• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

The England batting line up

Who should play for England in the summer

  • Collingwood

    Votes: 20 48.8%
  • Shah

    Votes: 5 12.2%
  • Cook

    Votes: 5 12.2%
  • Bell

    Votes: 11 26.8%

  • Total voters
    41

Autobahn

State 12th Man
Even if vaughan is fit he's really going to have to show some form sooner or later or the comparisions with Brearley will start to get to him. And the problem is now unless there's injuries to the opening lot he's not going to get his favorite place back at the top of order.

ODIs however is a completely different kettle of fish with him averaging well below what a batsmen should be, plus nowadays he doesn't use his handy off-spin anymore and you don't want to be carrying injury prone people in the field.

I could easily see vaughan being replaced in ODI by either strauss or tres as captain.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Trescothick
Strauss
Vaughan
Collingwood
Pietersen
Flintoff
Jones

Collingwood is very much a late bloomer, but even if he didn't add any big scores after his 134, he was consistent, scored more runs than Bell, Pietersen and Flintoff who all played one test more than him this winter, and is probably our best fielder

I'd have Bell next though, as well as his batting potential, he is one of the best close catchers around, obviously the ECB's attitude of giving players a chance these days is commendable, but Bell knows they won't be patient forever, if he is selected agaisnt Sri Lanka he will have to score runs else I doubt he will play against Pakistan.
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
tooextracool said:
yea that would be my argument too. he needs to take some time off work on his game in domestic cricket. its not going to happen but my side for the first test against SL would look like this:

Strauss
Trescothick(c)
Shah
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff
Read
Giles
Hoggard
Harmison
Jones



Anderson

i also wouldnt be completely against a cook/strauss opening partnership with tresco batting in the middle order(something ive always been for). i think Pietersen should at least by now be walking on a tight rope, since his performance at Lords, he hasnt played a single convincing innings(and his innings at the oval was anything but) and the strong temperament that he showed at the start of his career has actually gotten worse. Anderson may just be pushing Harmison for a place in the test side IMO, especially since hes probably going to get more chances at the international level with Jones and co frequently getting injured, so he'll get the chance to prove himself.
i wouldnt give flintoff the captaincy in tests because he himself has said that hes doesnt want to continue as captain after the series and would be glad for vaughan to take over.
I agree with you about Chris Read,it is times for Jones to go. However i would not drop Vaghan but would make it perfectly clear that he has to get runs, he can no longer fall back on the fact that he is the captain and cant be dropped. I think Sri lanka is a good series for him to get some runs. I would be tempted to drop pieterson just to remind him that he is not a big player yet but that is not going to happen.
 

dontcloseyoureyes

BARNES OUT
I don't see how it's Geraint's time to go, since by all accounts he's kept bery well [minus a few blunders] in India, and having watched the series in Pakistan I can say he kept very well.

He is definately improving, and at a good rate.
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
dontcloseyoureyes said:
I don't see how it's Geraint's time to go, since by all accounts he's kept bery well [minus a few blunders] in India, and having watched the series in Pakistan I can say he kept very well.

He is definately improving, and at a good rate.
because he still isnt a test class keeper and in his role as wicketkeeper "batsmen" he is failing miserably as he isnt getting any runs
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I'll wait for Collingwood to score some half-centuries on pitches offering anything to the bowlers before piling-on the sort of praise we've seen here (scores in the Second and Third Tests... 25, 14, 31, 33).
Bell has had enough chances for now IMO, he'll be better served in domestic cricket for present. Don't count anything as to his opening failures, though - where've we heard that one before...?
Vaughan would be the same for me, but everyone knows it ain't gonna happen.
There's no justification for Cook staying in the side ahead of Trescothick, though you could have made a case for Strauss' omission before that Mumbai century. Until someone shows some poor form, Cook is first-reserve opener.
One man yet to be mentioned is, of course, Mark Butcher - if he starts the season (and only if - we still don't know for certain if he's shaken-off the injuries) and scores plenty, he's got to be pushing for a place. And I for one would give it him without much hesitation...
Trescothick
Strauss
Butcher
Vaughan
Collingwood
Pietersen
Flintoff
Jones
Jones
Hoggard
Anderson \ Giles-if-pitch-looks-like-turner (unlikely)
Pietersen is pushing his luck for me, he's not played well since his 4th innings. Any more stupid strokes which cost him his wicket and I'd give him a break, hopefully to teach him a lesson.
So far I find it difficult to leave-out Collingwood, despite his wholly unconvincing nature of run-scoring. I have plenty of doubts, still, about Vaughan and Pietersen for not-dissimilar reasons. Strauss I hope will regain his run-scoring when he's back in England.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Pothas said:
because he still isnt a test class keeper and in his role as wicketkeeper "batsmen" he is failing miserably as he isnt getting any runs
Read has?
I just can't see Read scoring Test runs.
 

