How much have England being missing Monty!

[Cameron-Moss]

I've backed all the people saying that Monty should play, who cares about that Cricket Coach investigation what they did. I think Monty should of played from the start, he was brilliant in the English summer against Pakistan.
Giles isn't that good of a bowler, in my opinion I think he only gets into the team because if his batting and fielding

 

[greg]

I think a set of better poll options more appropriate to the thread title would be:

0-0
1-0 Aus
2-0 Aus
1-1
0-1 Eng
0-2 Eng

 

[Alysum]

I voted Giles just to annoy everyone

 

[ripper868]

I think monty showed everyone how much better than giles he is yesterday. he even managed to fire up harmy somehow in to turning his w's into W's

 

[silentstriker]

TBH, he didn't bowl magnificently or anything, but Giles didn't ever look like getting a five wicker haul, luck or not.

 

[Mister Wright]

TBH, he didn't bowl magnificently or anything, but Giles didn't ever look like getting a five wicker haul, luck or not.

You don't have to bowl magnificently to get a bag of wickets. As long as you're consistent and stick to your plans than you will be rewarded which Panesar was. Fine performance. I'd take Panesar's 5 wickets of Giles' 1 wicket and 20 runs for a match any day.

 

[silentstriker]

You don't have to bowl magnificently to get a bag of wickets. As long as you're consistent and stick to your plans than you will be rewarded which Panesar was. Fine performance. I'd take Panesar's 5 wickets of Giles' 1 wicket and 20 runs for a match any day.

Just pointing out he wasn't at his best.

 

[Mister Wright]

Just pointing out he wasn't at his best.

Maybe not, but he was hardly poor. You're suggesting Panesar got a lot of luck in his 5 dismissals, however I put all 5 down to good bowling. Might not have been magnificent, but it was good bowling.

 

[Perm]

The Symonds and Warne dismissals were poor balls that should have been put away, but in the case of Symonds it was quite well bowled because Panesar had been hit for a few runs but put it on the spot and tried to encourage Symonds to do it again.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Haha, if anything Warne's was a much better ball. He pushed it through, and tilted his wrist so it hit the face of the ball, rather than the seam, making it skid on a bit and skid off the surface.

 

[Jono]

The fact is Monty bowled consistently. He bowled well and took 5 Australian wickets, that's what it comes down too.

Its obvious to everyone, and has been since the start of the series, that Monty should have been selected ahead of Giles. And the few English fans that wanted Giles ahead (and I mean few) I'm sure would have changed their minds by now.

Incidentally, Monty has batted better than Giles

 

[wpdavid]

The fact is Monty bowled consistently. He bowled well and took 5 Australian wickets, that's what it comes down too.

Its obvious to everyone, and has been since the start of the series, that Monty should have been selected ahead of Giles. And the few English fans that wanted Giles ahead (and I mean few) I'm sure would have changed their minds by now.

Incidentally, Monty has batted better than Giles

... and he's dropped less catches.

Still a silly thread though.

 

[silentstriker]

Maybe not, but he was hardly poor. You're suggesting Panesar got a lot of luck in his 5 dismissals, however I put all 5 down to good bowling. Might not have been magnificent, but it was good bowling.

I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. I am suggesting that he has the potential to be even better.

 

[Nate]

I voted Giles, because he would be better out of the spinners, if he was better than Monty.

 

[Cameron-Moss]

Lol, Monty probally would take more wickets in 3 games, than giles could take in 4. Lol Giles only took 1 or 2 in 2 games, on Monty takes 5 in an innings, its just brilliant if you compare it.

 

[steds]

Don't care really. It's inconsequential. Fact is, Python or Giles, we were going to get/are getting dicked.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Easy to be wise after the fact (although I was one of the 99.94% of English fans who argued for his inclusion beforehand too) but it's almost enough to make one reach for the Hemlock when one considers had Monty played in Adelaide he'd have had 550+ runs to bowl at. *Sighs*

 

[andyc]

Lol, Monty probally would take more wickets in 3 games, than giles could take in 4. Lol Giles only took 1 or 2 in 2 games, on Monty takes 5 in an innings, its just brilliant if you compare it.

lol

 

[age_master]

Monty by a fair bit for mine.

 

[Slow Love™]

He's done really well - there's certainly a possibility that the result of Adelaide might have been different. I just couldn't believe it when he stepped into the side and immediately took a five-for.

Looks to have a great temperament, and ought to have a good career - didn't seem too cowed when Gilly took to him in the second innings either; that can happen to anyone when he's on song.

Not that it hasn't been said around a thousand times already (even before he was eventually picked), but it really is an embarassment that Giles was given precedence at the selection table up to now.