Sport Today

<http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ausveng/content/current/story/251829....>

Bad news indeed, but sort of expected given the way things were
shaping up.
--
Cheers,
SDM -- a 21st century schizoid man
Systems Theory internet music project links:
soundclick <www.soundclick.com/systemstheory>
garageband <http://www.garageband.com/artist/systemstheory>
"Soundtracks For Imaginary Movies" CD released Dec 2004
"Codetalkers" CD coming very soon in 2006
NP: nothing

ECB link:
<http://SportToday.org/,8953,EN.html>

***y hell! This is bad news. With Simon Jones gone for 5 months and
probably out of the Ashes running, and Flintoff still a big question
mark for the start of the Pakistan series (his ankle) the England test
lineup is very unsettled, never mind who might be in the mix for the
2007 World Cup.

So who captains the side? If Flintoff's not ready for T1 vs Pakistan
then do you persist with Strauss? Or do you give it to Trescothick?
Or, if worst case shows in the next week that he'll have to have
surgery (which would then sideline him for the Pakistan series) do you
make a left turn and consider one of the county captains who is a
batsman legitimately in the mix on the periphery of the test squad
(i.e. Vikram Solanki [Worcs] or Robert Keys [Kent, England A])?

So who then is the England team for T1 vs Pakistan? Presuming right
now that Flintoff won't be ready, and that Giles might be ready but
probably shouldn't be rushed back until he's 100% fit (if ever, given
his hip) and Panesar still deserves more playing time, and that
England has got to find a definite #3 to replace Vaughan here's who I
have automatically pencilled in:

Trescothick, Strauss, Cook, Pietersen, Collingwood, Panesar, Hoggard,
Harmison.

I guess for now Geraint Jones keeps his WK spot (though his batting
has dropped off enough that Read or Prior should get serious
consideration IMO), leaving two positions.

There has to be a third strike seamer (making Collingwood the tie-down
an end medium pacer change bowler), who is probably Plunkett based on
the SL test series, but I'd be open to other suggestions beyond
Mahmood (who has pace but not much else yet in his favour).

So the last slot is that of an all-rounder or another specialist
batsman? If it's a specialist batsman then I think it's Bell based on
his solid showing in the ODI games vs Ireland and SL. He can also
deliver some useful stock-bowler medium pace in a pinch for a few
overs while the quicks are resting. What if Key or Shah strikes an
impressive ton for England A vs Pakistan? Should that push them ahead
of Bell in the selector's depth chart?

What about this Dalrymple chap? He delivered some very solid
performances in the ODIs vs Ireland and SL, and is more than just a
guy that bats and bowls decently from what I've read about him. He's
very promising, and seems a pretty cool customer, but is he test match
quality? Maybe one of you that has seen him play a few times can offer
some insight.

My guess right now is this lineup for T1 vs Pakistan, with the
captaincy staying with Strauss for now for continuity:

1) Trescothick
2) Strauss *
3) Cook
4) Bell
5) Pietersen
6) Collingwood
7) G. Jones +
8) Plunkett
9) Hoggard
10) Harmison
11) Panesar

Which is probably going to be the core eleven around which the Ashes
touring party will be built (plus a fit Flintoff of course). What I
don't like about it is that it only has 4 recognized specialist
bowlers, seems a bit thin in the proper strike bowler area without
Freddie (which the ODIs have shown up). Which is why I keep thinking
about Dalrymple, especially if the wicket looked like there might be
potential for some turn. In which case does England drop the 3rd
strike bowler (Plunkett), inserting Dalrymple at #7, dropping Jones
down to #8, which gives much greater batting depth but puts a huge
weight on Harminson and Hoggard. Or more likely displace Bell with
Pietersen and Collingwood moving up to #4 and #5 with Dalrymple in at #6?

I haven't even got as far as contemplating another quick bowling
all-rounder to fill-in for Flintoff. Someone like Bresnan, for
example, who should be in the mix for Pakistan and the Ashes tour,
especially if Freddie's ankle has to be operated on. Huge shoes to
fill. Who else might be a seriously viable candidate?
--
Cheers,
SDM -- a 21st century schizoid man
Systems Theory internet music project links:
soundclick <www.soundclick.com/systemstheory>
garageband <http://SportToday.org/;
"Soundtracks For Imaginary Movies" CD released Dec 2004
"Codetalkers" CD coming very soon in 2006
NP: nothing

<snip>

I think Strauss is the better bet. He seems more comfortable with the
job than Trescothick has seemed to be on the few occasions that he's
been captain. In fact even if Flintoff is fit, a case can be made for
continuing with Strauss.

Solanki has too little Test experience, Key not that much more, and I
can't see either of them being chosen. If the selectors were to look
outside the current side, which I think is unlikely, Mark Butcher might
be a better bet. At long last he's fit again and scoring runs. He seems
to be making a good***of captaining Surrey, and Atherton for one
reckons that he has a good cricket brain.
--
John Hall
            "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick
             themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened."
                                            Winston S Churchill (1874-1965)

Bad news indeed for the poms - but they should forget the WC - even if
England played their Ashes winning side, they wouldn't win the WC.
Flintoff might be the best captain in the world - but he shouldn't have been
made captain IMHO - far too much to do.   Strauss might develop in tests.
Trescothick's record against us is poor so he could find his place in doubt
by the end of the Ashes.   Cook will presumably "replace" Vaughan as batsman
but obviously too young.   KP as captain?   Makes me smile but I doubt it.
Given he's grown up under Warne as Hants - England could probably do worse
than KP.   Fred - as I said - no way.   G Jones - too eager to claim dodgy
catches and an all rounder so***that.   Giles won't play so Panesar in
for him - no.   Hoggard - too nuts.   Harmison - too stupid.   Mahmood /
Plunkett - too young.   England's "best" 11 with all of these injuries
doesn't contain a leader.

