Slabber said:
I know.
What I'm saying is that if Jones had been available I think Bell would have played instead of Collingwood. Speculation, obviously.
England vs Pakistan first test thread
- Thread starter Nate
- Start date
I know.
What I'm saying is that if Jones had been available I think Bell would have played instead of Collingwood. Speculation, obviously.
Marcus Trescothick has admitted he was in two minds about accepting the England captaincy for the first Test against Pakistan in Multan on Saturday.
Trescothick was given the job after injury ruled out Michael Vaughan.
Trescothick said: "I talked to my wife about it, asking if she thought it was the right thing to do.
"But I'm unofficial second in command and I believe it was the right thing to step up. It is exciting to think I could be in charge for a few weeks."
Trescothick led England to victory at Lord's against New Zealand in 2004, the last time Vaughan's knee prevented him from playing.
But he insists he has no interest in taking over as skipper on a more permanent basis.
"I know there is a chance I maybe won't be a one-match wonder this time - it could be the whole series," he said.
"But being very close to Michael, I've seen the things it (captaincy) does to you.
"I've seen him go through tough times, and that's probably put me off a little bit.
"It's a 24-hour-a-day job. Even when he's back home I know he spends a lot of time on the phone.
"There are a lot of other problems outside when the games are on that you have to deal with. Whoever takes over, it is a tough job to do."
Chairman of selectors David Graveney believes Trescothick will not have to look far for support and advice, if he needs it.
"I'm sure he'll lean on the senior players like Freddie (Flintoff), Ashley (Giles) and Straussy. "It will not be easy - but he's done it before and he is the right guy," Graveney told BBC Five Live.
Trescothick was given the job after injury ruled out Michael Vaughan.
Trescothick said: "I talked to my wife about it, asking if she thought it was the right thing to do.
"But I'm unofficial second in command and I believe it was the right thing to step up. It is exciting to think I could be in charge for a few weeks."
Trescothick led England to victory at Lord's against New Zealand in 2004, the last time Vaughan's knee prevented him from playing.
But he insists he has no interest in taking over as skipper on a more permanent basis.
"But being very close to Michael, I've seen the things it (captaincy) does to you.
"I've seen him go through tough times, and that's probably put me off a little bit.
"It's a 24-hour-a-day job. Even when he's back home I know he spends a lot of time on the phone.
"There are a lot of other problems outside when the games are on that you have to deal with. Whoever takes over, it is a tough job to do."
Chairman of selectors David Graveney believes Trescothick will not have to look far for support and advice, if he needs it.
"I'm sure he'll lean on the senior players like Freddie (Flintoff), Ashley (Giles) and Straussy. "It will not be easy - but he's done it before and he is the right guy," Graveney told BBC Five Live.
how many players in the english team can play the wrist spinners well?
They can all do it potentially as they showed against Warne. Strauss struggled at first but he seemed to learn fast. Bell got kippered a few times but on other occasions handled him alright.
Having said that, Warne took feck loads of wickets.
Having said that, Warne took feck loads of wickets.
Slabber said:
The only reason Warne took so many wickets is because the other bowlers were crap, except McGrath at Lords.
MPTutd said:
Also because he's a genius
MPTutd said:
u know jack shit about cricket then..
Warne will take wickets against anyone.
I think what he was saying was that Warne took more wickets than you'd expect because the Aussie seamers were so indifferent in the series that Warne was often bowling in the 1st session on the 1st day of a test.
Normally you wouldn't expect to see him bowl so much in the 1st innings and some of his wickets would have gone elsewhere.
That said, it makes his performance more remarkable given that he still took wickets in unfavourable conditions and bowled so many overs
Normally you wouldn't expect to see him bowl so much in the 1st innings and some of his wickets would have gone elsewhere.
That said, it makes his performance more remarkable given that he still took wickets in unfavourable conditions and bowled so many overs
leviathan said:
The reason he took so many wickets is because the other bowlers could not. As they could not it gave him a chance to take them instead. He also bowled far more as the others (Gillespie especially) could not be trusted.
Clearly Warne is a genius with the ball, but there are only 10 wickets per innings to take and if other bowlers are taking some there is less for Warne.
Its also the reason Murali has taken so many for Sri Lanka.
Pure logic.
Slabber said:
Completely agree. If McGrath was available the whole series and Gillespie in form, he would not have taken more than 30.
leviathan said:
Coming from someone from the states that really is a strange accusation.
MPTutd said:
I agree with that, the rest of our bowlers are pretty crap and most of the wickets are taken by murali and vaas.
He does bowl shed loads of overs though.
roonaldo78 said:
Vaas is a good bowler, very accruate. You don't see many left arm quickie these days.
There's a few about
Bracken, Zahir Khan, Zoysa, Pedro Collins
Bracken, Zahir Khan, Zoysa, Pedro Collins
With the exception of Khan, none are real test regulars though.
MPTutd said:
Pathan is one for the future, he has a lot of potential.
sutty said:
He is a good bowler but injuries are stopping his progress.
Spends more time injured than on the pitch.
Can't wait for the start of play.
Reckon we'll go for 2 spinners.
C'mon the mighty mighty England
Reckon we'll go for 2 spinners.
C'mon the mighty mighty England
MPTutd said:... but there are only 10 wickets per innings to take and if other bowlers are taking some there is less for Warne.
Its also the reason Murali has taken so many for Sri Lanka.
Pure logic.
first, u're assuming that all wickets will fall - clearly bollox.
second, even if your other bowlers are not on top form, u still have to go there and bowl some good overs to get international batsmen out. they don't just throw their wickets to u since u're bowling better than the rest of your team.
third, anyone who has played cricket knows that its much harder to get wickets when u're the only one bowling decently while the cnut bowling at the other end is getting hit all over the ground.
in essence, your argument makes no sense.
MPTutd said:Coming from someone from the states that really is a strange accusation.
and why is that?
You lot should be fecking thankful for my input
And Slabber, Giggsy Girl and CrappyCrappyCrap Person can all go and do one as far as im concerned
Pakistan to win
And Slabber, Giggsy Girl and CrappyCrappyCrap Person can all go and do one as far as im concerned
Pakistan to win
Shah786 said:
This is an English thread, start your own if you're pro pakistan.
Yeah that would be a good idea
Me and erm........Bilal
No thanks
Me and erm........Bilal
No thanks
Shah786 said:
It isn't up for debate.
We don't need any negative stuff in here.
Shah786 said:
We would be if you weren't such a cretin.
Did I mention that I have met Shane Warne?Slabber said:
I am looking forward to this, it is all the better as I arrive home from work just as it starts, I will save Emmerdale and Coronation St. for the lunch break.
Shah786 said:
I havent even contributed in this thread.
Anyway I think Pak will win it.
crappycraperson said:
Depends on England's batting, if they bat well they will win it.
Slabber said:
Hmmm Slabber calling me a cretin and a retard
The irony of it!
Stick to correcting spelling mistakes
crappycraperson said:
I havent even contributed in this thread.
Anyway I think Pak will win it.
I was referring to the other thread in the Other Sport section
Shah786 said:
I hope there's an earthquake in Cheetham Hill.
We all do Slabber, we all do. 7 hours, 5 minutes to go.
These matches start at midday over here which makes a welcome change from having to stay up all night when watching England matches.
3hrs 42 mins to go
2hrs 43 mins.
2hrs 42mins
2hrs 42mins
ManUtdRed said:
No there weren't.
Eh?