Whats this obsession with Freddie?

malcolm31337 · 9th May 2008, 13:48

I dont really see it. Personally Id like him to play a whole season with Lancashire, before considering him for England. Hes got to start from the bottom, playing for England is not the practice he needs.

Rooney1987 · 9th May 2008, 20:19

I agree England are not gonna need him against New Zealand at home. His bat has been awful for 2 to 3 years now he needs to get that right. He is bowling well for Lancashire though.

FlawlessThaw · 9th May 2008, 21:02

Flintoff is still one of the best bowlers England have. His batting may not be up to scratch but I would pick him for England on his bowling alone.

I personally would consider playing him at number 7, followed by Ambrose, Sidebottom, Anderson/Broad, Panesar. That's not a bad looking tail in all honesty particularly if Broad was chosen.

We probably don't need Flintoff for the Kiwi Matches but he to say he isn't good enough and needs a full county season is ludicrous.

crappycraperson · 9th May 2008, 21:11

He has been rubbish for two years now. People were too quick to proclaim his as the best player in the world ever few years back.

Donado · 9th May 2008, 21:35

Rubbish player.

Not waving his shirt anymore is he, fucking twat.

Sultan · 9th May 2008, 21:38

On a selfish note I would have him playing for Lancashire full time.

He'd be an absolute hit in the IPL.

Rooney1987 · 10th May 2008, 14:04

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cric...nd/7393646.stm

Melbourne Red · 11th May 2008, 02:03

He's only been a genuine test batsman for one 18 month period in his entire career. He should always be used as a Pollockesque late order run getter rather than an out and out batsman. He's been bowling well for Lancs so I don't see any reason he shouldn't be sent straight back into the team if he's fully recovered. He's England's best bowler.

EDIT: Just read the article above. End of discussion I suppose.

crappycraperson · 11th May 2008, 02:35

mmmm I have always thought Flintoff was a better batsman than bowler. Don't think he is their best bowler as well. He has never been a very attacking bowler.

stats back me up as well

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/engl...yer/12856.html

crappycraperson · 11th May 2008, 02:36

Infact those stats are very average.

massey · 11th May 2008, 12:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melbourne Red

He's only been a genuine test batsman for one 18 month period in his entire career. He should always be used as a Pollockesque late order run getter rather than an out and out batsman. He's been bowling well for Lancs so I don't see any reason he shouldn't be sent straight back into the team if he's fully recovered. He's England's best bowler.

EDIT: Just read the article above. End of discussion I suppose.

Freddie has been struggling alot with the bat for a along time now and can't be relied on to fufill a top 6 place and is a risk at 7,That saying he still has a bit of time on his side and maybe his batting will improve as he ages more and has to balance that out with a slower bowling stint.To say he is englands best bowler is a bit too much praise though I have thought hoggard has been more consistent than him in picking up wickets and does the hard graft too.Sidebottom is englands best bowler currently.,Broad in the future.

9th May 2008, 13:48	#1 (permalink)
malcolm31337 Reserve Team Player Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: 93, 94, 96, 97, 99, 00, 01, 03, 07...08! CHAMPIONS! Posts: 3,485	Whats this obsession with Freddie? I dont really see it. Personally Id like him to play a whole season with Lancashire, before considering him for England. Hes got to start from the bottom, playing for England is not the practice he needs.

9th May 2008, 20:19	#2 (permalink)
Rooney1987 Reserve Team Player Join Date: May 2006 Location: Manchester Posts: 2,001	I agree England are not gonna need him against New Zealand at home. His bat has been awful for 2 to 3 years now he needs to get that right. He is bowling well for Lancashire though.

9th May 2008, 21:02	#3 (permalink)
FlawlessThaw most 'know it all' poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: London Posts: 8,501	Flintoff is still one of the best bowlers England have. His batting may not be up to scratch but I would pick him for England on his bowling alone. I personally would consider playing him at number 7, followed by Ambrose, Sidebottom, Anderson/Broad, Panesar. That's not a bad looking tail in all honesty particularly if Broad was chosen. We probably don't need Flintoff for the Kiwi Matches but he to say he isn't good enough and needs a full county season is ludicrous.

9th May 2008, 21:11	#4 (permalink)
crappycraperson First Team Regular Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: <Insert something funny here> Posts: 10,537	He has been rubbish for two years now. People were too quick to proclaim his as the best player in the world ever few years back.

9th May 2008, 21:35	#5 (permalink)
Donado Caf Vigilante Join Date: May 2003 Location: Goes it so. Posts: 11,031	Rubbish player. Not waving his shirt anymore is he, fucking twat.

9th May 2008, 21:38	#6 (permalink)
Sultan Bearded and Wise Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Kindness is a mark of faith, and whoever is not kind has no faith. Posts: 15,053	On a selfish note I would have him playing for Lancashire full time. He'd be an absolute hit in the IPL.

10th May 2008, 14:04	#7 (permalink)
Rooney1987 Reserve Team Player Join Date: May 2006 Location: Manchester Posts: 2,001	http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cric...nd/7393646.stm

11th May 2008, 02:03	#8 (permalink)
Melbourne Red Trannie Lover Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Melbourne Posts: 6,857	He's only been a genuine test batsman for one 18 month period in his entire career. He should always be used as a Pollockesque late order run getter rather than an out and out batsman. He's been bowling well for Lancs so I don't see any reason he shouldn't be sent straight back into the team if he's fully recovered. He's England's best bowler. EDIT: Just read the article above. End of discussion I suppose.

11th May 2008, 02:35	#9 (permalink)
crappycraperson First Team Regular Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: <Insert something funny here> Posts: 10,537	mmmm I have always thought Flintoff was a better batsman than bowler. Don't think he is their best bowler as well. He has never been a very attacking bowler. stats back me up as well http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/engl...yer/12856.html

11th May 2008, 02:36	#10 (permalink)
crappycraperson First Team Regular Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: <Insert something funny here> Posts: 10,537	Infact those stats are very average.