Harmison (and Broad!) Left Out Of England Squad?

Question

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/7527925.stm

And Collingwood has been recalled! He's gotten a little bit of form back in the ODI game for his county but I still think he could struggle in the Tests. It might have been better to see how he performs in the 4 day game for Durham just to make sure he has his game back to somewhere near international standards.

I'm surprised that Harmison was left out, they hyped him up so much I thought his inclusion would be guaranteed. Though his being left out has more to do with the pitch at Edgbaston not being right for his type of bowling, apparently it won't be bouncy enough there.

Broad has been out of sorts for a few games now so I'm not really surprised that he was dropped, he's been going for a few too many runs lately. But he has the potential to be a great bowler so I expect to see him back in the not too distant future.

Anyway, what are your thoughts on the squad?

Answer 1

The recall of Collingwood is the correct one. He should never have been left out in the first place. Yes, he was badly out of form, and I am not Collingwood's biggest fan. But I am of the belief that you only drop your top players when there is no other alternative, and their careers at that level are to all intents and purposes finished.

Collingwood has struggled for form for some time, but I think he paid the price for Vaughan's poor form, and the 199 scored by Bell. Had Bell failed, he may well have been the one to make way, which again would have been an erroneous decision.

England had too short a batting line-up once Collingwood was left out. Ambrose is not a good enough batsman to bat at six, and Flintoff has never been a real number six. His best position is number seven. Six is too responsible a position for his batting style.

I take your point about seeing how Collingwood performed in a 4 day game, and once dropped, this is the path the England selectos should have followed. It seems a little pointless to me to drop a player for poor form, tell him to regain it, and then bring him back in before he's had a chance to do so! It is a sign of a muddled selection policy.

I agree with the decision to leave Harmison out. In my opinion, he should never have been picked, and his axing in New Zealand was something that had been a long time coming. He has only performed sporadically since 2004, and this is unacceptable at international level. The only way his waywardness could be accommodated would be if he had a red-hot bowling attack alongside him that constantly fired on all cylinders. Sadly, England's bowliing resources are somewhat fragile, so the mis-firing Hrmison was not someone who could be carried.

I feel that Harmison's selection in the squad is another sign of a muddled selection policy. The final eleven is decided by the captain and coach, with some input from the selectors. This at least, is what Geoff Miller was saying on Saturday. So it appears Miller and his cohorts wnated Harmison in the team, but Vaughan and Moores think differently. I don't accept the explanation being put out that it is not Harmison's type of pitch. If they really believed in him, it would be irrelevant what the pitch was like. He has been left out because Vaughan has no faith in him. Also, if only four bowlers are to be picked, then would you really pick Harmison ahead of Anderson (who has been brilliant this summer - and I use the term 'summer' loosely, as it is hammering down outside, the sky is pich black, thunder is rumbling, and I have sen a flash of lightning!), Sidebottom, who has been our best bowler all year, or Panesar, our leading spin bowler.

The selection of Harmsion was a mistake from start to finish. Luckily, they have seen sense and left him out. Broad was looking very tired, and needs a break. His batting has kept him in the team recently, but his bowling was starting to become a liability. He should be given a month off from all cricket, and brought back recharged for the ODI series.

I think the squad is as strong as it possibly can be. There are worries over Vaughan's form, and questions have to be asked over his place in the side, as his captaincy alone is keeping him in. Owais Shah is waiting to take his place, and I think Rob Key would make a good England captain (or is that a bit leftfield?). Bell needs to start performing consistently, not just on flat tracks once Pietersen has shown the way. Ambrose is under a lot of pressure, as his 'keeping is decent-ish for a county player, but is not at international standard yet. However, he is a young player, and that position has been messed about with far too much (you know I'll post a question about this at some stage, backed up with lots of facts and figures!), so I would let Ambrose keep his place for a while, unpopular though this may be.

I think England have the capability to beat South Africa, but they need all their players to perform, not just a few.

