cricket betting betway blog banner small

View Poll Results: What to do?

Voters
42. You may not vote on this poll
  • Flintoff at 6 (drop a batsman)

    6 14.29%
  • Ambrose at 6, Flintoff at 7 (drop a batsman)

    4 9.52%
  • Flintoff 7, Ambrose 8 (drop a bowler)

    12 28.57%
  • Ambrose 7, Flintoff 8 (drop a bowler)

    16 38.10%
  • Public poll

    4 9.52%
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 57

Thread: What do you do with a Freddie Flintoff?

  1. #1
    Norwood's on Fire GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    2011 and 2015 champ - find me in the Platinum Lounge -
    Posts
    59,162

    What do you do with a Freddie Flintoff?

    I believe that Andrew Flintoff will play for England in the first Test match of this summer. It sounds like he is bowling well, if not yet at full pelt.

    Assuming he does play, where do you think he should bat? It seems pretty wideheld now that he should bat at 7, even Duncan Fletcher got in on the act last week. Some, though, wouldn't even bat him that high. Certainly, I'd rather see Anderson dropped than a batsman..
    So, I think the main options are:

    Drop a batsman and bat him at 6

    I don't think this would be a good choice. Whatever you think of his ability, his batting has showed no signs yet of getting up back up to top six Test standard (if you think it was ever there).

    Drop a batsman and bat him at 7 (Ambrose at 6)

    This is the option for those who agree with the above, want him in the side as a bowler but don't trust him to be in a four-man attack. Ambrose hasn't really shown that he's top-six material, though.

    Drop a bowler and bat him at 7 (Ambrose at 8)
    Drop a bowler and bat him at 8 (Ambrose at 7)


    Essentially the same theory but where Flintoff bats depends on whether you rate him above Ambrose. It would be a nice strong tail, and an attack of Flintoff-Sidebottom-Broad-Panesar is much to be positive about IMO. Potentially you could drop Panesar for a seamer if the May tests see green tops, but otherwise I'm happy with this. I'd stick Flintoff at 7, Ambrose at 8, with broad at 9 that would make for the strongest tail I have seen us bat with in a long time. I know people have concerns about him being in a 4-man attack, but if he's not fit enoguh to bowl a full quota then he shouldn't play, simple as really.

    Please vote to reflect your opinion

    Quote Originally Posted by Axl Rose
    The internet is a big garbage can


    RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.

  2. #2
    Hall of Fame Member chaminda_00's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Murali CG
    Posts
    16,305
    Would play Rikki Clarke
    The man, the mountain, the Mathews. The greatest all rounder since Keith Miller. (Y)

    Jaffna Jets CC (Battrick & FTP)

    RIP WCC and CW Cricket

    Member of the MSC, JMAS and CVAAS

  3. #3
    International Coach Barney Rubble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    All over the shop
    Posts
    10,190
    Bat him at 7. Takes the pressure off him with the bat, but still allows him to play the all-rounder role. Also allows Ambrose a bit more free reign, and we look strong with Broad at 9.

  4. #4
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    I've always said I don't think Flintoff should play in the opening Test, much as the current signs are the most promising since... well... his last comeback.

    If and when he should return to the side, which I do, obviously, hope will happen, it simply has to be in place of a bowler. If you think he won't be up for bowling his share of a four-man attack - you simply cannot pick him. It weakens the batting more to have a passenger at six (or seven) than it strengthens the bowling to have him available to bowl 10-15 overs a day.

    If he is once more fit to bowl a full share of overs, then I'd have him in the side in place of either Broad or Hoggard - assuming that the opening Test lines-up with Sidebottom, Hoggard, Broad, MSP. But I reiterate: I am far from sure that Anderson won't be selected in the opening Test.

    Flintoff at eight adds real ballast to the lower-order, just as having Craig White (who was, is and always will be a superior batsman to Flintoff) there did in 2000. He is not, however, a Test number-six and never has been IMO, and I don't really rate him as a number-seven either. Certainly I don't feel Ambrose needs the stigma that "promotion" in the batting-order provides this early in his career.

