How bad is Collingwood's bowling?

Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the
question. Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his fielding
is, of course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium paced trundlers?

Picking Anderson will surely maintain the balance and make up of the side,
as he's pretty much a straight swap. Bringing in Collingwood would upset
the balance of the team, change the way the other players look at the game
etc etc? If he can bowl, at all, even six or seven overs in a day, then
Collingwood might be worth the call; but if he's going to get some major
tap, and get smashed regularly out of the ground, then it's got to be
Anderson, surely? Then again, it's not going to swing much, so won't
Anderson also be vulnerable as he pitches it well up?

I reckon, if they're planning to bowl him, then picking Collingwood is the
way to go. However, if they want him more as a batsman, then this is the
wrong mental approach as far as I am concerned. Pick someone to replace
Jones, ie a bowler. Can our attack really stand up with only Harmisson and
Flintoff having any strike potential? Hoggard's not going to be too
penetrative on that wicket, I suspect, Ashley Giles is not a strike spinner,
by any means, and so we'd only really have Harmy and Freddy to take the
wickets. Which out of Anderson and Collingwood is more likely to take a few
wickets do you think? So many questions.

In message <431d6b23$0$17479$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net>, The
Crow <Thecrow@nobodyspimp.com> writes
>Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the
>question. Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his
>fielding is, of course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium
>paced trundlers?

He bowls around 75 mph and moves the ball orthodoxly if the conditions
permit. He has improved but on a flat pitch on a fine day he is a bit
of a gimmee for a decent bat. RH
--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk

"Robert Henderson" <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:B98PT6NLLXHDFwcR@anywhere.demon.co.uk...
> In message <431d6b23$0$17479$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net>, The
> Crow <Thecrow@nobodyspimp.com> writes
>>Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the
>>question. Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his
>>fielding is, of course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium paced
>>trundlers?
>
> He bowls around 75 mph and moves the ball orthodoxly if the conditions
> permit. He has improved but on a flat pitch on a fine day he is a bit of
> a gimmee for a decent bat. RH

I know this is rather simplistic, but Anderson has 51 first class wickrts
so far this season, Collingwood just 20.

Mick.

"The Crow" <Thecrow@nobodyspimp.com> wrote in message
news:431d6b23$0$17479$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net...
> Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the
> question. Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his fielding
> is, of course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium paced trundlers?
>
> Picking Anderson will surely maintain the balance and make up of the side,
> as he's pretty much a straight swap.

Insofar as he's a right-arm pace bowler, yes. Anderson is better known for
conventional out-swing, I think, rather than reverse, but according to
yesterday's Telegraph, that "has been largely absent this season. While he has
cut back on his heavy four-ball habit, his pace has diminished as well."

The Lancashire averages suggest that Cork would have been a better bet (and, of
course, Cork can bat, although I'm certainly no Cork fan).

--
David North
Email to this address will be deleted as spam
Use usenetATlaneHYPHENfarm.fsnet.co.uk

"Mick Tully" <mick.tully@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:3tfTe.3207$zw1.567@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Robert Henderson" <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:B98PT6NLLXHDFwcR@anywhere.demon.co.uk...
> > In message <431d6b23$0$17479$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net>, The
> > Crow <Thecrow@nobodyspimp.com> writes
> >>Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the
> >>question. Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his
> >>fielding is, of course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium paced
> >>trundlers?
> >
> > He bowls around 75 mph and moves the ball orthodoxly if the conditions
> > permit. He has improved but on a flat pitch on a fine day he is a bit of
> > a gimmee for a decent bat. RH
>
> I know this is rather simplistic, but Anderson has 51 first class wickrts
> so far this season, Collingwood just 20.

.... although Collingwood actually has marginally the better average. Neither has
been economical (both around 3.5 an over in the CC this season), and with
Anderson apparently not on top form, neither inspires much confidence as a
bowler for The Oval, but then nor do any alternatives that I can think of (and
that includes Sidebottom, Jim).

In principle, I think I'd prefer Anderson of the two, but if he takes a pasting,
it could well knock his confidence back still further.
--
David North
Email to this address will be deleted as spam
Use usenetATlaneHYPHENfarm.fsnet.co.uk

Anderson has been poor for his county this season but Collingwood would be
the better to play in this test.

