Off topic: (Ashes) Ian Bell

Loftgroov · Post by **Loftgroov** » 12 Sep 2005, 06:22

Aren't you glad this useless prick is in the lineup?

:(

5th and final test, a draw will do, just close out the innings... and what does Bell do? TWO ducks!!!!!!!

If England somehow lose this test, Bell should rightfully be slaughtered in the press. To think he was IN the press "hoping" the Aussies played McGrath, and look whats happened!!!

I'd be doing my very utmost to keep a low profile if I was him. 266 vs Bangladesh?? They must have been bribed....

EddieShredder · Post by **EddieShredder** » 12 Sep 2005, 06:26

I'm sticking by my "one for the future" tip. He's been shit this series, granted.... but I still think he'll come through in time. The list of England cricketers who've been shit in their first 10 tests or so.... who've then gone on to become very good players is endless. Test cricket, especially against the Aussies, is very hard to adjust to.

Loftgroov · Post by **Loftgroov** » 12 Sep 2005, 07:50

Yeah one for the future he may be, but the selectors look incredibly stupid picking him over Graham Thorpe now... (or Rob Key... or my Nan..)

EddieShredder · Post by **EddieShredder** » 12 Sep 2005, 07:54

Loftgroov wrote:Yeah one for the future he may be, but the selectors look incredibly stupid picking him over Graham Thorpe now... (or Rob Key... or my Nan..)

Other Thorpey, I'd agree.... although its easy to say with hindsight. The reality is that few were calling it wrong before the series started.

Rob Key has proven over a couple of years that he is unable to make the transition from very good first class player, to test player. He couldn't have scoredmany more than Bell.

Not too sure about your nan... although I did once see an old lady slip on the pavement, and show off a great leg-break

I still think the main negative from this series is our wicket keepers inability to catch a ball.

Loftgroov · Post by **Loftgroov** » 12 Sep 2005, 08:01

True, but then he has a far higher batting average than our 4th in the order batsman..

rhino222 · Post by **rhino222** » 12 Sep 2005, 09:10

its a team game lads and i admit england have been carried through the series mainly by flintoff. but when you look at the statistics they have all chipped in a bit. bell has even snapped up a couple of good short leg catches.

he has looked underpants in this test.

but england must maintain the momentum by keeping the same squad of players and working hard for each other.

in time bell will come good i hope. the experience will serve him well.

this is cricket at the highest level.

england change formulae far too easily in many sports. lets support the selectors this time.

Matchfixer · Post by **Matchfixer** » 12 Sep 2005, 16:24

Bell did score two 50s in one test which was good but obviously he has disappointed overall.

I think he'll do alright long term and he averages over 40 in county cricket which is fairly good going. Not always a good indicator though as both Trescothick and Vaughan were averaging about 30 in the county game when they were promoted to test cricket.

For those who are saying Thorpe should have been selected instead of Bell I agree and have thought that before the beginning of the series. However it was Pietersen who was picked above Thorpe; Bell's name was not mentioned because of his success against Bangladesh.

Loftgroov · Post by **Loftgroov** » 13 Sep 2005, 05:13

Though I do hope this is the last time one's form against Bangladesh is used as an indication of their likely form against Australia....

leforge · Post by **leforge** » 13 Sep 2005, 05:29

Look at Bell average against Australia under 20. Is he really going to do well in Pakistan or India?

Loftgroov · Post by **Loftgroov** » 13 Sep 2005, 06:14

Well what baffles me is people say e.g. “Robert Key isn’t good enough for international level, only a good county player” etc ..and hence is overlooked for selection.

Same with Shah.

But somehow Ian Bell IS good enough? It’s only based on a 266 against the minnows of world cricket Bangladesh. His form in the Ashes was not bad, it was awful… and his selection for the 5th test a mystery. Continuity of selection can be the only reason.

jomothepure · Post by **jomothepure** » 13 Sep 2005, 08:25

I read in the Times that Bell avaraged 17.5 or something over the whole series. If you take away the two 50s...

Simon Jones actually had a better average than Flintoff in the end. 21 to 27 or something similar

EddieShredder · Post by **EddieShredder** » 13 Sep 2005, 08:29

jomothepure wrote:I read in the Times that Bell avaraged 17.5 or something over the whole series. If you take away the two 50s...

Simon Jones actually had a better average than Flintoff in the end. 21 to 27 or something similar

Yeah.... Jones averaged 21.... awesome figures.

J · Post by J » 13 Sep 2005, 09:01

jomothepure wrote:I read in the Times that Bell avaraged 17.5 or something over the whole series. If you take away the two 50s...

