Buzzin Cricket

Durham fast bowler Steve Harmison has been called up by England ahead of the third test against South Africa which gets underway on Wednesday. The 29-year-old hasn’t represented his country since March but good form in the county game has seen him rewarded with another chance.

I have mixed feelings as to whether this is a sensible decision from the England selectors. Yes, Steve Harmison has been in fantastic form for Durham – he is the leading wicket taker in the County Championship – but his attitude towards international cricket bothers me. He has always shown a lack of commitment – he is retired from one day international cricket and while on tour for England has often hinted that there a million and one places he would rather be.

It does worry me that even if he performs this summer, he will either not want to tour this winter or he will under perform like he did in New Zealand recently. Should he really be selected if there is a good chance he won’t fancy touring India in November?

I guess the priority has to be winning the third test match against South Africa though and the selectors obviously feel that Steve Harmison is the man to make this happen. I’m not convinced, but I wish his the best. At least Andrew Flintoff will have his best mate back in the team with him.

Other changes to the squad include Paul Collingwood and Ryan Sidebottom returning to replace Chris Tremlett and surprise call-up last time round – Darren Pattinson. I’d put all my cricket betting money on Ryan Sidebottom making the 11 to play at Edgbaston, but Paul Collingwood’s involvement will depend on whether England operate a four or five man bowling attack.

If Paul Collingwood plays it will mean that Tim Ambrose will move down the order to eight and two of Stuart Broad, Steve Harmison, Monty Panesar, Ryan Sidebottom and James Anderson would have to miss out. If Paul Collingwood isn’t recalled, only one of these will miss out and England would have failed to strengthen their batting line up.

The problem at the moment for England is that nobody seems to know what the best team is. After going six test matches with the same side, things are now very uncertain – what exactly is England’s best team?

Well, putting aside the current squad, below is the team I would select given the choice:

Strauss, Cook, Vaughan, Pietersen, Bell, Flintoff, Foster, Broad, Swann, Sidebottom, Anderson.

As for the test match that starts on Wednesday, I expect Collingwood and Sidebottom to play with Stuart Broad and James Anderson missing out. I hope I am wrong though – this would be a negative move in my opinion.

As we well know, most of the discussion since England’s heavy defeat to South Africa in the second test at Headingley has been about selection issues regarding the England team. Should Darren Pattinson be playing? Why is Tim Ambrose batting at six? What is Andrew Flitntoff’s role in the side?

Well, with regards to that final question, it appears that Andrew Flintoff is happy with the role he had in the Headingley test match. The Lancashire man has said that he is ‘pleased batting at seven’. Andrew Flintoff said that after spending time at the crease, he could see himself batting at six again in the future – but not just yet.

This, of course, means that unless England replace a front-line bowler with a front-line batsman or Matt Prior is brought in to bat at six – the out of form Tim Ambrose will be forced to for fill this crucial position in the batting line up once more. I would put a lot of my cricket betting money on Tim Ambrose being very uncomfortable in this role and to be honest, I feel sorry for him. Why should Andrew Flintoff pick and choose where he bats while Tim Ambrose has to fill the gap?

I’m not saying that Tim Ambrose would turn down the chance to bat in the top six for his country, but I think that he knows it doesn’t exactly help the balance of the side. That was clear to see during the four days in Yorkshire.

In my opinion, the outcome of the last test match could have been a lot different if the selectors made different choices in the lead up to the game. Despite being out of form, I think Paul Collingwood was dropped at the wrong time. Ryan Sidebottom’s injury should have allowed Andrew Flintoff to be a straight swap for him. Meaning that six, seven and eight would have been filled by Paul Collingwood, Andrew Flintoff and Tim Ambrose – much stronger wouldn’t you agree? Stuart Broad would have been at nine and instead of a long tail it would, on paper, look like a solid batting line up.

The selectors name the squad for the next test tomorrow and I am intrigued as to who they will choose. Ryan Sidebottom will presumably come in for Darren Pattinson, but as for the batting positions of Tim Ambrose and Andrew Flintoff, it will require Owais Shah, Paul Collingwood or Matt Prior to be called upon if things are to be shaken up a little bit.

Let’s get one thing straight – England were completely outclassed by South Africa in the second test match at Headingley. They fully deserved their ten wicket victory and their 1-0 lead in the series. In all honesty though, as soon as I saw the England team for this match – or more specifically the batting order – I had an incline Graeme Smith’s men would be celebrating come the end of the test match.

First of all, let’s talk about Darren Pattinson. Why on earth was this man included? Basically, he is a 29-year-old Australian raised swing bowler who has only played 12 first-class matches. The fact that he was picked above Matthew Hoggard on his home ground or the in-form duo of Simon Jones and Steve Harmison is quite bizarre.

Matthew Hoggard and Steve Harmison are obviously now concerned for their England futures. Are they really behind an unknown Australian raised 29-year-old in the pecking order? Matthew Hoggard has said that he is bowling ‘better and better’ and is fearful that his international career could be over. Steve Harmison was critical of the selection and questioned whether the ECB believe the young bowlers in this country were good enough to make the step up after they ignored them for this test match.

