Ashes 1st Test

[Mr Wooly]

England team.
* *
AJ Strauss, AN Cook, IR Bell, PD Collingwood, KP Pietersen, A Flintoff, GO Jones, AF Giles, MJ Hoggard, SJ Harmison, JM Anderson

Australia team.
*
ML Hayden, JL Langer, RT Ponting, DR Martyn, MEK Hussey, MJ Clarke, AC Gilchrist, SK Warne, B Lee, SR Clark, GD McGrath *

Australia won the toss and elected to bat.

C'mon England!

[Matt the Shrimp]

He's gone for Giles & he's got Bell at three... typical Fletcher, and I'm not sure I agree with him. On top of that, the Gabba always turns by the 4th innings - we are going to have to be at our very best throughout this game.

http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/oops.gif

[Mr Wooly]

Yep, gotta feel for a lot of sympathy for Monty - obviously opted for the safe option of the extra batsman. And as you say, come the 4th day, Monty's influence could be missed sorely. A lot of pressure on the King of Spain.

[Matt the Shrimp]

Shocking first over from Harmy, I'm listening on TMS...

http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/oops.gif

[Mr Wooly]

The first ball was so wide, I almost caught it!

http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Mr Wooly]

No messin' from Freddie - Harmison out of the attack after two wayward overs.

Anderson's first ball pulled for four.

Five boundaries for Langer already - 28-0

[blues_r_best]

Hayden out for 21, Freddy strikes, Collingwood caught,

Currently 98-1

[blues_r_best]

109-1 at lunch

[Alexis_SUFC]

Australia 217-3 at tea. Flintoff got Hayden (21) and Langer (82) while the King of Spain got Martyn for 29. Ponting no on 63.

Alexis

[Bluesmanager]

Ponting got 137 and the Aussies are 3hundred and something after day one! Get Freddie and Peanuts on there!

[TrueBlue]

mite aswell give up now

[Hong Kong Blue]

Exact same score on close of play as 2002.

On the plus side, we can blame the reason we are bowling on the toss rather than on our captain and we haven't lost a quick bowler to a career-threatening injury.

With runs on the board Australia will now be ruing not having their extra bowler. This will be an interesting series not least because each sides' best bowler (by head and shoulders their best bowler at that) will have to carefully manage their workload.

TB - no need for that pessimism just yet. Australia have to beat not just England, but the clock. The draw is England's friend.

[Bluesmanager]

Who's up for a rain dance then? http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[stickyboy]

From the ground reports I read this ground was the most likely to be a draw out of any of the pitches so hopefully we can bat well (when we actually get in) and avoid the follow on and hopefully kill enough time out of the game at the same time...rain would be nice though but they reckon its going to get hotter.

[TrueBlue]

Quote[/b] ]TB - no need for that pessimism just yet. Australia have to beat not just England, but the clock. The draw is England's friend.

England ....

Football - Crap
Rugby - Crap
Cricket- Now Crap

lets face it we were not ment for international sports! http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Bluesmanager]

Badminton - Silver Olympic Medalists
Bowls - Several World Champions
Snooker - Several World Champions

Not so me thinks... *http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Shrimper2thecore]

I really dont like Ponting.

For the size of England, we really are very good at sport

[C C Csiders]

Quote[/b] (Shrimper2thecore @ Nov. 23 2006,12:31)]I really dont like Ponting.
Can't stick him either. Piggy-eyed, short ar$e tw@t (although he apparently speaks highly of me).

I like Langer, Lee and Warne. No great fan of any of the others.

[Hong Kong Blue]

I can't bring myself to like any of the Australian team. I can just about tolerate Damien Martyn and Michael Hussey but that's about as far as it goes.

When Ponting went out to bat at the MCG in 2002, the bloke in front of me stood up, picked up his newspaper and shook it angrily in the air and yelled:

"Oi Ponting, my newspaper was late again. And don't just chuck it on the floor, put it through the letterbox." http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[Ailsa Road Shrimper]

They're gonna get at least 500. Australia score so quickly and the weather is good, don't see how we can get a draw out of this. Very disappointing...

[Museshrimper]

Aussies made 602-9, we closed on 53-3 with Strauss, Cook and Bell all departing http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[scrounger]

The lack of updates already shows that people are not too optimistic of our chances of winning the 1st Test http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/down.gif

[The Flying Scotsman]

Is there any further update required? England are still 53/3 chasing Australias 602/9 dec.

[Bluesmanager]

As I recall we were absolutely hammered at Lords last year (I can't remember exactly as I was on holisay). All is not lost yet!

It's just looking like a whitewash.

[C C Csiders]

Ridiculous that the ECB should have agreed to such an itinerary. Just 2 3-day warm up games and a one day slog, and then straight into 5 Tests, with just one more opportunity of a 3-day State game. No way to go into a vital Test Series, and shameful really. The ECB will site the Champions' Trophy - but what is more important winning a second rate one-day trophy, or retaining the Ashes? Tough one, that. We could have sent a shadow squad, containing no players selected for the Ashes squad, and played some serious competitive warm up games in Australia.

You don't eat a Kurzi Lamb after 12 hours, as it is half-prepared, so why go into the Ashes with a half-prepared squad.

Unless 2 out of Bell, Pietersen and Flintoff score 100's and the other get a decent 50 we are doomed.

[keefmoon]

I think we can write off this test to be honest. But I kind of expected that really given that none of our bowlers are in any sort of form or, as the guy above has said, have played anywhere near enough cricket. They need to get into the swing of things. I'm sure this test will help them out.

