The Ashes 2009
- Thread starter Santino
- Start date
Just like we expected one when he was on 30? Keep on calling it -- you're bound to be right eventually.
I like Collingwood. He's severely underrated to the extent that even when he's playing well people are always calling for him to be dropped, and it's pretty much entirely down to him that England are still in the series at all. Bell on the other hand...
Ramps would have 500 by now.
I want CollingGod to have my babies.
I want CollingGod to have my babies.
I said it would happen between about 30 and about 65. I'm happy to be proved wrong but I'm not holding my breath.
I'd be ecstatic to have a batsman in the side that consistently got between 30 and 65 in every single test.
It's fine when the team are doing well. The trouble is he has never turned it on when the team needed someone to play a lone hand.
131-2.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Except that never happens. Bell gets between 30 and 65 when he gets in – he could and maybe should have been out for 0 today, for instance. Everyone gets low scores. Everyone. So you really have to make it count when you get in.
Which is why he would not be in my first XI. But he doesn't deserve the ire that people give him as a substitute.
TrippyLondoner
Well-Known Member
Been watchin this while half asleep due to fuck all sleep last night, finally woken up now sort of, decent stuff this from england so far.
Look -- you're writing him off when he's 50 not out! At least give him a chance to possibly score more than 65 before castigating him!
TrippyLondoner
Well-Known Member
exactly.
It's not just that though, it's the incomprehensibility of playing him at first drop when he can be a nervous starter (especially against the Aussies) and has, afaik, never made a test hundred unless someone else in the team has already made one first.
Strauss's wicket a massive no ball btw.
TrippyLondoner
Well-Known Member
Just seen this post btw, but my hatred of bell has been justified, always liked collingwood.
Quite a lot I should think. Although to be fair, I doubt they usually miss such massive ones as the Strauss dismissal.
It's almost like you're willing him to fail!
As we speak, he's 59 not out. So I'd already dispute the idea that he has FAILED at number 3. He hasn't yet put together a match-winning innings, but you're even destroying the guy when he's put togther a decent knock.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
How so? Checking whether the bowler has overstepped is the umpire's very first duty for each play. They should get it right every time.
tangerinedream
Density of Sound
It's not hate or ire, it's frustration that a player who is apparantly as good as anyone in the world just about has such weaknesses that seem to preclude him having the impact that he should. Those of us who are old enough to remember Hick and Ramprakash, well Bell pays the price for similar frustrations.
It's a kind of symbol of the way the English are seen by the Aussies that Bell struggles while, for sake of argument, Marcus North gets multiple hundreds. Who is the better player technically? Bell. Who gets the runs? North... Bell is seemingly phased, and seem to have not worked at the problems in his game, while other batsmen like North make the best of less talent. Could substitute Colly for North I suppose.
Now, I'd LOVE him to get a hundred here, I really, really, really would - just as I suspect everyone on the thread apart from the Aussies would. So far, he's done really well, he's fought and got lucky and battled etc - but if he gets out for 63, well ,it doesn't answer any questions about him at all, just says what we fear - that he simply doesn't have the mentality to do it when the tough gets going to use a cliche - you can't argue with the fact the evidence suggests he hasn't performed in the big moments thus far.
tangerinedream
Density of Sound
It's not picking on him, it's questioning the wisdom of picking an indisputably flakey player at 3 in the biggest test of the last 4 years. Now, of course it might be a stroke of genius and as I say, I really want him to do well and I'm sure Belly isn't getting live relays of Urban75 comments at drinks...
I'm not willing him to fail. I hope very much that he doesn't. He's just, as our citrusy friend says, a very frustrating player in that he's technically very good but never quite seems to turn it on when it really counts. Aesthetically wonderful but temperamentally dubious.
TrippyLondoner
Well-Known Member
Just like quite a few england players....
I dunno, I seem to see pretty big ones on replays quite often, for boundaries/close calls/whatever that they replay.
They're at a poor angle, and are expected to make decisions at the other end first and foremost. Given that no balls seem to be missed very often, it's quite clear that expecting them to catch them all is very unrealistic.littlebabyjesus said:
Well, it is one of the traditional types for England batsmen of recent years. There's either the grafter, who scores much-needed but ugly runs, or there's the aesthete, who has all the strokes but never quite seems to put in the performances their technique promises.
I feel the same as the above and i'm positive EVERYONE on this thread would love the Shermanator to get a big score but.......as has been eloquently stated above he has his flaws which let him down badly when he should have (judging by his technique and all round skills) cemented a place in the England team and been averaging 50 not just under 40
TrippyLondoner
Well-Known Member
Either way, its going well so far, which is what matters atm.
