South Africa in England

[aussie_ben91]

The question needs to be asked what the game situation would be like if Smith had've elected to bat first and batted like they are in this second innings?

312-1 is no mean feat under any conditions and I couldn't imagine England batting like this in a second innings after being bundled out for a smallish total and being required to follow on with a depesite of over 300 runs.

Very ominous signs for England in this series if they can't somehow pull off a victory in the final 2 sessions of play.

 

[Sureshot]

It's quite typical of Lord's. From a results point of view, I'd happily have it dropped. Same with The Oval, they just don't produce results. Which is surely the point of a test match?

I do feel sorry for the bowlers though, they are bowling quite well.1 wicket in 120 overs says otherwise, though.

Ben, I think you are over-reacting, on this pitch, we are lucky to have gotten 11 wickets in the match.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Is Stuart Broad vast becoming the next Ashley Giles?

 

[Leicester Fox]

Get out.

Broad is a way better batsmen than Giles and tbf he hasn't bowled any worse than the others, he bowled better in the first innings, could easily have had 2 or 3 more wickets. Plus he bowls with the new ball normally but because Jimmy and Sidebum are swingers he doesn't get a chance.

 

[Ollie_H]

Ben are you even watching this match?

 

[manee]

Get out.

Broad is a way better batsmen than Giles and tbf he hasn't bowled any worse than the others, he bowled better in the first innings, could easily have had 2 or 3 more wickets. Plus he bowls with the new ball normally but because Jimmy and Sidebum are swingers he doesn't get a chance.

He has a role with the ball and has currently not performed well in it. 18 wickets at 44.88 with an economy of 3.18 is not very good at all. He has done well with the bat, averaging 35.87 with the bat - but at eight, is batting really that important when you haved a bowler who is pretty much a waste at this point in time at Test cricket.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Ben are you even watching this match?

Yeah, are you?

 

[WestIndian]

He has a role with the ball and has currently not performed well in it. 18 wickets at 44.88 with an economy of 3.18 is not very good at all. He has done well with the bat, averaging 35.87 with the bat - but at eight, is batting really that important when you haved a bowler who is pretty much a waste at this point in time at Test cricket.

I agree with your analysis coming in at 8, if you can get runs its all well and good, but your primary function and present on the team would be to get wickets and do so as cheaply as possible.
So base on what you are saying, and in light of the recent talks about Flintoff, if you had to recommend a change, it would be Broad out and Flintoff in, even if some of the English commentators were suggesting Flintoff in for Collingwood!

 

[Sureshot]

He has a role with the ball and has currently not performed well in it. 18 wickets at 44.88 with an economy of 3.18 is not very good at all. He has done well with the bat, averaging 35.87 with the bat - but at eight, is batting really that important when you haved a bowler who is pretty much a waste at this point in time at Test cricket.

He's a better bowler than that. He isn't the finished article, but you can't judge him on this road. He has bowled well.

 

[manee]

So base no what you are saying, and in light of the recent talks about Flintoff, if you had to recommend a change, it would be Broad out and Flintoff in, even if some of the English commentators were suggesting Flintoff in for Collingwood!

It is a very complicated situation, but I'd go with...

6. Ambrose
7. Broad
8. Jones
9. Sidebottom
10. Anderson
11. Panesar

So Broad moves to seven as a fifth bowler and all rounder.

manee added 1 Minutes and 8 Seconds later...

He's a better bowler than that. He isn't the finished article, but you can't judge him on this road. He has bowled well.

He isn't the finished article, you're right. He has bowled some good deliveries, but plenty of dross. This is Test cricket, not the place to develop a bowler into Test cricket who hasn't even done too well as FC cricket!

 

[DPRA]

I personally feel the following changes should be made:

Ambrose out, Mustard in.

Collingwood out, Flintoff in.

 

[WestIndian]

It is a very complicated situation, but I'd go with...

6. Ambrose
7. Broad
8. Jones
9. Sidebottom
10. Anderson
11. Panesar

So Broad moves to seven as a fifth bowler and all rounder.

manee added 1 Minutes and 8 Seconds later...

He isn't the finished article, you're right. He has bowled some good deliveries, but plenty of dross. This is Test cricket, not the place to develop a bowler into Test cricket who hasn't even done too well as FC cricket!

So Collingwood would be left out?? Am assuming you would have your top 5 like this then:

1. Strauss
2. Cook
3. Vaughan
4. Pietersen
5. Bell

 

[manee]

Yes. I think Jones > Flintoff for Test selection at this point in time. Jones has proven his fitness over a longer period of time and Flintoff's massive slump in batting form has made his batting moot at this point. Jones has also performed far better in CC cricket than Flintoff, albeit in Division 2. Jones has been a wicket taking machine whereas Flintoff has often been outperformed in his few games this season.

 

[Sureshot]

I personally feel the following changes should be made:

Ambrose out, Mustard in.

Collingwood out, Flintoff in.

Mustard hasn't done that well in FC, averaging just 20 this season. Read is averaging nearly 50, Prior over 60. Only 20s from Davies and Jones. Foster in the 30s. I don't see the point in keep changing keepers. We aren't going to have a keeper come in and excel, it won't happen. I'd stick with Ambrose for the mean time, Mustard in ODIs though.

 

[m_vaughan]

Why the pitch is like this is beyond me.

According to the commentators its might have something to do with the hovercraft being used to cover the pitch.