Testing times
Jul. 30th, 2008 11:03 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
undyingkingThe Third Test is about to start, so here some quick thoughts.
The return of Collingwood above Flintoff means the batting is notionally pretty strong now. Presumably Ambrose will drop down to 8, which seems a place too low if he bats to form: but he hasn't been. The only other option would have been to bring in a different keeper to bat at 6, but who? -- Prior and others are in good county form, but so was Ambrose: county form seems to mean increasingly little.
The concern is obviously with the bowling. Are four bowlers plus Collingwood going to be enough on the Edgbaston featherbed? They must be thinking that Collingwood is pretty much a genuine fifth bowler, together with I suppose some Pietersen if it's turning. Maybe that's justified: he's been more successful as a bowler recently than I realized, 11 wickets at 23 in the last year or so. Harmison must feel hard done-by, but with Anderson, Panesar undroppable, and Flintoff and Sidebottom just returned, he had to be the one to go, particularly as this pitch might not do a lot for him. I would rather see him playing as one of five bowlers, but that would have made such a long tail it's not acceptable while the batsmen are unreliable. Maybe at the Oval we'll see that, if things go well here and they're pushing for the win by then.
I am obviously very disappointed that Essex missed out on the Twenty20 final, and the Champions League place that would have followed. Although the Indians are still saying that Kent are unacceptable because of their ICL connections, so who knows. I hear tell now that the ECB may be considering a rival Champions League themselves -- this is crazy. It's going to be bad enough having two barely-distinguishable domestic Twenty20 tournaments, without having two barely-distinguishable international ones too.
The return of Collingwood above Flintoff means the batting is notionally pretty strong now. Presumably Ambrose will drop down to 8, which seems a place too low if he bats to form: but he hasn't been. The only other option would have been to bring in a different keeper to bat at 6, but who? -- Prior and others are in good county form, but so was Ambrose: county form seems to mean increasingly little.
The concern is obviously with the bowling. Are four bowlers plus Collingwood going to be enough on the Edgbaston featherbed? They must be thinking that Collingwood is pretty much a genuine fifth bowler, together with I suppose some Pietersen if it's turning. Maybe that's justified: he's been more successful as a bowler recently than I realized, 11 wickets at 23 in the last year or so. Harmison must feel hard done-by, but with Anderson, Panesar undroppable, and Flintoff and Sidebottom just returned, he had to be the one to go, particularly as this pitch might not do a lot for him. I would rather see him playing as one of five bowlers, but that would have made such a long tail it's not acceptable while the batsmen are unreliable. Maybe at the Oval we'll see that, if things go well here and they're pushing for the win by then.
I am obviously very disappointed that Essex missed out on the Twenty20 final, and the Champions League place that would have followed. Although the Indians are still saying that Kent are unacceptable because of their ICL connections, so who knows. I hear tell now that the ECB may be considering a rival Champions League themselves -- this is crazy. It's going to be bad enough having two barely-distinguishable domestic Twenty20 tournaments, without having two barely-distinguishable international ones too.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-07-30 05:42 pm (UTC)If you're going to pick the captain then the team, (and I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that) then you have to accept that if the captain doesn't play well over the course of a series then you lose. We don't have the consistency elsewhere to cope for long with Pietersen effectively at 3.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-31 08:31 am (UTC)Yet I imagine they'd be terrified of installing a new captain just before the Ashes. Especially if that new captain can't be Collingwood (if his poor form continues) or Flintoff (was useless captain previously) or Strauss (for whatever mysterious reason he was ruled out before). Cook and Bell are surely too young, Pietersen too unpredictable: and it seems that none of the bowlers (or the keeper) can be sure of retaining their place. They might I suppose bring in some experienced county captain (Key?) but that in itself would require a major policy change.
It may be that Vaughan continues to hold the post by sheer default. Which is a very depressing thought.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-31 10:31 am (UTC)it seems that none of the bowlers (or the keeper) can be sure of retaining their place
Monty for captain!