Cricket Player Manager
Page 53 of 675 FirstFirst ... 343515253545563103153553 ... LastLast
Results 781 to 795 of 10122

Thread: ***Official*** England in India

  1. #781
    International Debutant Viscount Tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Leeds, G.O.C.
    Posts
    2,453
    AT-XI
    #J.Hobbs; #L.Hutton; #D.Bradman; #V.Richards; #G.Sobers; #A.Border; #A.Gilchrist; #K.Miller; #I.Khan; #S.Warne; #M.Marshall;

  2. #782
    International Coach morgieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    63*
    Posts
    11,743
    Quote Originally Posted by flibbertyjibber View Post
    Picking Napier is a cunning plan. As cunning as one from Baldrick I think, only you don't shovel **** you type it.
    5-0

    RIP Craig Walsh (Craig) 1985-2012
    RIP Hughesy

    Proudly supporting the #2 cricketer of all time.

  3. #783
    LFD
    LFD is offline
    School Boy/Girl Captain
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by Viscount Tom View Post
    I think despite his larger size Patel's probably still the better fielder than Monty.
    That should not be a factor when deciding on who should play.

    People are saying Patel could get an extra 20 or 30 runs.

    I think it should be who is more likely to take wickets? For me that is clearly Monty.

    It is the batsman job to score the runs, the bowlers job to take wickets, they are both bowlers and therefore you pick the best bowler and the is Monty.

    Michael Holding would agree with me!

  4. #784
    International Coach flibbertyjibber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Mrs Miggins pie shop
    Posts
    12,055
    If the pitch is a real turner I would have no problem seeing as their are fitness doubts about Broad and Finn in us going in with Anderson, Bresnan, Swann and Panesar as the attack and if Patel is chosen ahead of Bairstow then that is fine. I'd rather play Panesar than a half fit Broad/Finn anyway.


  5. #785
    Cricket Web Staff Member Woodster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    5,521
    Quote Originally Posted by LFD View Post
    That should not be a factor when deciding on who should play.

    People are saying Patel could get an extra 20 or 30 runs.

    I think it should be who is more likely to take wickets? For me that is clearly Monty.

    It is the batsman job to score the runs, the bowlers job to take wickets, they are both bowlers and therefore you pick the best bowler and the is Monty.

    Michael Holding would agree with me!
    They both bowl, but Panesar is a specialist spin bowler, Patel's main role is to score runs and chip in with a few overs, so you would hope that Panesar is the more likely to take wickets.
    http://batallday.blogspot.com/ - Cricket blog dedicated to domestic cricket.

  6. #786
    LFD
    LFD is offline
    School Boy/Girl Captain
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by Woodster View Post
    They both bowl, but Panesar is a specialist spin bowler, Patel's main role is to score runs and chip in with a few overs, so you would hope that Panesar is the more likely to take wickets.
    Sounds like you agree with me that Monty should play.

    I really dislike Patel as a cricketer. Not a very good batsman, not a very good bowler.

    Should not be in the squad!

  7. #787
    Cricket Web Staff Member Woodster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    5,521
    Quote Originally Posted by flibbertyjibber View Post
    If the pitch is a real turner I would have no problem seeing as their are fitness doubts about Broad and Finn in us going in with Anderson, Bresnan, Swann and Panesar as the attack and if Patel is chosen ahead of Bairstow then that is fine. I'd rather play Panesar than a half fit Broad/Finn anyway.
    I know that balance has proved successful for India in the past, the two spinners and two seamers selection, I would be very hesitant about England doing the same. Yes the conditions have to be taken into account and a team selected with that as a contributory factor, but we would be getting away from one of our strengths, which is our seam/swing attack. Would be much happier with three quicks in there regardless of the pitch being a turner.

  8. #788
    International Coach Cabinet96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    10,365
    Quote Originally Posted by LFD View Post
    Sounds like you agree with me that Monty should play.

    I really dislike Patel as a cricketer. Not a very good batsman, not a very good bowler.

    Should not be in the squad!
    It's not like any of the other batsmen are making him look like a rubbish batsmen though are they?
    RIP Philip Hughes - 1988-2014

  9. #789
    Cricket Web Staff Member Woodster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    5,521
    Quote Originally Posted by LFD View Post
    Sounds like you agree with me that Monty should play.

    I really dislike Patel as a cricketer. Not a very good batsman, not a very good bowler.

    Should not be in the squad!
    No, I would favour the selection of Patel over Panesar. As I've said previously I'm not sure either will be massively effective with the ball and I feel more confident with Patel the batsmen in there.

    He isn't my favourite player to be honest, but reckon he's done enough to start on Thursday.

  10. #790
    International Coach Cabinet96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    10,365
    Am I the only one who would just rather have Patel as a batsmen, regardless of his bowling?

  11. #791
    Hall of Fame Member grecian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    RIP
    Posts
    15,837
    Quote Originally Posted by flibbertyjibber View Post
    If the pitch is a real turner I would have no problem seeing as their are fitness doubts about Broad and Finn in us going in with Anderson, Bresnan, Swann and Panesar as the attack and if Patel is chosen ahead of Bairstow then that is fine. I'd rather play Panesar than a half fit Broad/Finn anyway.

    Well if you're going on about the first Test, then it's hard to know if it'll be a real Bunsen, as it's a re-laid pitch. Going in with two seamers, one with an injury recently, against the best players of spin in the world seems madness, I'd rather Patel bowled a lot of overs than Trott.
    Do I contradict myself?
    Very well then I contradict myself,
    (I am large, I contain multitudes.
    Walt Whitman

  12. #792
    LFD
    LFD is offline
    School Boy/Girl Captain
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by Cabinet96 View Post
    It's not like any of the other batsmen are making him look like a rubbish batsmen though are they?
    Not sure the series hasn't started yet. But it is the job of Cook, KP and the top six to get the main runs. Prior, Broad, Swann and Bresnan can all contribute as well as doing their other jobs.

    But if people are think Patel is going to thrive, they might be in for shock!

    England have to not only get runs, but get 20 wickets and I like picking bowlers on which is the best bowler. Not someone who can offer an extra few runs with the bat
    Last edited by LFD; 13-11-2012 at 04:55 PM.

  13. #793
    Cricket Web Staff Member Woodster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    5,521
    Quote Originally Posted by Cabinet96 View Post
    Am I the only one who would just rather have Patel as a batsmen, regardless of his bowling?
    He'd get the nod for me ahead of the rest, but only if we get a good few overs out of his spin aswell.

  14. #794
    Hall of Fame Member grecian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    RIP
    Posts
    15,837
    Quote Originally Posted by LFD View Post
    Not sure the series hasn't started yet.

    But if people are think Patel is going to thrive, they might be in for shock!

    England have to not only get runs, but get 20 wickets and I like picking bowlers on which is the best bowler. Not someone who can offer an extra few runs with the bat.
    Patel will be picked as a batsman. He's a decent player of spin, and has scored runs consistently in the build-up, plus bowled okay.

    I'm not his biggest fan, but to suggest there's just 5 runs between Monty and Samit is absurd.

  15. #795
    LFD
    LFD is offline
    School Boy/Girl Captain
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by grecian View Post
    I'd rather Patel bowled a lot of overs than Trott.
    I'd rather neither.

    Anderson, Bresnan, Swann, Bresnan, Monty and KP are six options.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. highest 50+ scores, percentage(ODIS)
    By Indusriver in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 18-08-2011, 03:51 AM

Posting Permissions

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