Cricket

[B-Rizzle]

Who do you think should keep for england

Geraint jones or chris read.

I think jones in test and read in one dayers but if read can get his batting on form then he should play in the tests aswell.

What do you think?

[Claverham_Red]

Well, Jones is a better batsmen than Read but Read is a better keeper.

But wickets keepers now have to score runs regularry which is why Chris Read is out of the team.

So Geriant Jones is my vote to play but Chris Read has performed well and scored runs in the one 'dayers'.

[Jimmy]

Jones for tests, Read for ODI's (at the momment.)

Whilst on the subject of cricket do either of you have any idea why Giles continues to be picked. I remember saying he should be dropped from the team before the last Ashes series in Australia but he is still there.

He is no-where near International class. He does neither of the things you would want from you spinner - he does not look threatening\take wickets or does he hold up an end and create pressure.

This is going to sound sad i know but i needed to emphasise my point. I went onto Cricinfo.com and looked at his stats. In test matches he averages 40 with the ball which in its own right is simply not good enough. However in England the guy averages 60 with the ball!!!

Here are a list of his significant bowling figures in test matches in England;

1-106, 1-108, 1-57, 1-64, 4-62, 1-47, 1-75, 1-134, 2-98, 1-15, 1-51, 2-153, 2-45, 1-142, 0-24, 2-102.

Those are his bowling figures, in England, not including the current test.

Forget 'Who was Jack the ripper?' or 'The Bermuda Triangle', how this guy continues to get picked when being so clearly the weakest link in the team is the biggest mystery of all.

I'm sure he's a nice bloke and its nothing personal but if we are ever going to match the Aussies we cannot carry any single player.

NB. Giles average is only as low as 40 because he had one outstanding series in Pakistan in 2001 where, ill give him his dues, he played very well and played a huge part in the series victory.

[Claverham_Red]

Although I agree what you are saying about Giles but he did do well in the last test against New Zealand (39 overs, 8 maidens, 87 runs conceded and 3 wickets).

And also who else have we got? Gareth Batty, he's worse than Giles. England seriously need a Shane Warne

[Jimmy]

Giles bowled acceptably in the second innings of the first test. One of his wickets was a good ball, another was a false shot and i foget how he took the third wicket.

To be honest mate i think your making the mistake that the majority of people do, justifying his selection by saying that we dont have a better spin bowling option.

Giles is probably the best spinner in England - however that fact on its own does not justify him being selected in the team. The bottom line is he isnt good enough: thus he shouldnt be picked.

He offers little to nothing for the team. He may bowl a good spell on occasions and possibly score a valuable 30 down the order, however he is the weak link and should be dropped in favour of another batsman with Vaughan bowling spin when required.

In my opinion if Giles was a 'number 11' he would have been dropped along time ago. But the argument that he 'provides valuable lower order runs' is ridiculous as you may as well just pick another batsman to do the same job better.

I'm disappointed to see, but do understand Nasser Hussain retiring. He is probably our most resistant batsman and still had alot to offer England. I think that his retirement may have saved Ashley Giles test career, for the time being anyway.