Indians can't bowl - Where has the rumour come from as I myself and many indian friends arwe competent fast bowlers ?
With the English bid I said: Let us be brief. If you give back the Falkland Islands, which belong to us, you will get my vote. They then became sad and left
I love the revisionism being trotted out about our win in India. Jesus **** that was an immense team effort, don't degrade it a year later when the team is playing on the other end of the scale.
At what moment in the series did England realize how **** they are? Think it was somewhere in Adelaide imo
I agree with the general point though that we have been largely poor for two years though. Hard to see how we right the ship to be honest, need to find a blend of new players and experienced ones who are just out of form.
~ Cribbertarian ~
Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since December 2009
I suppose one tough question is whether our experienced players are out of form or in decline. I suspect that Prior and Cook are in the former category, probably Swann as well. But I fear that Anderson and KP are in the latter. And Trott's a gonner imo. The problem then is that even if they are in decline, Jimmy and KP are still superior to the alternatives, so this isn't going to be easy. I'd still play Anderson next summer, given that we haven't a clue who are 3rd seamer is. Depending how it goes, he might still be around for the 2015 Ashes, but it would be an act of supreme cruelty to take him over there again. He really does need a consistently threatening opening partner. By rights, Broad should be first change, which he probably won't like, but so what. If SB wants to open the bowling, he should be doing some damage with the new ball far more frequently. Most of his best spells have come with an older ball anyway. As for KP, is his heart really in it? His whole approach being 'that's the way I play' adds up to one memorable innings in a series and not much else. Maybe two if it's a longer series. I know there are batsmen like Gooch who only hit top gear from their mid30s, but I think they're the exception rather than the rule. I really want to avoid 12 to 18 months of batsmen 'doing enough' to stay in the side thanks to occasionally good knocks, but that's what will happen if the selectors don't make some brave calls now. And as I've said elsewhere, I'd start in Melbourne.
The other tough question will be about who should come in. Given the question marks over the middle order, I'd actually stick with Carberry for a while. Certainly until someone else makes a serious case for an opener's position. No idea who that might be. Nor do I have any strong views about who'se a better bet out of Ballance, Taylor or whoever else is on the fringe, beyond suggesting that Bairstow was unfairly scapegoated for his part in the home series, given the performances of the more experienced guys most of the time. Whether rthat makes him better than Ballance or Taylor, I have no idea.
Last edited by wpdavid; 17-12-2013 at 08:41 AM.
Yeah always thought Broad was like Freddie in as much as he seemed to be better at first change
It's pretty tough atm for England. There are no major selection **** ups that other countries have had when they've slumped and no easy selections to make in terms of dropping and selecting people. The guys who can win matches for England are all in the side already, the only thing that can get the side winning proper series is basically to collectively raise the standard of cricket they've played.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)