Ashes debate thread.

[evertonfan]

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.

No way, I don't care how hopeless Panesar is in the field, he more than makes up for that with his off-spin. There is no point picking Giles because he can bat, he can't bowl for toffee and Brett Lee gets more turn than Giles.

 

[MUFC1987]

No way, I don't care how hopeless Panesar is in the field, he more than makes up for that with his off-spin. There is no point picking Giles because he can bat, he can't bowl for toffee and Brett Lee gets more turn than Giles.

Panesar can turn the ball all he likes, but I don't see Langer, Ponting and Co being so bamboozled by it that they collapse. Let's not forget the valuable contributions of Giles with the bat in the Ashes, e.g. the 5th Test. A tail with Hoggard at 8 is just a nightmare scenario.

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

Yes, suited to First Class cricket but not to Test Cricket. Do you want Mark Ramprakash brought back as well? We have plenty of other young Wicketkeepers in the country.

 

[evertonfan]

Panesar can turn the ball all he likes, but I don't see Langer, Ponting and Co being so bamboozled by it that they collapse. Let's not forget the valuable contributions of Giles with the bat in the Ashes, e.g. the 5th Test. A tail with Hoggard at 8 is just a nightmare scenario.

Yeah, because i'm sure those batsmen will be bamboozled by Giles.

 

[MUFC1987]

Yeah, because i'm sure those batsmen will be bamboozled by Giles.

That's precisely the point, we need a spinner who can do a job and contribute all round to the team. Giles is much better at this than Panesar, hence my point.

 

[andrew_nixon]

Panesar can turn the ball all he likes, but I don't see Langer, Ponting and Co being so bamboozled by it that they collapse. Let's not forget the valuable contributions of Giles with the bat in the Ashes, e.g. the 5th Test. A tail with Hoggard at 8 is just a nightmare scenario.

Because Giles bamboozled them so much didn't he? Had a strike rate of 96. Damn he bamboozled them. They just couldn't play him! He bamboozled them so much they could only face 16 overs of his bowling before getting out!

 

[evertonfan]

Because Giles bamboozled them so much didn't he? Had a strike rate of 96. Damn he bamboozled them. They just couldn't play him! He bamboozled them so much they could only face 16 overs of his bowling before getting out!

Yeah, why is there so much fuss over Warne and Murali when the real 'bamboozler' is sitting right in Warwickshire?

 

[Sureshot]

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.


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.

Jones played well?

What aload of tripe.

He is the worst England 'Batsman' vs spin I've seen in a long time, he has no composure under pressure, makes mistakes behind the stumps, he is a liability keeping to spin aswell. He's dropped at least 5 catches- stumpings of off Monty already. It's nearing 10 probably.


People say Monty can't bat, no one remember him hitting Murali for six? He's not master batsman but in an all round contribution. I'd rather have a bowler taking wickets at 25-30 and averaging maybe 10 (lower if we play a better keeper) than a bowler taking wickets at 45-60 and maybe 15 runs on average.

Read and Prior are better than Jones, and even Davies is imo but hasn't the experience.

Giles shouldn't be near our spinner slot.

Panesar can turn the ball all he likes, but I don't see Langer, Ponting and Co being so bamboozled by it that they collapse. Let's not forget the valuable contributions of Giles with the bat in the Ashes, e.g. the 5th Test. A tail with Hoggard at 8 is just a nightmare scenario.


Yes, suited to First Class cricket but not to Test Cricket. Do you want Mark Ramprakash brought back as well? We have plenty of other young Wicketkeepers in the country.

Actually the Aussies don't have that good a record lately vs proper SLA Rafique and Vettori have good records vs them.

I'd rather have a longer tail than 4 pacers and a 'spinner' and I use that in the lightest of terms.

Ashley Giles in 2004 did well, and I think even Andrew will admit that, he averaged well under 30 vs WIndies and New Zealand. Since then his average would be around 45.

 

[evertonfan]

Jones played well?

What aload of tripe.

He is the worst England 'Batsman' vs spin I've seen in a long time, he has no composure under pressure, makes mistakes behind the stumps, he is a liability keeping to spin aswell. He's dropped at least 5 catches- stumpings of off Monty already. It's nearing 10 probably.


