sohum
Executive member
Ooooh.... everyone loves a bit of controversy. I wonder how this one will pan out.barmyarmy said:
England in Australia
- Thread starter andrew_nixon
- Start date
BigCrickNan
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2005
England XI Alec Stewart (capt), Chris Read, Ed Joyce, Sajid Mahmood, Liam Plunkett, Monty Panesar, Adam Hollioake, Robin Smith, Jon Lewis, Owais Shah, James Dalrymple (subject to fitness)
CA Chairman's XI Justin Langer (capt), Luke Ronchi (wk), Chris Rogers, Luke Pomersbach, Marcus North, Adam Voges, Brett Dorey, Sean Ervine, Peter Worthington, Ryan Campbell, Chris Matthews, Jo Angel.
Teams for tonights tour match. Good thing Monty is getting some practise. Just a bit worried by these: Alec Stewart, Adam Hollioake and Robin Smith. Surely they're pst it
.
CA Chairman's XI Justin Langer (capt), Luke Ronchi (wk), Chris Rogers, Luke Pomersbach, Marcus North, Adam Voges, Brett Dorey, Sean Ervine, Peter Worthington, Ryan Campbell, Chris Matthews, Jo Angel.
Teams for tonights tour match. Good thing Monty is getting some practise. Just a bit worried by these: Alec Stewart, Adam Hollioake and Robin Smith. Surely they're pst it
.
aussie_ben91
School Cricketer
That's absolutely stupid. For whatever reason why wouldn't the likes of Strauss, Collingwood, etc not want Monty in the side? Not only has it lessened England's chances of winning the series but Monty flat out not being apart of all 5 matches is an immediate downer for the entire series.
Ben, I don't think he'd have done enough to have won us the Ashes, but he would've given us a chance.
How on earth can you drop the bowler who made Pakistan tremble un numerous occasions, including the spinners deathbed that is Headingley?
It's such a shame as I think it's ruined the series.
How on earth can you drop the bowler who made Pakistan tremble un numerous occasions, including the spinners deathbed that is Headingley?
It's such a shame as I think it's ruined the series.
Gunner786
Panel of Selectors
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2004
- Location
- Emirates Stadium
sajs case is the same as sami but both are on opposite sides
sami is judged by his test form
saj is judged by his odi form
sami is judged by his test form
saj is judged by his odi form
puddleduck
Chairman of Selectors
barmyarmy said:
*whistles a folk ditty*
I've said it many times but at the time people didn't seem particularly keen to actually read the facts -
1. Freddie captains England for the first time in India, Panesar is immediately taken out the attack and hidden when India go on the charge despite needing a massive total to win. He goes on the defensive and sticks everyone on the boundary suggesting he had no belief that they could actually win from that situation.
2. England get a draw in India, but in reality India were poor and could, perhaps should, have been beaten, nonetheless it is a fairly decent result with an inexperienced side. Throughout the series Freds field placings are poor, but the press and most fans make a big deal out of how inspirational he is (surely he can do that as a player?)
3. England come home to play Sri Lanka, they start amazingly, but when England are suddenly under a minor amount of pressure to take wickets Freddie immediately runs out of ideas and decides to just bowl himself for 3 days. Field placings are again poor considering the weight of runs he had to play with, tactics are shoddy and bare striking resemblance to India. Bang it in short with no short leg against a side that is merely looking to bat out time.
4. After that disastrous display at Lords where nothing was held, England eventually pay for their mistakes and draw a series they should by all accounts of won. Panesar is again fairly underbowled throughout the series more often than not taking more wickets than some of the seamers and bowling almost half the number of overs.
5. Strauss comes in for the now injured Flintoff, England attack Pakistan, Panesar plays a key part and finishes the series alongside Harmison as leading wicket-taker. England win their first series in 3 attempts.
