Page 4 of 18 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 257

Thread: James Anderson

  1. #46
    International Regular shortpitched713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,220
    Quote Originally Posted by wpdavid View Post
    Probably. It didn't help his cause that after he got injured in Aus we won the CW tourny with Plunkett & Mahmood opening the bowling, but since Plunkett's been deemed surplus to requirements, it's hard to see why Lewis isn't playing.
    I haven't really kept up as much with England as I have some other teams this World Cup, but it completely baffles me that when England feel that they have an extra seamer that they would drop Plunkett instead of Mahmood. Personally, I feel that all three of the players mentioned should play as well as Anderson for reasons that others have mentioned before.
    Proud 2nd member of GM-OLAS
    Honorary Assistant Vice-President and Inquisitor General of T2IBS (Twenty-20 is Boring Society)

    Fraz highlights the defining aspect of Shoaib's legacy:
    Quote Originally Posted by FRAZ View Post
    Those humanitarian works etc ?
    Quote Originally Posted by andruid View Post
    I feel Tendulkar's association with the money minting exploitation of cricket fandom by certain varying commercial interests tarnishes his greatness a tad.

  2. #47
    FBU
    FBU is offline
    State Vice-Captain FBU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,096
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    This is one-day stuff we're talking about - it's economy-rate, not wickets-per-match, that matter the most.

    For England? Mark Ealham, Robin Martin-Jenkins, Dmitri Mascarenhas, to name a few.

    It wasn't a case of taking wickets to get into the final - it was a case of scoring runs. In said victories (all of 2 of them) our totals were 292 and 270 (those chiefly responsible were Joyce and Collingwood, both thanks to a dropped catch). This was what set-up the victories, not Plunkett getting gifted a few wickets with rubbish deliveries.

    Broad's available right now - he's just currently not good enough.
    I am talking about opening bowlers and those three are all rounders or would you open the bowling with them? Mark Ealham had his chance in international cricket and I think Collingwood has taken his place.

    I suppose we are all different but for me it's about wickets in ODIs.

    Joyce and Collingwood might have got the runs but if Plunkett didn't take the wickets Australia would have also got the runs.

    I wouldn't say Broad is not good enough, he outshone Kirtley in Bangladesh. He just needs another season in county cricket.

  3. #48
    FBU
    FBU is offline
    State Vice-Captain FBU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,096
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    I just think Flintoff should have taken the new-ball with Gough at Lord's\Edgbaston and Kirtley\Bicknell in the other 2 (easy to forget he didn't take it at Headingley as those 2 did).

    I remember that Surrey-Lancs game you speak of - didn't watch it, but would have been hard-pressed to miss the massive discrepancy in totals. But just to think that someone looked the deal based on that 1 game, however sensational it was, was premature. My thoughts on Anderson at the start of that summer, when virtually everyone was going wild with excitement (near enough exactly the same thing as they did with Harmison a year later and Jones 18 months later) were of caution. And after the events of the SA series, I happen to think I was right to be cautious.

    I also genuinely believe that had Gough made his comeback 2 Tests later than he did he might quite possibly still be in the side today. It's a real shame he felt he was gone because of 2 bad games on flat pitches.

    I did mention that options at the start of that SA series were somewhat limited due to the large amount of injuries. But handing a 20-year-old rookie the lead role in the attack based on one World Cup game and one early-season game (which is essentially all it was) was plain madness.
    Well I agree with that. He should have had a couple of years in the ODI team first. After those Tests against SA he played in the Nat West Series with SA/Zim (only bowling at Zim in one game and getting 1 wicket) and was the leading wicket taker ahead of Gough and Johnson and Flintoff. He was also the leading England wicket taker in the 2003 World Cup and the VB series. I think he took 41 ODI wickets in 2003. Only Murali and Ntini took more. If he has a clear run in the ODI side and doesn't get dropped or pick up an injury he can do the same again.

  4. #49
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by FBU View Post
    I am talking about opening bowlers and those three are all rounders or would you open the bowling with them? Mark Ealham had his chance in international cricket and I think Collingwood has taken his place.
    Ealham and Collingwood? Totally and completely different players. Collingwood is a top-order batsman, Ealham is a bowler who was also a only-occasionally-useful lower-order batsman. Ealham did indeed have his chance - and was treated distinctly shabbily, being dropped in 2001 for no good reason. Even now, he's infinately better at one-day bowling than most in England have ever been and quite possibly will ever be.
    I suppose we are all different but for me it's about wickets in ODIs.
    If you restrict run-flow wickets will come (not that it really matters if they don't - the overs are limited). The same cannot be said the other way around.
    Joyce and Collingwood might have got the runs but if Plunkett didn't take the wickets Australia would have also got the runs.
    Not really, the wickets came because Australia and New Zealand realised they were up against it to get the runs.
    I wouldn't say Broad is not good enough, he outshone Kirtley in Bangladesh. He just needs another season in county cricket.
    He needs to become better. Another season will tell whether or not he has done so.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006


  5. #50
    FBU
    FBU is offline
    State Vice-Captain FBU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,096
    I would rather have Plunkett than Ealham. I think Plunkett will take more than 67 wickets in 64 games and have a better batting average than 17.46.

