Botham wants Hussain out

[marc71178]

Can't help but think he'll be the one to go in place of Pieterson when that time comes.

Probably will if Pieterson performs in the ODI's first.

For me I'd love to see a middle order of:

Butcher
Thorpe
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff


That allows us Read at 8, 3 seamers, and no loss of spin option!

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

Gees I don't like it when selectors or former players (like Botham) think that a player should step down from the side just because they are getting older. It always should be that if the player is out of form, then they shouldn't be in the side.

Hussain's 2004 Test Batting Record
4 Matches, 197 runs@ 32.83, SR: 34.38

They are not the best looking figures, but they also are not figures to justify Hussain's axing.

 

[twctopcat]

Probably will if Pieterson performs in the ODI's first.

For me I'd love to see a middle order of:

Butcher
Thorpe
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff


That allows us Read at 8, 3 seamers, and no loss of spin option!

Looks good, gives us a 18 months/2 years to start thinking of replacements for Butcher and Thorpe. I think i would prefer Strauss over Collingwood though, or maybe even Strauss opening in Tests, but then where does that leave tres?

 

[krkode]

The English need Devon Malcolm again. "You guys are History."

 

[Deja moo]

Probably will if Pieterson performs in the ODI's first.

For me I'd love to see a middle order of:

Butcher
Thorpe
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff


That allows us Read at 8, 3 seamers, and no loss of spin option!

English spinners ! hmpphh!

 

[Craig]

Probably will if Pieterson performs in the ODI's first.

For me I'd love to see a middle order of:

Butcher
Thorpe
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff


That allows us Read at 8, 3 seamers, and no loss of spin option!

So Flintoff makes it as the 4th bowling option with part-time stuff from Collingwood and Pietersen?

Which one misses out as when you play in Asia, or Sydney or Adelaide or any spinning wickets, Giles, even though I dont rate him that highly, does justify a spot there.

 

[marc71178]

So Flintoff makes it as the 4th bowling option with part-time stuff from Collingwood and Pietersen?

Spot on except its the 3rd option IMO.

Which one misses out as when you play in Asia, or Sydney or Adelaide or any spinning wickets, Giles, even though I dont rate him that highly, does justify a spot there.

Jones would IMO (Hoggard, Harmo and Fred)

If necessary for 2, drop Hoggard.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Looks good, gives us a 18 months/2 years to start thinking of replacements for Butcher and Thorpe. I think i would prefer Strauss over Collingwood though, or maybe even Strauss opening in Tests, but then where does that leave tres?

Carrying drinks?

Either way round, Strauss, Pietersen and Collingwood seem to be the next three for the middle order.

 

[Craig]

Spot on except its the 3rd option IMO.

So the side looks like:

Trescothick
Vaughan
Butcher
Thorpe
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff
Read
Jones
Harmison
Hoggard

?

 

[tooextracool]

Probably will if Pieterson performs in the ODI's first.

For me I'd love to see a middle order of:

Butcher
Thorpe
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff


That allows us Read at 8, 3 seamers, and no loss of spin option!

read in tests?if 11 failures with the bat arent enough.....so he played well in the odi series but that doesnt say much at all...his technique was completely out of sorts and his power hitting aint going to do much for him at the test arena. he just makes our tail look long, even at no 8.

 

[tooextracool]

Looks good, gives us a 18 months/2 years to start thinking of replacements for Butcher and Thorpe. I think i would prefer Strauss over Collingwood though, or maybe even Strauss opening in Tests, but then where does that leave tres?

it leaves him in somerset, where he should be.

 

[tooextracool]

Gees I don't like it when selectors or former players (like Botham) think that a player should step down from the side just because they are getting older. It always should be that if the player is out of form, then they shouldn't be in the side.

Hussain's 2004 Test Batting Record
4 Matches, 197 runs@ 32.83, SR: 34.38

They are not the best looking figures, but they also are not figures to justify Hussain's axing.

would you rather have a brand new untested and inexperienced middle order instead then? the thing is that strauss and collingwood are probably better players than hussain and they are missing out on the best years of their career.

 

[twctopcat]

it leaves him in somerset, where he should be.

Pretty unanimous decision it seems to me.
As for chris read, with his power play, he's obviously the next adam gilchrist, with the power to destroy tired bowling attacks all over the world,

 

[tooextracool]

As for chris read, with his power play, he's obviously the next adam gilchrist, with the power to destroy tired bowling attacks all over the world,

yep an adam gilchrist minus the technique in which case he ends up being a "chris gayle".

 

[marc71178]

yep an adam gilchrist minus the technique in which case he ends up being a "chris gayle".

Who has such a shocking record...

 

[marc71178]

read in tests?if 11 failures with the bat arent enough.....

Oh excuse me, I thought that the primary purpose of a wicket keeper was to keep wicket?

If not, why not give Trescothick the gloves in the Tests and play an extra batsman?

Read at 7 was alway 1 place too high - a point often made.

Read at 8 (in place of Giles) loses nothing with the bat, but does improve the number 6 and 7 spots (with an extra batsman - Pietersen?), and the wicket-keeper slot whilst not really weakening the effectiveness of the spin attack.

 

[EnglishRose]

yep an adam gilchrist minus the technique in which case he ends up being a "chris gayle".

Gilchrist actually has a pretty poor technique. He has been lucky in the sense that he has played on a plethora of flat wickets and faced some very average bowlers.

If he played in the 1980's or even the early to mid 90's he would have averaged no more than 35 I wager.

 

[twctopcat]

Gilchrist actually has a pretty poor technique. He has been lucky in the sense that he has played on a plethora of flat wickets and faced some very average bowlers.

If he played in the 1980's or even the early to mid 90's he would have averaged no more than 35 I wager.

That one should provoke a good bit of response. I think he bats so well because of usually coming in at 400/5, makes life a lot easier!

 

[tooextracool]

Who has such a shocking record...

averaging 35 is not something to be proud off especially considering the flatness of wickets these days.and gayle has a much better eye than chris read and is a much more powerful player. not that im justifying that gayle deserves a place in the side though.

 

[tooextracool]

Oh excuse me, I thought that the primary purpose of a wicket keeper was to keep wicket?

If not, why not give Trescothick the gloves in the Tests and play an extra batsman?

Read at 7 was alway 1 place too high - a point often made.

Read at 8 (in place of Giles) loses nothing with the bat, but does improve the number 6 and 7 spots (with an extra batsman - Pietersen?), and the wicket-keeper slot whilst not really weakening the effectiveness of the spin attack.

and what has jones done wrong that he doesnt deserve a place in this side?hes been just about as exceptional behind the wickets as read has and has impressed with the bat too.
and recent performances show that giles has been a much better batsman than read so clearly we are losing out on something....our tail is getting longer!