England vs S Africa test series: The Inquest

[Pavilionaire]

Good win today, but the series was already over.

In my book we lost that because their batting was more consistent than ours - all of their top 7 posted decent series averages apart from Kallis, who excelled with the ball.

You wonder whether axing Vaughan is the complete solution. I think not. We've now got a problem with Ambrose who scored only 97 runs in 6 innings and took only 9 dismissals as compared with Boucher's 18.

Lastly, I think we need to examine Monty's contribution. 13 wickets at 32 is so-so, while both his batting and fielding are pub-team. I think its time to see what Rashid of Yorkshire can do in an England shirt.

 

[Tooting Gull]

I think how we handle Harmison is another key issue. The guy never understood why people were so pissed off with him - evidently the notion that he was a Test matchwinner who was bowling like a nonce was beyond him. If the penny has finally dropped and he is no longer living off 2005, he will be a real asset for the next Ashes series.

With Sidebottom, Anderson, Broad and Jones maybe to come back, things are looking better on the bowling side.

Ambrose is very lucky to have survived the series. When you think what Chris Read was dropped for - a much better keeper, who got more runs. He must be seething watching all this, probably better for his health if he never watches an England match again.

I was one of those who doubted Pietersen was the right captain, and I think one win in a dead rubber doesn't prove anything much. However, he has done a lot of things very well in this match, and I will never be happier to be proved wrong than if he can do it next summer.

 

[Scoffers]

The only difference really was that South Africa batted better, in particular they applied themselves better. There were far too many airy fairy shots. Smith's innings was the finest example of that.

 

[vegster]

Good win today, but the series was already over.

In my book we lost that because their batting was more consistent than ours - all of their top 7 posted decent series averages apart from Kallis, who excelled with the ball.

You wonder whether axing Vaughan is the complete solution. I think not. We've now got a problem with Ambrose who scored only 97 runs in 6 innings and took only 9 dismissals as compared with Boucher's 18.

Lastly, I think we need to examine Monty's contribution. 13 wickets at 32 is so-so, while both his batting and fielding are pub-team. I think its time to see what Rashid of Yorkshire can do in an England shirt.

I mostly agree with that.. when we had to bat for a day to save a test we failed....when they had to bat for a day and a half to save a test they did it. I think they always had more control and I would discount this result as is usual ,teams who win a series often lose the last test.. even the Aussies

The batting IS fragile and needs work but I'm not sure there is anyone knocking on the door.
I think Boucher has more dismissals due to their mosty pace attack.. lots of thin edges methinks whereas our more military mediums got the ball swinging more and so they flew more to 2nd slip and gully.
It would be interesting to compare DROPPED catches between Boucher and Ambrose ? But, he still is poor with the wood so should be dropped.

Pieterson has had a good and lucky debut, all things considered.. I think the real test comes with the 1st test against the Aussies.... then we will see what he is made of .

 

[Tooting Gull]

Isn't the Aussies' first match against Sussex at Hove next summer? What a great choice.

 

[Simster]

Everyone is talking about our brittle batting, and you can argue about the selection of the batsmen, but the likes of Shah and Bopara will surely get their chances on the next tour - there is depth there. I actually think the problem we have is really a lack of strength in depth in the bowling department. Granted, our batting wasn't up to it in this series, but the bare fact is that you need to take 20 wickets to win a test match which we couldn't do until it was all over; and there simply wasn't the competition for places among the bowlers to change things.

For example, as has been said, Panesar is a village cricketer with the exception of his bowling. Is Rashid really anything like as good as Panesar in that department? Taking a shit spinner to India on those flat tracks would probably be disastrous. Flintoff and Harmison bowled spells that suggested they were returning to form and Simon Jones will be fit in the winter. We need those people playing because of the lack of depth.

As for Ambrose, he is the one who absolutely has to go. Prior is a better batsman, Read is a better keeper. Read should be first choice in India, IMO.

 

[sten_super]

For example, as has been said, Panesar is a village cricketer with the exception of his bowling. Is Rashid really anything like as good as Panesar in that department? Taking a shit spinner to India on those flat tracks would probably be disastrous. Flintoff and Harmison bowled spells that suggested they were returning to form and Simon Jones will be fit in the winter. We need those people playing because of the lack of depth.

As for Ambrose, he is the one who absolutely has to go. Prior is a better batsman, Read is a better keeper. Read should be first choice in India, IMO.

But Panesar is bowling pretty poorly as well at the moment. He'll do well in India; he generally does when the pitch is doing things. But he struggles in this country when the pitches are flat. There's not enough variation to his bowling, he struggles to out-think a batsman. I suspect Rashid will go as the second spinner; I really hope they don't take Swann in the Test squad, as he's a typical (non-spinning) English spinner.

Read, when he has played test cricket, has suffered from exactly the same problem that Ambrose has; he's been unable to assert himself at the crease. Ambrose this summer has looked like a tail-ender when he's come to the crease. Read was largely the same when he played. Prior certainly didn't. However saying that, Prior's keeping remains a concern. I don't go to Sussex games; how's he doing at the moment? If he can keep to Mushy he can't be that bad. At least with Prior in the side you have 6 batsmen (discounting Flintoff).

