South Africa v England, 1st Test, Centurion, Dec 16-20

Just over a week away, so may as well get this thread going. I'm excited about this series. It will be a big indicator as to where England stands and what their ambitions are after having regained the ashes. England v South Africa always produces close, tough cricket. As I start this thread the warm up match hasn't occured yet, and there are a few injury clouds hanging over the bowlers. If everyone is fully fit for England, i'd go with-

Strauss(c)
Cook
Trott
Pietersen
Collingwood
Bell
Prior+
Broad
Swann
Anderson
Onions

As it is, I think they'll go with 5 bowlers, mainly because at least one of them is likely to go into the test not quite 100% fit. I pray to God that it's Bell and not Trott that misses out to accomodate the 5th bowler, who imo should be Plunkett (because he takes wickets, and he can hold the bat down at number nine, and Sidebottom has lacked penetration for almost 2 years now)


Thoughts?

Sidebottom is 'ironically' doubtful with a side injury.

Anderson is by no means definite.

Bell will get f*cked off faster than a Russell Brand conquest. Unless Cook can't play.

Don't be so sure re Bell. Remember he made a "fighting, vital" 50 odd at the Oval. The selectors love him. They just can't help themselves. Forget Trott's match winning second innings century and the fact that he's continued to impress in the ODI team. Just remember Belly's reasonably important 50 odd in the first innings.

The c*nts.

Injuries excepted SA will probably look like this

Smith
Prince
Amla
Kallis
De Villiers
Duminy
Boucher
Harris
Morkel
Steyn
Ntini.

Henry wrote:Don't be so sure re Bell. Remember he made a "fighting, vital" 50 odd at the Oval. The selectors love him. They just can't help themselves. Forget Trott's match winning second innings century and the fact that he's continued to impress in the ODI team. Just remember Belly's reasonably important 50 odd in the first innings.

The c*nts.

Whilst I agree with you on most you have written, I think that Trott is so "KP fried flavour of the month" that it will not matter what Ian Ronald Bell has done. Unless they get rid of Colly, but he's in the team for his fielding and his spirit. Plus his gentle dobbers as a fill-in.

Another option is for them to open with Trott and SACK. COOK. NOW!

But Cook is now the vice captain. He's seen as FEC shit. Don't think he'll be dropped just yet.

Henry wrote:Another option is for them to open with Trott and SACK. COOK. NOW!

But Cook is now the vice captain. He's seen as FEC shit. Don't think he'll be dropped just yet.

No, but you're right. He needs a f*cking massive dropping. What has he actually done? Not only does he not score runs, he makes us struggle whilst he's at the crease. It's not like there is a plethora of openers to take his spot, but I'd suggest that even Ian Bell could make more runs than him.

Brass Monkey wrote:

Henry wrote:Another option is for them to open with Trott and SACK. COOK. NOW!

But Cook is now the vice captain. He's seen as FEC shit. Don't think he'll be dropped just yet.

No, but you're right. He needs a f*cking massive dropping. What has he actually done? Not only does he not score runs, he makes us struggle whilst he's at the crease. It's not like there is a plethora of openers to take his spot, but I'd suggest that even Ian Bell could make more runs than him.

Oh you were doing so well until then....

The bit that infuriates me about Cook is that he's got such obvious flaws in his game. OK, sure, most players do, but you can usually see them working on it and minimising the problem. Cook goes away, apparently works hard, comes back and gets out in exactly the same way over and over again. But I guess he "averages over 40" so he's OK.

Even in the T20 game he was edging through where 2nd slip would have been in a test. Is he physically incapable of bending his right leg when driving the ball?

Shoeshine wrote:
Oh you were doing so well until then....

The bit that infuriates me about Cook is that he's got such obvious flaws in his game. OK, sure, most players do, but you can usually see them working on it and minimising the problem. Cook goes away, apparently works hard, comes back and gets out in exactly the same way over and over again. But I guess he "averages over 40" so he's OK.

Whilst I vehemently agree with you that Ian Bell is a pencil-cock and not worth even low sodium salt, I have grown to have even more immense disdain for Cook. When he scores runs, he scores them slow enough not to harm the opposition. When he doesn't, he adds nothing anyway. Bell would at least hit a few of the gaps early up. Don't get me wrong, I'd pick Cook to bat for my life in front of Bell. Just not at the minute in the Test match arena. I'd be happy for Cook if he proved me wrong, but he hasn't learnt so far as you have mentioned.

There's a terrible choice for you though: you need to select someone to bat for your life and you can only have Cook or Bell...

Bloody Collingwood, hiding away when you need him.

I don't have any problem with his scoring rate - he's an opener, and there are plenty of strokemakers in the side - you need a balance. I also like the combination of him and Strauss in that you have to bowl different lengths to them, but his endless soft dismissals to the same damn ball just drive me up the wall. But at least he has some guts. Bell is just softness personified.

How about bumping Collingwood up to number 3, KP at 4 and Trott, Prior, Broad to follow.

DJ_Smerk wrote:How about bumping Collingwood up to number 3, KP at 4 and Trott, Prior, Broad to follow.

I suggested batting Collingwood at three before the ashes series, but they chose Bopara to bat there ahead of him, so I don't think Colly will ever bat in that position for England.

I still reckon they'll do anything they can to try and squeeze Bell into the side, even if it means sacking some hard working pressure performer with 2 kids and a mortgage to pay.

Drop a bowler, "so and so has a niggle", so we've decided to play Bell as the extra batsman to bolster the lower order.

Shoey, it's not like I want him to score quickly. My problem is that, if Strauss isn't scoring, that we then get into the problem where we could've batted for a session and a half with no wickets lost, only be 100 on the board and next thing you know it's 130/4.

Smerks - TBH, with Collingwood, he'd be more likely to have to deal with the vagaries of the new ball - it's not like he can't bat in difficult situations, just that the new cherry seems to be his enemy more than most.