WANTED: One English wicket-keeper

[Johnners]

Originally Posted by McKanga

Do tell? Pietersen obviously, quite a significant South African background. The Papua New Guinean? The other South African? I clearly have some research to do.

Strauss was born in SA iirc, or has significant SA links (please someone correct me if i'm wrong) and Geriant Jones was born in Papua New Guinea, before moving to Australia, then when he was around 15/16 i think that when he moved to england (again please someone correct me if i'm wrong)

EDIT: Just saw ur post re: Jones

[Goughy]

Originally Posted by Clapo

Strauss was born in SA iirc, or has significant SA links (please someone correct me if i'm wrong) and Geriant Jones was born in Papua New Guinea, before moving to Australia, then when he was around 15/16 i think that when he moved to england (again please someone correct me if i'm wrong)

My understanding of the Strauss situation is that he was born in SA to an English family that moved around a lot due to business. After a few years they moved to Aus for a short period and then back home to England. No particularly strong SA links as far as I understand.

As for England having a lot of foreign born players. Its only to be expected really. It is the 'Mother country' for a lot around the world with millions of British citizens living and working around the globe and having children born outside the country (Im an example of such). Also, Britain has high immigration and good career prospects in many areas (IMO, London is 1 of only 2 global cities in the world) and you would expect people that move to the UK for better prospects (eg young South Africans like KP) to represent them.

[steds]

Originally Posted by Clapo

make that 9, they have 2 South Africans & a Papua New Guinean

No. 1 South African and 1 Australian.

[steds]

Originally Posted by McKanga

Does it matter? If you have to ask you lack pride IMO.
England has something like 50 million people, surely 12 can play cricket? Sorry, 11 - they have one South African in the team already.

Yes, and Wessels happens to be one of those 50 million people. He lives here and has played all his pro cricket here. All I'm asking is if he actually qualifies to play for us.

[wpdavid]

Originally Posted by Goughy

My understanding of the Strauss situation is that he was born in SA to an English family that moved around a lot due to business. After a few years they moved to Aus for a short period and then back home to England. No particularly strong SA links as far as I understand.

I thought both of Strauss' parents are South African. Wouldn't swear to it though.

[Goughy]

Originally Posted by wpdavid

I thought both of Strauss' parents are South African. Wouldn't swear to it though.

Mother is English, not sure about his father though

[wpdavid]

Originally Posted by Goughy

Mother is English, not sure about his father though

You're right about his mum.
http://www.ecb.co.uk/england/series-...uss,11,PP.html

Presumably is dad isn't, or the piece would have said so.

[Bob Bamber]

For me Read gets one more chance tommorow. He's got to show his hand with the bat. I think technically this is probably unfair on Read but we need a new keeper , who can bat. Pothas fills that role.

[TT Boy]

Originally Posted by steds

Yes, and Wessels happens to be one of those 50 million people. He lives here and has played all his pro cricket here. All I'm asking is if he actually qualifies to play for us.

Don't believe so but for what is worth Stephen Brenkley said that young Riki Wessels will return ‘home’ to South Africa in a couple years time and try and play for them.

And with Kepler gone from Northamptonshire that maybe true though young Riki has more chance in England, South Africa have at least five or more wicket keeper batsman who would be ahead of him currently or in the future.

[marc71178]

Originally Posted by aussie

Flintoff will be @ 7 he will be a bowler, plus Hoggard, Panesar, Jones, Harmo to bring up the rear. So actually the same 5 bowlers will be around..

So we still have a pathetic number 8 then?

Surely the idea is to put in a proper batsman to drop Flintoff to 7 then a keeper at 8 and 3 other bowlers?

[steds]

Originally Posted by marc71178

So we still have a pathetic number 8 then?

Surely the idea is to put in a proper batsman to drop Flintoff to 7 then a keeper at 8 and 3 other bowlers?

Alternatively, give Cook the gloves and drop him to 6. Pick Vaughan/Joyce instead of a keeper and let him open with Strauss. Push Flintoff down to 7. Recall Corky to bat 8

...Then whatever 3 bowlers we can find.

[silentstriker]

Flintoff Injury free at #7, with a real wicket keeper batsman at 6 would be ideal. If they do not have such a wicketkeeper and have Read/Jones instead, then

6. Batsman (perhaps one who can send down a few spin overs)
7. Flintoff
8. Read
9-11. Bowlers

That would be a good deep batting lineup.

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Pete Young for England IMO.

[marc71178]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

Flintoff Injury free at #7, with a real wicket keeper batsman at 6 would be ideal. If they do not have such a wicketkeeper and have Read/Jones instead, then

If Flintoff is injury free then IMO it's 4 man attack, best glovesman at 8 and 6 batsmen.

[Goughy]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

Flintoff Injury free at #7, with a real wicket keeper batsman at 6 would be ideal. If they do not have such a wicketkeeper and have Read/Jones instead, then

Nah, a keeper bat would either bat 8 or, god forbid, have Flintoff at 8. 6 should be for a specialist bat. Having a genuine allrounder like Flintoff gives England the potential of having the longest batting line-up rather than the shortest.
No 8 is such an important position ala Pollock, Warne. A guy who can bat here makes such a difference. A keeper batsman at 8 would make England such a stronger and more successful team.