It has to be Strauss - who else is there?

Ashes 75% home - without a ball bowled and 5 months (ish) before the series
even starts.   Stupid pommie docs - couldn't cure an ingrowing toenail ...
without monitoring the situation before needing to amputate the foot.

tapped the keyboard and brought forth:

I'd prefer it if they made up their minds to appoint Strauss. He did a
pretty reasonable job as captain of Middx before being called up for
England.

Shah, possibly; Key, let's hope not. Even so, I'd agree that Bell is
the next cab on the rank.

I don't think you can know whether a bloke is Test class until he's
played some Tests. Some players who don't look all that special in
county cricket blossom in a Test side, whereas others who are ***
in county cricket can play Tests and struggle.

That said, I doubt that Dalrymple is a Test class player. Maybe in a
few years time when his spin bowling has improved a lot (or he bats so
well that he starts batting in the top four for Middx on a regular
basis), but I don't think he's ready now.

I have been banging on about Bresnan for a few years now, but he
wasn't really on my list of likelies for this season. I thought of him
as being more in the frame for about 2008.

There was a theory that Rikki Clarke could become a Fred-alike, but
his bowling hasn't improved enough over the last couple of years to
make that at all likely.

Your XI looks a pretty likely one, as Collingwood, Tresco and KP can
all at least turn their arms over, and I suspect that we will have to
muddle through with them as the fill-in bowlers.

Cheers,

Mike

On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:45:19 +0100, John Hall

Me, I'd go with Strauss rather than Flintoff as captain. It's usually
a bad thing to make your star player captain. Few of them make good
captains, and if by some mischance they turn out to be good captains,
their form often suffers. There are, of course, exceptions to this
rule of thumb; Bradman, Hutton, Border, Gavaskar, Tony Greig and Andy
Flower were their teams' star players, kept their playing form and
captained well, but there are precious few others (five minutes
thought hasn't revealed any others to me, but no doubt some people
will have the odd other name in mind).

I'm not trying to knock Fred's captaincy a great deal: he seemed to
handle the tactical side fairly well and the players liked him. But I
don't think he has the steel in his soul which would allow him to
recognise that someone is not performing and needs to be replaced or
at least given a serious bollocking. Strauss has ample experience of
that side of things, having captained Middx during some pretty dismal
seasons - that his reign as Middx captain was not very successful in
results terms is more a reflection of the almost total lack of
experience in the Middx team of four years ago than of his captaincy
skills.

Cheers,

Mike

I doubt if they will go with just 4 bowlers. Even with 5 bowlers,
Flintoff got injured by overworking himself.  I doubt if they want to
rely just on Harmison and Hoggard against Inzy and co. Pak has a strong
batting lineup - much stronger than SL.
I think they will have a 5th bowler - Bresnanif he does well as a
bowler for Eng A in the tour match.  Otherwise, may be  Plunkett as the
#7 batsman. They need to have Saj Mahamood for reverse swing now and in
the winter.

With Vaughan out long term, the captaincy probably should go to
Trescothick.
not sure if Strauss will remain an automatic selection in a 4 Test
series against Pak.

 1) Trescothick *
 2) Strauss
 3) Cook
 4) Pietersen
 5) Collingwood
 6) G. Jones +
 7) Plunkett/Bresnan
 8) Mahmood
 9) Hoggard
 10) Harmison
 11) Panesar

Agreed, as I half implied above.

<snip>

Gooch actually became a better player as captain, and captained
reasonably well (but for his inability to understand what made Gower
tick).
--
John Hall
            "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick
             themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened."
                                            Winston S Churchill (1874-1965)

On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:52:24 +0100, John Hall

I considered Gooch very seriously, but decided to leave him out
because of questions over his man-management, the Gower thing being
the most obvious example.

Cheers,

Mike

Are you ruling out Illingworthless on similar grounds?

Andrew

as i said well before even the SL series, England is bound to lose
ashes and lose it big time. poor englishmen still think that their team
could do well at the ashes against australia.

win or lose, both teams will be doing ur mom!

If we had a full strength team yes we could win, at the moment with
the chaos of the numerous injuries we have - no chance.

If we can at least get a bowling attack of Flintoff, Harmison,
Hoggard, Giles/Panesar and maybe Anderson or Plunkett all right at the
top of their games then we might just have a chance but with Harmison
looking poor, Anderson out with a stress fracture of the back and not
the most consistent of bowlers and Giles having yet another operation
you have to wonder what on earth the team is going to be when we get
there.

--
ButIstillneedtoknowwhat'sinthere! Thekeytoanysecurity
systemishowit'sdesigned! Thatdependsonwhyitwasdesigned!
Ihavetoknowwhatwhoeverdesigneditwastryingtoprotect!
(Blakes 7, City on the Edge of the World  - Vila in typical panic mode)