Having Flintoff at 8 is just going too far.
The question is how much of a difference is there between a 5-pronged England attack and a 4-pronged attack. And if Mahmood is the 5th prong, I'd say there's not much of a difference in terms of effectiveness. As such, I'd advocate a specialist batsman at 6, Flintoff (fully fit) at 7 and Read at 8.
Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."
If at any point we could put out a fit & firing attack of Flintoff, Harmison, Hoggard, Jones & Panesar the five-man attack again has merit. Tis a pity none of the last four can bat for toffee tho.
Cricket Web's 2013/14 Premier League Tipping Champion
- As featured in The Independent.
"The committee discussed the issue of illegal bowling actions, and believed that there are a number of bowlers currently employing suspect actions in international cricket, and that the ICC's reporting and testing procedures are not adequately scrutinising these bowlers."
- Even the ICC's own official press release thinks things must change
Its also a bit of a negative move.
It's negative to pick an extra bowler because you don't have faith that your 4 best bowlers can do the job. If England had four specialist bowlers worthy of selection, it would be a different matter. But as things stand, they barely even have 2, so why bother to play a substandard 5th?
That yorker length ball that he blocked through the covers for four was something special though.
But if Jones does prove England's version on Bond then the 4-bowlers could work, but the keeper dilemma would still be up..
marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!
Anyone want to join the Society?
Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.
Im not going to go in to why 5 bowlers is a bad idea for the 100th time. Apart from to say that to win Tests you must score more runs than your opponents and virtually every test shows the benefits of guys lower down scoring runs (Pollock, Warne etc) and turning a potentially average total into a good one and being able to salvage an innings if the top order collapses. Also, f you want to win games you have to bowl the opposition out relatively cheaply (generally in under 90 overs) and there are not enough overs in these scenarios for 5 bowlers to bowl equally and heavily, and usually at least 1 bowler is left twiddling his thumbs whilst the others take wickets and bowl overs.
Last edited by Goughy; 04-01-2007 at 04:33 PM.
If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there is bound to be edits
West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma
Happy Birthday! (easier than using Birthday threads)
Email and MSN- Goughy at cricketmail dot net
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)