    So hopefully there might at some point be a time when we get:
    Seven: Ambrose
    Eight: Flintoff
    Nine: Broad \ Hoggard
    Ten: Sidebottom
    Eleven: MSP \ Hoggard (depending on surface)
    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. #5
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Fine Leg/Technical Area
    Posts
    17,446
    Drop a bowler & bat him 7 & Ambrose @ 8. Againts consistently good bowling he would not make a good test match #6. Even though vs IND in 06 he really did play well in that role Freddie totally reverted from his natural insticts given the situation of the side, and thats not the kind of Flintoff England wants with the bat, England need the big hitting free-scoring Freddie.

    In a full-strenght side of:

    Cook
    Strauss/Vaughan/Key - depending on the form of Strauss & how much Key as improved.
    Vaughan/Bell - depending on form of Strauss, thus Vaughan opens again Bell bat @ 3.
    Pietersen
    Bell/Shah/Ramprakash - if openers fail he goes up to #3 & Shah/Ramps comes in
    Collingwood
    Flintoff
    Ambrose
    Sidebottom
    Hoggard
    Panesar

  6. #6
    International Coach wpdavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    12,062
    There's not a lot to debate, really. He's so not a test number six that it isn't funny, so it simply comes down to whether he bats at 7 or 8. I'd play him ahead of Ambrose, but it wouldn't bother me if he batted at 8. The real question is who else bowls, and that's far from easy.

  7. #7
    Drop Monty 'I only get wickets against numpty-esque shots or on bunsens' Panesar. Shoot any groundsmen that don't create wickets that suit our new bowling attack. We'll still have 4 bowlers plus Colly to bowl a few when needed. I want a team with the potential to beat the best, not one that's efficient at bullying mediocre rubbish but would definitely get brushed aside against good teams - as what happens if you make players like Panesar a fixture in the side.
    World Scrabble Champion 2014. National Scrabble Champion 2009, 2015.
    Author of Word Addict
    Countdown Series 57 Champion
    King of the Arcade
    ECB - you are a complete ****ing disgrace, #FTECB

  8. #8
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    39,837
    Flintoff is ideal at 7. The top six should be pure batsmen, and if two of them can combine to send down 10-12 overs a day, that's just great..

    Gilchrist came in at seven and he was a much better batsman than Flintoff, and it worked exceptionally well.

    I'd have:

    Cook
    Vaughan
    Strauss
    Pietersen
    Bell
    Collingwood
    Flintoff
    Ambrose (you could flip Flintoff and Ambrose too)
    Broad
    Anderson
    Sidebottom


    You could put Panesar in there for one of the pace bowlers if the wicket is going to turn a lot.
    Quote Originally Posted by KungFu_Kallis View Post
    Peter Siddle top scores in both innings....... Matthew Wade gets out twice in one ball
    "The future light cone of the next Indian fast bowler is exactly the same as the past light cone of the previous one"
    -My beliefs summarized in words much more eloquent than I could come up with

    How the Universe came from nothing

  9. #9
    First Class Debutant ozone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    805
    IMO, he still hasnt really shown any form with the bat since before all his injuries and so shouldn't even be considered at 6 and as we still havent got a proven wicketkeeper to bat at 6, you have to drop a bowler. I'd bat him at 8 because he has no form and I think that to have Ambrose batting that low would be a waste; if we were going to play a wicketkeeper at 8, we might as well pick the best glovesman in the country and not worry about their batting too much.
    There's only one Dimitri Mascarenhas!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by BoyBrumby View Post
    It's surely a piss take that in the country who gave us Robert Nesta Marley, King Tubby & Jimmy Cliff that we're tortured with Chumba-fuggin'-Wamba between overs?

  10. #10
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Fine Leg/Technical Area
    Posts
    17,446
    Quote Originally Posted by silentstriker View Post
    Flintoff is ideal at 7. The top six should be pure batsmen, and if two of them can combine to send down 10-12 overs a day, that's just great..

