South Africa in England

[aditya123]

Only a year ago, India struggled to beat Bangladesh

Hey! When ?
We thrashed them in one test match and the other got washed off.

 

[Will_NA]

The World Cup lol!

 

[Owzat]

Each and every England batsman contributed to at least one thrown away wicket in the Test, how can you possibly win a Test if you give the opposition your wickets? England are way too obsessed with the debate over four or five bowlers and the taking 20 wickets, it doesn't matter which you play, players have to perform and England's aren't. A change of captaincy might do the trick, drop the worst of the batsmen and get some more runs in the side. Collingwood should be judged on his next few innings, great 100 in defeat but one swallow doesn't make a summer

Vaughan hasn't the balls to step down, obviously nervously has one eye on the record for most Tests as captain. I read on a BBC blog someone calling for STRAUSS to be dropped, he scored more runs in the Test (45) than Vaughan has in the series! (40) Vaughan couldn't even manufacture a win with the saffers 93/4 and in box seat, he set new records for Edgbaston by the way - highest fourth innings total and highest fourth innings target chased successfully

And what about Freddie "Jonah" Flintoff, EIGHT consecutive defeats in the side but at least he more or less pulled his weight. The shame is he got England off to a good start in the 4th innings, but yet again didn't take enough wickets. People rant about his bowling, even in this Test where he took six wickets, coincidentally only the eighth time he's taken six wickets in a match, he took 50 balls to take each of them. That's around what his career SR should be, not in a match where he's bowled reasonably well and England need wickets. I don't solely blame him, but someone on BBC compared his effect on the team to that of Beckham and I agree. Players always looking at that icon to do the business, certainly in football it can feel like a one man show in a team sport. That can have as much a negative impact on team spirit as it does positive, while it's great to have that great player (if either actually is, they're perceived as such anyway), they must feel like they are second fiddle. When the 'great one' doesn't do the business then what chance the mere mortals? I doubt Sidebottom was thrilled to be taken off after just three overs and six runs conceded, how great was he when he ran out his last two chances of runs in the 1st innings?

I don't believe wholesale changes are needed, in these scenarios it can often be KEY changes that make the difference. Dropping the captain will send out the message that NOONE is safe from the axe, EVERYONE has to perform and THE PAST counts for nothing (ie Vaughan's captaincy against SAF/AUS where he won the series)

One thing I blame Moores and Vaughan for more than anything else is their lack of influence over the 2nd innings. What I mean is the 1st innings had some poor shots, soft dismissals etc and yet, while Vaughan is reported to have told Collingwood to "be postive but not reckless", how come that wasn't mentioned to COOK, BELL, ANDERSON and SIDEBOTTOM?!?!?! All four played silly shots and got themselves out, you could tell Pietersen the same a zillion times and he'll still 'do it his way'. So Vaughan gets quasi credit for Collingwood finding his form, I guess Colly was trying to save Vaughan at the same time, but the fact is he hasn't captained the side well for a long time. Too wrapped up in field placements, five bowler theory etc.

And for the South Africans/neutrals, South Africa deserved the win, in Test and series. As English we're analysing our own team, it isn't IN ANY WAY devised to take anything away from the opposition. When people start questioning integrity etc then it's different, I think both sides get good and bad decisions and make good and bad calls/decisions. You don't (often) win a five day Test by getting lucky.

 

[aditya123]

Oh and, Sid, you last beat Australia 7 years ago. Don't act as if you're world beaters just yet.

I was finding it hard enough to respect your opinion but you don't even support your own country.

During the period between the 2001 India-Australia series which India won and now, India have played the Aussies in 3 series. We drew one and lost two of them but when you have a look at the number of test matches won by both sides in those 3 series, Australia have 5 wins and India have 3.
It is far superior to any other side`s record against them.We haven`t suffered 3-0 whitewashes like SA in 2006 or England in 06-06.

But why are we discussing all this in this thread ?
SA won this test and the series because they were the better side and are the No.2 side in the world at the moment.
In fact, the current ICC Test Rankings give a perfect picture of the strength and performances of sides.

Australia are at No.1 and they deserve to be there.However they face stern tests ahead in India and against SA at home.
SA, having won here and drawn in India are deservedly No.2.
India, who have also been good in test cricket for the past couple of years without being spectacular are at No.3, followed by England and the rest.
The gap between the top 3 sides and the rest is quite big (a difference of 7 points between India at 3 and England at 4).
What England must be careful of is the narrowing gap between Sri Lanka at No.5 and themselves.

A question related to the team selection, what crime has Hoggard commited that he is out of the side.
I agree that he had a bad NZ tour but how does that make him a bad bowler.He has been England`s key bowler over the past few seasons.

aditya123 added 5 Minutes and 35 Seconds later...

The World Cup lol!

We`ve improved a zillion times since than and are now one of the top ODI sides.We`ve won ODI series against SA, Australia and Pakistan since then.
That was what it was,an upset.Does not happen often.

aditya123 added 5 Minutes and 40 Seconds later...

Looking ahead to the Oval test, will the English selectors dare to drop Vaughan and play Owais Shah or Bopara in his place(at least for the Oval test).

aditya123 added 4 Minutes and 36 Seconds later...

I feel the English fans should actually be happy that they have some posts to reply to in this thread because of the non-English participation here unlike the India Sri Lanka thread where most posts are by Indian members and there is very little scope for debate.

 

[manee]

Get this thread back on topic, please.

If you feel that someone is inappropriately commenting in a Cricket Chat thread, feel free to PM me and I'll take a look at it.

 

[vaibhav mehta]

Vaughan expected to resign

The rumours are that central to the debate will be the future of Michael Vaughan, with strong hints that he will step down from the role he has held since 2003. "Later today we will have to consider the best way forward for the England team," managing director Hugh Morris told BBC Radio Five Live.

Full story.

Well I am not sure this step is going to help England or not.But i know the only way to save respect is 'Positive Comeback'.I know Last test will be just a formality but England can get back something called ''MOMENTUM''.

 

[venom2011]

Weak decision by Vaughan. Seemed more like self-preservation than anything else. He should have seen the series through.

 

[Themer]

I don't see it as a weak decision in the slightest steppeing down as captain must have been the hardest thing he has ever done in his captaincy as he could see that they needed a new leader to input new ideas.

 

[Cricketman]

Strauss to lead, then?

 

[evertonfan]

Nah, KP will probably get it.

 

[venom2011]

I don't see it as a weak decision in the slightest steppeing down as captain must have been the hardest thing he has ever done in his captaincy as he could see that they needed a new leader to input new ideas.

Firstly, you don't desert your squad mid-battle and then make yourself unavailable, because you've had enough. He never even spoke to the squad about his decision.

Secondly, a new leader isn't required. He is a very good Captain, but just out of form. The team and individual players have to be looked at before ousting the captain. It doesn't matter how many times Bangladesh change their captain, they're just not good enough as a unit. Sidebottom has been poor, Anderson and Panesar mediocre at best, and these guys aren't exactly world-beaters to begin with. A captain is only as good as his team.

 

[Skater]

Firstly, you don't desert your squad mid-battle and then make yourself unavailable, because you've had enough. He never even spoke to the squad about his decision.

Secondly, a new leader isn't required. He is a very good Captain, but just out of form. The team and individual players have to be looked at before ousting the captain. It doesn't matter how many times Bangladesh change their captain, they're just not good enough as a unit. Sidebottom has been poor, Anderson and Panesar mediocre at best, and these guys aren't exactly world-beaters to begin with. A captain is only as good as his team.

He hasn't deserted the squad. It is clear the spark has gone with Vaughan, and he realised the way forward for both himself as a player and England as a team was for him to step down. The decision could completely back fire if Pietersen is made the captain, mind you. He did speak to the squad about the decision, not as the game ended yesterday, but this morning as he made the decision public, he spoke to several members of it.

 

[Themer]

Why is it mid battle we've already lost. With him ruling himself out it gives the chance for someone else to come in. A new leader is required in my opinion he has been brilliant for England but its now time for someone else to be in charge, plus I think he's past his best batting days. Many people in this thread have said they would drop him aswell due to his batting. Nasser Hussain also went "mid battle" and it proveds to be the right decision leading to the appointment of Vaughan.

 

[angryangy]

Just go with Pietersen, I reckon. He's the safest player in both teams, so he can be that unified captain for as long as you like. He has a good on field presence and can camp at cover or mid off for most of the match, which is a tick in the box for those who see that area as the captain's position. He is also potentially the sort of player whose batting improves with the weight of responsibility and increasing wisdom tempering his game. The proviso is that he actually has some captaining ability. I definitely don't think that he is devoid of it, there are certainly a lot of mental games of chance going on when he bats. If there are kinks to be found, then they can be ironed out now. England's next captain will have to take them through a considerable period of time, or leave them short changed in front of a very important home season. It is possible that Vaughan's immediate resignation is an act that allows England to quickly trial some remedial changes, with a substantial hiatus before England's next Test match.

I think it goes beyond simply picking the best captain out of the IX. England must answer the question. They must find out whether Pietersen can be a great captain.

 

[Themer]

Just go with Pietersen, I reckon. He's the safest player in both teams, so he can be that unified captain for as long as you like. He has a good on field presence and can camp at cover or mid off for most of the match, which is a tick in the box for those who see that area as the captain's position. He is also potentially the sort of player whose batting improves with the weight of responsibility and increasing wisdom tempering his game. The proviso is that he actually has some captaining ability. I definitely don't think that he is devoid of it, there are certainly a lot of mental games of chance going on when he bats. If there are kinks to be found, then they can be ironed out now. England's next captain will have to take them through a considerable period of time, or leave them short changed in front of a very important home season. It is possible that Vaughan's immediate resignation is an act that allows England to quickly trial some remedial changes, with a substantial hiatus before England's next Test match.

I think it goes beyond simply picking the best captain out of the IX. England must answer the question. They must find out whether Pietersen can be a great captain.

I completely agree, great post