Reply to: Being an England cricket fan

[Ruprect]

Bloody hell I'm distraught. We're in for a good few years of being utterly tulipe now. I thought vaughan could turn it round, and with a few selection and batting order changes sort the current slump out, but now he's gone I think we're damned. Possibly staring down the barrel of another ashes whitewash next year now. If that happens I will never be able to speak to an Australian again.

[LittlestHobbo]

135 for 4 .. ahh yes what a brilliant team we have!

[oracleslave]

If Collingwood hadn't dropped a dolly then it would be pretty even at 130 odd for 4. Eng may still get back into this game.

[PorkPie]

You think being an England fan is hard. You should try being a Surrey fan...

I am that too

[Moscow Mule]

You think being an England fan is hard. You should try being a Surrey fan...

[LittlestHobbo]

I think I'd bring in Broad definatly, 60 -70 runs down the order is not to be sniffed at, we'd bat down to 8 and as we are struggling for runs...

I'd drop Ambrose he's just not god enough at the moment, not sure who's in the running for that job..and I'd probably bring back Harmeson, just because when he's bowling well i love watching him. I think that means I have 12 players but i'm sure the SA's won't mind they'd still beat us.

Think I'd drop Anderson, just not sure he's asking enough questions with the new ball, he doesn't look constistently dangerous.

[BA to the Stars]

Vaughan should definatly be dropped, as should Collingwood..

Vaughan has a reputation as a ruthless captain, i think he should have applied that trait to himself along time ago...

I hate to agree with Boycott but i reckon he has it spot on here

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cric...nd/7534452.stm

so if they are both dropped who would you play in the next Test...

If Vaughan & Collingwood are dropped, then would you play 2 batsmen (leaving the bowling attack of Anderson, Sidebottom, Flintoff & Monty) or 1 batsman & 1 all rounder. If the latter, then this opens the door for Broad.

[oracleslave]

Vaughan should definatly be dropped, as should Collingwood..

Vaughan has a reputation as a ruthless captain, i think he should have applied that trait to himself along time ago...

I hate to agree with Boycott but i reckon he has it spot on here

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cric...nd/7534452.stm

so if they are both dropped who would you play in the next Test...

As said above I would play Shah. Not sure about who else though

[LittlestHobbo]

Vaughan should definatly be dropped, as should Collingwood..

Vaughan has a reputation as a ruthless captain, i think he should have applied that trait to himself along time ago...

I hate to agree with Boycott but i reckon he has it spot on here

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cric...nd/7534452.stm

so if they are both dropped who would you play in the next Test...

[FiveTimes]

If you are going to pick a batting replacement for Collingwood (his bowling contribution in test cricket would preclude from being classed as a genuine all rounder (such as Kallis or Flintoff), then instead of Broad you would look at a genuine batsman. Potential candidates would include Key (Kent), Shah (Middlesex) or Bopara (Essex). Selection of any of these may mean adjusting the batting order, for example Key would probably bat at 3, meaning that Vaughan would move down the order.

It is just a shame that Broad was not taking wickets (as he was selected primarily as a bowler).

Moving MV donw to #4 would make a little more sense, he should be coming in when the ball is a little softer.

Only one change is needed and that is the dropping of centrally contracted Collingwood.

That is the problem, he is contracted and the selectors feel they have to pick him. If they drop him and bring in someone else, then they are paying extra for that.
Send him back to county cricket to get some runs.

[oracleslave]

I watched the highlights last night on 5 - there was a South African fella - his accent was just like OS...... when he talked fast, I couldn't understand him either....

That's cause you'd had too many! I on the other hand make perfect sense after a few toots

[oracleslave]

If you are going to pick a batting replacement for Collingwood (his bowling contribution in test cricket would preclude from being classed as a genuine all rounder (such as Kallis or Flintoff), then instead of Broad you would look at a genuine batsman. Potential candidates would include Key (Kent), Shah (Middlesex) or Bopara (Essex). Selection of any of these may mean adjusting the batting order, for example Key would probably bat at 3, meaning that Vaughan would move down the order.

It is just a shame that Broad was not taking wickets (as he was selected primarily as a bowler).

A more eloquent version of what I was trying to say. I would pick Shah personally.

[cailin maith]

I watched the highlights last night on 5 - there was a South African fella - his accent was just like OS...... when he talked fast, I couldn't understand him either....

[BA to the Stars]

If you are going to pick a batting replacement for Collingwood (his bowling contribution in test cricket would preclude from being classed as a genuine all rounder (such as Kallis or Flintoff), then instead of Broad you would look at a genuine batsman. Potential candidates would include Key (Kent), Shah (Middlesex) or Bopara (Essex). Selection of any of these may mean adjusting the batting order, for example Key would probably bat at 3, meaning that Vaughan would move down the order.

It is just a shame that Broad was not taking wickets (as he was selected primarily as a bowler).

[oracleslave]

Agreed - Broad has an unfortunate habit of scoring runs

Doesn't mean he should sub for an out and out batsmen, a proven run-scorer, an exciting talent and young up and comer....like Collingwood though.

Seriously though for me the verdict is still out on Broad. Let's see how many runs he gets in the sub-continent etc before touting him as good enough a batsmen to be picked on that basis alone.