Simon Jones

[Prince EWS]

Depends. I don't see that going in with a 4-man bowling attack is likely. If you were to do so, obviously, you could just go Hoggard-Jones-Flintoff-MSP, but I think a 5-man attack is much the most likely.

If Jones is fit I'm pretty sure we won't be seeing Liam or Saj in whatever game that is, but if neither play at all in the summer (both injury and poor form are almost inevitable to someone or other, there's even an outside chance of Hoggard suffering from one or the other) I'll be astounded. And Broad, too, TBH, even though he's still absurdly young.

I wasn't aware that James Anderson had been killed in a knife fight. An attack of Hoggard-Anderson-Flintoff-Jones-Panesar is a definite option IMO. Anderson is quite obviously a better bowler than Mahmood and Plunkett, and Harmison too if he's going to bowl like he has in the last year.

We all know Harmison will be there though so it's useless discussing a hypothetical attack which discludes him.

 

[Richard]

It'll be a while before Anderson gets picked ahead of Harmison and I honestly don't believe he's unquestionably ahead of either Plunkett or Mahmood ATM.

Witness the "why did they pick Anderson ahead of Mahmood at the start of The Ashes" and the fact that STILL there's virtually no-one in the big positions saying "Mahmood's God-awful, don't let him anywhere near the England side".

 

[Prince EWS]

It'll be a while before Anderson gets picked ahead of Harmison and I honestly don't believe he's unquestionably ahead of either Plunkett or Mahmood ATM.

Witness the "why did they pick Anderson ahead of Mahmood at the start of The Ashes" and the fact that STILL there's virtually no-one in the big positions saying "Mahmood's God-awful, don't let him anywhere near the England side".

Yeah, as I said, it's purely hypothetical as the selectors would never go for it, but I certainly would.

 

[Nishant]

Well... and... if Jones performs well it'd be difficult to include Mahmood when fit...

If you see what I mean...

yh! i get what u mean.....jones would be preferred to mahmood in any case....and i'd agree with that TBH...mahmood is not consistent enough! With that said, what are the chances of jones playing really well after such a long time out! Its like with vaughan...he hasnt performed with that bat at all yet...he's in the team on the basis of his captaincy!

 

[Richard]

Well Vaughan's never performed with the bat in ODIs so there's not really any change there!

I don't know, as I said I was never quite so convinced by Jones as some and it'll be very interesting indeed to see what he does if he can get back to regular playing.

 

[cover drive man]

It'll be a while before Anderson gets picked ahead of Harmison and I honestly don't believe he's unquestionably ahead of either Plunkett or Mahmood ATM.

Witness the "why did they pick Anderson ahead of Mahmood at the start of The Ashes" and the fact that STILL there's virtually no-one in the big positions saying "Mahmood's God-awful, don't let him anywhere near the England side".

Imao I don't particulary rate anderson.

 

[Richard]

Nor me but there's no denying he's not been the most fortunate lad in The World.

EIGHT pratts who voted "no"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[pasag]

Nor me but there's no denying he's not been the most fortunate lad in The World.

EIGHT pratts who voted "no"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Meh, non-public polls don't mean anything (to me) around here.

 

[andmark]

if we get rid of Harmison mahmood and Jones can be in the squad


Imagine


Andrew Flintoff
Mathew Hoggard
Sajd Mahmood
Simon Jones
and Monty Panesar


That's a strong bowling line up anf we played with five bowlers in the ashes 2005.

Drop Mahmood and get Harmy
Not 2005 Ashes but better.What a bowling attack!!!

 

[cover drive man]

Drop Mahmood and get Harmy
Not 2005 Ashes but better.What a bowling attack!!!

Harmy's had his chance when was the last time he took a bundle of wickets he's just another lad with potintial.

 

[andmark]

A lad who's better than Sajid Mahmood.

 

[Goughy]

EIGHT pratts who voted "no"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well 'need' is a very strong word and I voted no.

If it was termed 'would be helped by' then I would vote yes.

However from my POV, there are 28 pratts that voted Yes. I mean since he has been injured has English cricket ceased to exist and been wiped from the face of the planet? (and yes, I did watch that Ashes)

He is a good cricketer, but he doesnt wear his pants outside his cricket whites.

 

[cover drive man]

Well 'need' is a very strong word and I voted no.

If it was termed 'would be helped by' then I would vote yes.

However from my POV, there are 28 pratts that voted Yes. I mean since he has been injured has English cricket ceased to exist and been wiped from the face of the planet? (and yes, I did watch that Ashes)

He is a good cricketer, but he doesnt wear his pants outside his cricket whites.

And for me it's need that's why I made the poll "need Simon Jones"

 

[grecian]

I agree with Goughy "need" is a very strong word. He's too injury-prone to rely on, same as NZ with Bond or Pakistan with Akthar, if you bank on a crock, your only letting yourself in for a world of pain.

If the question was "is England a better team with a fit Jones in it", then everyone should vote yes.

 

[cover drive man]

Yes but it would be pretty boring if everyone agreed.

 

[Richard]

Well 'need' is a very strong word and I voted no.

If it was termed 'would be helped by' then I would vote yes.

However from my POV, there are 28 pratts that voted Yes. I mean since he has been injured has English cricket ceased to exist and been wiped from the face of the planet? (and yes, I did watch that Ashes)

He is a good cricketer, but he doesnt wear his pants outside his cricket whites.

I've tended to read "need" as "would be better with than without".

"Need" in the most literal sense-of-the-word is something that doesn't exist in cricket.