To have someone who can go in at number 8 and score the amount of runs he
does and field the way he does will be far more benificial to England. And
it would be someone else who is a good batter against the spin of Warne and
maybe even McGill.

He bowls at 75 mph but does mix it up a bit then you have also got Tresco
who can bowl a bit alos and then KP with his off break bowling and we all
know that The Brit Oval takes spin.

Biggus

"David North" <dnorth@abbeymanor.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3o5gm7F49f5uU1@individual.net...
> "The Crow" <Thecrow@nobodyspimp.com> wrote in message
> news:431d6b23$0$17479$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net...
>> Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the
>> question. Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his
>> fielding
>> is, of course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium paced
>> trundlers?
>>
>> Picking Anderson will surely maintain the balance and make up of the
>> side,
>> as he's pretty much a straight swap.
>
> Insofar as he's a right-arm pace bowler, yes. Anderson is better known for
> conventional out-swing, I think, rather than reverse, but according to
> yesterday's Telegraph, that "has been largely absent this season. While he
> has
> cut back on his heavy four-ball habit, his pace has diminished as well."
>
> The Lancashire averages suggest that Cork would have been a better bet
> (and, of
> course, Cork can bat, although I'm certainly no Cork fan).
>
> --
> David North
> Email to this address will be deleted as spam
> Use usenetATlaneHYPHENfarm.fsnet.co.uk
>
>

I put it to you, The Crow, that on Tue, 6 Sep 2005 11:11:43 +0100 you
did state the following;
> Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the
> question. Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his fielding
> is, of course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium paced trundlers?
>
> Picking Anderson will surely maintain the balance and make up of the side,
> as he's pretty much a straight swap. Bringing in Collingwood would upset
> the balance of the team, change the way the other players look at the game
> etc etc? If he can bowl, at all, even six or seven overs in a day, then
> Collingwood might be worth the call; but if he's going to get some major
> tap, and get smashed regularly out of the ground, then it's got to be
> Anderson, surely? Then again, it's not going to swing much, so won't
> Anderson also be vulnerable as he pitches it well up?

If Collingwood plays, I doubt Vaughan will give him many overs.

--
Drodbar

"The Crow" <Thecrow@nobodyspimp.com> wrote in message
news:431d6b23$0$17479$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net...
> Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the
> question. Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his
> fielding is, of course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium paced
> trundlers?
>
> Picking Anderson will surely maintain the balance and make up of the side,
> as he's pretty much a straight swap. Bringing in Collingwood would upset
> the balance of the team, change the way the other players look at the game
> etc etc? If he can bowl, at all, even six or seven overs in a day, then
> Collingwood might be worth the call; but if he's going to get some major
> tap, and get smashed regularly out of the ground, then it's got to be
> Anderson, surely? Then again, it's not going to swing much, so won't
> Anderson also be vulnerable as he pitches it well up?
>
> I reckon, if they're planning to bowl him, then picking Collingwood is the
> way to go. However, if they want him more as a batsman, then this is the
> wrong mental approach as far as I am concerned. Pick someone to replace
> Jones, ie a bowler. Can our attack really stand up with only Harmisson
> and Flintoff having any strike potential? Hoggard's not going to be too
> penetrative on that wicket, I suspect, Ashley Giles is not a strike
> spinner, by any means, and so we'd only really have Harmy and Freddy to
> take the wickets. Which out of Anderson and Collingwood is more likely to
> take a few wickets do you think? So many questions.

typo fixed
Here´s a young lad with a very dodgy confidence level, who even in the CC
has took some tonk, he averages over 30 a wkt.
Huge gamble.

On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 21:47:48 +0100, "David North"
<dnorth@abbeymanor.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote:

>Bell is a better bowler than Trescothick (assuming that Bell is fit to bowl),

Besides, I don't really want to see one of the opening batsman bowl
too much. I think Tres's runs will be far more useful than his
bowling.

"Simon Pleasants" <plesbit@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:taath1h9brc2s49bthbvpmmqmjkq6odq57@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 21:47:48 +0100, "David North"
> <dnorth@abbeymanor.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Bell is a better bowler than Trescothick (assuming that Bell is fit to bowl),
>
> Besides, I don't really want to see one of the opening batsman bowl
> too much. I think Tres's runs will be far more useful than his
> bowling.

