The England squad has been announced and Rashid is in it. Apparently Bayliss has said that Moeen Ali will be number one spinner. This season in the county championship, three wickets at 91. Rashid has 15 at 24. Whoever plays will be batting at eight, and their batting average this season are almost identical. Will England ever learn? Who would the Aussies least like to face?
If they're number 8 in the batting order I think you've got to pick someone like Rashid who is predominantly a spinner and can bat a bit. Rather than somone who is a batsman who can bowl a bit. Plus I think irrespective who out of the two starts the Aussie batsmen will go after them, as they like to do with our spinners. So starting with a 'containing' spinner like Ali, who probably won't contain the Aussie batsmen, makes little sense to me. What's your thoughts goldeneagle?
Goldeneagle? My thoughts are exactly the same. The pitch has a very good chance of being dry thus receptive to spin in the later days, so we must start with Rashid. We have a secondary spinner in Joe Root if needed, but a leg spinner gives more problems to batsmen.
LOL... Sorry, bud. Was thinking logically rather than creatively. I skim read your name and goldeneagle it was. Be interesting to see if Bayliss does start with two spinners in some tests. Our batting order is certainly the strongest it's been for a while, and could possibly cope with it. Can't see it happening though as the Aussies have a habit of really winding up our batsmen and getting into their heads. I think the ability to stay cool and keep a level head will have a major effect on wins this Test Series. Personally I think we're set for a barnstormer, similar to 2005, with hopefully the same team triumphing!!
We need a front line spinner and rashid is probably the better of the pair more variety, maybe less consistency. I'm not totally sold on this idea of being able to bat through to 9 or 10. It's great if you can do it but it can't compromise the bowling. Swanny was good with the bat, but even if he was awful, he was still worth having in the team. Rarely do great all-rounders crop up. Botham and Flintoff are probably the only two players we've had who could have got in the XI based on their batting or there bowling alone. It's amazing how often The mantra "use the right tool for the job" is true if Ali could get into the team as a batsman he'd be useful otherwise Root is a passable second spinner. We shouldn't be picking bowlers based on how good their batting is.
Not having a go Bath, but I hear this statement bandied around about numerous players and it's a complete myth. The best all-rounder in my lifetime has been Jacques Kallis, and he would have been nowhere near the SA first XI as a bowler. Botham (at his absolute peak) was probably just good enough to get in the team as a number 6 batsmen (career average 33). Flintoff, forget it (average 31 in a better era for batsmen and just 5 hundreds in 79 test matches). There's VERY few Test Cricketers in the history of the game who could live up to that tag for a good test team. Off the top of my head Sobers (not sure about the bowling) Keith Miller, WG Grace (?) maybe Imran Khan and Mike Proctor, or Botham as above. Thats about it.
Well that took the wind out of my sails! Just hoping we can catch the Aussie's a little bit 'cold'..hmmmm.... and get ahead early in the series. Otherwise I fear we may be in for a tough summer.
Totally agree with Bath on this one - wonderful to have bowlers who can bat a bit and to be honest given the level of coaching and professionalism in the game there are few genuine ferrets in the international game any more and nor should there be but picking your bowlers because of their batting ability seems a bit strange. Nobody wins test matches unless they are capable of taking 20 wickets regularly (unless you get a Cronje declaration). By all means select a team to score 1000 runs in the match but unless they can knock the opposition over it will count for nothing. For me favouring bowlers who can bat is disingenuous. We need to have batters who can bat at test match level and bowlers who can knock over top class batters. As for all rounders kallis and sobers stand out as they were test class at both disciplines. Sadly botham and flint off are just not in the same class. Both capable of winning a match on their own but not capable of the sustained brilliance of the hugely under rated kallis and the excellent sobers.
Nobody is saying that having a tail that can regularly 'wag' is a bad thing, and if Broad can get his act together and Rashid/Ali play then that is what we have. However, as you mention, bowlers win matches. You need people who can provide wicket-taking deliveries on a regular basis. I've slightly changed my mind on Rashid. I was dead against him, because I thought the Aussies would have a field day with his loose deliveries, which they may still, but you do need someone who can nick a couple out when the ball is old and your back's against the wall. Given their relative batting abilities, Rashid would now get my vote, at least to see how he rolls. Shame we didn't get to see that in the West Indies though. Still don't agree that Kallis was a genuine test-class bowler, but he certainly wasn't bad! It's a moot point. Shakib-Al-Hasan deserves his place in the Bangladesh team in either discipline because they have a dearth of genuinely talented and capable cricketers. If he was South African he may not get in. The point I made to Bath was not important, just something that irks me, that people who are 'very good' at batting and bowling are suddenly given 'top 5 in the country' status in both. It's rarely true.
Kallis was not too bad with the ball - not many get 292 test wickets at 32 considering it was his weaker discipline. Not one of the best bowlers ever but surely if you had to pick an all rounder for your best ever XI he would be your man. Perfectly decent third or fourth seamer at test match level plus a batting average over 50. If you were to pick an all rounder in your best ever XI who else would get the nod? Kallis has suffered from being hugely effective and consistent rather than flamboyant like botham and flintoff neither of whom really are in his class.
I pretty much agree with you. Again, the small point I was making was that Kallis would not get into the team as a bowler alone - even a 3rd/4th seamer (my opinion only). He took all those wickets because he played in a hell of a lot of test matches for a very strong team. I would pick Sobers in my all time XI. Better batting average than Kallis (who made a lot of big not-out scores v Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, a very poor West Indies etc) in a time when some of the pitches were shockers compared to now. A more attacking, match winning player. Brilliant fielder both close to the wicket and in the outfield, from what I hear, and could bowl seam OR spin. The perfect cricketer, and probably the most valuable player of all time.
Ryan Harris has just announced his immediate retirement from cricket apparently, due to injury. That's a boost for England.
I know it's not technically to do with the Ashes but it is cricket related! I guess Brian Close was some sort of Superman! http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/33425867
Can almost taste it now. Really hope that England get off to a flier tomorrow and start putting a bit of pressure on the Aussies - love to see them put in to bat, rattled out for 180 by tea and Cook and Lythe still there at stumps after Mitchell Johnson having a bad RADAR day.
Why do I feel underwhelmed by the Ashes? I think it is because it used to have a special place being fought for every 4 years and so there was time to simmer down and build back up for the next confrontation. Now it feels like every 2 years and it is hardly off the radar and the 'special' place has been lost. Sorry just being an old gripe I guess.
