If he had Collingwood's mental ability, he'd probably be the best batsman in the world, though.
2009 Ashes Series - England vs. Australia **Spoilers**
- Thread starter oli collett
- Start date
If he had Collingwood's mental ability, he'd probably be the best batsman in the world, though.
Sorry, who do you mean, KP or Bell?
If you mean Bell, then I don't agree with that. Even when he's in, he's in my eyes still too tentative. Too feeble. He's not as technically gifted as Pietersen either (i.e. the man he's been brought into replace). Bell's also had plenty of chances, I think he's well into 40 tests now. It's not like he's new to the whole feel of the occasion.
I've never seen KP as lacking mental strength..
Err, Bell... He has a superior technique to Pietersen but his problems are all in his head (as you say, too feeble/tentative). Not that I was comparing Pietersen to Bell, but Pietersen is someone who has a massive amount of confidence and mental strength coupled with an incredible eye that allows him to hit some of the most outrageous shots. I wouldn't say his technique is anything special but the rest of him makes up for it.
I think we'll have to agree to disagree here
But fair enough.Anyway, roll on tomorrow - Fingers crossed we'll be able to pick up some wickets
LOL, how many lives does Clarke have???
Broad -> Sibo
Flintoff -> Trott (if not fit)
Trott seems a sound pick, he's scored a shedload of runs for the bears, I think he's actually been outscoring Bell when they've both been in the same team.
Broad just needs to go back and figure out test match bowling.
He spends far too much time on variation and so on which is all well and good in ODI/twenty20, but in test match cricket it's pointless and it explains his poor strike rate. I think he should model himself on McGrath - focus on bowling the same ball over and over in the channel. If the wicket isn't doing a lot he won't give away a lot of runs, and when the ball swings/seams he'll have extra bounce and cause the batsman no end of problems, especially if he's bowling at late 80s/early 90s.
Added with his batting which is looking excellent he would become a very, very useful all-rounder. He's definitely got the potential to be as good, if not better than flintoff at least on paper. In fact I'd put good money on him finishing up with both a better batting and bowling average than Flintoff at the end of his test career (although i don't think he'll turn games like Flintoff does).
Do you remember what Flintoff was like when he came into the England side?
Remember, Broad has just turned 23. He is capable of bowling above 90mph and he looks capable of scoring a test century too. So far, his career averages are after 20 games:
Batting: 30.33 including 4 50's
Bowling: 40.21 including 1 5fer
And he's played so far:
Australia (Home)
India (Away)
NZ
SA (Home)
Sri Lanka (Home)
WI
Have a look at Flintoff at the same age, 9 tests:
Batting: 16.64, no 50s
Bowling: 55.00, no 50s
2 of those tests were against Zimbabwe
Now by 20 tests that had improved a bit:
Batting: 20.74
Bowling: 46.50
But it wasn't until 2004 - the summer before the infamous 2005 Ashes, that his figures came up to the level Broad's are at now, in his 36th test, just before the series with West Indies, when his batting average reached 29.5 and bowling reached 40.5. He then played out of his skin vs. Windies and he was finally recognised as a world class allrounder.
My point being, Broad has years ahead of him and and I honestly think looking at the two in similar stages of their career there's no reason that Broad can't achieve even more than Flintoff has been able to.
Agreed, but look at what the likes of McGrath can do when conditions favour them. If Broad improves his accuracy he'll be a serious force to be reckoned with.
Course. I just don't see Broad becoming the same kind of bowler as Flintoff. If Broad works on putting the ball in the same place over and over again (no pun intended!) he could be quite good. I don't think he'll be used as an opening bowler but would be quite good as a change bowler coming on when the batsmen are a bit tired, hopefully, of fending off Anderson and Onions perhaps, then lose concentration a bit and Broad comes in with his accuracy and cleans up.
Possibly, I think they should just make their minds up and do whatever - but sooner rather than later!
Also, I didn't realise Tim Bresnan was only 24. He could be handy in the future too.
Yeah Onions is a great prospect too - looks the kind of bowler who should last a few years too. I'm surprised I haven't heard any comparisons to Simon Jones yet - both have a skiddier kind of action to the rest of the England bowlers and bowl wicket-> wicket at a similar pace.
So the latest news is that Flintoff doesn't look like he'll make it. No great surprise there, but now the question is who to play instead.
