• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Adil Rashid

Status
Not open for further replies.

brandon said:
To be fair, Samit is streets ahead of Dawson. In fact, I'd go as far as to say if Samit had got himself in shape he'd have enjoyed a fantastic England career.
Click to expand...
Not sure Samit is test quality - neither of his disciplines are enough to warrant him a place in the side - never been a fan of these "bits and pieces cricketers" that we have picked over the years.
Going back to the OP, I agree that Rashid has done enough to warrant getting a test series at home - he's played 10 tests, all in the sub-continent against players highly experienced in those conditions and has taken 38 wickets @ 42.78 and an economy rate of 3.83. Hardly the worst stats. Yes he will bowl the odd full toss, but most leggies do, it's a very, very difficult art to master
 
TopCat said:
Not sure Samit is test quality - neither of his disciplines are enough to warrant him a place in the side - never been a fan of these "bits and pieces cricketers" that we have picked over the years.
Going back to the OP, I agree that Rashid has done enough to warrant getting a test series at home - he's played 10 tests, all in the sub-continent against players highly experienced in those conditions and has taken 38 wickets @ 42.78 and an economy rate of 3.83. Hardly the worst stats. Yes he will bowl the odd full toss, but most leggies do, it's a very, very difficult art to master
Click to expand...

I'd say those stats are fairly worrying in the sub continent and they're probably why he's not selected. Not so much the average, more the economy rate. If your spinner isn't taking wickets and is going at just about 4 an over, test matches will get away from you.

Still better than Dawson though. As is Patel. He'd be in the squad but for his approach to the game IMO
 
The Sheepfolds End said:
I'd say those stats are fairly worrying in the sub continent and they're probably why he's not selected. Not so much the average, more the economy rate. If your spinner isn't taking wickets and is going at just about 4 an over, test matches will get away from you.

Still better than Dawson though. As is Patel. He'd be in the squad but for his approach to the game IMO
Click to expand...
I think the fact he's playing in spinning conditions, but against players who are used to the ball spinning sideways from teh first day they held a bat should be taken into account. I'm pretty sure Rashid would have taken wickets at Lords. In any case, this isn't a Dawson-bashing post, I just think Rashid deserves a chance to see what he can do in England before he is ruled out from test cricket
 
brandon said:
I'm a Rashid fan, I'd have him at 8 pretty much regardless of form/conditions. Always liked a leggie in any side and he's a better prospect with the bat than Dawson.
Click to expand...

My thoughts entirely. He's come on leaps and bounds since he first burst on the scene. He's pretty much the best shorter format English bowler atm. So why not keep him in the test side? Especially as his last series was really good.

I'm totally baffled why they left him out. I'm actually disappointed in Root for not sticking up for him homey.

TopCat said:
Not sure Samit is test quality - neither of his disciplines are enough to warrant him a place in the side - never been a fan of these "bits and pieces cricketers" that we have picked over the years.
Going back to the OP, I agree that Rashid has done enough to warrant getting a test series at home - he's played 10 tests, all in the sub-continent against players highly experienced in those conditions and has taken 38 wickets @ 42.78 and an economy rate of 3.83. Hardly the worst stats. Yes he will bowl the odd full toss, but most leggies do, it's a very, very difficult art to master
Click to expand...

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks this. My mate says he bowls the odd bad ball and relieves any pressure. I say that's leggies for you. He's an attacking threat.

I can't believe we have been that shady with him that he hasn't played a test as home.

The Sheepfolds End said:
I'd say those stats are fairly worrying in the sub continent and they're probably why he's not selected. Not so much the average, more the economy rate. If your spinner isn't taking wickets and is going at just about 4 an over, test matches will get away from you.

Still better than Dawson though. As is Patel. He'd be in the squad but for his approach to the game IMO
Click to expand...

Countered by the fact that he's facing the best players of spin on their home patch. He took 23 wickets in India series. Not even Warne did that iirc

I like him. I want him to play all three formats for England for years
 
Last edited:
ProfessionalMackem said:
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks this. My mate says he bowls the odd bad ball and relieves any pressure. I say that's leggies for you. He's an attacking threat.

I can't believe we have been that shady with him that he hasn't played a test as home.
Click to expand...
When I played, I switched to off spin for the last couple of seasons. I tried bowling some leg spin for a few overs and it's a bloody hard way to bowl and land the same spot 2 or 3 times in a row
 
We already have Ali who can bat and bowl At 8

Don't need Rashid or Dawson
 
ProfessionalMackem said:
okay so say we need two proper spinners? is ali and root sufficient? plus if we get a stable batting lineup, do you think we can ever afford the luxury of a good class leggie who has scored centuries?
Click to expand...

Why would we need 2 spinners?

We don't play in Asia for years

Absolutely not

We need a proper top 5 with stokes, bairstow n Ali at 6,7,8

No idea why we ever changed it
 
DaveAngel said:
Why would we need 2 spinners?

We don't play in Asia for years

Absolutely not

We need a proper top 5 with stokes, bairstow n Ali at 6,7,8

No idea why we ever changed it
Click to expand...
Its not that we don't need two spinners its that we don't need 6 bowlers. Even with 5 bowlers the 5th bowler can be a bit of a spare part. If conditions dictate you play 2 spinners then you only need 3 seamers.
The simple fact is England are going through a phase where their bowling attack is a bit limited unless their is helpfull conditions and they are trying to cover all bases with numbers rather than quality.
 
wayne entwhistle no9 said:
Its not that we don't need two spinners its that we don't need 6 bowlers. Even with 5 bowlers the 5th bowler can be a bit of a spare part. If conditions dictate you play 2 spinners then you only need 3 seamers.
The simple fact is England are going through a phase where their bowling attack is a bit limited unless their is helpfull conditions and they are trying to cover all bases with numbers rather than quality.
Click to expand...

Spot on
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bri
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top