>Mr ALex Tudor is a fast bowler, and he is young, I don't think that it
>would hurt england to maybe pick him for one of the matches, I think there
>may be one bowling place not guranteed in the side, and maybe he should
>fill the void. He will be big soon, I guarantee that, he could have the
>south africans quaking
I believe Tudor picked up a back injury last year (which is obviously a bad
injury for a fast bowler and particularly in one so young). I think Surrey
are doing him no favours by treating him with kid gloves. The thinking is
that "a bowler only has so many overs in him". However most fast bowlers
fade around the age of 35. I'm not sure how old Tudor is but I reckon he's
20+. I'd rather see an express 20 year old than a lively 30 year old.
Another problem with Tudor (not that I've seen him that much is that he
is inclined too often to revert to a short run and cut his pace down). The
great Richard Hadlee will tell him that alternating between a no-holds-barred
fast bowler and an accurate medium-pacer is fraught with problems in terms
of training, rhythm and timings.
>England side for most of the summer(probable)
He'll need a bit more form to convince me. One big hundred against Kent
(with Headley absent) is no great evidence of his return to form. Butcher
instead I think.
No, I think he's ok as a one-day player, but I'd suggest his brother at 7.
>Croft(most likely however if not then tuffers)
>Fraser( definite for first few but after that maybe
On the whole I agree with your selection. My preferred 11 for tests would be:
Assuming Stewart keeps wicket:
If Stewart doesn't keep wicket :
I'm not having Stewart open if he keeps wicket. Simple as that.