Topic: Bell retires-style over substance? (Read 8281 times)

Jeff Navarro · « **Reply #15 on:** September 09, 2020, 07:11:49 AM »

Bell was a decent player when England where a gun side. He was protected by the like of Strauss, Cook, Trott, Collingwood and Pietersen. Every time he was moved up the order he flopped. The real question is would England have been a lesser side without him? Most definitely not.

JTtaylor145 · « **Reply #16 on:** September 09, 2020, 07:22:14 AM »

Quote from: Jeff Navarro on September 09, 2020, 07:11:49 AM

Bell was a decent player when England where a gun side. He was protected by the like of Strauss, Cook, Trott, Collingwood and Pietersen. Every time he was moved up the order he flopped. The real question is would England have been a lesser side without him? Most definitely not.

Sorry but I can't disagree more with the above. Bell was protected by Collingwood? Are you being serious? Collingwood is not in the same league as Bell as an international or county batsman. With the exception of KP, Trott in his peak years and maybe Cook Ian Bell is as good as England have had in the middle order since Gower. Would England have been a lesser side without him...yes most certainly they would have been. Who would you have bought in to replace him, Ravi Bopara?

However if that's your opinion it is all good

Jeff Navarro · « **Reply #17 on:** September 09, 2020, 08:09:15 AM »

Quote from: JTtaylor145 on September 09, 2020, 07:22:14 AM

Sorry but I can't disagree more with the above. Bell was protected by Collingwood? Are you being serious? Collingwood is not in the same league as Bell as an international or county batsman. With the exception of KP, Trott in his peak years and maybe Cook Ian Bell is as good as England have had in the middle order since Gower. Would England have been a lesser side without him...yes most certainly they would have been. Who would you have bought in to replace him, Ravi Bopara?

However if that's your opinion it is all good

I�m not talking ability. Collingwood brought fight and guts. He might�ve overachieved but he was a vital member in the side.

Buzz · « **Reply #18 on:** September 09, 2020, 08:14:45 AM »

I take it you didn't watch the 2013 Ashes then?

I think people are getting Ian Bell and James Vince mixed up in this thread.

Jeff Navarro · « **Reply #19 on:** September 09, 2020, 09:08:45 AM »

Quote from: Buzz on September 09, 2020, 08:14:45 AM

I take it you didn't watch the 2013 Ashes then?

I think people are getting Ian Bell and James Vince mixed up in this thread.

Watched it saw Bell get dropped in each innings he scored a century. But we�ll pretend he�s peak Wally Hammond...

Bell played in the strongest England team in living memory, as the luxury player hidden away at 5/6. Averaged 42, despite all the others doing the heavy lifting.

Bell is was England�s Mark Waugh.

JTtaylor145 · « **Reply #20 on:** September 09, 2020, 10:20:17 AM »

And Mark Waugh was a very fine player

Nobody is comparing Ian Bell to Hobbs, Hammond, Sutcliffe or Hutton (they are all time greats) but he was a very good player for England and I would still take him over Collingwood every time. Ian Bell fine test match player, Collingwood average test match batsman.

Can't we just say...fine player, got runs and lovely to watch.

JT

jamesisapayne · « **Reply #21 on:** September 09, 2020, 10:29:42 AM »

Quote from: Jeff Navarro on September 09, 2020, 09:08:45 AM

Watched it saw Bell get dropped in each innings he scored a century. But we�ll pretend he�s peak Wally Hammond...

Bell played in the strongest England team in living memory, as the luxury player hidden away at 5/6. Averaged 42, despite all the others doing the heavy lifting.

Bell is was England�s Mark Waugh.

Would dearly love to see your cricket stats Mr Navarro/GerrySA/whatever it is you're calling yourself these days. You seem to have a consistent opinion across all your posts that pretty much everything and everyone who has every played the game isn't/wasn't good enough. Maybe give us an insight into your cricketing background, something that gives us a reason to believe you're not here just to constantly troll everyone

Bell was a top class player.

