maggie
Buttleresque
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Lancashire, England
Posts: 26,758
Test Squad for Sri Lanka Tour

So on Friday England name the squad for this tour. TMS had an interesting discussions at lunchtime today on the make up of the squad. I think the journalists were Colin Bateman, Stephen Brinkley and Dean ? from the Sun.

Dropping Strauss was quite a popular choice as was dropping Harmison. The latter would be a very good move IMHO especially since he hasn't proven his fitness as yet. Strauss I'm not too sure about. I certainly wouldn't want Ramps back in the team but wouldn't mind seeing Shah given an extended chance.

In the absence of Flintoff I don't think we can afford to play two spinners and just the two seamers which makes me think we could have a similar scenario to last winter with Swann being preferred to Monty for his all-round contribution (a tail of Sibo, Hoggard, Anderson and Panesar isn't that appealing!).

The choice of reserve keeper is a tough one I'd like to see Foster given another chance ahead of Ambrose but I guess the Sussex link will probably see Ambrose picked!

My squad:

Strauss
Cook
Vaughan
KP
Colly
Bell
Shah
Prior
Foster
Swann
Panesar
Hoggard
Sidebottom
Anderson
Broad

If taking 16 then Tremlett ahead of Harmison.

What do you think?
Minor Maggie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th October 2007, 21:45   #2
1000yardstare
Posting Goddess
 
1000yardstare's Avatar
JA 851 Cummins 149 Wagner 147 TCurran 21 SCurran 15
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,137
From The Times -

Flintoff’s absence has caused England to revise their plans for the Sri Lanka Test series. They will now take 16 players rather than 15, made up of seven batsmen, five fast bowlers, two spinners and two wicketkeepers � an admission that Flintoff cannot be replaced by one player.

Last edited by 1000yardstare : 13th October 2007 at 22:00.
1000yardstare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th October 2007, 21:52   #3
Shah's bitch
County Pro
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 561
Cook
Vaughan
Shah
Bell
Pietersen
Collingwood

Prior
Read

Hoggard
Harmison
Anderson
Sibo
Tremlett

Rashid(though it will be Swann)
Monty
Shah's bitch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th October 2007, 21:54   #4
Shah's bitch
County Pro
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 561
I cannot understand calls from Bob Willis on Sky today that Mustard should go to SL on tour.

His first class stats this year were very average, lowest in the CC1 i believe batting wise. Also he must only average about 15 in the ODI's.
Shah's bitch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th October 2007, 22:02   #5
1000yardstare
Posting Goddess
 
1000yardstare's Avatar
JA 851 Cummins 149 Wagner 147 TCurran 21 SCurran 15
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shah's bitch View Post
I cannot understand calls from Bob Willis on Sky today that Mustard should go to SL on tour.

His first class stats this year were very average, lowest in the CC1 i believe batting wise. Also he must only average about 15 in the ODI's.
Me neither.

Foster should be going.
1000yardstare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th October 2007, 22:05   #6
Minor Maggie
Buttleresque
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Lancashire, England
Posts: 26,758
Since they are taking 16 then I guess Harmy will go but I wouldn't play him. Personally he needs a period of reflection about what he wants. This series has shown what good accurate bowling can do even if it isn't at express pace. He needs to sort his head out and get back on the money in the international game.
Minor Maggie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th October 2007, 12:51   #7
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,775
Cook
Vaughan
Ramprakash
Bell
Pietersen
Collingwood
Shah

Read
Foster

Monty
Swann

Hoggard
Sidebottom
Anderson
Broad
Harmison

If the pitch looks like it will take spin, I would have no qualms about picking a four-man attack with two spinners.
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th October 2007, 12:59   #8
sharky
Posting God
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sunny Sussex
Team(s): Sussex, England
Posts: 10,939
I'd take Strauss instead of Ramprakash as I think we do need 3 openers, and swap the keepers for Prior and Ambrose, but I don't think you're far off the mark Sans. I think we'll need Harmison at his 100% best to have a chance of winning but it's always a huge gamble with him. Hopefully they have a few warm up games first to see how he goes
__________________
She was like a candle in the wind...Unreliable
sharky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th October 2007, 13:01   #9
cabinboy
Posting God
 
cabinboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 13,717
Are we picking the most likely squads or are own personal choices? This is the one I expect to be selected,

Strauss, Cook, Vaughan, Bell, KP, Colly, Shah, Prior, Mustard, Harmison, Hoggard, Sidebottom, Anderson, Swann, Prior and Schofield.

