What to do with a boy like Andrew?

[King Pietersen]

Arent England allowed to steal Irish players though ? Joyce is irish :?

Just stick with Strauss i say.

 

[angryangy]

Arent England allowed to steal Irish players though ? Joyce is irish :?

Just stick with Strauss i say.

Joyce never played an ODI for Ireland, so as soon as he qualified for residency, which he did by moving to Middlesex, he was eligible for England. Eoin Morgan represented Ireland at the World Cup!

 

[King Pietersen]

Ah got it, i didnt really know the rules tbh. Just presumed he could play for England.

 

[angryangy]

Anyway, to reply,

Shah still isnt a top order batsman though, i dont see shah as an opener. 3-5 i feel is his place, whereas bell's best place is 5-6. Strauss has to be supported in these tough times, his form has dipped, but his average is still pretty high. It's not like he is consistently getting out for below 10, he always seems to get starts of 20-40 and its just letting him get on with his game and allow him to battle through. Maybe a rest from the Odi series would be of benefit to him.

Shah is more in reference to Tom's post. If Vaughan is moved up to open, then Shah, a no. 3 batsman (which is top order) would be a sensible option.

Consistently getting starts and getting out is more indicative of bad form in an opener than a run of early wickets. Openers are exposed to uncertain conditions and it is to be expected that sometimes, they'll cop the worst of it more than once.

The run of starts shows that he is trying hard to get in, but then at the point that he wants to expand, he is locking up, he is unable to effect his natural game.

I think backing your player is usually the best option, especially when he is one of the better and more important players, but the problem for England is that they have a few players like Harmison and Plunkett, who are also struggling. How many strugglers can England back before they're out of in-form players?

 

[Griffo]

Shah was only put at 3 so they could drop him as soon as Vaughan came back without considering his from lucky for the selectors he did nothing if they put him at 6 and he scored runs and he was dropped there would of complaints but because he was at 3 hes in the captains spot

 

[Almost_Austwick]

Griffo, thats a cynical way of looking at things (agreed that there may be an element of truth in there though).

However, I rather suspect that they'd rather Shah had scored some decent runs as it would leave them with more options to play with, especially in light of the poor run of Strauss.

As for whether or not it's beneficial to drop him, then I'd say that it would do him good. Strauss doesn't strike me as a 'Harmison' (who, if he were to be dropped it would probably destroy his confidence for good - he already seems to be developing the yips) type player and think he's level headed enough to realise that if he were to be dropped it would for his benefit as well as the teams.

Also, we should factor in that the days of being told via a 3rd party or curt phone conversation are probably over and that he'd be getting support all the way through his stint back at Middlesex.

 

[angryangy]

Shah bats at 3 for Middlesex and has done so for quite a while, so there's nothing clandestine about him turning up at 3 for England; first drop is a recognised specialisation. Of course the new guy gets the shaft for the skipper or any senior player, that's obvious. When Martin Love came into the team for Damien Martyn, he played pretty much as good as Martyn, with a fifty and a century from his five matches, but as soon as Martyn was fit, he was out.

 

[Simbazz]

Jon Batty, i know hes a wicketkeeper i know, but why cant we stick him in as opener, hes been promising for a long time, without real dips in proper form, maybe a try?

Why not Mal Loye at three? Cook and Vaughan (Lets be honest, lately hes been an opener thanks to Strauss) to open?

I dont want Strauss to be dropped, he offers so much, and can proforme, needs to be consistant though!

 

[Almost_Austwick]

Loye would be a backward step whilst there are younger players around who can offer the same as he can.

I don't really want to see Strauss dropped but having an opening partnership that can score big is a key element of test cricket. I just think that he would benefit from time back at Middlesex in order to get some form without the immense pressure that test cricket brings.

 

[Animator!]

Aye, Loye's a backwards step.
Morgan isn't an established county player yet, let alone near playing for England in Tests.
Benning doesn't tend to play FC games so you cannot even bring him into the equation.
Joyce? No, He's already failed at his international career, at the side of the game he's supposedly better at.
Shah? Well, he hasn't been given a decent run yet.
Ramprakash? He's the in-form man, he looks a better player now than he was in his younger days, Worth a shot as he would be able to make the upcoming winter tours.

I have to agree that we should bring in a middle-order player. It's clear Tresco isn't going to play and besides him there isn't another county opener around who averages 45+ so I'd stick with putting Vaughan back to open, his favoured position, and bring in a number 3.

 

[Sureshot]

I think backing your player is usually the best option, especially when he is one of the better and more important players, but the problem for England is that they have a few players like Harmison and Plunkett, who are also struggling. How many strugglers can England back before they're out of in-form players?

Against this opposition we can get away with it. Unless things change India's batsman will make us pay. We cannot carry both Harmison and Plunkett for the India series. Hoggard in for Harmison.

As for Strauss? Well in his bad run he has made only 2 scores that haven't been double figures (a duck today and one against Aus). We should stick with Strauss but he has got a bit of a problem with the ball that is hitting the stumps. Seems to be very skewiff at the crease.

 

[Almost_Austwick]

Joyce? No, He's already failed at his international career, at the side of the game he's supposedly better at.

I think you find that Joyce is more of a 4 or 5 day man than one day player. Just look at the stats for proof - an average of over 47 in FC compared to 34 in the one day arena.

 

[PhilD123]

Joyce never played an ODI for Ireland, so as soon as he qualified for residency, which he did by moving to Middlesex, he was eligible for England. Eoin Morgan represented Ireland at the World Cup!

Hang on though, Niall O'Brian played for Ireland in the World Cup, and I thought he wanted to qualify to play for England?

 

[Kev]

The answer is simple, there isn't another player who can replace Strauss currently so stick with him. Although 2 names for the future would be Joe Sayers and Joe Denly (Who does average over 45 Animator, ok he's only completed 10 innings but its still over 45 )

 

[Simbazz]

The answer is simple, there isn't another player who can replace Strauss currently so stick with him. Although 2 names for the future would be Joe Sayers and Joe Denly (Who does average over 45 Animator, ok he's only completed 10 innings but its still over 45 )

Ive seen a fair bit ogf J.Sayers, but not so much Denly, but i have heard of him, and they look exciting, i just think England are going wrong with this "Get youth and stick with 'em," Get Ramps in if your looking for someone to mastermind a middle order battle, and experience in the field, if not and Moore and his staff want to get a youth in there, move Bell up to three, Bopara in at 5.