    Gilchrist came in at seven and he was a much better batsman than Flintoff, and it worked exceptionally well.

    I'd have:

    Cook
    Vaughan
    Strauss
    Pietersen
    Bell
    Collingwood
    Flintoff
    Ambrose (you could flip Flintoff and Ambrose too)
    Broad
    Anderson
    Sidebottom


    You could put Panesar in there for one of the pace bowlers if the wicket is going to turn a lot.
    No way should Hoggard not be in an England XI, his axing in NZ was absolute ignorance.
    While Strauss even though made that career saving innings againts & Bond-less NZ attack will have his work cut out when SA get there especially given he has blokes like Key & Ramprakash banging down the down ATM.

  11. #11
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Fine Leg/Technical Area
    Posts
    17,446
    Quote Originally Posted by ozone View Post
    IMO, he still hasnt really shown any form with the bat since before all his injuries and so shouldn't even be considered at 6 and as we still havent got a proven wicketkeeper to bat at 6, you have to drop a bowler. I'd bat him at 8 because he has no form and I think that to have Ambrose batting that low would be a waste; if we were going to play a wicketkeeper at 8, we might as well pick the best glovesman in the country and not worry about their batting too much.
    And who reallys is the best glovesman in Englnad ATM?. Don't tell me Chris Read

  12. #12
    First Class Debutant ozone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    805
    Quote Originally Posted by aussie View Post
    And who reallys is the best glovesman in Englnad ATM?. Don't tell me Chris Read
    Yes, but as I said, I would bat Ambrose at 7, so wouldn't pick Read.

  13. #13
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,797
    Quote Originally Posted by aussie View Post
    No way should Hoggard not be in an England XI, his axing in NZ was absolute ignorance.
    While Strauss even though made that career saving innings againts & Bond-less NZ attack will have his work cut out when SA get there especially given he has blokes like Key & Ramprakash banging down the down ATM.
    I'm amazed that I was able to understand this post.
    Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."

    The...er...Twitter[/SIZE][/CENTER]

  14. #14
    Hall of Fame Member steds's Avatar
    Breakout Champion!
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    ****ing cold and ****ing wet
    Posts
    17,205

    What do you do with a Freddie Flintoff?

    Earl-aye in the morning.



    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    If you think he won't be up for bowling his share of a four-man attack - you simply cannot pick him.
    He cannot be picked, then. You can't trust someone with his track record in a four-man attack. To do so is not so much tempting fate as walking straight up to it, dropping your kecks and ordering it to take its best shot.

  15. #15
    Norwood's on Fire GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    2011 and 2015 champ - find me in the Platinum Lounge -
    Posts
    59,162
    Quote Originally Posted by silentstriker View Post
    Flintoff is ideal at 7. The top six should be pure batsmen, and if two of them can combine to send down 10-12 overs a day, that's just great..

    Gilchrist came in at seven and he was a much better batsman than Flintoff, and it worked exceptionally well.

    I'd have:

    Cook
    Vaughan
    Strauss
    Pietersen
    Bell
    Collingwood
    Flintoff
    Ambrose (you could flip Flintoff and Ambrose too)
    Broad
    Anderson
    Sidebottom


    You could put Panesar in there for one of the pace bowlers if the wicket is going to turn a lot.
    Agree on the most part, but Strauss opens with Vaughan at 3, and if you're going to play 4 seamers then I'd pick Hoggard over Anderson. Oh, and Anderson has to bat 11, I'donly bat him that high because I can't bat him any lower. Sidebottom is not too shabby (compared to some of our recent tailenders that is)

    Something else that struck me earlier was that Flintoff's best innings for England actually came batting at 7, V the crims in 05.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Caption This - Freddie Flintoff
    By Cameron-Moss in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 26-06-2007, 08:21 AM
  2. Caption this: Freddie Flintoff
    By Alysum in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 20-05-2007, 06:05 AM
  3. The Freddie Flintoff 'Eat Your Words' Thread
    By Swervy in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 114
    Last Post: 08-08-2005, 09:27 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
  •