England in Australia

[puddleduck]

I think our problem with dismissing tails is that we treat them like top-order batsman and show them too much respect. If you've got someone with a career average of below 10 walking to the crease, treat him as such. Bring in a short-leg, don't give him any easy singles and make him feel under pressure, that we as a team believe it's only a matter of time before he gets out.

Another thing is that in England there is always a little bit more seam and swing in the air than most other places in the world, so putting it on a length is often the best way foward. On a pitch like this one however, if you are getting nothing, then all they are doing is sticking it in the right area when in fact a yorker or three is more likely to do the business. You miss, I hit.

I just think that in England the yorker isn't a massively useful ball because you take out any help you might get, whilst in just about every other country in the world it is a key component of a fast bowlers armoury. I feel that maybe that has something to do with their reluctance to bowl them, and it really is unfathamoble that it took until Clarks 23rd ball of swinging before one was bowled, and it unsurprisingly did the job. Not even to mention the fact that there was barely a slower ball bowled all day, it was almost as if the bowlers were afraid to try anything different other than trying to put it on a length all day.

 

[JamesyJames3]

Monty has to play the next test! I would have said drop Giles, but to be honest, I would drop Harmison, he needs to re-group completely in my opinion.

If Monty doesn't play in the next match then I doubt we will see him in the series. Such a shame. Such a waste of talent.

 

[Sureshot]

Well the funny thing is Harmison and Panesar bowled really well in partnerships in the summer, just to throw something else into the equation.

Short bowling isn't working at all so far, I can see Saj doing quite well.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Yup. I agree. Dump Harmy and Jimmy, bring in Monty and Saj. Freddie seems fit enough to bowl long spells.

 

[irottev]

Is Plunkett injured? I saw him hitting there. He should get a go.

 

[puddleduck]

I think if England bowl again in this match, which is fairly unlikely Harmy could feasibly be bowling for his place, what does however stand him in fairly good stead to start the next test is that Mahmood was hammered all over the park in the warmup games, but he does at least bowl a fuller length. Still Fletcher may be more inclined to play Monty ahead of Giles if he brings Saj in for Harmy as Mahmood looks to be the most likely to bat at 8 out of all the quicks on offer barring maybe Plunkett who hasn't played a single game of cricket on this tour.

 

[aussie1st]

I think our problem with dismissing tails is that we treat them like top-order batsman and show them too much respect. If you've got someone with a career average of below 10 walking to the crease, treat him as such. Bring in a short-leg, don't give him any easy singles and make him feel under pressure, that we as a team believe it's only a matter of time before he gets out.

Thats how you should be treating them really as if you try and force the issue bowling yorkers and bouncers that isn't going to get them out most of the times because most tailenders have to be able to survive those types of balls. Field setting obviously be more attacking but the bowlers should bowl the same type of deliveries they do to a top order batsmen.

 

[puddleduck]

Yes fair enough Sylvester, but when he first walks out to the crease you have to attack, once they get past 10 or so revert to a more normal setup, but when they first walk out make them feel like a tail-ender. Because at the end of the day you saying that is how they should be treating them can't be right because for years England have done just that and struggled with dismissing tails. If it's not that that's going wrong, then what is?

 

[aussie1st]

I agree you definitely need the attacking field chuck a few bouncers in as that should unsettle them and then bowl the conventional line and length which usually will get out these tailenders. That is probably one of the problems Lee faces against the tail, he loses focus and just tries to bounce or yorker them out.

Of course if that doesn't work then bring on your spinner although the only thing Giles will be doing is seeing his balls fly into the stand! Monty would have caused the tail much more problems.

 

[Pak_cricketer]

From what I saw Giles wasn't too impressive, Monty was far the better bowler... Also Zorax, dumping Harmisson is not the right idea, maybe you could say that for Anderson. But Sajid Mahmood did not look any better either.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Saj pitches it up. That's what they need. Harmy should bowl about 40 overs in the nets each day and get his rythem.

 

[aussie1st]

Nets isn't the same as being out there on the pitch. You can bowl all you want in the nets but it doesn't have the same feeling that a Test match does hence let him play more tests thus getting more overs under his belt not less!

 

[sifter132]

I've never seen Monty bowl in a match - but it seems he might be a bit overrated when just looking at the figures. In 10 Tests taken 32 wickets (3.2 per test) and he's averaging 32.41 with the ball. That's not really what I was expecting after hearing all the hype from the English.

So I thought I'd compare him with Giles recent record. Since 2003, Giles has played 27 Tests (not including this one), has taken 76 wickets (2.81 per test) with average of 37.8.

Worse figures yes - but consider his value with the bat. The problem with the England side is that they need to play an extra bowler to cover for Flintoff, which makes their tail longer, meaning that 1 or 2 of their bowlers need to be able to bat a little bit.

By the numbers, assuming they both take 3 wickets per test, Giles will concede 16 more runs (3 x 37.8 = 113 for Giles, 3 x 32.41 = 97 for Monty) with the ball.

With the bat in those 27 matches, Giles has scored 805 runs at 23.68, while Monty averages 10.2 (after only 5 innings, but I think this will be a fairly accurate number). If England bats twice, as they most certainly will against Australia, then Giles has value of 23.68 x 2 = 47.36, Monty 10.2 x 2 = 20.4, a difference of 26.96

Numbers can be misleading (and boring for some of you), but just from the naked eye - Giles seems to have improved since 2005. Sure Michael Clarke got into him a little bit, but Clarke is a great player of spin.

I can't blame Fletcher for taking the more defensive decision to play Giles. England holds the Ashes, so they are entitled to play more defensively to retain them.

 

[puddleduck]

But Sifter132, Monty is a young lad and that is his first 10 tests! Against India, Sri Lanka and Pakistan, three teams that generally play spin excellently. He also has 2 five-fers already. Considering that he has improved steadily since his first tests in India, he looks a very bright prospect indeed. Also two of those series were in England which are hardly the most spin conducive pitches in the world. So I think you should probably watch him bowl instead of trying to figure everything out by the numbers as though it's a computer game.

Throw into the equation that he has gotten Tendulkar, Dravid, Yousef, Jayawardene, Sangakarra among his scaps and he most definately looks a player that has a bright future.

 

[evertonfan]

Giles has been in constant decline since his good home series against the Windies in 2004. In fact, the only time he has really bowled well away from home is when we toured the subcontinent in 2000/1.