Having said that, my money is on a 3-0 win for the Aussies.

I wish I hadn't stayed up til tea on both days watching this crap. My eyes feel like a dog has ****ed in them.

[The Flying Scotsman]

Quote[/b] (Bluesmanager @ Nov. 24 2006,10:24)]As I recall we were absolutely hammered at Lords last year (I can't remember exactly as I was on holisay). All is not lost yet!

It's just looking like a whitewash.
The Lords match wasn't all that bad though. We laid down a marker on the first day when we bowled them out for 180ish?? and more importantly got stuck into them with some ferocious bowling.

[Bluesmanager]

I only saw thirty seconds of that Test in the luggage retrieval of Birmingham Airport, so I'm just guessing.

I would say they've set a marker, but 600-odd's pushing it.

[Hong Kong Blue]

Quote[/b] (C C Csiders @ Nov. 24 2006,10:57)]Ridiculous that the ECB should have agreed to such an itinerary. Just 2 3-day warm up games and a one day slog, and then straight into 5 Tests, with just one more opportunity of a 3-day State game. No way to go into a vital Test Series, and shameful really. The ECB will site the Champions' Trophy - but what is more important winning a second rate one-day trophy, or retaining the Ashes? Tough one, that. We could have sent a shadow squad, containing no players selected for the Ashes squad, and played some serious competitive warm up games in Australia.

You don't eat a Kurzi Lamb after 12 hours, as it is half-prepared, so why go into the Ashes with a half-prepared squad.

Unless 2 out of Bell, Pietersen and Flintoff score 100's and the other get a decent 50 we are doomed.
Spot on.

I think last night I might have eaten a Kurzi lamb cooked for only 12 hours, which might explain why my stomach feels wrong.

I watched about half an hour last night and the ball was actually doing a fair bit. Hoggy took a double wicket maiden and then next over had Clarke (or Warne) dropped by Jimmy Anderson and beat the edge twice.

Freddy bowled some peaches as well.

[Shrimper2thecore]

Quote[/b] (Bluesmanager @ Nov. 24 2006,11:12)]I only saw thirty seconds of that Test in the luggage retrieval of Birmingham Airport, so I'm just guessing.

I would say they've set a marker, but 600-odd's pushing it.
Cant see us getting that in both innings put together!!

So much pressure on Freddie already!!

Harmison bowled like a drain!!

[dloman]

Quote[/b] (The Flying Scotsman @ Nov. 24 2006,11:08)]It's just looking like a whitewash.
The Lords match wasn't all that bad though. We laid down a marker on the first day when we bowled them out for 180ish?? and more importantly got stuck into them with some ferocious bowling.[/QUOTE]
i think now we are likely to lose this test, this what we should be doing as in getting the bowlers to make their batsmen work and get stuck right into them i.e Harmison last year hitting ponting with a short delivery and using the 2nd innings to shopw them it will not be an easy series.

Also really do think Simon Jones made a huge difference last time.

[dloman]

Also why isn't pietersen bowling more, seems a very competent spinner and certainlt gets more turn and bounce than giles

[C C Csiders]

Quote[/b] (Shrimper2thecore @ Nov. 24 2006,12:35)]Harmison bowled like a drain!!
He wasn't that good, unfortunately. http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[Matt the Shrimp]

Harmy will come right. *It's Jimmy Anderson I feel truly sorry for. He*has been treated abominably by Fletcher. *He played when the West Indies came to England in the summer of 2004. *Since then - some 2.5 years ago - he has played one test (4th Test in SA, winter 04/05 - best part of 2 years ago) where he got caned to all sides (2-117 off 28 ov in the 1st innings, 0-32 runs of 6 ov in the 2nd).

So, he's played no test cricket in more than two years; he's been injured; he's been kept around the England side as water-carrier-in-chief whilst dibbly-dobbly bowlers like Jon Lewis are given a go... and then, suddenly, he's pitched in to the bearpit that is the Gabba for a Test match for which the Ockers have been psyching themselves up for the last 16 months.

The poor sod quite literally didn't know what was lying in wait for him. *Needless to say, he has been smashed around for almost 5 an over and has one wicket in recompense. *Everyone's going on about "when is Harmy going to sort himself out" because, presumably, they've given up on Jimmy already. *He has been truly rodgered by Fletcher... in hindsight, the question shouldn't have been "Giles or Monty", but should instead have been "Monty or Jimmy" - and the answer, unqestionably, ought to have been Monty (although I guess I'm speaking with 20-20 hindsight here).

Harmy will come good sooner or later - he's a class act (I'm still thinking of that Michael Clarke dismissal at Edgbaston - truly the stuff of legend, that was), and that doesn't vanish overnight. *It might even be seen in the second innings here (if we make them bat again) - who knows? *But this could be a horrid swan-song for Jimmy's Test career, and that's a terrible way for his England epitaph to be written.

Hey ho. *Here's hoping that Belly & KP pull off something utterly miraculous tomorrow.

Matt

[dloman]

Quote[/b] (Matt the Shrimp @ Nov. 24 2006,13:15)]Harmy will come right. *It's Jimmy Anderson I feel truly sorry for. *He*has been treated abominably by Fletcher. *He played when the West Indies came to England in the summer of 2004. *Since then - some 2.5 years ago - he has played one test (4th Test in SA, winter 04/05 - best part of 2 years ago) where he got caned to all sides (2-117 off 28 ov in the 1st innings, 0-32 runs of 6 ov in the 2nd).