I jolly well hope so. ;o)
--
David North
Email to this address will be deleted as spam
Use usenetATlaneHYPHENfarm.fsnet.co.uk

"Robert Henderson" <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:B98PT6NLLXHDFwcR@anywhere.demon.co.uk...
> In message <431d6b23$0$17479$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net>, The Crow
> <Thecrow@nobodyspimp.com> writes
>>Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the question.
>>Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his fielding is, of
>>course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium paced trundlers?
>
> He bowls around 75 mph and moves the ball orthodoxly if the conditions
> permit. He has improved but on a flat pitch on a fine day he is a bit of a
> gimmee for a decent bat. RH

Bowled at an average of 80-81 mph yesterday. So much for medium pace; that's
pushing towards FM - the same sort of pace that Hoggard was bowling this
morning. He also produced the best catching chance so far. Certainly bowled
better than I was expecting.
--
David North
Email to this address will be deleted as spam
Use usenetATlaneHYPHENfarm.fsnet.co.uk

	#1
The Crow	How bad is Collingwood's bowling? Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the question. Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his fielding is, of course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium paced trundlers? Picking Anderson will surely maintain the balance and make up of the side, as he's pretty much a straight swap. Bringing in Collingwood would upset the balance of the team, change the way the other players look at the game etc etc? If he can bowl, at all, even six or seven overs in a day, then Collingwood might be worth the call; but if he's going to get some major tap, and get smashed regularly out of the ground, then it's got to be Anderson, surely? Then again, it's not going to swing much, so won't Anderson also be vulnerable as he pitches it well up? I reckon, if they're planning to bowl him, then picking Collingwood is the way to go. However, if they want him more as a batsman, then this is the wrong mental approach as far as I am concerned. Pick someone to replace Jones, ie a bowler. Can our attack really stand up with only Harmisson and Flintoff having any strike potential? Hoggard's not going to be too penetrative on that wicket, I suspect, Ashley Giles is not a strike spinner, by any means, and so we'd only really have Harmy and Freddy to take the wickets. Which out of Anderson and Collingwood is more likely to take a few wickets do you think? So many questions.

	#2
Robert Henderson	Re: How bad is Collingwood's bowling? In message <431d6b23$0$17479$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net>, The Crow <Thecrow@nobodyspimp.com> writes >Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the >question. Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his >fielding is, of course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium >paced trundlers? He bowls around 75 mph and moves the ball orthodoxly if the conditions permit. He has improved but on a flat pitch on a fine day he is a bit of a gimmee for a decent bat. RH -- Robert Henderson Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/ Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk

	#3
Mick Tully	Re: How bad is Collingwood's bowling? "Robert Henderson" <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:B98PT6NLLXHDFwcR@anywhere.demon.co.uk... > In message <431d6b23$0$17479$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net>, The > Crow <Thecrow@nobodyspimp.com> writes >>Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the >>question. Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his >>fielding is, of course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium paced >>trundlers? > > He bowls around 75 mph and moves the ball orthodoxly if the conditions > permit. He has improved but on a flat pitch on a fine day he is a bit of > a gimmee for a decent bat. RH I know this is rather simplistic, but Anderson has 51 first class wickrts so far this season, Collingwood just 20. Mick.

	#4
David North	Re: How bad is Collingwood's bowling? "The Crow" <Thecrow@nobodyspimp.com> wrote in message news:431d6b23$0$17479$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net... > Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the > question. Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his fielding > is, of course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium paced trundlers? > > Picking Anderson will surely maintain the balance and make up of the side, > as he's pretty much a straight swap. Insofar as he's a right-arm pace bowler, yes. Anderson is better known for conventional out-swing, I think, rather than reverse, but according to yesterday's Telegraph, that "has been largely absent this season. While he has cut back on his heavy four-ball habit, his pace has diminished as well." The Lancashire averages suggest that Cork would have been a better bet (and, of course, Cork can bat, although I'm certainly no Cork fan). -- David North Email to this address will be deleted as spam Use usenetATlaneHYPHENfarm.fsnet.co.uk