Simon Jones actually had a better average than Flintoff in the end. 21 to 27 or something similar

that his bowling average freddie averaged 40 with the bat.

jomothepure · Post by **jomothepure** » 13 Sep 2005, 09:09

J wrote:
jomothepure wrote:I read in the Times that Bell avaraged 17.5 or something over the whole series. If you take away the two 50s...

Simon Jones actually had a better average than Flintoff in the end. 21 to 27 or something similar
that his bowling average freddie averaged 40 with the bat.

Yeah, I should have said that was bowling ave, sorry.

This is all from memory whilst flicking through the paper whilst I had a Sainsbury's fry up, but batting aves, it was Pietersen best, followed by Strauss Trescothick, Flintoff, Vaughan I think

states · Post by **states** » 13 Sep 2005, 09:22

Batting average's went: Pietersen, Trescothick, Flintoff, Strauss, Jones then Vaughan, would you believe?

jomothepure · Post by **jomothepure** » 13 Sep 2005, 09:24

states wrote:Batting average's went: Pietersen, Trescothick, Flintoff, Strauss, Jones then Vaughan, would you believe?

Which Jones, Simon or Jimmy no hands?

states · Post by **states** » 13 Sep 2005, 09:26

jomothepure wrote:
states wrote:Batting average's went: Pietersen, Trescothick, Flintoff, Strauss, Jones then Vaughan, would you believe?
Which Jones, Simon or Jimmy no hands?

Sorry, should have made that clear. Which one did you think? That's right, it was Simon Jones. Seriously. Averaged 33. Only scored 66 runs in total, but there you go.

EddieShredder · Post by **EddieShredder** » 13 Sep 2005, 10:19

states wrote:
jomothepure wrote:
states wrote:Batting average's went: Pietersen, Trescothick, Flintoff, Strauss, Jones then Vaughan, would you believe?
Which Jones, Simon or Jimmy no hands?
Sorry, should have made that clear. Which one did you think? That's right, it was Simon Jones. Seriously. Averaged 33. Only scored 66 runs in total, but there you go.

Didn't get out much though.... Biased his average.

That said.... he can swing the bat a bit when required

J · Post by J » 13 Sep 2005, 10:24

look bell is only 22 and has talent, he just wasnt ready to take on the best in the world, i said this as much in the ahses thread.

He got exposed cos he was facing the best out there, he will come good.

NOW IS THE TIME to stick with him, iof you were to chop him it should have been done at the start of the series, now its out the way where else will he face an attack with anyone near as good as Mcgrath warne and lee.

watch him make a buketful againt the indians and pakistanis on slowerr pitches. Kumble / Singh are the main dangers out there. The pakistanis for me have a totally erratic attack and one you can dominate if you get on top.

Teh aussies are still the best attack England have to face.

EddieShredder · Post by **EddieShredder** » 13 Sep 2005, 10:52

J wrote:look bell is only 22 and has talent, he just wasnt ready to take on the best in the world, i said this as much in the ahses thread.

He got exposed cos he was facing the best out there, he will come good.

NOW IS THE TIME to stick with him, iof you were to chop him it should have been done at the start of the series, now its out the way where else will he face an attack with anyone near as good as Mcgrath warne and lee.

watch him make a buketful againt the indians and pakistanis on slowerr pitches. Kumble / Singh are the main dangers out there. The pakistanis for me have a totally erratic attack and one you can dominate if you get on top.

Teh aussies are still the best attack England have to face.

Finally..... Another believer

Loftgroov · Post by **Loftgroov** » 13 Sep 2005, 11:00

Well I don’t doubt he has talent, but my beef is with his selection for the 5th test, and though I can’t prove it, I was adamant is was a mistake to pick him for the final test because his batting average had been woeful in the series (especially for a 4th order batsman).

And I was proved right. TWO ducks!

Imagine if Pieterson hadn’t played the innings he did? Bell wouldn’t be able to look his team-mates in the face. TWO ducks for a guy fourth in the order in such a critical game is a disgrace. He choked in a major way, and his selection was a mistake. Also Gerant Jones has copped so much flak (often unfairly) when Bell has been the BIG selection mistake.

Sure… he may go on to become a good player, but the Bangladesh series was the one to blood him in and his current level. Thorpe should have played in a series as high-octane as the Ashes.

He just pissed me off that’s all. What a big time choker. I can’t believe the tool went and got out for zero runs in the entire match……and with time also a critical factor it's not even as if he stayed around! Collingwood at least faced 40 balls to be out for 8 runs.... Bell out first ball!!!

Ahhh well… it’s history now.

EddieShredder · Post by **EddieShredder** » 13 Sep 2005, 11:03

Who was the last person to fornicate the aussies and bring back the ashes?

Paula Yates

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 14 Sep 2005, 02:44

EddieShredder wrote:Who was the last person to fornicate the aussies and bring back the ashes?

Paula Yates