So, he's played no test cricket in more than two years; he's been injured; he's been kept around the England side as water-carrier-in-chief whilst dibbly-dobbly bowlers like Jon Lewis are given a go... and then, suddenly, he's pitched in to the bearpit that is the Gabba for a Test match for which the Ockers have been psyching themselves up for the last 16 months.

The poor sod quite literally didn't know what was lying in wait for him. *Needless to say, he has been smashed around for almost 5 an over and has one wicket in recompense. *Everyone's going on about "when is Harmy going to sort himself out" because, presumably, they've given up on Jimmy already. *He has been truly rodgered by Fletcher... in hindsight, the question shouldn't have been "Giles or Monty", but should instead have been "Monty or Jimmy" - and the answer, unqestionably, ought to have been Monty (although I guess I'm speaking with 20-20 hindsight here).

Harmy will come good sooner or later - he's a class act (I'm still thinking of that Michael Clarke dismissal at Edgbaston - truly the stuff of legend, that was), and that doesn't vanish overnight. *It might even be seen in the second innings here (if we make them bat again) - who knows? *But this could be a horrid swan-song for Jimmy's Test career, and that's a terrible way for his England epitaph to be written.

Hey ho. *Here's hoping that Belly & KP pull off something utterly miraculous tomorrow.

Matt
Have to agree totally he has been treated with utter contempt though so has Monty.

I do feel we have lost our way a little under fletcher at the moment, though agree with more bowling harmison will come good.

[Hong Kong Blue]

Quote[/b] (Matt the Shrimp @ Nov. 24 2006,13:15)]Harmy will come right. *It's Jimmy Anderson I feel truly sorry for. *He*has been treated abominably by Fletcher. *He played when the West Indies came to England in the summer of 2004. *Since then - some 2.5 years ago - he has played one test (4th Test in SA, winter 04/05 - best part of 2 years ago) where he got caned to all sides (2-117 off 28 ov in the 1st innings, 0-32 runs of 6 ov in the 2nd).

So, he's played no test cricket in more than two years; he's been injured; he's been kept around the England side as water-carrier-in-chief whilst dibbly-dobbly bowlers like Jon Lewis are given a go... and then, suddenly, he's pitched in to the bearpit that is the Gabba for a Test match for which the Ockers have been psyching themselves up for the last 16 months.

The poor sod quite literally didn't know what was lying in wait for him. *Needless to say, he has been smashed around for almost 5 an over and has one wicket in recompense. *Everyone's going on about "when is Harmy going to sort himself out" because, presumably, they've given up on Jimmy already. *He has been truly rodgered by Fletcher... in hindsight, the question shouldn't have been "Giles or Monty", but should instead have been "Monty or Jimmy" - and the answer, unqestionably, ought to have been Monty (although I guess I'm speaking with 20-20 hindsight here).

Harmy will come good sooner or later - he's a class act (I'm still thinking of that Michael Clarke dismissal at Edgbaston - truly the stuff of legend, that was), and that doesn't vanish overnight. *It might even be seen in the second innings here (if we make them bat again) - who knows? *But this could be a horrid swan-song for Jimmy's Test career, and that's a terrible way for his England epitaph to be written.

Hey ho. *Here's hoping that Belly & KP pull off something utterly miraculous tomorrow.

Matt
Not sure what you are going on about there Matt - Jimmy Anderson played at least one test and most of the ODIs in India back in March/April.

He then had a stress fracture of his back, but played in the county championship and then the Champions Trophy.

Are you saying he should have been a watercarrier for this test?

I can't recall too many pie-chuckers like Lewis (one test, when Anderson was injured) being chosen ahead of him.

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (Hong Kong Blue @ Nov. 24 2006,13:23)]Not sure what you are going on about there Matt - Jimmy Anderson played at least one test and most of the ODIs in India back in March/April.

He then had a stress fracture of his back, but played in the county championship and then the Champions Trophy.

Are you saying he should have been a watercarrier for this test?

I can't recall too many pie-chuckers like Lewis (one test, when Anderson was injured) being chosen ahead of him.
All of Plunkett, Lewis and Mahmood have been earnestly looked at whilst Jimmy was in the wings. Granted that he was injured for some of that time... but he wasn't injured for all of that time. It just seems more than a little unfair that huge amounts of patience have been granted to the likes of Bell (who has come good, so that was vindicated) and Geraint Jones (about whom the jury is definitely still out), and yet when Anderson was fit, he wasn't given the ringing votes of confidence that those players got.

Jimmy hasn't played a full test series since the Windies tour of England in the summer of 2004. He has played in two last-match-of-series test matches, when other players were injured. He has, basically, been treated like England's sloppy seconds for quite some time - so why was he pitched into this Test?

His presence in the ODIs side is almost entirely irrelevant, isn't it? England are sh*t at One-day cricket; one suspects (although it would never be said, perish the thought) that plenty at the top of the game in England really don't take it that seriously; and plenty of characters play one-day cricket who are really nowhere near the selectors' thoughts for an Ashes test side (eg Kabir Ali, Blackwell, Batty, Yardy, Dalrymple...).

I'm not saying he should have been a water-carrier. I'm saying he's been chucked into a battle for which he quite clearly wasn't prepared. Why isn't Fletcher being vilified for that?

http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Matt

[Hong Kong Blue]

Quote[/b] (Matt the Shrimp @ Nov. 24 2006,13:58)]
Quote[/b] (Hong Kong Blue @ Nov. 24 2006,13:23)]Not sure what you are going on about there Matt - Jimmy Anderson played at least one test and most of the ODIs in India back in March/April.

He then had a stress fracture of his back, but played in the county championship and then the Champions Trophy.

