Ashes 2006/07 Third Test Perth
- Thread starter littlebabyjesus
- Start date
Donna Ferentes
jubliado
But not Aggers, who supported Giles' inclusion at Panesar's expense.agricola said:
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
agricola said:
Most of the reports seem to have been suggesting that Fletcher wanted to play Panesar in the last test and that it was Flintoff who insisted on Giles playing.
Notorious J.I.M
Well-Known Member
I'm just glad Monty has made it impossible to ignore him now he's finaly been given a chance, Giles looks like he's played his last test now surely?
DrRingDing
'anti-human wanker'
Notorious J.I.M said:
Giles was a bog standard county spinner to start off with.
Bring back Tuffers is what I say
liquidlunch
fargonebeauty
This is how our press reads it
English blush at full Monty
By Ron Reed
December 15, 2006 MUDHSUDEN Singh Panesar - Monty to his many admirers in the England cricket team's vast entourage - left his dressing room bosses severely red-faced yesterday.
But sometimes gratitude, relief and excitement form a more potent mix of emotions than mere embarrassment.
So it was at the WACA as the nowhere man of England's stumbling, bumbling Ashes campaign at least appeared at the front line and left everyone - not least some perplexed Australia batsmen - wondering what might have been.
The colourful left-arm spinner's haul of 5-92 - he removed Justin Langer, Andrew Symonds, Adam Gilchrist, Shane Warne and Brett Lee - left Australia stranded some way short of its accustomed high ground at the end of a compelling day's cricket and a series that had looked to be dead on its feet was suddenly asking to be let out of the morgue.
Panesar was not the only one responsible for that - the real Steve Harmison made a re-appearance as welcome and as impressive as it was belated - but he was undoubtedly the catalyst for it.
His baffling absence from the first two Tests, watching in frustration from the sidelines as the incumbent Ashley Giles plied his tired version of the same art, can now be positively identified as what it always seemed to be - a crime against cricketing commonsense.
Simply put, Panesar's 10 previous Tests had shown him to be a wicket-taker - which is why coach and selector Duncan Fletcher labelled him the best bowler of his type in the world before the tour began.
It remains unclear whether it was Fletcher or skipper Andrew Flintoff who had the bigger say in the decision to fly in the face of that when they got here, but between them they will be a long time living it down.
It might have cost them the urn and Fletcher will be lucky not to lose his job.
Not that Panesar was about to indulge in any grumbling or the poor-me or I-told-you-so sort.
He's a modest soul at any time and simply said that as the selectors had invited him to tour in the first place he was prepared to trust their judgment.
This is not a case of an unknown boy surprising everybody by grabbing a chance thrown his way from out of the blue, and it is not the 20-20 vision that hindsight provides.
The wide array of former England captains and players and professional media critics have been shouting it from the commentary boxes, virtually unanimously, from day one.
Even the most diehard Australians would have been pleased for him because he comes across as such a likeable and modest personality, whose background, English-born but the first Sikh to play for England, adds a slightly exotic note.
He wears a turban instead of a cap, practises yoga every day and can't bat or field any better than the average park cricketer in the stands, which helps the punters relate to him.
They have adopted him as a cult hero and now they see him as the hope of the side. They may be right, too.
Even in the dressing room they might finally have to admit that now.
English blush at full Monty
By Ron Reed
December 15, 2006 MUDHSUDEN Singh Panesar - Monty to his many admirers in the England cricket team's vast entourage - left his dressing room bosses severely red-faced yesterday.
But sometimes gratitude, relief and excitement form a more potent mix of emotions than mere embarrassment.
So it was at the WACA as the nowhere man of England's stumbling, bumbling Ashes campaign at least appeared at the front line and left everyone - not least some perplexed Australia batsmen - wondering what might have been.
The colourful left-arm spinner's haul of 5-92 - he removed Justin Langer, Andrew Symonds, Adam Gilchrist, Shane Warne and Brett Lee - left Australia stranded some way short of its accustomed high ground at the end of a compelling day's cricket and a series that had looked to be dead on its feet was suddenly asking to be let out of the morgue.
Panesar was not the only one responsible for that - the real Steve Harmison made a re-appearance as welcome and as impressive as it was belated - but he was undoubtedly the catalyst for it.
