Ashes debate thread.

[valvolux]

Lets hope taht he is fit for the Ashes; The Aussies were almost clueless against him last summer.

even if he does go, one months cricket in a year isn't going to see him in tip top shape. anyway, i only remember him bowling well in the 3rd ashes test...not much to write home about before, and we haven't seen much of him after. he's still a bit of an unknown quantity. a couple of spells of bowling does not make a career, but he does have a bit of x factor about him so I wouldn't be suprised if he's on the plane if only in an attempt to psych the aussies out. having said that, the lack of reverse swing in australia might make his flat seamers as tasty for aussie batsmen as one Darren Gough was when he came down under

what about Giles? do you think he will get a game now that he's fit? i think the spinner and keeper spot are the most glaring weaknesses that you'll bring over. But KP and Freddie in top form have the potential to win a test on their own, so it'll still be one hell of a contest. Most of all i'm looking forward to seeing big Glenn back, god i've missed him!

 

[Sureshot]

I honestly believe in Monty we have our spinner issue problem solved, the only thing he hasn't done is prove his ability, which you can't fairly judge until 2 years of cricket.

For the keeper, Read is the best choice. Jones is out of runs and probably only in the team as his keeping has improved. Still can't read the spinners with either the keepers gloves or the batting gloves.

 

[evertonfan]

I honestly believe in Monty we have our spinner issue problem solved, the only thing he hasn't done is prove his ability, which you can't fairly judge until 2 years of cricket.

For the keeper, Read is the best choice. Jones is out of runs and probably only in the team as his keeping has improved. Still can't read the spinners with either the keepers gloves or the batting gloves.

Agreed. I'm licking my lips over the prospect of Monty. I have a horrible feeling that Fletch will still play Giles instead though, and I don't think he'll drop GoJo either, even though Read should be in the side. Fletcher must just have a thing for inferior players.

 

[nightprowler10]

Agreed. I'm licking my lips over the prospect of Monty.

:rtfl

I think it would be a tragedy if Monty didn't get to play in the Ashes.

 

[evertonfan]

:rtfl

I think it would be a tragedy if Monty didn't get to play in the Ashes.

Given England's recent injury woes, I wouldn't be surprised if Monty and our entire quota of 'spinners' was wiped out, and Phil Tuffnell is forced out of retirement.

 

[kodos]

Monty should do fine in the Ashes but he would be under a massive amount of pressure from the crowds. Plus Aus in recent past have been troubled against left arm spinners who give it flight and drift and Monty is very much like a Vettori or Rafique so he should do some damage.

 

[Sureshot]

I don't think the crowds would phase Monty, as soon as he has the ball in his hands his mentality changes from quiet chap to really aggressive spinner.

 

[MUFC1987]

Giles should be back in the team as soon as he is fit. He had a decent enough Ashes with the ball and adds a bit of skill and a lot of experience to the batting order. I don't see the need for Read personally, I'd be very worried with him at 7 and Hoggard at 8 going into the Ashes. I'm confident Jones would score just as many in FC Cricket as Read. At least Jones has shown Potential with the bat in Tests, the most notable thing that Chris Read has done, was duck into Chris Cairn's slow ball.

 

[andrew_nixon]

Giles should be back in the team as soon as he is fit. He had a decent enough Ashes with the ball

Yeah, because averaging nearly 60 with the ball is a great series.

I'm confident Jones would score just as many in FC Cricket as Read. At least Jones has shown Potential with the bat in Tests, the most notable thing that Chris Read has done, was duck into Chris Cairn's slow ball.

The stats don't back you up on that one mate. Since he was dropped in 2004, Chris Read has averaged 50.14 with the bat. In the same time period before England selection, Jones averaged 44.31. Since the home series against New Zealand in 2004, which featured his one and only test century, he has averaged 23.54 in Test cricket.

 

[MUFC1987]

Yeah, because averaging nearly 60 with the ball is a great series.

The stats don't back you up on that one mate. Since he was dropped in 2004, Chris Read has averaged 50.14 with the bat. In the same time period before England selection, Jones averaged 44.31. Since the home series against New Zealand in 2004, which featured his one and only test century, he has averaged 23.54 in Test cricket.

