What's new

The England Cricket thread

kishman

Well-Known Member
Apr 22, 2005
10,575
771
Big summer of cricket ahead for England. First up, the West Indies (who start the post-Brian Lara era) and then the Indians.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/6644239.stm

Squad for the first test against West Indies announced.

England squad: Andrew Strauss (captain), Alastair Cook, Ian Bell, Kevin Pietersen, Paul Collingwood, Andrew Flintoff, Matt Prior, Liam Plunkett, Steve Harmison, Matthew Hoggard, Monty Panesar, Owais Shah.

No Vaughan who's injured once again. Prior included instead of Nixon. It is good to see Moores building for the future.
 

paulspursman

New Member
Oct 19, 2004
5,430
1
no real surprise

prior is the better option over nixon

vaughan is a loss but not too big of one

KP being fit to play is great

shah deserves his chance

glad plunkett is in there too tbh
 

Bill_Oddie

Everything in Moderation
Staff
Feb 1, 2005
19,120
6,003
Having watched Prior since he was a nipper, pretty happy for him. Not sure he's up to scratch just yet, but for years we've needed to do what the Saffas did with Boucher (i.e. play him at 8 until he found his feet with the bat - now a genuine top 6 batter).

With a keeper as coach and another keeper as deputy (Flower is a cracking appointment btw. Super player and a super gentleman) hope he gets all the help he needs.
 

montylynch

Fandabeedozee
Jun 23, 2005
5,822
3,990
I think the appointment of Flower is long overdue, he's a great bloke to have about and his knowledge of the game is tenfold, he knows more about cricket than the England team have forgotten. Shame Tresco couldn't be persuaded to join in, him and Strauss at the top would have given us a great start. Just hope Harmi can get back on form, we've missed him. I would have included Bopara though, but being an essex boy i'm bound to have said that !!
 

Tickers

Marquee Signing
Feb 16, 2005
3,646
21
Not convinced by Prior, but will give him a chance. The same chance as Chris Read has had in the past (ie. he has two games. In those games he must score runs in each innings and keep faultlessly. Even then, probably still get dropped).

Considering Ambrose was widely regarded as the better keeper when the two of them were together at Sussex, but had to leave for Warwickshire to get a game, it does rather suggest an early Moores pick.

Especially as Prior has scored no runs this season while Ambrose has scored shitloads.

EDIT: Recent form: Prior - 158 runs this season, average 22. No score over 50. Ambrose - 418 runs this season, average 139, One double century. Admittedly early days in the season, but a stark contrast nonetheless, especially as the better batting figures belong to the better gloveman as well.
 

kishman

Well-Known Member
Apr 22, 2005
10,575
771
Maybe Prior is the Downing of the England cricket team. He's in the team because he played under the new coach.
 

Bill_Oddie

Everything in Moderation
Staff
Feb 1, 2005
19,120
6,003
Or it could be that he has the highest first class average (38) of all available wicket-keepers.


Nah, can't be that. :wink:
 

paulspursman

New Member
Oct 19, 2004
5,430
1
i think kishmans point may have some truth but yeah Bill your most probably right

has flintoff been passed fit to play??
 

paulspursman

New Member
Oct 19, 2004
5,430
1
5 minutes from starting apparently

doubt we will get much play though

england match in england comes up - cue the rain
 

BracknellYid

New Member
Dec 13, 2004
2,590
0
no real surprise

prior is the better option over nixon

vaughan is a loss but not too big of one

KP being fit to play is great

shah deserves his chance

glad plunkett is in there too tbh

Agree with most of that apart from vaughan, i see it as a positive he's not there. Hasn't cut it with the bat or in the field for a long time barring one innings against the aussies.

I'm fed up of players being selected purely because they are the skipper.

As someone else mentioned Read should still be in there. The way fletcher treated him was appalling came in for the pakistan tests and played well was then dropped for the ashes. Its no wonder he didn't play to well when he did come in. Fletcher made it blatantly clear he didn't want read anywhere near the side.
 

paulspursman

New Member
Oct 19, 2004
5,430
1
yeah vaughan is rubbish really with the bat since being skipper

England 175/3 (48.2 ov) Bad Light Stopped Play.....Again!
 

TrueYid

Active Member
Jul 29, 2003
2,429
33
Well Cook has his hundred, I would say 200-3 after day one is a great start, considering the toss and conditions...

Will be marvelous to see how England will accomodate Tres, Vaughn and Flintoff should they all be ready to play at the same time.

I would guess that Bell, Shah would be two to go. Even if I rate them both...

Thoughts?
 

Bill_Oddie

Everything in Moderation
Staff
Feb 1, 2005
19,120
6,003
Flintoff to bat at 7 is the other option. Plunkett to miss out, is my guess. Would be the best balance and side for English conditions. Might struggle overseas when 5 bowlers is a must though.
 

rich75

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2004
7,591
3,215
all looks pretty good so far.... im off to lords on saturday.. hope we're bowling by then, would love to see harmison get back to his old self and show the windies what west indian fast bowling used to look like
 

paulspursman

New Member
Oct 19, 2004
5,430
1
collingwood has been dropped when it was so much easier to catch him and also been given not out for lbw appeal that looked quite clearly out

so start really from england but they gotta get themselves in again

213-3
 

paulspursman

New Member
Oct 19, 2004
5,430
1
collingwood goes to 100 for 4th time in test matches and after gettin dropped twice and avoiding a clear lbw appeal

352 - 4
 

kishman

Well-Known Member
Apr 22, 2005
10,575
771
524-5.

4 centurions in the England innings. Most notable Prior who's made his maiden test century on his debut. It was nearly run-a-ball as well.
 
Top