Are you saying he should have been a watercarrier for this test?

I can't recall too many pie-chuckers like Lewis (one test, when Anderson was injured) being chosen ahead of him.
All of Plunkett, Lewis and Mahmood have been earnestly looked at whilst Jimmy was in the wings. *Granted that he was injured for some of that time... but he wasn't injured for all of that time. *It just seems more than a little unfair that huge amounts of patience have been granted to the likes of Bell (who has come good, so that was vindicated) and Geraint Jones (about whom the jury is definitely still out), and yet when Anderson was fit, he wasn't given the ringing votes of confidence that those players got.

Jimmy hasn't played a full test series since the Windies tour of England in the summer of 2004. *He has played in two last-match-of-series test matches, when other players were injured. *He has, basically, been treated like England's sloppy seconds for quite some time - so why was he pitched into this Test?

His presence in the ODIs side is almost entirely irrelevant, isn't it? *England are sh*t at One-day cricket; one suspects (although it would never be said, perish the thought) that plenty at the top of the game in England really don't take it that seriously; and plenty of characters play one-day cricket who are really nowhere near the selectors' thoughts for an Ashes test side (eg Kabir Ali, Blackwell, Batty, Yardy, Dalrymple...).

I'm not saying he should have been a water-carrier. *I'm saying he's been chucked into a battle for which he quite clearly wasn't prepared. *Why isn't Fletcher being vilified for that?

http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Matt
Lewis and Mahmood both made their test debuts last summer. Jimmy Anderson was unavailable through injury for both series.

I think Plunkett might have been chosen over Anderson for the 3rd test in Pakistan and the first(?) test in India. Can't remember if Anderson was fit at the time. England generally play 2 spinners in India/Pakistan so were only playing 3 seamers at the time.

Other than those two tests for Plunkett the seamers chosen ahead of Anderson have been Hoggard, Harmison, Flintoff and Simon Jones. I think most people would consider Anderson England's 5th best seamer so what is the issue?

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (Hong Kong Blue @ Nov. 24 2006,14:21)]Lewis and Mahmood both made their test debuts last summer. Jimmy Anderson was unavailable through injury for both series.

I think Plunkett might have been chosen over Anderson for the 3rd test in Pakistan and the first(?) test in India. Can't remember if Anderson was fit at the time. England generally play 2 spinners in India/Pakistan so were only playing 3 seamers at the time.

Other than those two tests for Plunkett the seamers chosen ahead of Anderson have been Hoggard, Harmison, Flintoff and Simon Jones. I think most people would consider Anderson England's 5th best seamer so what is the issue?
I wasn't aware that he'd been out for the whole summer - which he appears to have been.

That being so, why is he playing in this test? *How do we know he's England's fifth best seamer when England themselves don't know whether he is? *He certainly hasn't been treated like he is. *He wasn't injured throughout the winter of 2004/05 or the summer of 2005, but with Jones fit, Anderson was (so far as we can tell) largely excluded from the England bubble. *

If Fletcher really believed Anderson was England's fifth best seamer, then as soon as Jones was injured for the winter tours in 05/06, Anderson should have been straight in the side in Lahore, rather than picking Plunkett. *Fletcher should have ensured that Anderson's name was constantly on the media's lips (why is it, for instance, that we're seeing stories about Simon Jones at the moment; but we saw nothing about Jimmy when he was injured)?

Fletcher hasn't treated Anderson like that at all. *Jimmy was picked for the Pakistan Test squad, but Fletcher played Plunkett ahead of him; and Fletcher then dropped Anderson for the India Test tour only to call him up when Fletcher discovered he was short of fit players. *Plunkett played in the second Test in India (and then, I think, got injured).

It's why I find the decision to play him in this test utterly baffling. *Fletcher has obviously a plan A for his seam attack (Harmison, Hoggard, Flintoff) and absolutely no clue who his back-up bowlers should be. *It's why Anderson has been picked, dropped, picked then dropped again in rotation with a variety of other bowlers whom Fletcher isn't sure whether he likes or not.

The final evidence: does Jimmy have a central contract for 2007? *Does he heck!

So why is a man who Fletcher clearly doesn't rate that much, who has been injured all summer, who is clearly utterly unprepared and who (as as a result) has been flayed to all corners by Australia, playing in the first match of this hotly anticipated Ashes series?

He's in by default, not by design - and that is scandalously poor preparation on Fletcher's part.

Final thought: why bother playing a fourth seamer if you don't rate him that highly? *Why not have the courage of the convictions about your hot young spinning talent (Fletcher himself called Monty the "best finger spinner in the world") and play him? *It's not as if the likes of Warne, Murali or Vettori miss out just because the surface is a bit green...

http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Besides, what are we really disputing here? *Surely you're not defending Fletcher's default "choice" of Anderson (I use the inverted commas because I don't think Fletcher actively chose him at all, he just didn't make a decent plan about who else to pick), who's just haemorraged 141 runs off 29 overs... i.e. almost 5 an over?

Matt

[Hong Kong Blue]

Quote[/b] ]I wasn't aware that he'd been out for the whole summer - which he appears to have been.

That being so, why is he playing in this test?

Because he is now fully fit. He played a county championship match at the end of the season, he then toured India with the ODI side and played every game. He has played in every game of this tour as well.


Quote[/b] ] How do we know he's England's fifth best seamer when England themselves don't know whether he is? He certainly hasn't been treated like he is.

