Another reason I would pick Finn is that if England continue to choose only 4 main strike bowlers, they have to be great wicket-takers. Although granted he gets hit around a bit more than Bresnan, Finn is much more of a wicket-taker in my opinion. Also, Finn is something a bit different compared to Broad and Anderson (more pace and bounce) - especially effective on the Lords pitch. Bresnan is more a similar style and pace to what the attack already has.
In an ideal world any batter knicking off would walk. I have only played at a low standard where we umpire our own team but I never had to give one of my team out caught behind, they just walked, as did the people we played against. If you didn't you would get a fair bit of stick in the bar afterwards. I think that the "spirit" of the game is alive and well in the lower echelons but, like football and other team sports, where you have a living to be made from winning things are a bit more cut-throat. Broad was not obliged to walk just as Haddin didn't walk when he has come out publicly and said that he knew he had hit it. Just because Broad's was a more obvious edge does not make Haddins any better (or worse). It is a pity that the example of Adam Gilchrist was not followed by other high profile players where walking became the norm and not doing so unacceptable within the game. Now players are not inclined to walk as they have their fair share of poor decisions going the other way - Jonathan Trott's being out bat before wicket springs immediately to mind. Despite it's limitations I really like the DRS system and would probably give each team another one per innings to erase the howlers from the game and to catch out batters who knick the ball behind and don't walk. I reckon that if players knew they would be caught out by DRS and made to look dishonest publicly then we would see more walkers as what is the point of standing your ground if you know the opposition are going to get you via the review system anyway and you will still be out but also look like a cheat.
i never realised this but swann has never taken a five wicket haul at trent bridge - crazy baring in mind its his home ground. however, his record at lords is a bit tasty...
I'd go Finn, one bad match doesn't make a bad bowler, he's also more of a handful for tail enders who are proving difficult when he gets his pace up. Think he'll go on to be one of our best bowlers so keep him
While we're on the subject of interesting facts, did you know that Devon Malcolm hit more Ashes sixes (7) than Sir Don Bradman (6) did? You do now!
let's not forget that haddin reviewed the final wicket on sunday. are you telling me he didn't know he hit that? yes it was a faint knick but i heard it at the time and he definitely knew, he looked around at prior which is a giveaway for starters
I think you'll find Cook asked for a review after consultation with Matt Prior. Anderson admitted he had no idea, so left the decision to those behind the stumps
The aussies got too caught up in the game and wasted their reviews, listening to andy strauss he always had rule that the captain, wicket keeper and bowler all had to agree before they asked for a review.
In that case do what i did! Post it as a thumbnail, open it, right click on image, copy image url then edit and remove the jpeg info and paste it from copy!
Haddin has come out publicly and said that he knew he'd hit it but stood his ground in the hope that England wouldn't review. He has not said he did this as a response to Broad or made any apology for doing so.
A few interesting points on weather to walk or not from Gilchrist and Test umpires, these are from the Aussie media a while ago so not tempered by current events Gilchrist: walking the walk To walk, or not to walk, that is the question And heres the video of Gilchrists famous walk [video=youtube;9gVI8sOtdNk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gVI8sOtdNk[/video]
so backs up my point about aussies not walking themselves. at the end of the day it's down to the umpires to get it right in the first place. they won't get them all right, that's where reviews come in. perhaps if they hadn't wasted their final review on a 'punt' they might have won the test. that's not why they were brought in.
Brezza gets nod ahead of @FinnySteve (as predicted by moi - and many knowlegable pundits at the conclusion of the first test )