Whereas my preference would be for Read as first choice keeper though sadly it ain't going to happen. Foster would be my second choice but he hasn't featured in any of England's plans for a while now. I'd also definitely like to see Rashid as third spinner instead of Schofield, however he tailed off badly at the back end of the summer.

I have no problem at all with playing two pace men alongside two spinners. It'll give England the opportunity to bowl all day. Panesar had a superb summer in England and should thrive in Sri Lanka and Swann has also taken to SL like a duck to water.
cabinboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th October 2007, 13:11   #10
sharky
Posting God
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sunny Sussex
Team(s): Sussex, England
Posts: 10,939
I doubt even Moores would resort to cloning Sussex players to make up the numbers

And the thought of Schofield going brings me out in a cold sweat, and not in a good way
__________________
She was like a candle in the wind...Unreliable
sharky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th October 2007, 13:13   #11
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 42
Posts: 43,685
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharky View Post
I'd take Strauss instead of Ramprakash as I think we do need 3 openers, and swap the keepers for Prior and Ambrose, but I don't think you're far off the mark Sans. I think we'll need Harmison at his 100% best to have a chance of winning but it's always a huge gamble with him. Hopefully they have a few warm up games first to see how he goes
I agree with this pretty much entirely. I don't like taking Harmison though. He's not proved his fitness and wasn't it much form. Having said that, we're not going to be playing that many pace men so whether he tours or not may be irrelevent. Mine and I hope England's choice of bowlers will include Hoggard, Obliquearse and Panesar so there's only one slot available. Does Harmison offer more than Anderson, Tremlett, Broad or Swann? Potentially he does, of course but practically I doubt it.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th October 2007, 13:15   #12
Aidan11
Harmisonesque
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Somewhere cold and wet
Posts: 40,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minor Maggie View Post
If taking 16 then Tremlett ahead of Harmison.
So you would prefer someone virtually untried against someone with 200 test wickets?
Aidan11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th October 2007, 13:21   #13
Kim
Posting God
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastBowlersUnion View Post
Me neither.

Foster should be going.
Why?
Kim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th October 2007, 13:21   #14
'ampshire
Established International
 
'ampshire's Avatar
Legend. FACT.
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Maidenhead/Sheffield
Team(s): Hampshire, Southampton FC and England
Age: 30
Posts: 4,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aidan11 View Post
So you would prefer someone virtually untried against someone with 200 test wickets?
Well, yes. Tremlett did perfectly well against India and Harmison barely played in the second half of last season...

Harmison being in this squad would simply being repeating the classic England mistakes of picking players with doubts over their fitness...

Oh, and when Harmison has played in the last two years or so. He's been garbage a fair percentage of the time...
'ampshire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th October 2007, 13:24   #15
daz
Posting God
 
daz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Team(s): Northamptonshire
Posts: 11,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim View Post
Why?
Because he is an outstanding wicketkeeper
__________________
Look out for my flag in Dhaka.
daz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th October 2007, 13:24   #16
daz
Posting God
 
daz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Team(s): Northamptonshire
Posts: 11,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aidan11 View Post
So you would prefer someone virtually untried against someone with 200 test wickets?


Is Harmison even gonna be fit?
__________________
Look out for my flag in Dhaka.
daz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th October 2007, 13:25   #17
Maty
Posting God
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Derybshire
Age: 30
Posts: 13,332
Send a message via MSN to Maty
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim View Post
Why?
i was thinking the same
Maty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th October 2007, 13:26   #18
Aidan11
Harmisonesque
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Somewhere cold and wet
Posts: 40,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by daz View Post
Is Harmison even gonna be fit?
He should be ok by then
Aidan11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th October 2007, 13:28   #19
daz
Posting God
 
daz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Team(s): Northamptonshire
Posts: 11,288
So you want to play a bowlerwho should be ok by then, who hasnt bowled for quite a while and lets be honest his test performances over the 18 months to 2 years have been pretty inept.


Maybe it is time for someone else.
__________________
Look out for my flag in Dhaka.
daz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th October 2007, 13:31   #20
LUHG
Established International
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,552
The keeper situation is an interesting one and I wonder how much it will be affected by Prior's fitness. If Ambrose were to play the first test and do well it would lead to a selection dilemma for subsequent matches - which the selectors may or may not be happy with. If Mustard were picked it would surely be to avoid such a situation as there is no way that he is next in line for the test spot (even though personally I would like to see him get more ODI games).

Please, please, please don't take any quick bowlers unless they have proven fitness.
LUHG is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:36.



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