I'm pretty sure he is fifth in the pecking order. He's been consistently involved with England squads. He was running neck and neck with Simon Jones until Simon Jones really established himself as first choice with some highly impressive performances. Who do you think is ahead of him?



Quote[/b] ]He wasn't injured throughout the winter of 2004/05 or the summer of 2005, but with Jones fit, Anderson was (so far as we can tell) largely excluded from the England bubble. If Fletcher really believed Anderson was England's fifth best seamer, then as soon as Jones was injured for the winter tours in 05/06, Anderson should have been straight in the side in Lahore, rather than picking Plunkett.

2004/05 (South Africa) Anderson was competing neck and neck with Simon Jones.

In 2005 he had just remodelled his action under the supervision of Troy Cooley and England made a conscious decision to allow him a season in the county championship to get as much match practice in as possible. Although England's 5th best seamer, they wanted to ensure that if he was called up he'd have been playing regularly. Tremlett was instead given experience of being included in the squad, but as soon as Jones was injured Anderson was called up, although with only a draw needed they eventually went for Collingwood.




Quote[/b] ]Fletcher should have ensured that Anderson's name was constantly on the media's lips (why is it, for instance, that we're seeing stories about Simon Jones at the moment; but we saw nothing about Jimmy when he was injured)? Oh come on, selection policy shouldn't be conducted through the media. In anycase, people are far less concerned about the fitness of a first reserve than they are about the most successful bowler in the Ashes.

I know England monitored Anderson's fitness carefully, and FLetcher did actually try and get Lancashire to loan Anderson out, as he thought Lancs might not play him in the final championship game as he wasn't then 100% match fit and Lancashire still had something to play for.


Quote[/b] ]Fletcher hasn't treated Anderson like that at all. Jimmy was picked for the Pakistan Test squad, but Fletcher played Plunkett ahead of him; and Fletcher then dropped Anderson for the India Test tour only to call him up when Fletcher discovered he was short of fit players. Plunkett played in the second Test in India (and then, I think, got injured).

In 2004/05 England toured India and Pakistan. England's game plan was to play two spinners and three seamers. By the time of the third test and England reverted to 4 seamers (or someone got injured - I can't remember), they picked on form rather than talent. Plunkett was bowling very well in warm-up games and in the nets, which an off-colour Jimmy Anderson, whose action was falling away, wasn't.

Its also completely wrong to say Anderson was excluded from the England bubble. He was/is a key member of the ODI set-up, and although left out of the india squad he was hardly forgotten as he was sent to the West Indies with the A team to work with Troy Cooley as this was considered more beneficial than carrying drinks.


Quote[/b] ]It's why I find the decision to play him in this test utterly baffling. Fletcher has obviously a plan A for his seam attack (Harmison, Hoggard, Flintoff) and absolutely no clue who his back-up bowlers should be. It's why Anderson has been picked, dropped, picked then dropped again in rotation with a variety of other bowlers whom Fletcher isn't sure whether he likes or not.

Rubbish, it was obvious that Anderson was 5th choice and if fit would play in Jones' place. Mahmood is probably 6th choice and Plunkett probably 7th. Proof? Fletcher's concern to take Anderson to India, Fletcher playing Anderson ahead of Plunkett and Mahmood in the warm-up games (Mahmood only played the last one as a late replacement for the injured Harmison)


Quote[/b] ]The final evidence: does Jimmy have a central contract for 2007? Does he heck! More of a financial thing. However Anderson was previously a regular recepient of a central contract before the financial constraints, which suggests that Fletcher does rate him.


Quote[/b] ]So why is a man who Fletcher clearly doesn't rate that much, who has been injured all summer, who is clearly utterly unprepared and who (as as a result) has been flayed to all corners by Australia, playing in the first match of this hotly anticipated Ashes series?
Since September Anderson has had as much preparation as anybody else. He's a relatively experienced international (more tests than Mahmood and Plunkett combined) but particularly in one day cricket where he has tasted the big match experience. He's also played international cricket in Australia before.


Quote[/b] ]He's in by default, not by design - and that is scandalously poor preparation on Fletcher's part.

The only way he is in by default is because Jones is injured. That is hardly Fletcher's fault.


Quote[/b] ]Final thought: why bother playing a fourth seamer if you don't rate him that highly? Why not have the courage of the convictions about your hot young spinning talent (Fletcher himself called Monty the "best finger spinner in the world") and play him? It's not as if the likes of Warne, Murali or Vettori miss out just because the surface is a bit green...
Brisbane isn't the place to play 2 spinners. The reasons why Fletcher went for Giles over Panesar are well documented.



Quote[/b] ]Besides, what are we really disputing here? Surely you're not defending Fletcher's default "choice" of Anderson (I use the inverted commas because I don't think Fletcher actively chose him at all, he just didn't make a decent plan about who else to pick), who's just haemorraged 141 runs off 29 overs... i.e. almost 5 an over?

Of course I'm defending Fletcher's selection of Anderson. Selecting Giles and Harmison were the only two selections I'd maybe query (not to say they were necessarily wrong). Its no way its the end of Anderson's international career. Only injury will stop him from playing in the next test.

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] ]He played a county championship match at the end of the season, he then toured India with the ODI side and played every game. He has played in every game of this tour as well.
Hmm... one, as in a single, County Championship game; followed by a string of games with the whipping boys of international one-day cricket, followed by two warm up games (one of those being another one-dayer in which we got hammered). *If you think that's adequate preparation for an Ashes Test, then I can only stand back and admire your blind following of the England camp and Duncan Fletcher.


