• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state with some features missing, normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Anderson finished?

Anthly said:
Couldn’t agree more. Makes you wonder who actually picks the team.
Click to expand...

There has been an element of Stokes picking who he wants. Bairstow and Ali as an example were Stokes picks where using Bairstow, he was woefully undercooked and did not get going until this last test. It may have been 1-1 playing the third test if Foakes had been given the gloves for the first two tests with Bairstow getting game time for Yorkshire. It would have put the wind up Foakes to play even better whilst Bairstow could have been bought in with more cricket behind him mis series
 

essex boy said:
There has been an element of Stokes picking who he wants. Bairstow and Ali as an example were Stokes picks where using Bairstow, he was woefully undercooked and did not get going until this last test. It may have been 1-1 playing the third test if Foakes had been given the gloves for the first two tests with Bairstow getting game time for Yorkshire. It would have put the wind up Foakes to play even better whilst Bairstow could have been bought in with more cricket behind him mis series
Click to expand...

What was certainly daft was playing a test against Ireland where Bairstow did not bat. That said, Bairstow did get going in the first test but needlessly threw his wicket away by running down the pitch to the spinner when he’d been playing him beautifully from the crease.

Asking him to keep and bat after the injury he had was / has been daft IMO. As was asking Ali to bowl as many overs as he did first test despite having little red ball practise. An unenviable task.

We’ve made quite a few strategic mistakes and team selection was questionable in the first two tests. Bairstow, Robinson and Anderson were all coming back from injuries, Stokes clearly wasn’t able to bowl and Ali hadn’t bowled for donkeys. And Ireland was our prep with a couple of lads playing in it who’ve not had much of a look in since.
 
Sea to Shining Sea said:
What was certainly daft was playing a test against Ireland where Bairstow did not bat. That said, Bairstow did get going in the first test but needlessly threw his wicket away by running down the pitch to the spinner when he’d been playing him beautifully from the crease.

Asking him to keep and bat after the injury he had was / has been daft IMO. As was asking Ali to bowl as many overs as he did first test despite having little red ball practise. An unenviable task.

We’ve made quite a few strategic mistakes and team selection was questionable in the first two tests. Bairstow, Robinson and Anderson were all coming back from injuries, Stokes clearly wasn’t able to bowl and Ali hadn’t bowled for donkeys. And Ireland was our prep with a couple of lads playing in it who’ve not had much of a look in since.
Click to expand...

I would also question if England should have played host to the World Test Championship a week before the first Ashes test giving Australia a much better warm up than what England got. Why not tell them to play it after the Ashes
 
essex boy said:
I would also question if England should have played host to the World Test Championship a week before the first Ashes test giving Australia a much better warm up than what England got. Why not tell them to play it after the Ashes
Click to expand...

I suppose it was scheduled for then regardless of who was due to play? I’m not sure.

In 2005 we were undercooked after in the first test match after playing very poor opposition prior
 
Sea to Shining Sea said:
I suppose it was scheduled for then regardless of who was due to play? I’m not sure.

In 2005 we were undercooked after in the first test match after playing very poor opposition prior
Click to expand...

So we are not learning our lessons. We always seem undercooked whenever we start an Ashes series

England should have realized there was a good chance Australia would be in it though and played their hand accordingly. Would Australia play host to the world test championship a week before an Ashes series. Can you imagine England going into Brisbane having played a test match a week before, our performance should in theory be far better
 
Last edited:
listening to Harmy on the radio, he thinks that Jimmy should be given a send off at the Oval next week, and i tend to agree, no point keeping him hanging on to play against New Zealand next year in the winter & a few home tests next summer, He's 41 no matter how fit he keeps himself he cant go on forever.

it feels like making a decision on putting a dog down, but i think its proabably time to go out on his own terms rather than just hanging on and eventually getting dropped
 
If you listen to this with Vaughan and Mcgrath will the SMB tell Vaughan he is being too critical?

You must be logged on to see external links
 
essex boy said:
If you listen to this with Vaughan and Mcgrath will the SMB tell Vaughan he is being too critical?

You must be logged on to see external links
Click to expand...
Vaughan had been discussed to death on here. Knows his cricket but does anything for controversy and clicks. In the Lords test he was spontaneously combusting against England taking on the short ball and when Aus were defending it trying to get out the way he was slagging them off for not being aggressive.
 
There's no way Jimmy should play at the Oval. Both Tongue (my pick) and Robinson are in far better form.

He's had his swan song at his home ground when he shouldn't have been picked!
 
SAFC 2012 said:
Nice to see a lot of the England faithful throw jimmy to the dogs after the career he’s had and one shit series.

Typical really.
Click to expand...
There has got to be a certain element of realism though.

He can't go on forever and England has to look to the future. Looking at the future will inevitably involve looking at the oldest member of the oldest seam quartet England has fielded since before the Great Depression.
 
SAFC 2012 said:
Nice to see a lot of the England faithful throw jimmy to the dogs after the career he’s had and one shit series.

Typical really.
Click to expand...
Wankers the lot of them. As mentioned before if an old player has a poor game or two that means they are ‘finished’ when in many cases they have just had a poor game. I remember Alec Stewart in his 30s getting similar treatment with ‘his eyes have gone’ type comments after a poor run and then went on to have one of the best spells of his career. Maybe it is time for Jimmy he will know himself when the time is right and might not want to continue banging the ball half way down or bowling without sufficient rests. He will certainly have a better idea than the knee jerk, know nowts on this thread.
 
stapler said:
There has got to be a certain element of realism though.

He can't go on forever and England has to look to the future. Looking at the future will inevitably involve looking at the oldest member of the oldest seam quartet England has fielded since before the Great Depression.
Click to expand...
I agree the time for him to retire probably is here but some of the remarks people are making are madness

There’s some looper on here saying he should have been dropped when he was 30 😂😂
 
Keith S30S said:
There's no way Jimmy should play at the Oval. Both Tongue (my pick) and Robinson are in far better form.

He's had his swan song at his home ground when he shouldn't have been picked!
Click to expand...
Woakes apparently has an injury, Broad surely needs a rest and I’m not sure it’s worth risking Woody
 
SAFC 2012 said:
I agree the time for him to retire probably is here but some of the remarks people are making are madness

There’s some looper on here saying he should have been dropped when he was 30 😂😂
Click to expand...
Well I'm not one of them. But I think we need to take stock of our aging attack and start bringing the next generation through. One of England's biggest issues in the past (with bat and ball) is to become over-reliant on an aging group, watching them all retire at about the same time, and then having no experience to guide the younger players.
 
stapler said:
Well I'm not one of them. But I think we need to take stock of our aging attack and start bringing the next generation through. One of England's biggest issues in the past (with bat and ball) is to become over-reliant on an aging group, watching them all retire at about the same time, and then having no experience to guide the younger players.
Click to expand...
I agree I just think he deserves to be shown a little bit more respect than he’s being shown by a lot of the fans like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top