His baffling absence from the first two Tests, watching in frustration from the sidelines as the incumbent Ashley Giles plied his tired version of the same art, can now be positively identified as what it always seemed to be - a crime against cricketing commonsense.
Simply put, Panesar's 10 previous Tests had shown him to be a wicket-taker - which is why coach and selector Duncan Fletcher labelled him the best bowler of his type in the world before the tour began.
It remains unclear whether it was Fletcher or skipper Andrew Flintoff who had the bigger say in the decision to fly in the face of that when they got here, but between them they will be a long time living it down.
It might have cost them the urn and Fletcher will be lucky not to lose his job.
Not that Panesar was about to indulge in any grumbling or the poor-me or I-told-you-so sort.
He's a modest soul at any time and simply said that as the selectors had invited him to tour in the first place he was prepared to trust their judgment.
This is not a case of an unknown boy surprising everybody by grabbing a chance thrown his way from out of the blue, and it is not the 20-20 vision that hindsight provides.
The wide array of former England captains and players and professional media critics have been shouting it from the commentary boxes, virtually unanimously, from day one.
Even the most diehard Australians would have been pleased for him because he comes across as such a likeable and modest personality, whose background, English-born but the first Sikh to play for England, adds a slightly exotic note.
He wears a turban instead of a cap, practises yoga every day and can't bat or field any better than the average park cricketer in the stands, which helps the punters relate to him.
They have adopted him as a cult hero and now they see him as the hope of the side. They may be right, too.
Even in the dressing room they might finally have to admit that now.
DuckQuack'sEcho
More Cowbells No Vevezula
Everyone (all the 'experts') is saying the pitch will play placid for the batsmen today 'til about Sunday.
Will make for an interesting weekend with speculation about Warne bowling on a deteriorating last-day wicket.
Still, all congrats to Monty and his trickery. And good to see some threatening quicks from the Poms.
Will make for an interesting weekend with speculation about Warne bowling on a deteriorating last-day wicket.
Still, all congrats to Monty and his trickery. And good to see some threatening quicks from the Poms.
Why is bell anywhere near the top order. For me he's a complete liability at number 2-3 batsman. Plus putting collingwood up the order just means that there are problems in the batting line up. pieterson should be 3-4, with collingwood 5-6. Why I say that is because pieterson loves to slog balls, and can afford to do that higher up, but coming in at 5-6 means he has to bed in and play a game he isn't really suited for, while collingwood is perfect cover if the top order get roasted.
51-2. my prediction all out 200.
fletcher drop bell down the order, or drop him entirely and get someone whose more consistent with a bat.
51-2. my prediction all out 200.
fletcher drop bell down the order, or drop him entirely and get someone whose more consistent with a bat.
Flanflinger
Well-Known Member
Arise Sir Monty....................
tangerinedream
Density of Sound
Monty is wonderful, wonderful, wonderful. I virtually ran home to watch the highlights on the t'internet, just to see the celebrations. I wouldn't bother for any other player.
Lets not be too harsh on Gilo, he's done a job for years but the crucial factor for me was that he hadn't played any cricket for about 6/7 months before the warm up games. Even if he was as good as Monty, the decision to play him makes no sense at all.
Looking forward to tomorrow morning!
Lets not be too harsh on Gilo, he's done a job for years but the crucial factor for me was that he hadn't played any cricket for about 6/7 months before the warm up games. Even if he was as good as Monty, the decision to play him makes no sense at all.
Looking forward to tomorrow morning!
JTG said:how much did Harmy enjoy getting Ponting
And why wouldn't ya?! The most maligned, out-of-form bowler going around taking the wicket of the most in-form batsman in the world. What was Ponting's 2006 Ashes average coming into this Test? Something ridiculous like 145 or thereabouts? Like him or loathe him, Ponting is easily the best batsman in the world right now. And Harmy got him plum.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
JTG said:how much did Harmy enjoy getting Ponting
Innit. the fact that Harmy got back into gear with 4 wickets has been somewhat overlooked (and thats from someone who doubted him in the first place). Here we go, we're gonna in 3-2, gonna win 3-2......
