England test team: the five bowler theory

[BoyBrumby]

Im happy with 5 bowlers if one of them can make the team as a batsman and one other can bat as well. To say I never see the merits of 5 bowlers is missing the point. For example South Africa. Kallis's bowling is a huge bonus. A quality specialist batsman that can bowl. Then add Pollock who can bat. That allows them to have 3 other pure and specialist bowlers ie Nel, Ntini, Harris. However, that 5 bowler philosophy is centered on having a specialist batsman as the 5th bowler.

As for your question, Ive never advocated England go into a test with 3 bowlers (mainly because the occasional bowling is so poor). Ive said 4. It gives by far the best balance given the players available. If England had a few good specialist batsmen that could bowl then I would rather 3 bowlers than 5.

As for taking it up with the Aussie selectors, they have been massively successful with 4 bowlers (also 3 as I showed) for a long time, same as the great West Indian teams. If they want to go to 5 bowlers that is their issue, it is however far from a proven formula and most unwise.

Also, there are not enough overs in a day for 5 specialist bowlers. There will always be someone barely bowling and that is a complete waste of a selection.

You seem to be basing everything on a principle and an ideal rather than real life and putting the side most capable of winning on the field.

No, that's exactly what I haven't done. I actually argued that five bowlers is the ideal & that it isn't always practical. I said at the outset that the selection of Giles at 8 ahead of Panesar because of his superior batting was wrong-headed. In 2005 the form of Flintoff & Geraint made a 6-7-8 of Flintoff-Jones-Giles just about sustainable, but by the time of our tour to Oz we had a Flintoff & a Giles who hadn't played in months & a Jones who'd just been dropped for lack of runs. The extra batsman would've absolutely made sense.

 

[Richard]

Would've made sense instead of Harmison in 2005, TBH.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Would've made sense instead of Harmison in 2005, TBH.

We'd have missed him in the second test, if nowhere else.

He does need to do a lot more to justify his place tho. One good test per summer (well year, really, as he never really does anything abroad) isn't enough for a bowler who should be close to his peak years now.

 

[cover drive man]

I'm going to be frank I'm all for the five bowler theory good luck with the 500000 post Rich.

 

[Richard]

We'd have missed him in the second test, if nowhere else.

We'd have missed his magnificent 2 wickets?

It'd have been 1, I might add, if Bowden could give a plumb lbw or Jones could catch (Flintoff deserved that last wicket infinately more than Harmison).

 

[adharcric]

Seriously - the chances of Nixon playing a Test are impossibly slim.

Let's hope so. I never thought he would get into the national side period but that happened so you never know.

 

[Richard]

Well he's always been regarded as a reasonable lower-order one-day batsman and given that there was a World Cup a couple of months down the road the long-term could go to hell.

The same is not true on either count in the longer game!

 

[adharcric]

Good point. A 37-year-old debutant just seems a little strange to me.

 

[Richard]

Well it was a bit, yeah, but with a World Cup just 50 days away or whatever and the other many factors of the time (England being dire, England's wicketkeeper-batsmen being dire, etc.) it's less crazy than it normally would be.

 

[open365]

What gets me is the way that the media are making a fuss of how great he is and how much impact he made on the side, despite the fact he averages lower than both Read and Jones.

When they talk about him in the media, his batting goes un noticed and they focus on his 'attitude' whereas with Read and Jones all they ever talked about was how crap their battin was.

 

[Richard]

Well - Jones' batting was crap. Barely any better than Nixon's. And I said that in 2004, I said "don't pick him for ODIs!" they ignored me (and those like me saying a similar thing, rare as they were) and paid the price.

I agree, Nixon's impact has in some quarters been vastly over-emphasised, but equally don't doubt that he has offered something that Read and the like would not - ever - do.

 

[ozone]

Basically, at the moment england can only afford to go in with 4 bowlers because they wouldn't have enough batsmen if they went in with 5 due to there lack of a wicketkeeper who can bat. And I think that of the Read/Jones/Nixon trio, you have to pick Read because he's a much better keeper

 

[Richard]

Or you could just go for none of the 3...

 

[ozone]

Yeah, but who else is a good enough keeper to perform at test level. There are others like Foster and Prior who can bat but aren't as great keepers. Although either of these two would probably do better than Jones.

 

[Richard]

IMO Foster's done quite enough to deserve a 2nd go, and Prior's not good enough with either bat or gloves.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Is Nic Pothas qualified to play?.If he is he should be ahead of Foster and Read because of the amount of runs he scores in county cricket.

 

[Richard]

Pothas, at 33, is not someone I'd want to consider for Tests.

Shame he wasn't given a go ahead of Nixon in the ODIs this winter, though.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Pothas, at 33, is not someone I'd want to consider for Tests.

.

Better batsmen than Read/Jones/Foster will ever be IMO.Very unlucky to miss out on the WC.Think he might have a shout for the summer tests considering how England have no idea who there number 1 keeper is going to be.Age shouldn't be the problem if he keeps on getting loads of runs.

 

[Richard]

I can't say I'm terribly keen on the idea of a 33-year-old Test debutant. I'd be surprised if such a player had 2 good years in him.

Yes, he might be a better batsman than Read and Jones (equally he might not), but I don't see any evidence that he's conclusively better than Foster, and given that Foster is far younger IMO he's the most deserving candidate.

 

[ozone]

IMO England haven't got the class to discount someone like Pothas with an average of 38 in first class cricket. Over the next 2 years, the young Worcestershire keeper, Steve Davies, might turn out to be our next long term keeper so Pothas would only have to stay at the top of his game for a few years.