Quote[/b] ]I'm pretty sure he is fifth in the pecking order. He's been consistently involved with England squads. He was running neck and neck with Simon Jones until Simon Jones really established himself as first choice with some highly impressive performances. Who do you think is ahead of him?
What do I think? *That's not the point. *It's what Fletcher thinks. *It's Fletcher's selection policy that I'm questioning. *You've given an explanation of what happened in winter 05/06; but I'm not buying it. *He & Plunkett were called up for Pakistan. *Plunkett got the nod, and Jimmy got dropped for the India series. *Hardly a ringing endorsement, was it? *I call that bad management on Fletcher's part.

Incidentally, I've no idea if he's England's fifth best seamer or not. *Sadly, there are very few bowlers in the England county set-up who are truly catching the eye. *But that's a whole different argument. *There seems, however, to be a top 4 (Simon Jones, to me, has clearly moved onto a different plane to Anderson in the last two years) and then a phalanx of fast-mediums who are not bad, but possibly not good enough. *Jimmy was in the top 4 at one point, but seems to be slipping back into the latter group (which includes the likes of Tremlett, Lewis, Mahmood, Plunkett, Onions and perhaps Mascarenhas).


Quote[/b] ]Rubbish, it was obvious that Anderson was 5th choice and if fit would play in Jones' place. Mahmood is probably 6th choice and Plunkett probably 7th. Proof? Fletcher's concern to take Anderson to India, Fletcher playing Anderson ahead of Plunkett and Mahmood in the warm-up games (Mahmood only played the last one as a late replacement for the injured Harmison)
Rubbish indeed...! *All that proves is that Anderson is currently *ahead of Plunkett & Mahmood. *As we've already established, Anderson was behind Plunkett in 2004/05... which rather proves my point. *Anderson is not, in Fletcher's mind, England's automatic 5th choice seamer. *He is, instead, one of a group of bowlers who are the "B-team" behind Fletcher's top 4.

Yes, Anderson has had plenty of A-team experience, lots of ODIs etc. etc... but so what? *That just proves he's been around a while. *

My point is that Fletcher has a clear "plan A", which is his top 4 bowlers. *Fletcher then does not seem to have a clear plan B. *Current Plan B is one of the three bowlers you mention. *Jimmy is currently top of the plan B pile at the moment. *But if one of Liam or Sajj has a great tour match, or if someone else emerges in the not too distant future, I suspect that Jimmy will get dropped again - just as he was for the India series at the start of this year.


Quote[/b] ]Brisbane isn't the place to play 2 spinners. The reasons why Fletcher went for Giles over Panesar are well documented.
You've missed my point again. *I completely understand why Fletcher picked Giles. *The question is not whether he picked Giles over Panesar; the question instead is whether it was right to leave out "the best finger spinner in the world".

In my view, it wasn't. *If Monty is really that good, if you believe in him that much, then pick him - pick your best players. *I don't buy the "not two spinners" approach. *Giles's position in the side is not as a strike bowler. *It's as someone who ties an end down, picks up a few wickets, and who hangs around at number 8.

Would Sri Lanka hold back from playing two spinners because "Brisbane isn't the place for it"? *If our best XI happens to have two spinners in it, then why is that somehow a selection which is prohibited?

Let's hope that Fletcher's selection policy hasn't dented Monty's confidence, that's all.


Quote[/b] ]Of course I'm defending Fletcher's selection of Anderson. Selecting Giles and Harmison were the only two selections I'd maybe query (not to say they were necessarily wrong). Its no way its the end of Anderson's international career. Only injury will stop him from playing in the next test.
Selecting Giles and Harmison merely proves that Fletcher knows who his first XI is, and then he fits players around that side when first XI members are injured. *His first XI is:

Trescothick
Strauss
Vaughan
KP
Bell
Flintoff
G. Jones
Giles
Hoggard
Harmison
S. Jones / Panesar (depending on surface)

The current inclusions are either patch-repairs (eg Collingwood - who would be dropped sharpish if Vaughan came back) or long-term replacements (Cook will be the successor to Tresco). *Luckily, there appear to be a fair few reaonsable batsmen waiting in the wings to have a go at filling the spare places as well.

But there is a dearth of really good seam bowlers, hence all the chopping and changing. *If Anderson gets carted again in the second innings, I fully suspect Adelaide will be declared a "bunsen" and Monty will play; Sydney is a bunsen; and Melbourne can do anything (so Monty will play those two).

That leaves Perth - a genuine fast track... and I don't think Anderson is a shoo-in for that test. *I think Fletcher will pick whoever he fancies the most... because he showed in 05/06 that he doesn't truly believe that that person is definitely Anderson. *And it's that lack of ostensible faith, combined with the throwing him to the lions in this test, that I really object to.

[Hong Kong Blue]

I agree that England's preparation in Australia was ridiculously short, but otherwise I completely disagree that Anderson was thrown to the lions in this test.

Anderson was fit in September, we are now nearing the end of November. If Anderson's match practice was not sufficient than neither was Hoggard's (who has played two 3 days games since then end of August).

I find your criticism of Fletcher's lack of a clear plan B bizarre. I think Anderson has been in the picture throughout. I also think it would be madness to have completely rigid plans. I get the feeling you are trying to use the handling of Anderson as a stick to beat Fletcher with over his dropping of Panesar and/or Read.

[MrB]

Sitting watching now is more of a when rather than an if as far as wickets are concerned. Neither batsmen look comfortable.

[Shrimpersarmy]

Glad i'm not the only loser watching it then B http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/upside.gif

[Shrimpersarmy]

That was a let off http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/down.gif

[MrB]

Big drop! Why play that shot KP?

