Print

[iand123]

I read on twitter Rashid would be dropped for Ansari, If true I reckon Yorkshire fans will go into meltdown for missing the final game of the season to rest

[Mr_Orange]

Lawrence Booth tweeted this morning that Ansari was getting lots of pats on the back after the squad huddle today suggesting his debut is imminent. He's also been told Broad is definitely rested.

[ppccopener]

there's a few on here who think Rashid may be better as a one day player.

I think we need to preserve with him but on this tour with batty and Ali spin options with more control is what Cook will want....

Ansari is away from the right handers so it's like for like....

England obviously rate Ansari highly, he's going to play so hope he does well.

Rashid does tens to get wickets more when batters attack him, bit different in tests......

[Alvaro]

I read on twitter Rashid would be dropped for Ansari, If true I reckon Yorkshire fans will go into meltdown for missing the final game of the season to rest

1. Rashid bowled a hatful of pies in Chittagong. 2. He missed the Yorkshire game because he wanted a rest had to deal with a family illness.

[edge]

Having watched the 1st test  Woakes needs to be dropped he didn't get  any wickets  and unlike the other  seamers  never looked like getting any

Zzzzz... Did Chris Woakes once let the tyres down on your car or something?

[joeljonno]

1. Rashid bowled a hatful of pies in Chittagong. 2. He missed the Yorkshire game because he wanted a rest had to deal with a family illness.

Rashid needs games to improve and get to a point where he is, or is not, really rated as an international player. He needs to play vs Bangladesh and against India to give him the opportunity to show his talent and whether he can be a long term addition to the England team.

Take Bairstow, for instance, he was in and out of the team for ages before this current run showed how good he can be. 

The only way they replace Rashid for Ansari is if he is dropped.  Rested just doesn't cut it for me.

[Alvaro]

What suggests Rashid is any better than he was when being clubbed around the UAE? Or going to get better?

[WalkingWicket37]

How do we know Rashid didn't ask to be rested for the second test?
It wouldn't be the first time...

[six and out]

one of the main problems with Rashid is that Cook simply doesn't trust him.

he ends up having to bowl with these dodgy in/out fields that good players of spin just milk him for runs, so he can't build up any pressure and are putting away any bad balls that then come on top of that

Cook has to go 1 way or the other, either you give Rashid men round the bat/close catchers and mid off/on up and say to him go on then here's your attacking field you bowl to it - then if he isn't good enough to do it you take him off and ultimately drop him and give someone else ago.

[ppccopener]

one of the main problems with Rashid is that Cook simply doesn't trust him.

he ends up having to bowl with these dodgy in/out fields that good players of spin just milk him for runs, so he can't build up any pressure and are putting away any bad balls that then come on top of that

Cook has to go 1 way or the other, either you give Rashid men round the bat/close catchers and mid off/on up and say to him go on then here's your attacking field you bowl to it - then if he isn't good enough to do it you take him off and ultimately drop him and give someone else ago.

to be be fair..I think,,,or at least I thought...that's why England picked Batty because Rashid and Ali(bowled well thou in the last test) leak runs....

totally agree Rashid you have to play as an attacking spinner or not at all.

I don't think Test wise he will last, one dayers yes....

Cook has got better skippering but your right...it doesn't appear he rates Rashid, or does not trust him....

I cant help thinking somewhere in the England set up there is a nagging doubt about Rashid that has not gone away. Could be totally off the mark thou 

[Rob580]

I personally don't rate Rashid at all to be honest.

Tuffers made a very good point on 'Tuffers & Vaughan' the other day:

What is an attacking spinner? You don't have an 'attacking seamer' do you? Attacking spinner is just a term for someone who lands the odd wonder ball, but bowls a heap of dross the rest of the time...

A good spinner (Ashwin, Herath, Yasir et al) is able to bowl tight enough to have attacking fields set, and bowl consistently enough to make the Batsmen do something different, other than just block, and wait for the inevitable scoring opportunity. If you had a seamer that bowled 1 wonder ball an over, but the rest of them half volleys, drag downs & full tosses, you'd drop him. So I don't see why a spinner is any different.

Michael Vaughan threw out there playing 4 seamers, on the basis that, even on the absolute raging turner in Chittagong, our seamers were the best bowlers. Now he does talk some utter nonsense, but I can see the logic in that point.

[Alvaro]

Why would picking four seamers and running them into the ground make sense? The last time England did that in Bangladesh it meant Swann bowled himself into a chronic elbow injury http://www.espncricinfo.com/bdeshveng2010/engine/match/426423.html

[Seniorplayer]

Zzzzz... Did Chris Woakes once let the tyres down on your car or something?

You have to bowl guys  who can get you 20 wickets Captain Cook in the 1st test only bowled  Woakes   For 14 overs in the entire match wonder why..
Oh and I can't afford a car.....

[Vitas Cricket]

I personally don't rate Rashid at all to be honest.

Tuffers made a very good point on 'Tuffers & Vaughan' the other day:

What is an attacking spinner? You don't have an 'attacking seamer' do you? Attacking spinner is just a term for someone who lands the odd wonder ball, but bowls a heap of dross the rest of the time...

A good spinner (Ashwin, Herath, Yasir et al) is able to bowl tight enough to have attacking fields set, and bowl consistently enough to make the Batsmen do something different, other than just block, and wait for the inevitable scoring opportunity. If you had a seamer that bowled 1 wonder ball an over, but the rest of them half volleys, drag downs & full tosses, you'd drop him. So I don't see why a spinner is any different.

Michael Vaughan threw out there playing 4 seamers, on the basis that, even on the absolute raging turner in Chittagong, our seamers were the best bowlers. Now he does talk some utter nonsense, but I can see the logic in that point.

I would said it is harder to define an attacking spinner, but i can tell you what a non attacking spinner is. Someone like Tredwell. Steady, solid, reliable, but not a wicket taker. Ashley Giles was maybe another. 

[Rob580]

Why would picking four seamers and running them into the ground make sense? The last time England did that in Bangladesh it meant Swann bowled himself into a chronic elbow injury http://www.espncricinfo.com/bdeshveng2010/engine/match/426423.html

In fairness, there were only 3 seamers & 1 spinner there, but you do make a fair point, it was just an observation. If the best bowlers (and those most trusted by the skipper), even on this raging turner, are seamers. Then why wouldn't you play the best bowlers?

In the same sense that when Sri Lanka came to England, Herath was still be their best bowler, and easily the most effective, even on green seaming pitches. You wouldn't have dropped him before the tour, just for being a spinner would you?

The solution is for England to not have such poor spinners, but unfortunately we're not in the situation to rectify that at this precise moment, so maybe playing an extra seamer is the solution at the moment? You'd still have 2 spinners, and there would still be 6 bowlers, so 15 overs a day, each. Which isn't overbowling them. Fred Trueman used to bowl 100 overs a day, up hill, into the wind! 

It's just an interesting discussion point I think, more than anything.