Was it a mistake to leave Harmison out?

Should Harmison have been included?

  • Probably yes, as much for experience as other reasons

    Votes: 7 38.9%
  • Probably not, best to move on

    Votes: 5 27.8%
  • Maybe, he is bound to be recalled anyway

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Maybe someone other than Broad or Panesar should have played

    Votes: 6 33.3%

  • Total voters
    18

King Pietersen

ICC Board Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Location
Manchester
He was bloody awful in that Test though tbh, worse than Broad's been in this one. I'd say he's over the hill, there are better options.

Anderson > Flintoff > Broad > Onions > Harmison > Sidebottom

That's the pecking order of our fast bowlers I reckon. Sidebottom's not really done enough to get back in the side. Been outbowled by Onions and Harmison this season.
 
P

pcfan123

Guest
He was bloody awful in that Test though tbh, worse than Broad's been in this one. I'd say he's over the hill, there are better options.

Anderson > Flintoff > Broad > Onions > Harmison > Sidebottom

That's the pecking order of our fast bowlers I reckon. Sidebottom's not really done enough to get back in the side. Been outbowled by Onions and Harmison this season.

so you reckon broad be given a go at lords?
 
P

pcfan123

Guest
Why not Fred opening the bowling, our best bowler, the one the aussies fear the most.
 

King Pietersen

ICC Board Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Location
Manchester
Jimmy's a swinger, and Onions gets the new ball for Durham. We can't rely on bouncing Hughes out, and Onions is accurate enough to bowl a tight line to Hughes and stop him freeing his arms. He opens for Durham, so he should open for England.
 

King Pietersen

ICC Board Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Location
Manchester
What the hell has happened to Hoggard?

Just thought I'd bring this question up again, having just read an interesting point regarding Hoggard on CW.

Last 12 Tests - 31 wickets @ 41.35.

The "one bad Test" is a myth.

I was wrong. Seems he's had more than 1 bad Test before being dropped. He's not performed brilliantly in the Championship either. Here are the comparison stats between the guys you'd consider to be in contention for a bowling place:

In the Championship

Anderson 11 @ 9.90
Onions 40 @ 13.02
Broad 7 @ 15.14
Flintoff 8 @ 18.62
Harmison 35 @ 18.68
Swann 6 @ 21.16
Plunkett 19 @ 22.15
Mahmood 24 @ 24.08
Rashid 10 @ 27.30
Hoggard 28 @ 27.50
Sidebottom 10 @ 30.20
Pattinson 7 @ 46.28
Bresnan 8 @ 59.50
Amjad Khan 2 @ 78.00
Panesar 6 @ 86.66

Pretty interesting stats really. Anderson, Onions, Broad, Flintoff and Harmison have performed comfortably better than their nearest seam bowling rivals, with Onions and Harmison having played more games. Swann's also performed well in the game he's played. The real interest comes in the fact that Plunkett, Mahmood and Rashid have all outperformed Hoggard, Sidebottom and Panesar. Plunkett has had an especially good season, and has contributed with the bat as well as the ball. I really don't see a way we could justify picking Hoggard or Sidearse, with Anderson, Onions, Broad, Flintoff and Harmison all having performed better.

Interesting to note that the 1 cap wonders in Amjad, Bresnan and Pattinson have all had pretty terrible seasons, and the less said about Panesar the better. That's a truely terrible performance given he's been playing in Division 2.
 

STLIndian

Club Cricketer
Joined
Apr 4, 2009
Location
St. Louis, USA
Online Cricket Games Owned
I'd say no. But it was a mistake to keep Onions out.

Bring in Onions for Panesar, and Ian Bell for Cook.
 

mattfb

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Location
Australia, Sydney
Online Cricket Games Owned
I'd say no. But it was a mistake to keep Onions out.

Bring in Onions for Panesar, and Ian Bell for Cook.

No, Cook is better then Bell as he is showing. Despite the obvious flaws in his technique he still has the ability to score some good runs. Wouldn't be surprised if he got a ton today.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top