The Ashes

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (C C Csiders @ July 29 2005,12:51)]Embers joins the club:

J.E.Emburey's view

That's Allan Border, Wisden/Cricinfo, John Emburey, MtS and me the new England selection panel.

This isn't rocket science. Announce a 12 man squad, with Colly in place of Tremlett, and then turn up and look at the pitch next Thursday.

If it's a bunsen, pick the King of Spain; if it's a green-top, pick Colly.

Surely it's that simple, isn't it?

Matt

 

[Hong Kong Blue]

I thought England had moved on from knee-jerk reactions.

Giles has had one bad game and people want him dropped. Giles is integral to the balance of the team, England need him to bowl to allow Freddie and Harmy a rest.

I think Edgbaston is neither a bunsen nor a green-top. I also believe that the most successful bowler there this season is one AF Giles.

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (Hong Kong Blue @ July 29 2005,14:27)]I thought England had moved on from knee-jerk reactions.

Giles has had one bad game and people want him dropped. Giles is integral to the balance of the team, England need him to bowl to allow Freddie and Harmy a rest.

I think Edgbaston is neither a bunsen nor a green-top. I also believe that the most successful bowler there this season is one AF Giles.

So, if someone is bowling like a sack of sh*t (0/47) and useless with the bat, you shouldn't drop him in favour of a man who has scored two tons this week and who has already proved his worth against the Aussies earlier this summer... because that would be kneejerk?

Well, call me kneejerk then. If Giles isn't taking wickets then, cracking run-outs aside (but then again, Colly has taken the catch of the summer so far), he is the proverbial chocolate teapot... totally useless.

He's taken wickets at Egbaston because he plays for Warwickshire. It's as convincing an argument for recalling Jason Gallian when England go to Trent Bridge.

Either someone is playing well, or they're not. And if they're not, you drop them until they buck their ideas up. We're quite happy for that to happen - indeed, we demand it - in football. So why should cricket be any different?

Finally, it's not so much a question of Giles, it's Collingwood. Frankly, on current form, he has to play, doesn't he? And since there's no one else to leave out, it has to be the King of Spain.

Matt

 

[Grayson]

I agree, compare what Collingwood can add to the side with what Giles adds, then you'll find Colly SHOULD contribute many more runs, save more runs fielding and probably could bowl figures better than 0/47, too. That's why I, and others, feel he should be in the side ahead of Giles - because Colly adds a lot more to us.

 

[Hong Kong Blue]

Quote[/b] (Matt the Shrimp @ July 29 2005,15:27)]

Quote[/b] (Hong Kong Blue @ July 29 2005,14:27)]I thought England had moved on from knee-jerk reactions.

Giles has had one bad game and people want him dropped. Giles is integral to the balance of the team, England need him to bowl to allow Freddie and Harmy a rest.

I think Edgbaston is neither a bunsen nor a green-top. I also believe that the most successful bowler there this season is one AF Giles.

So, if someone is bowling like a sack of sh*t (0/47) and useless with the bat, you shouldn't drop him in favour of a man who has scored two tons this week and who has already proved his worth against the Aussies earlier this summer... because that would be kneejerk?

Well, call me kneejerk then.  If Giles isn't taking wickets then, cracking run-outs aside (but then again, Colly has taken the catch of the summer so far), he is the proverbial chocolate teapot... totally useless.

He's taken wickets at Egbaston because he plays for Warwickshire.  It's as convincing an argument for recalling Jason Gallian when England go to Trent Bridge.

Either someone is playing well, or they're not.  And if they're not, you drop them until they buck their ideas up.  We're quite happy for that to happen - indeed, we demand it - in football.  So why should cricket be any different?

Finally, it's not so much a question of Giles, it's Collingwood.  Frankly, on current form, he has  to play, doesn't he?  And since there's no one else to leave out, it has to be the King of Spain.

Matt

Hoggard didn't bowl well that last test match, so shall we drop him as well?

