Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Why is Bell playing for England?
- Thread starter goldstone
- Start date
Edward Scissorhands
New member
- Feb 20, 2005
- 6,979
So who would you put in instead?
Safeway
M0DERAT0R
Viv Richards.
Leekbrookgull
Well-known member
It,s not the fact that he gets out but,how he is dismissed! His shot or defence selection is poor,Warne yesterday had him all over the place. 
Blackadder
Brighton Bhuna Boy
Thorpe for me as well
Shropshire Seagull
Well-known member
He was kept in coz he got a shed load of runs vs Bangladesh.
Big difference in bowling quality as he has found out to his cost.
To late to ring the changes now (pardon the pun).
Maybe it's good experience for him for future tests?
Was a big gamble to leave Thorpe out, but I reckon if Butcher had been fit, he would have gone in at 3 with Skip at 4 and Bell on the bench.
Big difference in bowling quality as he has found out to his cost.
To late to ring the changes now (pardon the pun).
Maybe it's good experience for him for future tests?
Was a big gamble to leave Thorpe out, but I reckon if Butcher had been fit, he would have gone in at 3 with Skip at 4 and Bell on the bench.
Uncle C
Well-known member
I thought he did pretty well in 66
Blackadder
Brighton Bhuna Boy
Re: Re: Why is Bell playing for England?
In which round?
Uncle C said:
In which round?
The Large One
Who's Next?
Re: Re: Why is Bell playing for England?
Anyway, I would have put Chris Adams in there.
I think you mean '70.Uncle C said:
Anyway, I would have put Chris Adams in there.
cheeseroll
New member
When Robert Key was doing alright last year everybody here was saying Bell should be there instead !
Thorpe retired from test cricket when he wasnt picked for the first test, so he is not an option.
Thorpe retired from test cricket when he wasnt picked for the first test, so he is not an option.
king Wombat
Well-known member
Bell is obviously in there for his potential. He has been a major disapointment - but remember when flintoff first played for england, and was absolutely woeful.
admittedly I would have preferred thorpe to be in there as a middle order of thorpe, pieterson, flintoff, and Jones would have been awesome.
admittedly I would have preferred thorpe to be in there as a middle order of thorpe, pieterson, flintoff, and Jones would have been awesome.
Barrel of Fun
Abort, retry, fail
Matt Prior as specialist batsman.
Bell is a lame duck. He has scored two half centuries that were very slow and he was very fortunate to score them anyway. He threw his wicket away when we were chasing an easy target.
Should we persist with him? I dont think so
Bell is a lame duck. He has scored two half centuries that were very slow and he was very fortunate to score them anyway. He threw his wicket away when we were chasing an easy target.
Should we persist with him? I dont think so
He is not an automatic choice though, it just happens that tehre isn't really anyone else pushing for the place. Bell has talent, that is clear, he just needs a run in the side. Watching the highlights of all the tests last night also showed that his fielding is of a very good standard. He didn't drop anything and that catch off Langer at short leg was extraordinary. Give him a chance, we've had enoguh chopping and changing in recent years, time to keep a solid side together and build on this success.
IF we were to drop him though where would people look? Solanki? Shah? You would really consider Prior good enough to be a specialist batsman at number 4? Robert Key?
Bell is still the best choice IMO and hopefully can keep his place in teh side. Remember, he's only 23. Time is on his side.
IF we were to drop him though where would people look? Solanki? Shah? You would really consider Prior good enough to be a specialist batsman at number 4? Robert Key?
Bell is still the best choice IMO and hopefully can keep his place in teh side. Remember, he's only 23. Time is on his side.
eastlondonseagull
Well-known member
Golden ducks are so embarrassing 
RonnieO'Sullivan
New member
- Feb 21, 2005
- 2,823
Leekbrookgull said:It,s not the fact that he gets out but,how he is dismissed! His shot or defence selection is poor,Warne yesterday had him all over the place.
Wanre has him all over the place?? Shane Warne is even better than i thought then cos glenn mcgrath got ian bell 1st ball!?!?
talk me thru warne bamboozling him yesty
Uncle Buck
Ghost Writer
- Jul 7, 2003
- 28,071
The selectors made a decision on Bell at the beginning of the summer and it has had mixed blessings. But they obviously have doubts regarding Key as they keep dropping him. To me Key is just another flat track bully in the mould of Hick, Crawley or Ramps, who will get a bucket load of runs in the county game, come back into the England side for a few games and then be dropped again, having done very little.
Once Thorpe had retired it left the selectors with limited options. They had dropped Key, Collingwood is generally viewed as a one day specialist and Ed Joyce had not qualified for England at the beginning of the summer and is not really ready yet.
I do think they were correct to stick with Bell. Technically he has it all and he will come good. It also meant we played with a settled side.
Once Thorpe had retired it left the selectors with limited options. They had dropped Key, Collingwood is generally viewed as a one day specialist and Ed Joyce had not qualified for England at the beginning of the summer and is not really ready yet.
I do think they were correct to stick with Bell. Technically he has it all and he will come good. It also meant we played with a settled side.