Pedro Delgado

International Debutant
Read had his go and buggered it up, and unless he's improved dramatically (has he? genuine query) then there's no reason to think he wouldn't bugger it up again.
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Richard said:
I'll wait for Collingwood to score some half-centuries on pitches offering anything to the bowlers before piling-on the sort of praise we've seen here (scores in the Second and Third Tests... 25, 14, 31, 33).
Bell has had enough chances for now IMO, he'll be better served in domestic cricket for present. Don't count anything as to his opening failures, though - where've we heard that one before...?
Vaughan would be the same for me, but everyone knows it ain't gonna happen.
There's no justification for Cook staying in the side ahead of Trescothick, though you could have made a case for Strauss' omission before that Mumbai century. Until someone shows some poor form, Cook is first-reserve opener.
One man yet to be mentioned is, of course, Mark Butcher - if he starts the season (and only if - we still don't know for certain if he's shaken-off the injuries) and scores plenty, he's got to be pushing for a place. And I for one would give it him without much hesitation...
.
I just thought of Marc Butcher actualy but i really cant see him regaining his fitness or form. Even if he did i think it would be a bit of a step backwards. The thing about Bell is that whenever he goes into county cricket he gets a lot of runs and i really dont thik him playing in domestic cricket will do him much good. I am torn between Colingwood and Bell, would be very harsh to drop Colingwood but im not convinced he will ever make a quality test match number 4, Bell on the other hand might do.
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Pedro Delgado said:
Read had his go and buggered it up, and unless he's improved dramatically (has he? genuine query) then there's no reason to think he wouldn't bugger it up again.
His batting has improved considerably in the last couple of seasons, and he recently got a century for England A
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Jones is a superior batsman to Read, and as is keeping has been strong lately there isn't really a case for bringing Read in

Geraint may have failed with the bat in India, but his average for the series of 15 si the same as Chris Read's Test match average. geraint is the best option available to us, regardless of whetehr he's my hero or not :ph34r:
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Pedro Delgado said:
Read had his go and buggered it up, and unless he's improved dramatically (has he? genuine query) then there's no reason to think he wouldn't bugger it up again.
Read has shown no evidence of improvement to me.
He's always scored runs at the First-Class level but, for whatever reason, he's just not managed to translate it into Test runs.
A shame, really, but I can't see it changing.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Pothas said:
The thing about Bell is that whenever he goes into county cricket he gets a lot of runs and i really dont thik him playing in domestic cricket will do him much good.
It's very, very easy to miss but the actual fact of the matter, which was easily missed, was that Bell didn't score any First-Class runs after the Bangladesh series.
Bell had such a sensational start to the season, you could easily overlook his poor form post-call-up.
I don't really worry too much about his lack of Ashes runs - he got lots of very good balls - but in India his poor form worried me. Indeed, in Pakistan he played pretty well but nowhere near as well as his average made him look like he'd played - he got dropped in most of his innings.
I reckon a spell with Warks could genuinely do him some good.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Pothas said:
His batting has improved considerably in the last couple of seasons, and he recently got a century for England A
Except it hasn't - Read's form with the bat has been good since 2002, and he's played Test-cricket in that period.
 

Pedro Delgado

International Debutant
Richard said:
Read has shown no evidence of improvement to me.
He's always scored runs at the First-Class level but, for whatever reason, he's just not managed to translate it into Test runs.
A shame, really, but I can't see it changing.
Just as I thought. Ta.
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Let's see ..

Bell - top performer in Pakistan but did next to nothing against Aus or India. And yes, I know Aus are good, but all the other top 6ers did much more than he did. We keep being told how talented he is, but he rarely looks convincing at this level.

Collingwood - top average for the winter from those who played more than 2 tests, but only made runs on absolute roads. More guts & brains than one or two of the dashers, but is he good enough when there's anything in it for the bowlers?

KP - talented but thick as pig****. Topped the averages against Aus, but needed loads of lives at the Oval to do that and needed almost as many when he made runs during the winter. More than anyone he has the ability to absolutely destroy an attack, and won't be intimidated in Australia. But given his performances, he's very lucky to be the automatic choice that he seems to be at present.

Shah - probably looked our most convincing middle order batsman in his one test, and looked set to give the selectors a real headache if he hadn't been run out.

Cook - that rare thing: an English batsman with the patience to build a long innings. Any other time, he's be straight in the side, but he's not going to replace Tres or Vaughan, or probably Strauss. Talking of whom,

Strauss - poor for most of the winter, but 3 hundreds in SA and 2 against Aus still makes him fireproof at present. I think.

My top 6?
Tres, Cook, Strauss, Vaughan, Shah & Fred.