You don't have to take a host of wickets to bowl well. For years Giles has been given a job and he's did it well in the Ashes.

I was refering to Read's Test stats, sure he gets a few in First Class cricket, but there have been lots of players in the past who can do that and fail at Test level. He's never made the grade in Tests, it's just the way it is, I'm afraid.

EDIT: Ah yes, Chris Read, average of 15, highest score of 38*, a Test Career against New Zealand, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and the West Indies, most of whom have pretty average bowlers, but yes I see your point. :

 

[andrew_nixon]

You don't have to take a host of wickets to bowl well. For years Giles has been given a job and he's did it well in the Ashes.

No matter what spin you put on it, averaging 60 is an incredibly poor performance.

I was refering to Read's Test stats, sure he gets a few in First Class cricket, but there have been lots of players in the past who can do that and fail at Test level. He's never made the grade in Tests, it's just the way it is, I'm afraid.

EDIT: Ah yes, Chris Read, average of 15, highest score of 38*, a Test Career against New Zealand, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and the West Indies, most of whom have pretty average bowlers, but yes I see your point. :

You don't see my point. The point is that Jones was brought in because he was a better batsman. Chris Read is now averaging more at the same level of cricket than Jones was in the same time period before he got selected.

Yes, Read's test stats are poor. But he's improved a hell of a lot since then. His First Class average in the 2 years before he got dropped was just above 30. In the 2 years since he got dropped it is just above 50. If that isn't an improvement, what is?

 

[MUFC1987]

No matter what spin you put on it, averaging 60 is an incredibly poor performance.

But it's a team game, he doesn't need to take 40 wickets at 20. I'm saying I'd rather see Giles back in the side as a better all round Cricketer than Panesar, especially for the Ashes. Let's not forget that Giles also brings something in the form of fielding as well. I'm all for Panesar being played now and on turning wickets, but unless we get that in Australia, then the smart thing to do is to take Giles.

You don't see my point. The point is that Jones was brought in because he was a better batsman. Chris Read is now averaging more at the same level of cricket than Jones was in the same time period before he got selected.

Yes, Read's test stats are poor. But he's improved a hell of a lot since then. His First Class average in the 2 years before he got dropped was just above 30. In the 2 years since he got dropped it is just above 50. If that isn't an improvement, what is?

Jones was brought in to add more runs to the team, yes I agree. Chris Read has done well in First Class cricket, yes. But my point is that Read played against some pretty poor bowlers and averaged 15, whereas Geraint Jones has come in and played well, despite a low average, he has the mentality for Test cricket, something which Read lacks. We don't need to be messing about with a team in a position which doesn't need it.

All this Read is the better keeper is marginal as well, he's dropped just as many clangers over the last few years.

 

[Ritwik]

Jones was brought in to add more runs to the team, yes I agree. Chris Read has done well in First Class cricket, yes. But my point is that Read played against some pretty poor bowlers and averaged 15, whereas Geraint Jones has come in and played well, despite a low average, he has the mentality for Test cricket, something which Read lacks. We don't need to be messing about with a team in a position which doesn't need it.

Jones has been performing well below standards, so that would logically tell you that the selectors do need to experiment with that position a bit. The way I see it, Jones has got a hell lot of chances and not taken them - what's the problem in giving an improved Read a go ?

 

[MUFC1987]

Jones has been performing well below standards, so that would logically tell you that the selectors do need to experiment with that position a bit. The way I see it, Jones has got a hell lot of chances and not taken them - what's the problem in giving an improved Read a go ?

Well why should it be Read? Your argument to get rid of Jones is that he's been given a go and has not been up to scratch, yet you want to replace him with a guy who has also had a go and has looked even more out of his depth? That makes no sense.

 

[andrew_nixon]

Well why should it be Read? Your argument to get rid of Jones is that he's been given a go and has not been up to scratch, yet you want to replace him with a guy who has also had a go and has looked even more out of his depth? That makes no sense.

A guy who looked out of his depth. And has since improved 100%.