Has Chris Tremlett got an international future..?

Question

I remember that he was 12th man in 4 out 5 of the 2005 Ashes series tests. He has been 12th man for most of the the matches against NZ and against South Africa too

BUT

After being 12th man for so long, will the selectors actually give Tremlett a prolonged run in the side, seeing as the unknown Darren Pattinson leapfrogged him in the pecking order! Plus there's Harmison, Hoggard, Mahmood, Jones, Plunkett etc! waiting in the wings.

Will Tremlett ever be an England regular?

Do the selectors even believe Tremlett is good enough? If YES why hasnt he be given a chance? If NO why is he the 12th man?

A bit of good news for Tremlett is that Brett Lee was 12th man, something like 12 times before he got a run in the side! and now look at him!

Answer 1

they brought him in against India ,,,i think because of his height and bounce ,,.,but he didn't really do that good imo ,,hes a bit like a gentle giant ..i personally cant see him charging in creating to much fear ,,id go with a fully fit Harmison over him

im trying to remember it was such along time ago i think he don well at first .....getting a few top wickets  but i think the batsmen worked him out towards the latter stages if i remember rightly  

kookee ,,you can correct me as i cant remember that well

.

Answer 2

While he may not have an international future I cannot recall a Darren Pattinson.

Answer 3

You may be right KooKee, Lee spent 18 months carrying the drinks & he has certainly held his own since coming back. Times like these I think England should give everything a try, it can't hurt & it may well be just what the doctor ordered as they say.

Answer 4

Selectors are unable to decide whether or not chris Tremlett is good enough to represent England but keep giving chances to other lowly performers. It is only my computer programme that has identified him as the best performer as per the following ratings it has provided based on test match performances in the last year("form"). The numbers represent relative performances on 0-100 scale, 100 being the best (Brett Lee).

(1) Tremlett (74.8) (2) Anderson (73.6) (3) Sidebottom (68) (4) Panesar (47.9) (5) Hoggard (40.7) (6) Broad (40.3) (7) Harmison (36) (8) Collingwood (14.9) (9) Bopara (5.8) (10) Vaughan (0.1).

Selectors need a programme like mine to be able to judge the differences. Number of wickets per match, economy of bowling and the amount of bowling per match are measured in a relative manner in my system to give these performances a number to easily identify potential.

Tremlett showed enormous potential, not recognised by selectors. But then, we can't blame selectors as they do not have the help of my computer to decide the best team. Even now, they can bring in Tremlett.

Answer 5

As everyone has said the surprising thing about Tremlett was that he was selected as Sidebottom's backup but when Sidebottom was ruled out the selectors bizarrely preferred Pattinson.

I can only guess that one of the selectors just doesn't rate in. After performing well against India, Broad was chosen ahead of him for Sri Lanka. Broad took one wicket in one Test but was still chosen for the NZ tour ahead of Tremlett. It doesn't quite make sense to me.

The only explanation I've heard for Pattinson's selection was he was the right horse for the right course. If that was the selectors reasoning then it leaves Pattinson and Hoggard international careers pretty much dead.

Of the other names I can't see Mahmood or Plunkett being selected in the near future which leaves Harmison and Jones who have both been in superb form this season. When/If Harmy gets a chance it will surely be his last, the selectors really should know better by now. Jones won't be rushed for this summer but is likely to be selected for the winter tours if he stays fit.

So will Tremlett ever be an England regular, probably not there's equally good players who's faces fit, but he's 26 so there will be chances of playing Test cricket for the next five years +, and if he gets in then you never know. Few people could see Anderson being an England regular 6 months ago.

Answer 6

I don't think he has an international future. The slectors can't decide whether he is good enough or not, so keep picking him in squads, but then leaving him out of the final eleven, because they always find someone who is better.

The Darren Pattinson selection is a huge kick in the teeth for all young English fast bowlers.

As to the Brett Lee example: Lee was already an established member of the Australian elven, he was left out originally through injury, and then couldn't get his place back because the person who took his place did so well.

If Tremlett was good enough, he would be in the team now. Clearly, he isn't.