PS I'd think about bringing in Anderson permanently unless Harmison contributes a whole lot more this summer.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I'd seriously consider having Strauss-Cook opening - neither, as far as I'm aware, have any experience of anything but opening. Trescothick, at least, does.
I've really done Shah an injustice - didn't even mention him - certainly played far better than most of our batsmen have for the last 2 years. But it was only 1 Test. England's recent debutants have sure as been paradoxical to the normal (before 2003, the last right-handed specialist batsman to score 50 on Test debut was Kim Barnett in 1989 - Thorpe scored 6 and 114* Trescothick 66 and 38*, and the next best was 65, by Darren Gough of all people; I don't count McGrath or Clarke as their "debuts" were against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh):
Ed Smith - 67 and 0-off-1
Strauss - 112 and 83ro
Bell - 70 and DNB
Pietersen - 57 and 64*
Cook - 60 and 104* (though it should only have been 70)
Shah - 88 and 38ro
Making your debut as a batsman really has been turned on it's head.
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Richard said:
I'd seriously consider having Strauss-Cook opening - neither, as far as I'm aware, have any experience of anything but opening. Trescothick, at least, does.
I've really done Shah an injustice - didn't even mention him - certainly played far better than most of our batsmen have for the last 2 years. But it was only 1 Test. England's recent debutants have sure as been paradoxical to the normal (before 2003, the last right-handed specialist batsman to score 50 on Test debut was Kim Barnett in 1989 - Thorpe scored 6 and 114* Trescothick 66 and 38*, and the next best was 65, by Darren Gough of all people; I don't count McGrath or Clarke as their "debuts" were against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh):
Ed Smith - 67 and 0-off-1
Strauss - 112 and 83ro
Bell - 70 and DNB
Pietersen - 57 and 64*
Cook - 60 and 104* (though it should only have been 70)
Shah - 88 and 38ro
Making your debut as a batsman really has been turned on it's head.
I wonder what that tells us about the English system nowadays, standrads in test cricket, or both.

I'm trying to recall when Tres batted anywhere other than as an opener. Chatting to a Somerset mate a few months ago, he reckoned it may have happened a long time ago, but not remotely recently. Plus his performances at the top of the order have been outstanding for the last 2 years, so you really wouldn't want to lose that.

Hasn't Strauss played in the middle order for Middlesex? He's certainly batted at 4 for the oneday side, and done well there (yes, I know ..).

As for Shah, I know what you mean about it being only one test. Sometimes you just have to go with a gut reaction though. And would I really be brave enoug to drop KP if I was in charge? Dunno. You know what sort of flack you'd cop from Botham Gough, Warne et al, although that shouldn't matter of course. I do think that something of his attitude will be needed in Australia in 8 months time. But anyway. Truth be told, I change my mind on this one pretty much every day.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Yep, me too.
As for the Shah gut-reaction... I thought upon the debuts of pretty much everyone I gave the example of (except Edward Smith) "here's a 100 Test, 40+ average man".
As for what does this sudden change prove... I think it says a bit about an improvement in the English domestic system (not that there's not still plenty to do) and a lot about the downgrading in the quality of Test bowling.
As far as I know, Strauss has always opened in the long game. I also can't think of many if any occasions he's batted down the order in the short game for Middx.
The KP thing... you say would\should it matter...?
My answer to that is, yes, it might.
What has been the single biggest praised thing in selection terms recently? You've said it enough times; Matthew Engel has said it enough times; I'm not going to say it again.
How much of that has been down to the fact that, in Grav, Dusty Miller and Duncan, we've had a settled panel to make settled selections? IMO a huge amount.
If you make a huge call, cop slack from ITB, Goughie, Shane et al, what if we then lose to Pakistan? How much "what's Graveney doing selecting our teams? He's been there for 10 years, time to go" etc. flack will we see flying around? We've already begun to see it in Aus with Mark Waugh's recent comments on Hohns. And you and I know that once the press gets a bee in it's bonnet, it rarely if ever comes out alive.
Nasser Hussain said, several times, in his autobiography - David Graveney is too worried about what others think, looks after his own job too much, etc. Yet he also said that he feels you have to have some element of selfishness for top-level cricket success. But isn't that also true of selection? IMO, yes it is.
David Graveney has done a great job, for me, and he'd not have done that great job if he'd not had the sense to protect his position.
Nasser makes a big thing, too, about not taking the easy option - never trying anything unusual, knowing that, if it doesn't work, it won't rebound so horribly on you. Says he's always hated that style of captaincy\management.
And yet... that's undeniably the way to make best sure you have a long career. Take risks only when you need to.
You could say: do we not need, badly, to teach Pietersen a lesson? That is a question to which there can be no simple answer. We won't know.
I really, really hope we won't have to try desperate measures.
 

Top