	#6
Biggus Dickus	Re: How bad is Collingwood's bowling? Anderson has been poor for his county this season but Collingwood would be the better to play in this test. To have someone who can go in at number 8 and score the amount of runs he does and field the way he does will be far more benificial to England. And it would be someone else who is a good batter against the spin of Warne and maybe even McGill. He bowls at 75 mph but does mix it up a bit then you have also got Tresco who can bowl a bit alos and then KP with his off break bowling and we all know that The Brit Oval takes spin. Biggus "David North" <dnorth@abbeymanor.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote in message news:3o5gm7F49f5uU1@individual.net... > "The Crow" <Thecrow@nobodyspimp.com> wrote in message > news:431d6b23$0$17479$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net... >> Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the >> question. Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his >> fielding >> is, of course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium paced >> trundlers? >> >> Picking Anderson will surely maintain the balance and make up of the >> side, >> as he's pretty much a straight swap. > > Insofar as he's a right-arm pace bowler, yes. Anderson is better known for > conventional out-swing, I think, rather than reverse, but according to > yesterday's Telegraph, that "has been largely absent this season. While he > has > cut back on his heavy four-ball habit, his pace has diminished as well." > > The Lancashire averages suggest that Cork would have been a better bet > (and, of > course, Cork can bat, although I'm certainly no Cork fan). > > -- > David North > Email to this address will be deleted as spam > Use usenetATlaneHYPHENfarm.fsnet.co.uk > >

	#7
Drodbar	Re: How bad is Collingwood's bowling? I put it to you, The Crow, that on Tue, 6 Sep 2005 11:11:43 +0100 you did state the following; > Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the > question. Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his fielding > is, of course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium paced trundlers? > > Picking Anderson will surely maintain the balance and make up of the side, > as he's pretty much a straight swap. Bringing in Collingwood would upset > the balance of the team, change the way the other players look at the game > etc etc? If he can bowl, at all, even six or seven overs in a day, then > Collingwood might be worth the call; but if he's going to get some major > tap, and get smashed regularly out of the ground, then it's got to be > Anderson, surely? Then again, it's not going to swing much, so won't > Anderson also be vulnerable as he pitches it well up? If Collingwood plays, I doubt Vaughan will give him many overs. -- Drodbar

	#8
JP	Re: How bad is Andersons bowling? "The Crow" <Thecrow@nobodyspimp.com> wrote in message news:431d6b23$0$17479$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net... > Now that Jones is definitely out of the test, we have to answer the > question. Collingwood has batted rather well this season, and his > fielding is, of course, legendary, but just how bad are his medium paced > trundlers? > > Picking Anderson will surely maintain the balance and make up of the side, > as he's pretty much a straight swap. Bringing in Collingwood would upset > the balance of the team, change the way the other players look at the game > etc etc? If he can bowl, at all, even six or seven overs in a day, then > Collingwood might be worth the call; but if he's going to get some major > tap, and get smashed regularly out of the ground, then it's got to be > Anderson, surely? Then again, it's not going to swing much, so won't > Anderson also be vulnerable as he pitches it well up? > > I reckon, if they're planning to bowl him, then picking Collingwood is the > way to go. However, if they want him more as a batsman, then this is the > wrong mental approach as far as I am concerned. Pick someone to replace > Jones, ie a bowler. Can our attack really stand up with only Harmisson > and Flintoff having any strike potential? Hoggard's not going to be too > penetrative on that wicket, I suspect, Ashley Giles is not a strike > spinner, by any means, and so we'd only really have Harmy and Freddy to > take the wickets. Which out of Anderson and Collingwood is more likely to > take a few wickets do you think? So many questions. typo fixed Here´s a young lad with a very dodgy confidence level, who even in the CC has took some tonk, he averages over 30 a wkt. Huge gamble.

	#9
Simon Pleasants	Re: How bad is Collingwood's bowling? On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 21:47:48 +0100, "David North" <dnorth@abbeymanor.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote: >Bell is a better bowler than Trescothick (assuming that Bell is fit to bowl), Besides, I don't really want to see one of the opening batsman bowl too much. I think Tres's runs will be far more useful than his bowling.