  6. #51
    Cricket Web Staff Member Woodster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    5,481
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    If you restrict run-flow wickets will come (not that it really matters if they don't - the overs are limited). The same cannot be said the other way around.
    Taking wickets is by far the best way to slow the run rate down.

  7. #52
    International Regular shortpitched713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,220
    Quote Originally Posted by Woodster View Post
    Taking wickets is by far the best way to slow the run rate down.
    Aaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh!!!!!! They both work off of each other!

  8. #53
    State Captain Tomm NCCC's Avatar
    Squirrel Soccer Champion!
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Papplewick, Nottingham
    Posts
    1,565
    Quote Originally Posted by Woodster View Post
    Taking wickets is by far the best way to slow the run rate down.
    We need Ryan Sidebottom. Has a fantatsic economy rate, and he won't accept failure from himself, let alone the team. He does not get that many wickets, however, he had a good season in 2006
    This Weeks Samit Patel Fact - Has been mentioned in 32 of my posts

    The Rifles - Whats your verdict? www.myspace.com/therifles

    Winner of Cricket Webs Shane Warne Award - 4-11th Feb

    RIP Mr Woolmer, We are all poorer for your loss.

  9. #54
    Cricket Web Staff Member Woodster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    5,481
    Quote Originally Posted by shortpitched713 View Post
    Aaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh!!!!!! They both work off of each other!
    I was replying to a statement off someone else that suggested it doesn't work the other way round, I was merely suggesting it does!! Read the previous posts!
    Last edited by Woodster; 03-04-2007 at 11:10 AM.

  10. #55
    Hall of Fame Member steds's Avatar
    Breakout Champion!
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    ****ing cold and ****ing wet
    Posts
    17,201
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Mark Ealham
    Yeah, and Graham Gooch could solve our thorny top 3 problem.

  11. #56
    Hall of Fame Member steds's Avatar
    Breakout Champion!
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    ****ing cold and ****ing wet
    Posts
    17,201
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomm NCCC View Post
    We need Ryan Sidebottom.
    Hahahahahaha no.

  12. #57
    Cricket Web Staff Member Woodster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    5,481
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomm NCCC View Post
    We need Ryan Sidebottom. Has a fantatsic economy rate, and he won't accept failure from himself, let alone the team. He does not get that many wickets, however, he had a good season in 2006
    Did not see that much of Sidebottom last season, but yes from what I did see and read he was impressive. Variety also being a left armer. However, I do still have certain reservations over his ability to succeed at the highest level.

    He has gained a lot of valuable experience over the years and I may be doing him a dis-service.

  13. #58
    State Captain Nishant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    london
    Posts
    1,722
    dont know much about sidebottom TBH....but wouldnt it be better if england just developed the set of players they have at the moment instead of trying new faces again?

    At the end of the day, they are a fairly young side as it is! ( if u take into account he bowlers)

  14. #59
    International Regular shortpitched713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,220
    Quote Originally Posted by Woodster View Post
    I was replying to a statement off someone else that suggested it doesn't work the other way round, I was merely suggesting it does!! Read the previous posts!
    But the fact of the matter is that it is neither just about taking wickts nor just about restricting the run rate. Both are equally important and are intrinsically tied to one another. My disgust was at both your and Richard's view.

    Edit: Nevermind, you weren't the original poster of the "its about wickets" comment.
    Last edited by shortpitched713; 03-04-2007 at 03:57 PM.

  15. #60
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by FBU View Post
    I would rather have Plunkett than Ealham. I think Plunkett will take more than 67 wickets in 64 games and have a better batting average than 17.46.
    I happen to think he won't take anywhere near that number of wickets (or play that number of games), and far more importantly I expect his economy-rate to be over 1-an-over higher. In that context, averaging 4 or 5 more with the bat - which is a hell of an ask for a lower-order batsman in ODIs - isn't really too important.

Page 4 of 18 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Simon Jones or James Anderson?
    By sledger in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 266
    Last Post: 13-06-2008, 03:12 AM
  2. Battle of CW members II
    By Pratters in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 2881
    Last Post: 27-11-2006, 07:54 PM
  3. Surrey 2002: A Cricket Captain Diary
    By SIX AND OUT in forum General
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 17-02-2005, 08:25 AM
  4. Is it time James Anderson is dropped?
    By Craig in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 17-09-2003, 05:15 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •