The English disease

[Prince EWS]

I'd take Swann over Ajmal as well if it really came down to it (which it wouldn't because playing Rehman ahead of either of them is ridiculous, but anyway) because regardless of which side of the "better bowler" debate you come down on it's obviously ridiculously close and Swann's batting and fielding is much better.

If three offies is too much then you just don't play Ajmal. Or you don't bowl Hafeez much. Swann has to play.

 

[Prince EWS]

I will add though that "which team would have more players in a combined side" is a really poor way of measuring the relative quality of two teams anyway. The higher the level of cricket you play, the more it becomes about eliminating weaknesses, getting all parts contributing etc and the less it becomes about having star players who can carry the rest of the side. You can only get 4/11 players into a combined side and still be better overall if all your players contribute consistently in their roles and the opposition has four Saj Mahmoods.

 

[Xuhaib]

I would never drop Ajmal in sub cont imo he's best bowler in the world for sub cont conditions. I would pick Swann over Ajmal anywhere outside sub cont but for sub cont I would not even pick Steyn over Ajmal.

 

[Xuhaib]

I will add though that "which team would have more players in a combined side" is a really poor way of measuring the relative quality of two teams anyway. The higher the level of cricket you play, the more it becomes about eliminating weaknesses, getting all parts contributing etc and the less it becomes about having star players who can carry the rest of the side. You can only get 4/11 players into a combined side and still be better overall if all your players contribute consistently in their roles and the opposition has four Saj Mahmoods.

fair point.

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah, even in the first innings the cracks were there to see. The performances of our 4-6 in this tour have been dreadful.

I did say I would rather play a seamer for Morgan.. You guys just thought it was funny.

 

[Jono]

I will add though that "which team would have more players in a combined side" is a really poor way of measuring the relative quality of two teams anyway. The higher the level of cricket you play, the more it becomes about eliminating weaknesses, getting all parts contributing etc and the less it becomes about having star players who can carry the rest of the side. You can only get 4/11 players into a combined side and still be better overall if all your players contribute consistently in their roles and the opposition has four Saj Mahmoods.

Big fan of Swanny but I'd play Ajmal ahead of him in Asia. Swann's batting doesn't make up for the experience that Ajmal has playing in such conditions.

 

[GIMH]

I did say I would rather play a seamer for Morgan.. You guys just thought it was funny.

Yeah and I still think it was funny, another seamer would have been pointless. Our bowling was excellent. Our batting was poor. Lengthening the tail would not have improved things. It was a bad idea without hindsight and is a worse one with it.

​

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah and I still think it was funny, another seamer would have been pointless. Our bowling was excellent. Our batting was poor. Lengthening the tail would not have improved things. It was a bad idea without hindsight and is a worse one with it.

​

As always you miss the point. This idea is always worth it when your 6th batsman is someone like Morgan. Simple as.

 

[tooextracool]

Haha I would definitely play Swann over Rehman or Panesar. Don't care about lefty/right; he's a far, far better cricketer than either of them.

Why not? This series and most of Swann's career have shown us that if there is any spin in the pitch, then batsmen have found it infinitely harder to play the ball turning away from them. And by that I mean, right hand batsmen have struggled against left arm spin while left handed batsmen have struggled against off spinners. For example, only one left handed batsman from my memory has managed to play Swann with any sort of ease over his career - Mike Hussey. I'd certainly prefer having a right-left arm combo.

 

[Prince EWS]

Why not? This series and most of Swann's career have shown us that if there is any spin in the pitch, then batsmen have found it infinitely harder to play the ball turning away from them. And by that I mean, right hand batsmen have struggled against left arm spin while left handed batsmen have struggled against off spinners. For example, only one left handed batsman from my memory has managed to play Swann with any sort of ease over his career - Mike Hussey. I'd certainly prefer having a right-left arm combo.

I don't think it has anywhere near the impact you think it does. I'd rather have Swann bowling to right handers than Rehman anyway and you're forgetting the fact that if you have to bowl from both ends, and the fact that if there's a righty/lefty batting combination at the crease then you can't really choose who your bowlers get to bowl to anyway.

Lefty/righty is the most overblown issue in cricket.

 

[Spark]

Disagree, I'd rather Rehman that Swann to right-handers on this pitch. (My thoughts on Swann vs. RHers and what I think he gets wrong is well documented). Left vs. right-hander is generally overblown, yes, but not in Swann's case. There is a sizeable disparity between the quality of his bowling against right handers to left handers.

Mind you, I'd still take Swann overall, comfortably.

 

[tooextracool]

In terms of cricket, in my lifetime, England just simply have not been very good in the subcontinent. Barring the odd result like England beating Pakistan in 2000 I can't remember anything to really get excited about.

In any case, I don't buy the claims over weakness in the English Psyche or whatever. More likely there are problems caused by an ingrained overconfidence.

It's perhaps funny to look back at the class of 2000/01 again and put their accomplishments in context. Lets remember that they not only beat a Pakistan with Saqlain, Wasim and Waqar in the subcontinent but they also followed that up with a win in Sri Lanka against Murali and Vaas in their pomp. The two sides that toured in 2005/06 and 2011/12 are often considered to be far superior but I though its worth a mention especially because I feel that the class of 2000/01 often gets underrated because of the Ashes thrashing that followed when a core of their side was injured.

 

[tooextracool]

I don't think it has anywhere near the impact you think it does. I'd rather have Swann bowling to right handers than Rehman anyway and you're forgetting the fact that if you have to bowl from both ends, and the fact that if there's a righty/lefty batting combination at the crease then you can't really choose who your bowlers get to bowl to anyway.

Lefty/righty is the most overblown issue in cricket.

I think its overblown with the batting definitely, having a right/left hand batting combination probably doesnt make that much of a difference yet commentators make a bigger deal out of it than any team does.

But when you look at Swann list of dismissals, it becomes immediately evident that he's far more potent against left than right handers - some 50% of his career test dismissals are left handers. Considering that most teams at best tend to have about 3-4 left handers in the entire side that is quite significant. I'd venture to suggest that if we look just at top order batsmen, that number of left hander dismissals will probably rise even further.

Anyhow, the point I am trying to make is that in general my personal opinion is that orthodox left arm/off spinners tend to do far far better against their opposite handed batsmen. Ajmal is a bit of an exception because he can spin the ball both ways.

 

[GIMH]

As always you miss the point. This idea is always worth it when your 6th batsman is someone like Morgan. Simple as.

Ignoring the unnecessary insult...Or rather, we could add a different batsman who might actually score some runs, or another bowler who will bowl seven overs in the match. Yeah tough choice.

 

[Burgey]

Ignoring the unnecessary insult...Or rather, we could add a different batsman who might actually score some runs, or another bowler who will bowl seven overs in the match. Yeah tough choice.

Disappointing avatar. Hardly as bad as I'd hoped for.

Then again, disappointing poster.

 

[Black_Warrior]

No, I don't mean sodomy, beating children, binge drinking, football hooliganism, crap teeth or questionable personal hygeine, rather the real English disease: an inability to sustain excellence of performance.

The English beat their children?

 

[Quaggas]

At cricket, barely.

 

[marc71178]

As always you miss the point. This idea is always worth it when your 6th batsman is someone like Morgan. Simple as.

No, you're missing the point, because as poor as Morgan's been, he's offers a lot more than Finn, Tremlett or Panesar.

 

[silentstriker]

I remember lolsweeping against spin the last SC tour.


Stop lolsweeping.

 

[silentstriker]

There is no reason for England to be so terrible at spin. It seems they just freeze when they tour the subcontinent.

It's like they think they have to play crazy shots to get on top of spinners on the subcontinent, or play no shots to not lose wickets. Most wickets are just flat, they aren't spinning minefields. But they get it into their heads that they are. It makes very little sense to me - just play normally FFS.