6. Fletcher describes Panesar as the best finger spinner in world cricket.
7. England name Flintoff as captain for the Ashes, the first test arrives and to everyones surprise Panesar is left out. Two tests later and he still hasn't played, news comes out that Flintoff and Fletcher are the two selectors on tour, and unsurprisingly, the captain has a big say considering on the field he will be in charge of his players.
I think the news that talks about a rift is just stirring trouble to create column inches, but as I've said all along Fletcher isn't an idiot, it has been fairly common practice that the Captain will get the team he wants, because when it comes to the match it will be on his shoulders to get the best out of them, you can't have someone sitting there that he didn't want in the first place.
Throughout his first two series, Flintoff seemed unsure as to how to use Panesar, he has a clear lack of confidence in him and as well as that clearly backs Giles and Jones because they were alongside him when he was last part of a winning series - Freddie hasn't actually played in a winning series since the last Ashes
Anyway, perhaps Fletcher should have put his foot down, but then Freddie would again been left with a bowler that he didn't have faith in, and a rift would have developed between coaching staff and players.
So I summise the biggest mistake of all, was not Giles over Panesar, not Jones over Read, but Flintoff over Strauss, as the others are merely by-products of the original error.
The BBC Website and reporting that there are 'suggestions' that it was just Flintoff who somehow managed to overrule the coach. If that's true then I'm right in my opinion that Flintoff should be no where near the England Captaincy.
I see this has been put forward in the post above mine, apologies for the slight repeat.
I see this has been put forward in the post above mine, apologies for the slight repeat.
Iron-Haggis
Club Cricketer
I think all this could be solved if England actually had a selector on tour. I mean seriously how can Jones and Collingwood, both not certain of places before the start of the seires, be considered part of a senior committee on selections? Jones is not going to come out and say "You know what, Chris Read is a far better keeper than me and is just as capable with the bat and has not been in a huge batting slump for the past year, I think we should pick him." Although you can see why Jones would want Giles in the team, he probably comes out and says "That Monty bloke, he spins the ball way too much I couldn't possibly keep to him. Best to go with Giles, that way I won't concede 50 byes each innings."
But in the end of the day when teams go to Australia looking to play defensively they usually end up getting beaten. The only time the defensive strategy worked was by New Zealand and that was 6 years ago.
But in the end of the day when teams go to Australia looking to play defensively they usually end up getting beaten. The only time the defensive strategy worked was by New Zealand and that was 6 years ago.
It's all really interesting stuff? And I agree with you Iron-Haggis. To have players involved in the selection committee, especially in the Jones instance, seems a little ridiculous. If there is a sniff of conflict in the England camp, the Aussies will be all over it like a rash. The Aussie press will undoubtedly look to go for the jugular and not only write column inches about how the Australians are winning effectively, but also how England are in-fighting and such.
Gunner786
Panel of Selectors
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2004
- Location
- Emirates Stadium
am i reading this right?
alec stewart?
seriosuly?
shouldnt england be playing couple of out of form batsmen instead?
like cook?
alec stewart?
seriosuly?
shouldnt england be playing couple of out of form batsmen instead?
like cook?
Why is everyone trying to pin the blame on people like Jones? How the hell do you know what he thinks about who should be the spinner?
It seems to me Flintoff is as much to blame as anyone, but people can't see past the fact that according to the media he won us the Ashes on his own in 2005.
:
It seems to me Flintoff is as much to blame as anyone, but people can't see past the fact that according to the media he won us the Ashes on his own in 2005.
:Iron-Haggis said:
My thoughts entirely. Collingwood and Jones weren't even expected to be in the first test team until Tresco went home.
@ PD - I'm with you on the Flintoff thing. I argued strongly at the time that they had to pick Strauss. This isn't ex-post facto rationalisation.
puddleduck
Chairman of Selectors
barmyarmy said:
Yep I know mate, your sitting alongside me starving as well because there's no humble pie available
Also the biggest muppet around at the moment has to be Aggers. In his various columns he praised the decision to name Flintoff captain, he was behind them picking Jones, and he agreed with them about Giles ahead of Panesar!
Similar threads