The ECB line on Darren Pattinson’s call up seems to be that it was a ‘horses for courses’ selection. They wanted someone to make the most of the Headingley conditions. If that was the case, why on earth wasn’t Matthew Hoggard chosen? He is one of the best swing bowlers in the world on his day, has taken 248 test wickets and knows the Headingley pitch better than anyone. I would have put all my cricket betting money on the Yorkshire bowler causing plenty of problems to the South African batting line up.

However, this test match is gone now – it’s all about England trying to level things up when the third test starts at Edgbaston on 30th July. How will Michael Vaughn’s men line up? Well, Ryan Sidebottom has a chance of being fit, so I would imagine he will come in for Darren Pattinson.

Other than that, I’d love to see Simon Jones involved again. If that means Sidebottom misses out, then so be it. Simon Jones is in great form for Worcestershire and he could provide the England attack with that extra spark that it is lacking right now.

My final word for today though is with reference to Tim Ambrose. He has to be dropped in my opinion. I feel sorry for him after the ludicrous decision to bat him at six. He hasn’t scored a run all summer so how can he warrant a move up the order? He quite simply doesn’t appear to be up to the task – with the gloves or the bat. I’d personally pick Essex’s James Foster, but I think the selectors are more likely to turn to Matt Prior again if Tim Ambrose is dropped. Especially after he scored a majestic 137 for Sussex the other day.

There are certainly more questions than answers in terms of England’s selection policy right now and I for one will be intrigued to see how they line up against South Africa against Edgbaston.

Jonathan Agnew stated in one of his recent blogs that if Andrew Flintoff comes through Lancashire’s County Championship game with Hampshire –which starts today – then he will be playing in the second test against South Africa. The BBC pundit came to this conclusion after Andrew Flintoff netted with the England side ahead of the first test.

So, instead of a debate about whether he should be selected, it now seems that it is a case of – who will Andrew Flintoff replace? In my mind, there is no doubting that, if fit, Andrew Flintoff should play for England. His bowling has been especially missed and his batting appears to be showing signs of improvement recently. Overall, it seems difficult to leave him out.

Let’s presume he is fit for the second test match at Headingley and he is going to play. Who would be the man to miss out? Well, after scoring an impressive 75 not out yesterday, Ian Bell appears to have secured his place for now. The Warwickshire batsman shared a 192 run partnership with the majestic Kevin Pietersen – who finished unbeaten on 104 – to leave England 309-3 at the end of day one.

Ideally for England, if Andrew Flintoff is to return to the fold, he would do so batting at number six. This means that he would add to, rather than disrupt, the current bowling trio of Ryan Sidebottom, James Anderson and Stuart Broad. It would provide a great balance to the England side.

With this in mind, Paul Collingwood must have had a fairly restless evening. He knows that Andrew Flintoff is set to replace somebody and he knows that Ian Bell – who was the other England batsman under pressure – has performed admirably to all but secure his place. When Paul Collingwood walks to the crease later today, this won’t be too far from his thoughts. Talk about pressure. I’d put all my cricket betting money on the fact that the Durham batsman will be more nervous than ever when he walks out today.

Paul Collingwood needs to take it upon himself to make the selectors think twice before dropping him. He needs to get himself some runs and do all he can to keep his place in the side. I do wonder though, that secretly, the England selectors wouldn’t mind if Paul Collingwood failed to deliver in this test. It would certainly make there job much, much easier.

Something else that has been suggested is that Michael Vaughan’s poor batting form has gone rather unnoticed. He hasn’t exactly been getting many runs has he? In my opinion, his excellent captaincy warrants a place in the side on its own, but a century in the second innings at Lords wouldn’t go a miss.

England’s focus over the next four days though has to be winning this test match. They need to put selection issues to the back of their minds. If that means they win by an innings with each batsman getting some runs, then so be it. Andrew Flintoff will just have to wait his turn.

England reached 309-3 at stumps on day one of the first Test against South Africa at Lord’s.  The day belonged to Kevin Pietersen who finished on 104*.  He was well supported by the under-pressure Ian Bell who reached 75* - the pair adding an unbeaten 192 for the fourth wicket.

Pietersen received a tremendous ovation from the normally staid Lord’s crowd, probably in recognition of just how much effort he has put in for his adopted country.  There was a lot of talk about how the visitors would be targeting Pietersen, sledging him etc - his innings today was the most marvellous response.

SA skipper Graeme Smith won the toss and put England in - I bet he regrets that now, although Vaughan also said he would have bowled.  The recent rain in London seems to have taken all the life and pace out of the track leaving the visitors’ hyped-up pace attack looking distinctly unthreatening.

On other days on other pitches they may well be a handful, but here they never adjusted to the conditions - constantly bowling too short and wide to be a threat.  England’s batsmen - especially KP - must be looking to kill off the game tomorrow.