[Shrimpersarmy]

KP gone now, 78-4 http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/blush.gif

[Shrimpersarmy]

*prepares to take overdose*

[MrB]

There was that little part of me that thought I could sit and watch B&P bat through the first session. Now we'll be lucky to see it through!

Go to bed Daniel!

[Bluesmanager]

Pack your bags gents, the Ashes are staying in Aus.

Fred's gone for 0.

ETA: We'll be lucky to get 200 at this rate. Half of the Follow-On mark.

[Stats]

80 odd for 5 in 30 overs

Anyone care to tell the team we're playing a test match and not a one dayer

Oh we're poop at that as well

Lets hope the King Of Spain justifys his inclusion with a ton!!

[Bluesmanager]

The King of Spain? Century? Not much good unless Jimmy, Harmy, and, in fact, the rest of the team yet to bat add them in too.

[blues_r_best]

Can't wait to see Jones bat, it'll be fun.

http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/upside.gif

[Bluesmanager]

He's in now. What're the odds he won't last the hour?

Come to think of it, what are the odds that we'll be in a innings break by 2?

[MrB]

Quote[/b] (blues_r_best @ Nov. 25 2006,01:08)]Can't wait to see Jones bat, it'll be fun.

http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/upside.gif
He's there right now if you care to open your eyes.... http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Bluesmanager]

This Vic Marks bloke's got a point. If it was quiet yesterday, you'd find more cheer in a graveyard today!

Good grief! A maiden!?

[Stats]

Perhaps we should send the SZFC Cricket team out to play the aussies we'd give em more of a game!!

Team

Mr B - Experienced pro at the top of the order, will start to suffer from cramp after 5 overs so will need a runner.

Dangle - Talented youngster has all the shots shows flashes of class but needs to work on his calling, come one

Flying Scotsman - Typical scotsman economical with his bowling, likes to get the batsmen fishing outside off stump

Statski - Mastermind of the team, models his game on Mike Brearley, chips in with the odd run and wicket

Scrounger - Rich mans Ashley Giles but fatter

Andee aka Chaiman Mao - Excellent spinner, good at working the ball around the field with the bat as well

Glenn - Fiery member of the team, known to sledge quite a bit. Bit hitting specialist

Toddy - Another of the talented youngsters, Keeps wicket but stands back to everything. Conceeds the odd bye

Usual Suspect - Workhorse who holds the middle of the innings together

Unc - Another experienced pro, in his final season passes on valuable knowledge to youngsters

Gangly Dave - SZFC CC's version of Steve Harmison, Quick and sprays the ball around like an unmanned hose

Leeboy - Naturally the Garry Pratt of the team aka 12th man, drinks carrier

[MrB]

All accurate enough!

[Shrimpersarmy]

http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

Good to see Kev doesn't get a place in the side

[Stats]

Quote[/b] (Shrimpersarmy @ Nov. 25 2006,01:27)]http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif *http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

Good to see Kev doesn't get a place in the side
He might make the 2nd XI

The original Jack of all trades, master of none!! http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[blues_r_best]

Quote[/b] (statski77 @ Nov. 25 2006,01:29)]
Quote[/b] (Shrimpersarmy @ Nov. 25 2006,01:27)]http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif *http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

Good to see Kev doesn't get a place in the side
He might make the 2nd XI

The original Jack of all trades, master of none!! *http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I'm sure he'd be in the OD team

[Stats]

Speaking of Kev I think this bloke was modelled on him

Same haircut, bit of a nerd etc

What you think, I could just see him throwing these shapes on the dancefloor

Kevs Jingle (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixsZy2425eY)

[MrB]

Michael Holding just told us to go to bed, anyone obeying?

I honestly believe we can make it through to lunch and maybe even get 150 http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif Then we have the simple task of defending our 10 wickets for 8 sessions. Easy http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[King of Berks]

well, here we go again! I'm refusing to get too downhearted yet, but it's hardly a good start to the series.

One thing though, is Giles really that good a batsman? ok, he'll hit the occasional 30, and occupy the crease, so potentially add 100, but if we're taking that kind of option wouldnt it make more sense to add a full time spinner (ie Monty) or a full time batsman with KP bowling occasional spin? Yes, i know he's not a full time spinner, but both Vaughan, and, before him, Hick, have been batsmen that could well have filled this role given the chance.

My one wish tbh is they'd abolish the "luck" of the toss. make it a competition too. How about a boxing match between the two captains? After seenign Flintoff next to Ponting, lets face it, who'd not pay to watch?

[King of Berks]

and yes, maybe I'm biased, but we're really missing Swansea lad, Simon Jones! Top class swing bowlers, with pace, aren't that common. Hoggard's a very good swing bowler on certain pitches, but tbh i don't feel he's got the pace to take wickets down under.

[Up the Shrimpers]

126-6 Jones out for 19. Jesus!! Giles just been dropped nearly 7 down. Anyone without Sky the following link works Ashes Live (http://www.fedsq.com/index.cfm?pageID=55)

[blues_r_best]

126-6 at lunch - Jones out for 19

[blues_r_best]

Bell gone for 50, Hoggard and Harmison have a race to see who can get back into the pavillion fastest.

157-9

[King of Berks]

Quote[/b] (Up the Shrimps @ Nov. 25 2006,03:07)]*Anyone without Sky the following link works Ashes Live (http://www.fedsq.com/index.cfm?pageID=55)
Top stuff, thats the end of any sleep for me this weekend!

