With the SA series only a couple of weeks away, England will need to be on top of their game. But would England stand a better chance of winning this series with Steven Finn in the test time in expense of Tim Bresnan? Steven Finn in my opinion is England's best bowler in all forms of the game, and to me offers more of a threat to the South Africans. Tim Bresnan to me seems out of form, but does offer more with the bat which could be vital if in need of extra runs. I personally can't wait for this series, going to be goooood!
Might be a bit late now, but i completely agree. I am a Yorkshire fan through and through, yet i understand Bresnan's ability but his weakness's. He is no doubt canny at picking up that odd wicket, but does he produce magic balls to get rid of world class players? No. Anderson and Swann are great at holding up ends. Finn may go round the park now and again but so does Bresnan. No matter when Finn has bowled for England he has never let them down. He could become truely World Class in a few years, lets give him a chance to shine.
For once the England attack looked "samey" and never looked like taking 10 wickets (let alone 20). Some raw pace and bounce from Finn would give a bit of variety. Whether that replaces Bresnan or Broad (who was worringly down on pace) is for the selectors. Also I heard on the grapevine that Swann has an injury that will need an operation after the test series (he will miss the 20-20 WC)
Finn is playing instead of Swann for the second test. Big call, I reckon England's bowlers are really going to struggle in the second innings without Swann tying down one end. If they start tiring we're going to see some part-timers bowling, and that could get messy.
