You really are a fool

If the number of overs bowled by the scheduled close is, say, ten short of the required number, take the number of runs scored in the ten most expensive overs of the day and add this to the batting team's total. That should do the trick!

Two years ago in a championship match at The Oval I saw Shane Warne & Shaun Udal bowl 23 overs in an hour for Hampshire against Surrey. It can be done, and it really put pressure on the batting team to have so little time to compose themselves between deliveries and overs. Obviously fast bowlers can't bowl at that rate, but if fielding teams are proactive it can actually work in their favour to sustain a high tempo.

I think it's Sidebottom who replaced Jimmy isn't it? Not the best decision if you ask me...a) Sidebottom hasn't played for months and b) Jimmy offers more IMO...I'll admit I'm biaised as I watch Jimmy bowl on a regular basis.

Good to see Broad get his first 5 fer as well...now if only that Flintoff chap could get a few of them too

Harmison was also brought back after being dropped for the final Test in India. Swann & Anderson were both dropped for this one with Sidebottom & Harmison both recalled.

Not only that, but Sidebottom didn't offer anything in the games before he got injured.

I'm pleased for Broad.

...and normal service is resumed by he England top order, 11-2 at lunch with Cook and Bell both out cheaply just before the break.

Exactly...it always seems to be Jimmy who's the fall guy (Stanford game, this test) and he's always going to have this "he's inconsistent" tag stuck unfairly to him...he's been, IMO, our best test bowler this past 12 months...maybe its because he's so quiet and such a good team man that he accepts it better than certain others who quit international one day cricket and such...mentioning no names



An interesting stat from sky earlier...Flintoff has 2 test 5 fers from 127 innings'...Monty has 8 from 61 innings'

I hate it when folk bring that up, for loads of different reasons, especially as he must have tens of 4 'fors' as he's one of theose bowlers. Add to that the pressure he builds, bowlers at the other end benefit from that but his figures don't. I used to work with a bloke who used to bring that up all the time to back up his argument that we 'wouldn't miss him'.

We need a Bothamesque Flintoff knock.

23/5.

Absolute e.

Make that six.

I love the way its so easy to have a pop at them

26/7

No one in double figures yet.

...and Vaughn isn't good enough to get into this squad?

last time we were in the windies - he didn't look like he could get the ball off the square, so yes, he'd fit in nicely.

Fork in hell.

51 All out

Grief. That was not part of the plan.

What do England do next ? The squad doesn't give you too many options to change things around. Do they even want to ?

Bell > Shah

After that ? You could make a decent case to drop half a dozen of them, not a knee jerker like, I mean if you looked at their records over the last say 18 mths.

Cook > Nobody in the squad.

Where are the 'Development Squad/England 'A'/Whatever they are called right now', where are they now, Loughborough ? Can you call any of them up ? Should you ?

Cook > Key/Denly ??
Colly > Bopara
Harmison > Amjad Khan ??
Sidebottom > Anderson
Panesar > Rashid/Swann (FWIW - I thought Monty bowled better all told, beat the beat etc, just didn't get rewards)

Just to clairfy, I'm not suggesting all of these will/should get dropped, just looking at what they could do, options they have etc.

I think they'll go with the same, maybe Shah for Bell, it's very much the England way, give the guys the opportunity to put things right.

Hmmm... turned it off when England went into bat expecting to watch around now. How does a team get bowled for 51 though when you have 2 players worth £1m each

So annoying, In commentary they were sort of excusing it, going on about how well Taylor had bowled. Fair enough like, the KP delivery was pretty much unplayable, especially that early in your innings, but I sat there thinking,

"Would South Africa be 26/7 ?, Would they fook."

The worst possible start for Struass. Well, nearly, 7 runs better that.

There won't be any kneejerk reactions with people being brought in from outside the original squad. Swann & Rashid won't be brought in unless the next pitch is conducive to using a second spinner. Shah might get in for either Bell or Collingwood; Anderson might get in for Sidebottom or Harmison, but I suspect not.

At least Prior & Broad enhanced their reputations in positions we've had difficulty filling in recent years. Let's hope they can both kick on from here.

There'll probably be wholesale changes in the bowling unit (who didn't do a great deal wrong) and zero changes in the batting line-up (who did). It's the England way.

How many more chances can Bell get?

I think that could be the last chance and could signal the end. 51 runs against an average bowling attack is shambolic. Cook's place could be under threat also, IMO.

Well that came out of nowhere, 300+ 400+ to 51?

Absolutely pathetic effort from England, no excuses whatsoever for a collapse like that.

I've lost patience with Bell, too. We've given him so much time, but he just persists in giving his wicket away cheaply, he's so inconsistent and I just can't see him becoming a top test batsman. I hope they bringe somebody in now (Shah, maybe?) so they can have their chance to settle for the ashes, but persisting with Bell clearly isn't reaping any rewards, how much longer can they persist with the blind faith?