And hey, it's just stopped raining, and the sun is trying to come out!

Answer 2

Sure

Answer 3

Stuart Broad is the best test match player of England currently. In the last 8 matches he played, he scored 371 runs in 9 innings (average 40.1). He bowled 1,746 balls, conceded 938 runs and captured 19 wickets. He also took 4 catches.

This performance is that of a genuine all rounder. If we measure the worth of all these performances, I feel that he is the best test match player of England as of now. But then, he has been dropped !

How does Stuart Broad compare with Collingwood in tests ?

Batting: Broad - 43%       Collingwood: 38.2%

Bowling: Broad - 37%      Collingwood: 13.9%

Fielding: Broad - 9.7%     Collingwood: 23.6%

Overall: Broad - 58.7%    Collingwood: 40.3%

Now, we know what blunder England has done.

Stephen Harmison is being recalled for sentimental reasons. During the last one year, he played 3 test matches, bowled 617 balls, conceded 336 runs and took 7 wickets. This is not an acceptable performance at all. He also scored 10 runs and took 0 catches. Fortunately, he is not there in the team or else England's loss would be even more pronounced.

England will lose this match. I give SAF 100 marks and England 89.

Answer 4

im surprised about harmison drop, but not of broad..hes not a good bowler i think so; he is useful in odis but not good in test..

Answer 5

harmison should have played

Answer 6

What is wrong with the English selectors??

Answer 7

yeah surely a good move.

Answer 8

I am shocked, but it does actually make sense.

The obvious reason why England have gone in with 6 batsmen, is because the conditions are bowler friendly and England dont want there weak batting line-up to be exposed! so they have chosen to pack everyone in there and challenge SA to bowl them out!

Broad being dropped, wasnt a suprise to anyone, not only is he not match-fit anymore, but he isnt doing his primary job in the England side, which is to take wickets. Some people were saying that Broad should bat at 6 ahead of Flintoff & Ambrose, well i think thats ludicrious!!! He's a talented batsmen for sure, but he's not ready to be thrown to the lions at 6 just yet!!

It was always going to be Collingwood vs Harmison, and seriously i thought Harmison was going to win. England need 20 wickets in the test match!! Can they do it with a 4 man attack? many people think not.

The decision is the correct one though because the conditions dont suit Harmison, the pitch is more suitable to swing bowlers, rather than the hit the pitch Harmison kind.

The question is, whats the point in playing Harmison, if he is only going to be played in matches/series that suit his type of bowling!! That doesnt make sense!! If Harmison is going to be considered for every match that suits his type of bowling, but dropped for every match that is swing friendly, then surely the England selectors have no sense of building for the long term. Sajid Mahmood would have been dangerous on this pitch! He can swing the ball at great pace, and produce devastating bouncers and yorkers (kind of like Steyn) BUT nooo Harmison was picked! because the selectors wanted to make Harmison feel like he was still part of the team!!

The fact is Harmison will play in the 4th test at The Oval, The Oval pitch has always had pace & bounce, so Harmy will go there and probably take a lot of wickets. BUT does that actually help England?? The next tour is against India on lifeless pitches in steaming hot conditions!! Do England even take Harmison on that tour, well the arguement would be that if Harmison takes lets say 10 wickets against SA at The Oval then how could you drop him?? Harmison hates touring!! and he is an average bowler on a pitch that doesnt suit his style! England have no long term thoughts under Peter Moores!!

Harmison rant over!

Although i prefer Owais Shah to Paul Collingwood, i do believe for "Team England" bringing back Collingwood and not another batsmen is the right choice. Collingwood is a good player, but has found it tough in swinging conditions before, his technique is poor, and he could be exposed again?

Hopefully it will spin for Monty! because we need Monty to take about a third of the wickets in this match!! Monty can be dangerous on a track that spins! and supposedly because of the hot weather, the pitch will crack later on so if Monty fires and England win the toss and choose to bat then England can win!!