[King of Berks]

Australia NOT enforcing the follow on! They must fancy an early finish, as theres no way they can feel they've not got enough runs. maybe they feel that by increasing the total, they can prevent the traditional second innings fightback by the lesser team.

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (Hong Kong Blue @ Nov. 24 2006,19:02)]I agree that England's preparation in Australia was ridiculously short, but otherwise I completely disagree that Anderson was thrown to the lions in this test.

Anderson was fit in September, we are now nearing the end of November. If Anderson's match practice was not sufficient than neither was Hoggard's (who has played two 3 days games since then end of August).

I find your criticism of Fletcher's lack of a clear plan B bizarre. I think Anderson has been in the picture throughout. I also think it would be madness to have completely rigid plans. I get the feeling you are trying to use the handling of Anderson as a stick to beat Fletcher with over his dropping of Panesar and/or Read.
Watching Anderson's body language in the first innings (and seeing that he has already gone for 6 an over in the second innings) was like watching a man's talent and confidence unravel before one's very eyes.

I'm criticising Fletcher for playing someone in this match who was clearly nowhere near being ready to play in it. His physical fitness may be fine; but psychologically, he was nowhere near ready for this game. Getting him psychologically ready is Fletcher's responsibility just as much as ensuring his back is tweak-free... and Fletcher has patently failed in that responsibility. That's what I'm criticising.

Sadly, it would seem that the same applies to Harmison as well... and so perhaps my lament is merely that we're not even half as good as we thought we were last summer.

http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[Museshrimper]

I went to bed when Kp departed - I sensed I'd wake up to see us skittled out. Never mind, just got to forget about this one.

[Ailsa Road Shrimper]

By far and away my two favourite teams in sport are Southend United FC and the England Cricket Team. England looked like suffering perhaps their worst ever defeat to their arch rivals! Southend face their arch rivals this weekend too, a defeat to Col******r could make this my worst weekend of sport for a long long time!

[MrB]

Well for the second night in a row I've ducked out of a night out early to watch some cricket in the ridiculous hope of seeing something happen. No doubt those illusions will have been shattered in about half an hour!

[Bluesmanager]

300-4dec I reckon for the Aussies.

100-5 (if we're lucky) at stumps for England.

[MrB]

I don't think they'll carry on much past Langer's hundred.

[MrB]

Not wishing ill on anyone but I hope Ponting has a real problem here!

[MrB]

Oh dear oh dear.....

I guess everyone else has given up watching now!

[Bluesmanager]

What is it? 2hundred and something for 5?

Aussies 1 - Poms 0

[Hong Kong Blue]

Australia still have to beat the clock (and the weather).

There's hope, albeit feint.
More importantly England have shown yet again in this second innings that we can cope against this Australian attack when it is without a fully fit McGrath.

Back to back tests will take a lot out of McGrath. It is therefore important that we see him off and then attack the weaker bowlers like Warne, Lee and Clark.

[MrB]

Very encouraging days play, it's probably too late but at least it gives us some hope.

[canveyshrimper]

Quote[/b] (Hong Kong Blue @ Nov. 26 2006,15:51)]Back to back tests will take a lot out of McGrath. It is therefore important that we see him off and then attack the weaker bowlers like Warne, Lee and Clark.
Blimey, I never thought I would ever see Warne described as a weaker bowler. But it is a good point with the Adelaide match starting on Friday.

If England can keep the convicts on the field for a long period or the weather intervenes then Ponting could well rue his decison not to enforce the follow on.

[Shrimpersarmy]

What is the weather forecast over there for todays play?

[Hong Kong Blue]

Quote[/b] (canveyshrimper @ Nov. 26 2006,18:21)]
Quote[/b] (Hong Kong Blue @ Nov. 26 2006,15:51)]Back to back tests will take a lot out of McGrath. It is therefore important that we see him off and then attack the weaker bowlers like Warne, Lee and Clark.
Blimey, I never thought I would ever see Warne described as a weaker bowler. But it is a good point with the Adelaide match starting on Friday.

If England can keep the convicts on the field for a long period or the weather intervenes then Ponting could well rue his decison not to enforce the follow on.
Compared to McGrath he is.

I was downunder for the last Ashes in Oz, and don't get me wrong Warne is a bloody good bowler, but the pressure still drops if Warne replaces McGrath.

Warne is still a threat, but he isn't nearly as big a threat as McGrath is to top order batsmen. He may have picked up 4 wickets last night, but see how many overs he had to bowl to pick up those wickets. Against the tail, its a different story, and he can wreak the damage that McGrath can against top order batsmen.

Finally, everyone says Warne is one of the all-time greats - Warne averages about 25 a wicket, McGrath averages about 20 a wicket and takes a lot more top order wickets. McGrath's bowling average is in the top handful of all time, despite bowling in an era when the bat has tended to dominate the ball.

[dloman]

Quote[/b] (Hong Kong Blue @ Nov. 26 2006,15:51)].

Back to back tests will take a lot out of McGrath. It is therefore important that we see him off and then attack the weaker bowlers like Warne, Lee and Clark.
Warne weaker http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[dloman]

Quote[/b] (Hong Kong Blue @ Nov. 26 2006,19:10)]Finally, everyone says Warne is one of the all-time greats - Warne averages about 25 a wicket, McGrath averages about 20 a wicket and takes a lot more top order wickets. McGrath's bowling average is in the top handful of all time, despite bowling in an era when the bat has tended to dominate the ball.
to be fair they are both fantastic bowlers and it is a shame they both haven't picked up knocks as i would feel more comfortable then.

[loz]

Oh KP... http://www.shrimperzone.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif