England at the 2015 World Cup.

[D/L]

Monty was highest wicket taker (14 wickets) and least economy rate (2.14) in UAE series and second best average. What else he has to do ...

Not dropping simple catches would be a start. Not being a complete duffer with the bat would be useful too.

[meninblue]

The fact that England are going with two specialist spinners rather than a specialist spinner and part time spinner in some test matches in Asia show that England think tank's approach regarding spinners is changing gradually. Therefore, we might also see two specialist spinners in ODI as well.

Not really we've played two specilist spinners in Asia for quite some time, not that we've won anything with that plan and when we actually played a spinner and a part timer we won a Test!

England will only play two specialist spinners if we have a front line pace bowler who can bat in the top seven.

The spin combination that they have now looks much better than that of the past. With patience and consistency in selection the benefits would be seen.

[Making_Splinters]

The fact that England are going with two specialist spinners rather than a specialist spinner and part time spinner in some test matches in Asia show that England think tank's approach regarding spinners is changing gradually. Therefore, we might also see two specialist spinners in ODI as well.

Not really we've played two specilist spinners in Asia for quite some time, not that we've won anything with that plan and when we actually played a spinner and a part timer we won a Test!

England will only play two specialist spinners if we have a front line pace bowler who can bat in the top seven.

The spin combination that they have now looks much better than that of the past. With patience and consistency in selection the benefits would be seen.

Again not really, Monty was dropped from the side for a reason and he hasn't actually developed or improved as a bowler since then as he showed pretty clearly in Sri Lanka when he bowled basically the same delivery from his first ball to his last and any batsman who was prepared to put a price on their wicket was not going to get out to him.

[meninblue]

Monty was highest wicket taker (14 wickets) and least economy rate (2.14) in UAE series and second best average. What else he has to do ...

Not dropping simple catches would be a start. Not being a complete duffer with the bat would be useful too.

Yes, Monty is not a good fielder. As for the runs from specialist bowlers: When you play 7 batters and still expect number 8 - 11 to contribute shows that people do not have any confidence in their own chosen strategies. If they need both runs as well as wicket from a cricketer then have an all rounder, not a specialist batsman or a specialist bowler. It is better to know the needs first and clearly enough.

[meninblue]

The fact that England are going with two specialist spinners rather than a specialist spinner and part time spinner in some test matches in Asia show that England think tank's approach regarding spinners is changing gradually. Therefore, we might also see two specialist spinners in ODI as well.

Not really we've played two specilist spinners in Asia for quite some time, not that we've won anything with that plan and when we actually played a spinner and a part timer we won a Test!

England will only play two specialist spinners if we have a front line pace bowler who can bat in the top seven.

The spin combination that they have now looks much better than that of the past. With patience and consistency in selection the benefits would be seen.

Again not really, Monty was dropped from the side for a reason and he hasn't actually developed or improved as a bowler since then as he showed pretty clearly in Sri Lanka when he bowled basically the same delivery from his first ball to his last and any batsman who was prepared to put a price on their wicket was not going to get out to him.

You are not considering the fact that he was highest wicket taker in UAE series. If you take out the good form of player then obviously he will look bad.

[Making_Splinters]

The fact that England are going with two specialist spinners rather than a specialist spinner and part time spinner in some test matches in Asia show that England think tank's approach regarding spinners is changing gradually. Therefore, we might also see two specialist spinners in ODI as well.

Not really we've played two specilist spinners in Asia for quite some time, not that we've won anything with that plan and when we actually played a spinner and a part timer we won a Test!

England will only play two specialist spinners if we have a front line pace bowler who can bat in the top seven.

The spin combination that they have now looks much better than that of the past. With patience and consistency in selection the benefits would be seen.

Again not really, Monty was dropped from the side for a reason and he hasn't actually developed or improved as a bowler since then as he showed pretty clearly in Sri Lanka when he bowled basically the same delivery from his first ball to his last and any batsman who was prepared to put a price on their wicket was not going to get out to him.

You are not considering the fact that he was highest wicket taker in UAE series. If you take out the good form of player then obviously he will look bad.

He did not have any variation in the UAE either, Pakistani batsmen tried to attack his defensive lines and got out.

[meninblue]

You are not considering the fact that he was highest wicket taker in UAE series. If you take out the good form of player then obviously he will look bad.

He did not have any variation in the UAE either, Pakistani batsmen tried to attack his defensive lines and got out.

Siddhu and Sehwag attack the spinners much more than Pakistan batsmen in UAE series do. Should we say that spinners who took there wickets were more lucky. In fact Siddhu's was a prize wicket for spinners, so is Sehwags. Shane Warne bowled the leg stump line as well. many batsmen lost their wickets attacking that line. Should we say that he was lucky as well because batsmen attacked. KP attacks the spinners too, but his is most prized English wicket for the spinners.

[Making_Splinters]

You are not considering the fact that he was highest wicket taker in UAE series. If you take out the good form of player then obviously he will look bad.

He did not have any variation in the UAE either, Pakistani batsmen tried to attack his defensive lines and got out.

Siddhu and Sehwag attack the spinners much more than Pakistan batsmen in UAE series do. Should we say that spinners who took there wickets were more lucky. In fact Siddhu's was a prize wicket for spinners, so is Sehwags. Shane Warne bowled the leg stump line as well. many batsmen lost their wickets attacking that line. Should we say that he was lucky as well because batsmen attacked.

Warne has a horrific record in India and home Sehwag is one of the best batsmen in the world.

I didn't say he was lucky i said he has no variation to his bowling.

[meninblue]

You are not considering the fact that he was highest wicket taker in UAE series. If you take out the good form of player then obviously he will look bad.

He did not have any variation in the UAE either, Pakistani batsmen tried to attack his defensive lines and got out.

Siddhu and Sehwag attack the spinners much more than Pakistan batsmen in UAE series do. Should we say that spinners who took there wickets were more lucky. In fact Siddhu's was a prize wicket for spinners, so is Sehwags. Shane Warne bowled the leg stump line as well. many batsmen lost their wickets attacking that line. Should we say that he was lucky as well because batsmen attacked.

Warne has a horrific record in India and home Sehwag is one of the best batsmen in the world.

I didn't say he was lucky i said he has no variation to his bowling.

Monty's wickets from cricinfo. (Second Test)

I don't see any defensive line or lack of variation. He has got those dismissals with stock ball, off stump lines, turners and quicker ones. There are specialist batsmen who have got out to him who play spin since ages of 6 years. Also, Pakistan team has played most in UAE than any other team to know the wicket well. They even know how to take spinners out of attack and get close in fielders away from them. Will have a look at the you tube as well as i missed that test.

Also Swann bowled against same set of batsmen. Further, even batsman cut some strokes and knock a century. it is applauded often citing reasons that eh played according to strengths and weaknesses. When Monty does it, it's just not worth.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/pakistan-v- ... ew=wickets

23.5


Panesar to Mohammad Hafeez, OUT, 87.8 kph, the drop didn't cost anything for England, Panesar bowls the arm ball and Hafeez stays back at the crease and the ball skids through the gap between bat and pad, Hafeez didn't account for the quicker one

11.4


Panesar to Mohammad Hafeez, OUT, 88.9 kph, given out lbw. He was forward and struck on the knee, looked to be going on to hit leg stump and that's what the umpire thinks too. This didn't turn from Panesar and beat Hafeez on the inside edge. He did get a good stride in but they're given out nowadays


Mohammad Hafeez lbw b Panesar 22 (49m 37b 2x4 0x6) SR: 59.45

17.4


Panesar to Younis Khan, OUT, 90.7 kph, the off stump has been felled! Panesar on a roll, the ball lands on the off stump and straigtens, Younis was forward but the ball went straight through, full credit to the bowler for foxing him


Younis Khan b Panesar 1 (14m 14b 0x4 0x6) SR: 7.14

27.5


Panesar to Misbah-ul-Haq, OUT, 87.1 kph, got him Misbah gone! Playing forward, gets one that slides on and strikes Misbah below the knee roll. Referred. Bowden is having a long look at whether it was pad first, looks like it was, or no conclusive proof anyway. Hawk-eye has three reds and the Pakistan skipper has got to go here


Misbah-ul-Haq lbw b Panesar 12 (36m 32b 2x4 0x6) SR: 37.50

69.6


Panesar to Asad Shafiq, OUT, 89.3 kph, gone! Lovely delivery from Panesar turning off a length and a thick edge is taken sharply by Anderson at slip. He has been getting the odd one to turn has Panesar and this leaves the right hander, his forward push produces a good edge and snapped up by Anderson - no mistake this time from Jimmy

97.4


Panesar to Saeed Ajmal, OUT, 88.2 kph, five for Monty! It's another gorgeous delivery that turns away from the right-hander, takes the edge and Anderson bags the simply chance straight to him at slip. The forward lunge produced a good edge and no-one could put that chance down




Saeed Ajmal c Anderson b Panesar 17 (52m 31b 1x4 0x6) SR: 54.83

99.2


Panesar to Junaid Khan, OUT, 88.9 kph, out and that's a mess, a disgusting, selfish hoof across the line from Khan and he's lost his middle stump. No idea where he was going but tried to swing away a full ball over midwicket and middle peg is on the ground


Junaid Khan b Panesar 0 (9m 4b 0x4 0x6) SR: 0.00


Monty's wickets from cricinfo. (Third Test)

35.3


Panesar to Saeed Ajmal, OUT, slider and given out


Saeed Ajmal lbw b Panesar 12 (52m 53b 1x4 0x6) SR: 22.64

39.6


Panesar to Asad Shafiq, OUT, out it was pad first as he backed away trying to cut and was caught bang in front so has to go. Just looking to give himself room but it slid on from Panesar and caught the flap of the back back right in front of middle stump, no doubt for the umpire


Asad Shafiq lbw b Panesar 45 (120m 78b 3x4 0x6) SR: 57.69

130.2


Panesar to Misbah-ul-Haq, OUT, 87.3 kph, Given out lbw, and Misbah refers it. Straight, quick armer from Monty that drifts straight in. Misbah pushes forward with bat and pad very close together. The ball hit him marginally in front of off stump and was crashing into the stumps. Bat first? Pad first? Hot Spot doesn't light up and the referral is struck down. Definitely pad first. A wicket for England, their second of the day.

136.2


Panesar to Asad Shafiq, OUT, 90.4 kph, another one bites the dust. 40 lbws. Golly. Pakistan can't review it. Monty angled it in from over the stumps. Did it pitch outside leg? It straightened as Asad got well across and looked to paddle it. He missed and was hit on the back leg. Was it hitting leg stump? It was clipping leg. And it landed on middle and leg, so that was a fair decision and would have been upheld on review.


Asad Shafiq lbw b Panesar 5 (24m 17b 0x4 0x6) SR: 29.41

138.2


Panesar to Adnan Akmal, OUT, 90.0 kph, Monty's spitting fire with the old ball. He's cleaned up Adnan with a classic left-arm spinner, angles in towards middle and off, dips on a length, grips and straightens past a hopeful forward prod to tickle off stump. Gone for a blob. England will be very worried by the amount of turn on offer now.


Adnan Akmal b Panesar 0 (7m 7b 0x4 0x6) SR: 0.00


152.4


Panesar to Umar Gul, OUT, 87.8 kph, flighted up, big swing towards leg, missed and plumb lbw. Five more for Panesar. Jolly well done Monty, two five-fors in his two comeback matches. Thoroughly deserved after almost 57 overs! A fine effort. It was a length ball that Gul simply missed by a long distance, being done in the flight, easy decision for the umpire


Umar Gul lbw b Panesar 4 (31m 38b 0x4 0x6) SR: 10.52

[greyblazer]

Misbah and Younis are good players of spin. Monty isn't a world beater but he is better than what some people think.

[Making_Splinters]

You are not considering the fact that he was highest wicket taker in UAE series. If you take out the good form of player then obviously he will look bad.

He did not have any variation in the UAE either, Pakistani batsmen tried to attack his defensive lines and got out.

Siddhu and Sehwag attack the spinners much more than Pakistan batsmen in UAE series do. Should we say that spinners who took there wickets were more lucky. In fact Siddhu's was a prize wicket for spinners, so is Sehwags. Shane Warne bowled the leg stump line as well. many batsmen lost their wickets attacking that line. Should we say that he was lucky as well because batsmen attacked.

Warne has a horrific record in India and home Sehwag is one of the best batsmen in the world.

I didn't say he was lucky i said he has no variation to his bowling.

Monty's wickets from cricinfo. (Second Test)

I don't see any defensive line or lack of variation. He has got those dismissals with stock ball, off stump lines, turners and quicker ones. There are specialist batsmen who have got out to him who play spin since ages of 6 years. Also, Pakistan team has played most in UAE than any other team to know the wicket well. They even know how to take spinners out of attack and get close in fielders away from them. Will have a look at the you tube as well as i missed that test.

Also Swann bowled against same set of batsmen. Further, even batsman cut some strokes and knock a century. it is applauded often citing reasons that eh played according to strengths and weaknesses. When Monty does it, it's just not worth.

Swann was in a long period of poor form, there was quite a lot of talk on here about whether he or Monty should be dropped which was promptly silenced when he took six in the second innings at Galle then ten at Colombo. Monty bowled negitive lines and lengths with no variation at all through the Galle test, he has no variation aside from an "arm ball" or in propper langauge the one that doesn't turn as all your posting of wickets shows.

Compare Swann's attacking bowling, his variation in line, length, flight and drift then go back and look at Monty.

[meninblue]

Swann is England No 1 spinner and Monty is No 2. I am not saying otherwise in any of my post. But because Monty is not good as Swann it does not means he should not be played as spinner. By that token nobody lesser than Bradman, Jonty and Murali should bat, field or bowl . If thinktank wants two spinners then Monty is the one, thats what i am saying. And he is not as bad as what CMS makes him look. His five wicket hauls will speak for itself irrespective we applaud it or don't.

Also, you have ignored Swann's UAE performance saying he was in bad form. Can we ignore Monty's performance against SriLanka saying he was in bad form .

[Arthur Crabtree]

How about the Pakistan side of 2006? Monty took 17 wickets in four Tests at 30, with an econ of 2.8. Seeing as that side included Yousuf, Younis and Inzi, that has to be seen as a strong batting line up. He removed the three master bats eight times in 7.5 innings. As a team brought up on Asian wickets, I don't see why Pakistan shouldn't be added to SA/Ind/SL. And they are now a higher ranked Test country than India. Monty averages 26.4, econ 2.5, at over 5 wickets a match.

[Making_Splinters]

Misbah and Younis are good players of spin. Monty isn't a world beater but he is better than what some people think.

This was supposed to be about the World Cup, Monty hasn't played ODI cricket in five years and his domestic List A record is dire add in he can't bat, can't field and it's a fairly hard to see him anywhere near the ODI side.

[Making_Splinters]

Swann is England No 1 spinner and Monty is No 2. I am not saying otherwise in any of my post. But because Monty is not good as Swann it does not means he should be played as spinner. By that token nobody lesser than Bradman, Jonty and Murali should bat, field or bowl . If thinktank wants two players then Monty is the one, thats what i am saying. And he is not as bad as what CMS makes him look. His five wicket hauls will speak for itself irrespective we applaud it or don't.

Also, you have ignored Swann's UAE performance saying he was in bad form. Can we ignore Monty's performance against SriLanka saying he was in bad form .

How would Monty be in bad form coming off the back of the UAE series which you keep talking about?

This thread is actually about the World Cup and Monty is not England's second spinner in ODI cricket for a start.