Bowling option wise, first two names for me are Anderson and Onions. Swann has been a bit hit and miss this series and it's questionable whether he'll be that effective at Headingley. Broad has been ineffective and his place seems under threat, but if both Broad and Flintoff are out and replaced by bowlers, our batting will be seriously fragile.
Sidebottom seems a good option given that Headingley is traditionally a seam/swing track. He bowls a consistent line and length, and before his various injuries he was England's no. 1 bowler 2 years ago. Being a left-armer he will add another angle, but the worry will be that Anderson, Onions, Sidebottom and Swann will have little to offer if there is no swing, which has been England's problem all series and will become a bigger one without Flintoff.
Harmison is of course the other option with his pace and bounce, but it's questionable how effective he could be at Headingley. He's been in great form this season though and he will at least add a different dimension.
I think if Flintoff goes we'll have to bring in Trott as an extra batsman. For me, Broad has to go because he isn't strong enough in a 4 man bowling attack and the team may end up carrying him. I'd bring in Sidebottom for Broad, which leaves a bit of a one dimensional attack, but I don't think Harmison is going to be any better option right now.
Bowling option wise, first two names for me are Anderson and Onions. Swann has been a bit hit and miss this series and it's questionable whether he'll be that effective at Headingley. Broad has been ineffective and his place seems under threat, but if both Broad and Flintoff are out and replaced by bowlers, our batting will be seriously fragile.
Sidebottom seems a good option given that Headingley is traditionally a seam/swing track. He bowls a consistent line and length, and before his various injuries he was England's no. 1 bowler 2 years ago. Being a left-armer he will add another angle, but the worry will be that Anderson, Onions, Sidebottom and Swann will have little to offer if there is no swing, which has been England's problem all series and will become a bigger one without Flintoff.
Harmison is of course the other option with his pace and bounce, but it's questionable how effective he could be at Headingley. He's been in great form this season though and he will at least add a different dimension.
I think if Flintoff goes we'll have to bring in Trott as an extra batsman. For me, Broad has to go because he isn't strong enough in a 4 man bowling attack and the team may end up carrying him. I'd bring in Sidebottom for Broad, which leaves a bit of a one dimensional attack, but I don't think Harmison is going to be any better option right now.
Problem is, you would end up with a 4 man pace attack:
Anderson
Onions
Harmison
Sidebottom
It could be tough if, say, Australia bat first and get a big total without a spinner able to hold down an end, but that would be a nice balance to attack. Another problem is, the tail would really start at 8, but then with Prior batting at 7 that's not a bad lineup (even with our middle-order frailties)
I think if anything he just tries to think too much. It's like he sees something wrong and tries something, gets hit for some runs, then completely changes the plan and tries something else, that doesn't work, tries something else - all in the space of an over! I think if he didn't worry so much about specific plans and just focused on bowling in the channel, he'd be a much better bowler - and we'd have a better balance of attack if we had a control bowler who can bowl long spells. That's something we're really missing at the moment.
Looks like we're going to get what we want - trott/sidebottom for flintoff/broad
Great - looks like Prior is out! 
Goodbye this test.
Great start there...!
Btw, read this interesting article about swing bowling yesterday:
http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/258645.html
Basically, the summary is, there are THREE types of swing bowling:
conventional, reverse, contrast
Cloud cover has nothing to do with the ball swinging and it's a myth, according to this chap. I don't know what his research is based on, but he does work for NASA, so he probably does know a bit more about this than the commentators!
Thing is, this article is 3 years old, yet the same myths are still being put around in cricket, and "contrast swing" is never spoken of?
http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/258645.html
Basically, the summary is, there are THREE types of swing bowling:
conventional, reverse, contrast
Cloud cover has nothing to do with the ball swinging and it's a myth, according to this chap. I don't know what his research is based on, but he does work for NASA, so he probably does know a bit more about this than the commentators!
Thing is, this article is 3 years old, yet the same myths are still being put around in cricket, and "contrast swing" is never spoken of?
Dreadful.
Interesting the commentators just picked up the no ball - i spotted that at the time. I think it's just OK, but in the last test one of Australia's wickets was a no ball.
Not that I'm bitter - but if you start looking closely at this stuff the umpiring decisions often do even themselves out over time.
Not that I'm bitter - but if you start looking closely at this stuff the umpiring decisions often do even themselves out over time.
all out for < 200
Harmison to get 7-12?
If only we had played a game at Old Trafford
If only we had played a game at Old Trafford