Jeff Navarro · « **Reply #22 on:** September 09, 2020, 10:33:11 AM »

Quote from: JTtaylor145 on September 09, 2020, 10:20:17 AM

And Mark Waugh was a very fine player

Nobody is comparing Ian Bell to Hobbs, Hammond, Sutcliffe or Hutton (they are all time greats) but he was a very good player for England and I would still take him over Collingwood every time. Ian Bell fine test match player, Collingwood average test match batsman.

Can't we just say...fine player, got runs and lovely to watch.

JT

Never said Bell wasn�t a decent player he was just a luxury player.
In the side that reached #1, had been not been around would it have made any difference? For me no.
Pietersen, Cook/Trott, Strauss and Collingwood. Bell comes after all of them.

Buzz · « **Reply #23 on:** September 09, 2020, 10:44:17 AM »

Bell a luxury player? Glorious.

Also have a read of this
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2020/09/09/cricket-nerdfour-stats-prove-just-brilliant-ian-bell/

JTtaylor145 · « **Reply #24 on:** September 09, 2020, 10:52:08 AM »

Quote from: Jeff Navarro on September 09, 2020, 10:33:11 AM

Never said Bell wasn�t a decent player he was just a luxury player.
In the side that reached #1, had been not been around would it have made any difference? For me no.
Pietersen, Cook/Trott, Strauss and Collingwood. Bell comes after all of them.

Just for the sake of a discussion (not an argument) if Ian Bell hadn't of been playing in that England side that reached number 1, who would have replaced him from the County game? Which county player in your opinion was a better fit in the England side than Ian Bell?

I wish Bell was in the current England side or would you prefer Burns, Sibley, Pope etc.?

alba caerulea · « **Reply #25 on:** September 09, 2020, 01:13:21 PM »

I dont know why people give this jokers comments the time of day.

Bell was a fantastic Batsman. Would have got in every other national teams middle order for the majority of his career with the exception of Australia at the start and India in the middle. If thats not top class then someone please tell me what is?

Add to that a great fielder, superb longevity and never had any sort of ego/mental/injury problems that some of the others hes been compared to here had. Dropped permanently too early in my book and some of those brought in to Englands middle order in the years following his axing weren't fit to lace his boots as a test batsman.

billyb · « **Reply #26 on:** September 09, 2020, 02:50:57 PM »

This forum gives me life.

In the top 10 England test run scorers of all time.
22 Hundreds & 46 Fifties.

A luxury player. Love it.

SouthpawMark · « **Reply #27 on:** September 09, 2020, 06:39:39 PM »

Classy player and classy guy. One of the best England players in the past 15 years, and very much under-appreciated by an awful lot of England �fans�.

Bats_Entertainment · « **Reply #28 on:** September 09, 2020, 08:18:02 PM »

He was dropped and brought back a fair few times? Do we know how many?

Some have called him the Gower of his generation.

ppccopener · « **Reply #29 on:** September 09, 2020, 08:53:56 PM »

We were 51 all out in Jamaica early on in the Flower/Strauss era, Flower was by all accounts a hard taskmaster so Bell was dropped after that match if I remember right.

Whatever Flower told him seemed to work as he was brought back and played pretty well.

We havnt had that may stylish players over the years and as others have said if he was 25 now he would be in the team at the expense of just about anyone apart from Root and maybe Stokes(as a batsman)

Author Topic: Bell retires-style over substance? (Read 8281 times)

Jeff Navarro

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

JTtaylor145

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

Jeff Navarro

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

Buzz

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

Jeff Navarro

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

JTtaylor145

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

jamesisapayne

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

Jeff Navarro

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

Buzz

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

JTtaylor145

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

alba caerulea

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

billyb

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

SouthpawMark

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

Bats_Entertainment

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

ppccopener

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?