Its a kneejerk reaction as its based on Giles' bowling in a single innings, at a time when England were already losing.

The point I was making earlier

My point re Giles taking lots of wickets at Edgbaston is relevant, as it means a spinner is taking wickets rather than the quicks.

Also Collingwood dropped two sitters in the field the other day.

 

[canveyshrimper]

Quote[/b] (Hong Kong Blue @ July 29 2005,16:39)]

Quote[/b] (Matt the Shrimp @ July 29 2005,15:27)]

Quote[/b] (Hong Kong Blue @ July 29 2005,14:27)]I thought England had moved on from knee-jerk reactions.

Giles has had one bad game and people want him dropped. Giles is integral to the balance of the team, England need him to bowl to allow Freddie and Harmy a rest.

I think Edgbaston is neither a bunsen nor a green-top. I also believe that the most successful bowler there this season is one AF Giles.

So, if someone is bowling like a sack of sh*t (0/47) and useless with the bat, you shouldn't drop him in favour of a man who has scored two tons this week and who has already proved his worth against the Aussies earlier this summer... because that would be kneejerk?

Well, call me kneejerk then.  If Giles isn't taking wickets then, cracking run-outs aside (but then again, Colly has taken the catch of the summer so far), he is the proverbial chocolate teapot... totally useless.

He's taken wickets at Egbaston because he plays for Warwickshire.  It's as convincing an argument for recalling Jason Gallian when England go to Trent Bridge.

Either someone is playing well, or they're not.  And if they're not, you drop them until they buck their ideas up.  We're quite happy for that to happen - indeed, we demand it - in football.  So why should cricket be any different?

Finally, it's not so much a question of Giles, it's Collingwood.  Frankly, on current form, he has  to play, doesn't he?  And since there's no one else to leave out, it has to be the King of Spain.

Matt

Hoggard didn't bowl well that last test match, so shall we drop him as well?

Its a kneejerk reaction as its based on Giles' bowling in a single innings, at a time when England were already losing.

The point I was making earlier

My point re Giles taking lots of wickets at Edgbaston is relevant, as it means a spinner is taking wickets rather than the quicks.

Also Collingwood dropped two sitters in the field the other day.

On balance I think Hong Kong Shrimper is just about right, but Matt's points were great.

However I think we should put things in perspective, England are the second best test playing nation, behind possibly the best side in the history of the game.

Now say or think what you like the success England have had over the past few years have been in the main due to continuity of selection. Plus the fact that they have been well coached and well led. During this time there have been times when certain players have had a rough trot or an individual poor game in a winning situation. Did we change the team because a player had a bad game in a winning cause?? No. Then why should the team be changed in view of players having a stinker against the worlds best side. It has been well documented in these threads before about players who got one game here and there and disappeared due to the rubbish selection policy.

During the recent run of success that England have had over recent years we have won in Pakistan, Sri Lanka (very rare these days), West Indies (first time in 30 odd years), and South Africa something that only the Aussies have done since readmission. Plus we have beaten all comers at home. On the basis of one result does this make England a bad team?? Again the answer is no.

I do agree that on form Collingwood should be in the 12 or 13 for Edgbaston, and it looks like it will be green so that will even negate Warne a little. In view of that it may well be worth while making a change to suit conditions but not for the sake of it.

I honestly do not believe that England have become a bad side overnight, and we know that we can bowl the convicts out twice. We also know they don't fancy Harmison or Flintoff too much. I fancy a lot of the bad reaction to the defeat at Lords was borne out of disappointment, both in the result and in the overall performance. In the main the batting was poor and the fielding abysmal.

I can see Ashley Giles' point he has copped a lot of abuse, if this had been couched as constructive criticism then i am sure he would have accepted it, but mindless comments like wheely bin etc being made, i am sure he has every right to be peed off.

 

[sufcintheprem]

I admit that when I suggested we should drop Giles, I was wrong. However, my point about Bell seems to be hanging around. Yes, he's playing against the best in the world but his problems seem to be mental not technical.