Cricketman
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2005
- Location
- USA
I know i'm late to the party and I might have missed something, but why the hell was Monty picked?!
Unofficial Buildup to the 2010/11 Ashes
- Thread starter Skater
- Start date
Just on my arguments about Swann, I was reading a RIDICULOUS article about Swann from Mike Selvey suggesting Swann might be England's best off spinner EVER!!! Why not best spinner ever mate??
Graeme Swann may just have passed the Fred Titmus test | Mike Selvey | Sport | The Guardian
Look, I like Swann but look at his record...there's a big gap between the haves and have-nots:
Against Australia, India and SA - the big 3 Test sides:
11 Tests, 43 wickets @ 35.86, S/R: 67.14, Econ: 3.20
Against everyone else (Pakistan, West Indies and Bangladesh):
13 Tests, 70 wickets @ 20.84, S/R: 46.13, Econ: 2.71
IF Swann does well in this Ashes, I'd be more willing to accept the arguments, but right now there is WAY too much smoke being blown up his rear IMHO.
And just for fun, look at Hauritz against his 3 big rivals - India, SA and England:
6 Tests, 20 wickets @ 33.90, S/R: 69.40, Econ: 2.93
Everyone else (NZ, Pak, WI)
9 Tests, 37 wickets @ 30.70, S/R: 61.41, Econ: 3.00
And for the record...not saying Hauritz is better, I'm just saying one is overrated and one is underrated.
Graeme Swann may just have passed the Fred Titmus test | Mike Selvey | Sport | The Guardian
Look, I like Swann but look at his record...there's a big gap between the haves and have-nots:
Against Australia, India and SA - the big 3 Test sides:
11 Tests, 43 wickets @ 35.86, S/R: 67.14, Econ: 3.20
Against everyone else (Pakistan, West Indies and Bangladesh):
13 Tests, 70 wickets @ 20.84, S/R: 46.13, Econ: 2.71
IF Swann does well in this Ashes, I'd be more willing to accept the arguments, but right now there is WAY too much smoke being blown up his rear IMHO.
And just for fun, look at Hauritz against his 3 big rivals - India, SA and England:
6 Tests, 20 wickets @ 33.90, S/R: 69.40, Econ: 2.93
Everyone else (NZ, Pak, WI)
9 Tests, 37 wickets @ 30.70, S/R: 61.41, Econ: 3.00
And for the record...not saying Hauritz is better, I'm just saying one is overrated and one is underrated.
Good summer with Sussex. He's bowling well again, the other options were Tredwell (who had a very average summer) and Rashid, who is still quite raw.
Lee1981
International Coach
Look what happened when swann got his recall to the england set up, not saying that monty is capable of making a huge impact again but you never know.
Who would have thought swann would be the best spinner in the world when he got his chance again? not many is probably the answer.
Cricketman
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2005
- Location
- USA
The only way Monty's ever going to even get a game is if Swann like, dies or something. I think they'd rather go with 4 seamers than to try Monty anyway.
I would have given Rashid a go. Not seen him play but i've been hearing that he's 'raw' for the last 3 years! someone cook him already!
I would have given Rashid a go. Not seen him play but i've been hearing that he's 'raw' for the last 3 years! someone cook him already!
TumTum
International Cricketer
What is it with you and people dying? :laugh
King Pietersen
ICC Board Member
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2006
- Location
- Manchester
Have you actually watched Swann bowl since The Ashes? He's improved without doubt since then. He was disappointing in The Ashes, especially at Cardiff, but since then he's been awesome. He was superb in South Africa, and although he still averaged just over 30, he bowled brilliantly. Also, using his stats against India as a way to discredit him is pretty laughable TBH. It's like using Warne's debut series against India to rate him. That series was a long time ago, and it was Swann's debut series. Swann is not over-rated, and if you'd actually seen him bowl in the last year, you'd know that. Swann's the best spin bowler in the world bar none.
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
Amen...
Yes I'm seen Swann bowl since the Ashes. Not in all the SA Tests (missed Centurion and a bit of Cape Town), but I saw him bowl very well at Durban (where he got like 8 LBWs - all of which were out BTW), I saw him plug away in the 2nd innings at Cape Town against G.Smith and I saw him do not too much in J'burg. And then I saw the last couple of Pakistan Tests too, which were great fun at the time but I'm not putting much weight on. Admittedly didn't see him v Bangladesh. People can rabbit on about how improved Swann is, which I've heard 10 million times already in this Ashes lead up. Yeah he has improved - as I saw in the above matches, he's a good bowler. But it wouldn't take much since his bowling last Ashes was pretty poor until towards the end of the series. Hauritz outbowled him, and he didn't threaten our right handers much.
Look, I'm not saying Swann isn't a good bowler. I RATE SWANN. But not as highly as Mike Selvey does calling him potentially England's best offie ever when he's yet to prove anything in Asia, or against Australia. Even in SA he didn't get the results that England's greatest off spinner should be getting. That was my point, merely reporting facts on Swann's career - not that Swann is ████, or trying to mislead the forum readers with dodgy edited figures. They are raw career stats. If you say he's much better than them, good for you (and I'd agree with you to an extent), but I think it's still to early to call him a 'great' bowler as is currently the trend.
And now to something completely different...
Ind v Aus 2010: Marcus North gets selectors' backing | Cricket News | India v Australia | Cricinfo.com
Well it's not different at all. Blind loyalty to Marcus North, but I think with each article we are learning more. Hilditch says: ''What we do know is that he [North] was in excellent form in the tour game, he's scored hundreds at international level, he's scored hundreds against England. He is a very classy player. He'd be disappointed he failed, like any other player.''
I think we can assume the selectors want him to show up at #6 in the Ashes because he did well at #6 in the last Ashes. The idea has it's merit, but you have to be able to spot the real deal from the false returns. eg. I wouldn't play JP Duminy against Australia, just because he did well last Australian tour, as he's since turned out to be a disappointment. You can't live in the past. But I wonder how many innings Marcus will get in the team once the Ashes start and he keeps failing until the selectors finally pull the plug. What does the guy have to do to be dropped??
- all of which were out BTW), I saw him plug away in the 2nd innings at Cape Town against G.Smith and I saw him do not too much in J'burg. And then I saw the last couple of Pakistan Tests too, which were great fun at the time but I'm not putting much weight on. Admittedly didn't see him v Bangladesh. People can rabbit on about how improved Swann is, which I've heard 10 million times already in this Ashes lead up. Yeah he has improved - as I saw in the above matches, he's a good bowler. But it wouldn't take much since his bowling last Ashes was pretty poor until towards the end of the series. Hauritz outbowled him, and he didn't threaten our right handers much. Look, I'm not saying Swann isn't a good bowler. I RATE SWANN. But not as highly as Mike Selvey does calling him potentially England's best offie ever when he's yet to prove anything in Asia, or against Australia. Even in SA he didn't get the results that England's greatest off spinner should be getting. That was my point, merely reporting facts on Swann's career - not that Swann is ████, or trying to mislead the forum readers with dodgy edited figures. They are raw career stats. If you say he's much better than them, good for you (and I'd agree with you to an extent), but I think it's still to early to call him a 'great' bowler as is currently the trend.
And now to something completely different...
Ind v Aus 2010: Marcus North gets selectors' backing | Cricket News | India v Australia | Cricinfo.com
Well it's not different at all. Blind loyalty to Marcus North, but I think with each article we are learning more. Hilditch says: ''What we do know is that he [North] was in excellent form in the tour game, he's scored hundreds at international level, he's scored hundreds against England. He is a very classy player. He'd be disappointed he failed, like any other player.''
I think we can assume the selectors want him to show up at #6 in the Ashes because he did well at #6 in the last Ashes. The idea has it's merit, but you have to be able to spot the real deal from the false returns. eg. I wouldn't play JP Duminy against Australia, just because he did well last Australian tour, as he's since turned out to be a disappointment. You can't live in the past. But I wonder how many innings Marcus will get in the team once the Ashes start and he keeps failing until the selectors finally pull the plug. What does the guy have to do to be dropped??
Last edited:
Other news media sources are using that quote as saying Ferguson is going to put pressure on his spot. Aka Hilditch backs Ferguson's Test claims | Fox Sports
Sadly it seems to mean they don't see Smith as a batsmen and probably Hughes not as a middle order player. Ideally Ferguson should come in for Hussey and Smith for North so we still have the spinning option.
Sadly it seems to mean they don't see Smith as a batsmen and probably Hughes not as a middle order player. Ideally Ferguson should come in for Hussey and Smith for North so we still have the spinning option.
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
Although im not surprised to See Ferguson anointed as the next middle-order bat. While his rise ATS reminds me alot Clarke circa 2003/2004. Which is not a great FC record early on, but every time he's dipped his toe into international waters via the shorter forms, he's looked the goods. I have BIG hunch, which i pesume the selectors do as well, that we would adapt to Test match cricket just as well.
But in this post McWarne era of consistent batting collapses. I am bit nervious about that lack of a strong FC record from Ferguson. I think it'd send a terrible message back to state cricket that the quickest route into the Test team is to look like you're going to score runs and that actually scoring them is secondary. Guys like Hughes, Bailey, Jaques, Rogers, Klinger & maybe even D Hussey who have proven they can score play long innings should be ahead of him really.
Ferguson needs a strong FC season for S Australia this year before he gets a test call-up.
Last edited:
Very true, the selectors seem to love using the ODI arena as the stepping stone. Johnson is another who went into the Test side with a pretty average FC record. But hard to complain when it pays off. White would have been better off never making his Test debut as he'll probably be next in line for the Test side going by his ODI form of late.
lethalhughes
Club Cricketer
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
With White i think its more a technical thing as a result Odi perfromances alone might just not be enough to catch selectors eye, rightly or wrongly.He'll need to atleast dominate in the 4 day stuff a bit to catch the selectors eye i think.The fact he doesn't bowl again doesnt help his cause either.Ferguson just has to have a shot at test cricket, he's class, regardless of what his first class record says.As others pointed out Clarke didnt have a good record either.What i'm still asking myself is why NORTH is in our best 11 and Hughes isnt?Smith is the same as White in that techincally he isnt the greatest for test cricket and one season of dominance in domestic cricket might not be enough, he'll need to have atleast two strong seasons batting wise to convince selectots he's a top 6 bat.
Last edited:
Similar threads
