Test and One day squads announced. No Harmison or Monty is either. Wright called into the Test squad along with Plunkett. news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket ... 294143.stm

Test and One day squads announced. No Harmison or Monty is either. Wright called into the Test squad along with Plunkett. news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket ... 294143.stm

Not too bothered about Plunkett being called up as I think he's a good player and offers a bit more depth batting-wise than any of the other alternatives (Mahmood, Woakes etc) but Luke Wright??? In the test squad??? Good lord!!

No Harmison?!! But he got two tail enders out in the last Ashes test, this is an outrage.

Don't panic Asim, the minute one of the quicks gets a bit of a twinge he'll be in the papers saying how he's ready to go and would relish the chance to claim his place back.

He's Trescothick Lite. At least Tres had the knackers to make a difficult decision and stick to it.

Harmison would of been a lot better option than Plunkett. Just shows how far our young seamers have got to go. Tremlett,Mahmood, Plunkett have all been given chances and been found wanted id have Harmison in before any of them

Plunkett is a miles better option than Harmison for numerous reasons...I think Harmison sealed his own fate with his "pick me and play me" ultimatum and, thankfully, the England selectors have refused to countenance him. Good riddance I say.

yeah in that respect but talent wise Harmison is a much better bowler than Plunkett even in the form he's in. Anything happens to Anderson and we probably have 1 of the weakest bowling attacks in the world

Harmison's got 4 kids at home. He probably just wanted some bloody time off.

Its all rather dependent on how fit Pietersen is - otherwise that batting line-up looks decidedly lightweight. The bowling looks alright, although Anderson needs to pull his finger out.

Plunkett is a much improved bowler from the slightly raw youngster of 3 years ago. Even back then, he demonstrated a canny ability to bowl swinging, wicket-taking deliveries.

Luke Wright is merely back up for Stuart Broad, but is showing signs of becoming more than just a useful ODI player. I would imagine the coaching regime want to work with him as much as possible, so taking him on a test tour is a good idea.

No Harmison? About chuffing time.

At least we have got Plunkett in the side, he will kill it with his wonderful control after all he outplayed Harmison in CC didn't he, didn't he?

Why the hell has Luke Wright made it into the Test side? He has done okay in the OD side but nothing more than that.Would have rather had Bopara than Wright and I also don't see why Shah missed out on the OD squad and they picked bloody Cook

Plunkett - 12 CC matches - 49 wickets @ 24.83 Batting Average 44.44
Harmison - 13 CC matches - 51 wickets @ 22.62 Batting Average 1.77

And in total in all cricket last season....

Plunkett 74 wickets @ 27.09
Harmison 67 wickets @ 26.60


So in one CC game more he got 2 more wickets...not much difference there I'd say...throw in Plunkett's much better abilities with the bat, more athleticism in the field and the fact that he wouldn't be moping around like a wet weekend in Ashington a la Harmison then I can see why the selectors have picked Plunkett ahead of Harmison...and that's without even mentioning Harmison's ultimatum.



I assume Cook is in the ODI due to his end of season one-day form for Essex where he scored a couple of centuries and averaged well over 70.

I can't believe that someone is using control of line and length as an argument for Steve "watch out second slip" Harmison.

Very fair point

Stats for Plunkett are better than I thought, he has certainly improved and maybe he deserves his chance?

Cook in OD cricket I just don't get, as for his centuries, was that in Div 2?

I didn't.

Then I saw these two centuries, both innings were I think a few days apart when I was off and he was very impressive, going over the infield, shots all around the wicket, he was very good.

You sort of saw something, there & then. My issue with him previously was how would he exploit the powerplays, I sort of have changed that now, but obviously ODI will test this out.

Harmison averages over 45 in his last 16 overseas Tests. When someone the wrong side of 30 is no more reliable than that it's time to look for alternatives. Even in his relatively ordinary first spell in Test cricket, when he was picked too soon, Plunkett averages under 40, a similar sort of start that was made by the likes of Broad & Anderson before they went on to establish themselves. Harmison has repeatedly gone back to Durham and produced the goods only to be erratic when recalled by England. For me, especially given his well known dislike of touring, it's time to move on now.

There are a lot of unkown quantities in this Test squad. Four of the 16 (Trott, Davies, Wright and Rashid) have just one Test cap between them, plus another (Plunkett) hasn't been in the team for three years. Yet Wright is the only real suprise choice and the only one I really wouldn't have picked. I don't think he's a good enough fourth seamer; he's a better batsman than bowler and would be more an alternative to Collingwood than to Broad (or replacement for Flintoff) in my view. Hopefully the selectors have seen something they can work with for the future, but I'd rather have seen another batsman chosen who is comfortable in the top 3, logically Joe Denly although maybe Robert Key. It's a dangerous assumption that Trott is a ready made Test cricketer just because he had a wonderful debut in the last match. Remember how quickly the likes of Philip Hughes and Ravi Bopara were exposed when they seemed to have cracked it.

Have you watched any cricket in the last 2 years??