Tell me your team doesn't look a bowler short - let alone a penetrating bowler like Mahmood (accept it or I'll argue it in another post).
Can't beleive you would think of giving Paul Nixon a Test match, he doesn't have a future in Test cricket. If Trescothick was fit, I would prefer to see Vaughan in there for Strauss and have Cook opening, however I don't think they will want to push Trescothick back into the Test side straight away.
Nixon should definitely play in the tests for atleast 2 years. Performances of Read,Jones,Foster surely pale in comparison.
Mahmood is only likely to get batsman out with a half volley or long hop, also he'd be an ideal part of your side if you were wanting to have 3/100 off 20 overs or something similar.
Michael Vaughan has had 6 innings down the order at #6 and averages 36, Ian Bell averages 93 over 7 innings. Simple choice for me. Bell did an average job in Australia, he didn't convert his starts into a decent score and was guilty of letting his team down. I don't see the point in batting Vaughan down the order when almost all of his innings have come in the top 4, especially when Bell is more than competent down the order.
Wouldn't surprise me, especially if they want to bring Trescothick straight back into the team. Collingwood would be the one I would drop if they wanted to play 6 batsman.
Pretty sure it would be the selectors job to pick a squad, obviously Moore will want certain players but I'm not exactly sure what will happen there.
Maybe in the short term, but in the long term it would be a bad choice. If he isn't promised a Test spot then he may well retire in the next few weeks.
I rahter have Mahmood in the team than Harmison, Anderson and Plunkett. And don't give me that expense talk. Just cast back your mind to the Melbourne Test, who else do you think could get a well set Hayden out with an absolute peach? Anderson and Plunkett couldn't do that and if anything Harmison is a liaibility.
So to your dismay and my delight, that means that Mahmood and many of the others - Dalrymple and co will still be around the fringes of the England team?
Sajid Mahmood bowled a good delivery in Test cricket? I think some sort of knighthood is in order. Seriously how can you say that he is good when he is such a liability to England? He is a "wicket-taking" bowler, but those wickets generally come at a high expense as he gets tonked all around the park. He may have bowled a peach to get Hayden, but I've seen plenty of rubbish bowlers bowl good deliveries, it's the frequency of them that matters.
Exactly right, but for the meantime Ian Bell would be best served batting at #6. Michael Vaughan still has a few (possibly 5) years left in him to play Test cricket and to captain the English side, therefore he should be one of the first names on the team sheet if he is fit enough to handle Test cricket which I'm not sure he is at the moment.
?
And you're going to get that from an uninterested Harmison? Mahmood can fill in the reverse swing void that is there due to Jones' ommission.
Interesting. You are questioning his suitability to play in the toughest form of cricket, in quite possibly the toughest position to bat, but a proven youngster like Bell should make way for someone who hasn't played Test cricket for near 2 years?
I never said Harmison was the man to do it, it's entirely possible that Simon Jones will be in the Test side if he puts in a few good performances for Glamorgan. Who said England need a specialist reverse swing bowler anyway? Someone who will bowl tripe 90% of the time and then produce a couple of decent deliveries isn't someone that should be playing Test match cricket, and that's all Sajid Mahmood does. Simon Jones is far more accurate when bowling in normal conditions, and then when the reverse swing does start to come into it then he can use it to devastating effect.
Vaughan has played cricket, he played in some of the CB series games and has played every game in the World Cup IIRC. He just hasn't had much chance to have a decent bat in First Class cricket, that is all he is lacking. I seen how his body was reacting during his innings against the West Indies, it showed me that the one thing Michael Vaughan needs is a decent bat just to push his body to the limit and see how fit he really is. I'm not advocating dropping Bell, just pushing him down the order to #6 where he has done well in the past and where he would be better suited for the team.
If the selectors had any sense they would drop Collingwood before Bell, I really can't see Bell sitting out these Tests.
True, but they probably use the 206 v a few starts theory to pick their team.
I'm not his doctor or physio so I wouldn't know, but no doubt every Englishman will be scrambling to read the match reports whenever Glamorgan play just to see how he gets on.
Harmison against Pakistan at Trent Bridge and against the West Indies at Sabina Park showed that he can bowl well. Every bowler is going to have a few good performances here and there, whether they actually bowl well is a different story, they may just pick up a heap of wickets. If Jones is unfit to play then personally Anderson would be my next choice, although I think the selectors will probably go with Harmison.
Well I'm assuming that Fletcher dropped a hint that he liked the look of Mahmood and would like him in the squad, that's generally how it works if there is a good relationship between the coach and selection panel. I wouldn't have any idea how Moore feels about Mahmood though, your guess is as good as mine.
I really don't see what your point about Read, Mahmood and Panesar is. If Michael Vaughan and Marcus Trescothick are both unavailable to play, then Ian Bell will play at #3. If either of these two players comes back into the side and doesn't replace Strauss or Cook, then Bell will drop down to #6, where he has had good sucess in the past. It all depends on whether or not Vaughan and Trescothick will be fit really, if we had a definate confirmation whether they would be playing or not then we could pretty much come up with the batting lineup, assuming that they are going to play 6 batsman, which they should.
If Vaughan is playing then it will be almost inevitable that Bell will play at #6 because Collingwood isn't very flash with the tail.
we did that with lewis against sri lanka last year. he didnt perform to well and it also had a noticable effect on hoggys bowling and he is a key player so i would not pick lewis.
And consdiering that Mahmood has only played 8 tests (minus the 2 he played in Australia) and his percentage of good performances is relatively high don't you agree?
It's all about the groove my friend. Let's forget about Bell not converting - he has done well at no. 3. Why would you want to change that?
When excellence is lacking, you pick the bowlers doing it best at the present time. And Daren Powell is in better form than Jerome Taylor. Taylor has not done enough in the past to get him picked ahead of an in-form Powell or Collins, when he is out of form.
My problem is not Bravo at 6, but Ramdin at 7. Ramdin has to prove that he's capable of batting at 7, given that there's nothing worthwhile after him. That the West Indies bowlers generally can't bat (though Taylor has potential) is a major influence on the makeup of the team.
Despite the fact that Collins, when fit, is a more reliable bowler than Taylor and Powell? Right...
Batting has been the bigger issue for the West Indies of late. That much is clear.
If the top six includes a genuine allrounder, not a batting allrounder, batting strength is a perfectly acceptable concern. Dwayne Bravo may have great potential, but he is, and well never be, a Kallis. Given that after him is a young wicketkeeper, still adjusting to Test cricket, and then squat all, it's a bold move to go in with 5 batsmen and Bravo.
Strauss has too good a record at home to even consider leaving him out, especially (essentially) for Trescothick. Trescothick has a lot to do to prove that he's up to Test cricket again. And yes, Strauss had a poor Ashes series, but I'd still say he's higher in the pecking order than Trescothick at this stage.
Have you actually watched Mahmood bowl in Test cricket?! The man is nowhere near Test calibre.
* Luckily the Aussies know the difference between Tests and ODIs.