2006-11-28 22:50:25 · 9 answers · asked by rotedward 2 in Sports ➔ Cricket
I think so. I was a supporter of Giles in the first test, I'm not sure why, I just was. But now I think we need more attack in our bowling, especially with Harmison throwing them all to the stands. Also Adelaide is apprently good for spin, maybe play them both...
2006-11-28 23:01:15 · answer #1 · answered by hardcoredjbenzy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely, as much as I love the King of Spain, I think Panesar is the best option. His attitude is fantastic, as is his bowling. I think he will get a lot out of the pitch and will help England imensley. His fielding is not so bad, and is improving all the time. His batting is not awful either.
I think they should play just 4 bowlers, Harmison, Hoggard, Flintoff and Panesar. They can use Collingwood and Pietersen if they need to. This would allow so much needed depth of batting by bringing in another batsmen, Flintoff and Jones can then drop down the order a bit.
2006-11-30 06:12:01 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Problem with panasar is that he cant field or bat were as giles offers you both of these.
2006-11-29 07:23:40 · answer #3 · answered by grezzor 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Definitely. We have badly been in need of a holding midfielder since Hargreaves got injured.
2006-11-29 11:03:53 · answer #4 · answered by captcookremembered 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Both could play at Adelaide.
2006-11-29 07:03:03 · answer #5 · answered by pressurekooker 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think panesar should play hes much better at bowling just because he is more attacking and relishes in big challenges like when he got tendulkar out. hes young and couragous and i think he should play!
2006-11-29 08:57:38 · answer #6 · answered by Oli 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think they will play both and drop hoggard instead of anderson
2006-11-29 09:07:09 · answer #7 · answered by dennis 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes
2006-11-30 00:39:42 · answer #8 · answered by john 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i would say...both should play..
2006-11-29 07:22:03 · answer #9 · answered by nick 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