 

[Clapham Old Mug]

I think England lost the series at Lord's when we had to bowl the spinners at the start of SA's second innings because the light was bad. Their openers walked past me on their way out to bat and they looked really demoralised and pissed off. When they came back, after facing a few innocuous overs from Petersen and Panesar, they were both grinning and you could sense a spring in their step. Funny game, cricket...

 

[SNOOBS]

Prior Test keeper for his batting
Foster should be one day keeper for his keeping and he can bat a bit
Can Monty get more variation?
As for the batting I don't think theres much you can do, they are the best current players. I do prefer Ian Bell at 5 and Vaughan (or someone else) at 3 though

 

[Questions]

In the first innings of this test many of our batsmen got themselves out playing at deliveries that they could have left. We need to remember that test matches last 5days and you do not always need to score at 4 runs an over, something not lost on Graeme Smith when he bats.

 

[mattb]

our batsmen simply are not as patient as those from other countries

 

[Uncle Buck]

Read playing in the ICL means that he is unlikely to play for England again, having said that we should pick him, just to annoy the Indian cricket board. Prior is probably the best bet at present, he has batted well this season and his keeping has not been too bad.

I see that Monty has already taken over 100 test wickets, hardly the case to be dropped. Rashid has been so / so this season, certainly does not look finished yet, long term the fact he is a decent bat means he will be an option. However if you want a spinner for the future, I suspect that could well be Will Beer.

Regarding England, they have to go with a 5 man attack, which has to include Flintoff and Harmison. There needs to be a spinner in there, which is Monty. The selectors have made it fairly clear they want a number 8 that can bat, which means Broad gets in. The issue with Broad is that his bowling is not there at present, so the attack carries him a tad. So that leaves one place for Anderson, Jones or Sidebottom and at present Anderson is bowling well, in a way shows that Gibson is improving the bowlers, something Shine was incapable of doing.

Regarding the batting, well Bell has to prove he can do it at 3, not convince Collingwood should be in the test side. Also I have issues with the opening pair of Cook and Strauss, I feel England need an attacking opener, which Trescothick did so well.

 

[Lord Large]

Not going with a five man attack in the second game was as good as surrendering the series.

 

[Stumpy Tim]

if we're going to play a 5-man bowling attack then Prior MUST be the keeper IMO. There isn't much pressure on the batsman, though Shah must be wondering what he has to do... he's a better bet that Bopara.

For the first game in India I would play this XI - bearing in mind 2 spinners need to be taken:

Strauss
Cook
Bell
KP
Collingwood
Prior
Flintoff
Rashid
Broad
Sidebottom
Monty

I would also take Harmison, Shah, Jones & Ambrose

 

[BensGrandad]

I enjoy cricket but am not as au fait with the county scene as perhaps I should be but is there not a reasonable spin bowler who can also bat like Ashley Giles did or a batsman who can also bowl spin to a reasonable standard about.

 

[Lord Large]

Kevin Pieterson can dabble with spin and is often underused.

Not suggesting he bowls a load of overs but isn't a bad option for mayb half dozen or so during the longer sessions.

 

[BensGrandad]

As an oldie I was thinking in terms of somebody like Alan Oakman, Geoff Miller, Richie Benaud.

 

[Lord Large]

If only Mushy was English...

 

[Barrel of Fun]

I enjoy cricket but am not as au fait with the county scene as perhaps I should be but is there not a reasonable spin bowler who can also bat like Ashley Giles did or a batsman who can also bowl spin to a reasonable standard about.

Adil Rashid averages something like 30 in first class cricket, but I don't think he is ready to make the step up just yet. Graeme Swann is a useful bat, who is capable of chipping in, but has never been tested at Test level, so would be a huge gamble.

Agree with pretty much everything Uncle Buck says. A real shame that Trescothick is out for the count. We need a Trescothick/Stewart type player to get our innings off to a flying start. There is generally too much pressure of the top order to steady things and push the score on (a la Sussex). I can't think of many contenders off hand, sadly.

 

[Pavilionaire]

It's interesting that in England people say that, at 20, Rashid isn't ready to make the step up but if he were on the sub-continent if he'd hadn't been picked by now he'd have probably missed the boat for his career. India in particular have a history of giving spinners their debut whilst they're still in their teens.

We know that the best sides have a reliable contributions from the 7 and 8 positions. Gilchrist and Warne, Boucher and Pollock etc. In this post-Alec Stewart era we've had A.N.Other and Ashley Giles.

For me I've seen enough to suggest a 20-year old who averages 31 with the bat in First Class cricket with a century and 10 50s to his name and who's wickets have cost only 4 more runs apiece than Monty should be given a chance pretty soon.

If Broad doesn't work out we then have that No. 8 problem. If we drop Ambrose then whoever comes in will have that huge pressure on them to score. Someone like Rashid could chip in with vital runs at number 8, and it is surely time the England coaches started to give him the best coaching before he gets into bad habits.