People say Monty can't bat, no one remember him hitting Murali for six? He's not master batsman but in an all round contribution. I'd rather have a bowler taking wickets at 25-30 and averaging maybe 10 (lower if we play a better keeper) than a bowler taking wickets at 45-60 and maybe 15 runs on average.

Read and Prior are better than Jones, and even Davies is imo but hasn't the experience.

Giles shouldn't be near our spinner slot.

You are very brutal aren't you?

Spot on though, everything you have said is totally right. Panesar looked more comfortable against Murali than Jones.

 

[Sureshot]

When Jones plays against Kaneria or Afridi tomorrow he'll play the sweep and he'll more than likely he'll get out by out.

I may be brutal, I just wish the selectors would be, especially going on the stat Andrew posted on Jones average since his Kiwi Hundred.

Why play a keeper who is supposedly in the team for his batting who averages 23 for the best part of 2 years and is a liability behind the stumps?

 

[MUFC1987]

Because Giles bamboozled them so much didn't he? Had a strike rate of 96. Damn he bamboozled them. They just couldn't play him! He bamboozled them so much they could only face 16 overs of his bowling before getting out!

FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! I NEVER SAID THAT GILES WAS GOING TO BOWL OUT AUSTRALIA.

I said that Panesar is not good enough as a spinner to get them out, so it seems pointless playing a one dimensional spinner who may take the odd wicket, over the better option for the team. NOTE: I am not saying that Giles is a better bowler.

I'm not even going to bother replying to the bit about Jones as I seem to have been misunderstood yet again. My question is, why should he be replaced by Chris Read who has failed more dramatically then any keeper in the last 20 years. Seems to me that Read wasn't such a great keeper for England either, but that seems to have been forgotten.

 

[evertonfan]

When Jones plays against Kaneria or Afridi tomorrow he'll play the sweep and he'll more than likely he'll get out by out.

I may be brutal, I just wish the selectors would be, especially going on the stat Andrew posted on Jones average since his Kiwi Hundred.

Why play a keeper who is supposedly in the team for his batting who averages 23 for the best part of 2 years and is a liability behind the stumps?

I hope GoJo scores a hundred tomorrow and puts a six through your window!

Can't see it happening though, he'll get 10 like he normally does before giving it away. As long as England pass 450 i'll be happy, even though they should be aiming at 500.

FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! I NEVER SAID THAT GILES WAS GOING TO BOWL OUT AUSTRALIA.

I said that Panesar is not good enough as a spinner to get them out, so it seems pointless playing a one dimensional spinner who may take the odd wicket, over the better option for the team. NOTE: I am not saying that Giles is a better bowler.

I'm not even going to bother replying to the bit about Jones as I seem to have been misunderstood yet again. My question is, why should he be replaced by Chris Read who has failed more dramatically then any keeper in the last 20 years. Seems to me that Read wasn't such a great keeper for England either, but that seems to have been forgotten.

You pick spinners to spin, not to bat. Monty may not bowl out Australia, but he'll do a better job than Giles. And as much as I hate to say it; Read should be in the England side.

 

[ste_mc_efc]

why isnt anyone even mentioning dalrymple

his extra batting might help,

and the way i see it its handy to have a deccent tail, at a slight expense to bowling

 

[MUFC1987]

You pick spinners to spin, not to bat. Monty may not bowl out Australia, but he'll do a better job than Giles. And as much as I hate to say it; Read should be in the England side.

My point is if Panesar doesn't take wickets. If he doesn't his place in the side is essentially wasted, whereas Giles can still score runs and take catches if his bowling doesn't go well.

I also don't get this mentality that us English people seem to have. We have a keeper who doesn't do well, so we want the old keeper who was quite frankly poor as well?

Imagine if India had gone back to Patel after Karthik instead of Dhoni.

 

[ste_mc_efc]

but read has improved vastly since he last played, especially with the bat

 

[evertonfan]

My point is if Panesar doesn't take wickets. If he doesn't his place in the side is essentially wasted, whereas Giles can still score runs and take catches if his bowling doesn't go well.

But Panesar does take wickets, so far there has only been one innings in his England career whereby he hasn't taken a wicket. Not to metion that he took a fiver in his previous test.