Jonathan Trott

[Redbacks]

Originally Posted by Briony

He sounded very South African when interviewed the other night. By saying it was the realisation of a boyhood dream proves that people aspire to play test cricket, not for their countries.

Micky Authur said in a cricinfo webcast that he felt Trott had the potential to play for RSA but maybe not for another few years. Good in any case to see players wanting to play test cricket rather than become a mickey mouse specialist.

[sledger]

Originally Posted by Jamee999

Oh come on - why in the world can't we have Pietersen - Trott - Collingwood as a middle order?

No reason why we can't, I just think we won't.

[Langeveldt]

Originally Posted by Redbacks

Micky Authur said in a cricinfo webcast that he felt Trott had the potential to play for RSA but maybe not for another few years. Good in any case to see players wanting to play test cricket rather than become a mickey mouse specialist.

SA would love to have him back, but at this moment in time he probably wouldn't get a game.. Possibly for Amla though

[Lillian Thomson]

Originally Posted by Redbacks

Micky Authur said in a cricinfo webcast that he felt Trott had the potential to play for RSA but maybe not for another few years. Good in any case to see players wanting to play test cricket rather than become a mickey mouse specialist.

Considering he's already 28 it's rather potty to be talking about his potential in a few years.

[BoyBrumby]

Originally Posted by Langeveldt

SA would love to have him back, but at this moment in time he probably wouldn't get a game.. Possibly for Amla though

Was thinking whether he'd get a gig for SA. Maybe ahead of Prince or Amla, but in the current selectorial climate he'd probably be competing with the white players only (not saying that's right, but it's the realpolitik of the situation) and I'd have to have Smith, Kallis & de Villiers in front of him.

Plus now it'd be 4 years til he could turn out for SA anyway.

[Jamee999]

Isn't Trott now ineligible for your Saffies as he's played a Test for us?

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Originally Posted by Jamee999

Isn't Trott now ineligible for your Saffies as he's played a Test for us?

For 4 years, yes. Forever? No.

[BoyBrumby]

Originally Posted by Jamee999

Isn't Trott now ineligible for your Saffies as he's played a Test for us?

For 4 years, yeah. Once you play for a national team at any level from U-19 up you're committed for the next 48 months at least.

It's why Tahir wasn't eligible for the yarps as soon as he got his passport, he'd played for Pakistan A in 2005, so had to wait until April this year to become available for SA.

EDIT: Actually, Trott was already committed to us because he'd played those 2020 internationals a couple of years back.

[Redbacks]

Originally Posted by Lillian Thomson

Considering he's already 28 it's rather potty to be talking about his potential in a few years.

more to do with the fact he didn't think anyone was in line to crack into their current top 6

[Langeveldt]

Originally Posted by Jamee999

Isn't Trott now ineligible for your Saffies as he's played a Test for us?

Nope, Kepler Wessels played for two countries.. Trott won't play for SA, although I was half hoping Pietersen might one day after his fallout with the ECB, and judging by the fact that whenever he isn't playing for England he seems to be in Durban..

[simmy]

Would have to get another tattoo then...

[zaremba]

Originally Posted by Son Of Coco

Zaremba seems to overreact every time Ponting's quoted in the papers.

Yeah, guilty as charged. I just find "mind-games" media sniping by players so irritating, regardless of who does it. The game just doesn't need it.

[DingDong]

That century was easily the greatest century I have ever seen. And I've watched over 160 centuries.

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by sledger

With Trott playing the role which effectively Collingwood is in the team for much more effectively than Collingwood himself, one has to wonder how long Collingwood can last in the team, as Trott is now clearly undroppable, and rightfully so. Bell is unlikely to be dropped either, rightly or wrongly, and that leaves very little space for poor old Colly once Pietersen is fit, which fortunately for him won't be for a while, so he will probably get the chance to play himself back into contention. If he is not in the side by this time next year, I would not be surprised.

I know you don't find Collingwood convincing, but he's definitely better than Bell. He's not the best player in the world but I don't think England have the alternatives to drop him.

[tooextracool]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

I know you don't find Collingwood convincing, but he's definitely better than Bell. He's not the best player in the world but I don't think England have the alternatives to drop him.

Bell is 6 years younger and is arguably at present only a little worse than Collingwood with age on his side he could end up a lot better if he gets his game together.

The question one has to ask is, is it time to build a side, or as Vaughan put it an 'empire', or is it time to pick the best side to tour SA. If Collingwood is picked, it wouldn't be the worst decision, but if he's not I would be more impressed because it suggests that the selectors have put the focus on the future. Ideally, I'd like to see him replaced by someone who isn't Bell but theres not very many options here. Perhaps Joyce would make more sense?