Quotehanger

  • "The fact is that once I was playing again I was automatically available for everything on the schedule and that meant Stanford. I make no apologies for that and, as for the suggestion that I should waive the fee or give it to charity, I don't see why I should be a special case."
    Steve Harmison feels strongly about suggestions that he came out of one-day retirement in order to play the Stanford Twenty20 for 20

    Sep 7, 2008

    • Recent Posts

    Try DVD rental for £3.99 per month!

    The headlines

    The news

    TWC



    Bopara or Shah?

    By Will last year, at the end of November Leave a comment on this post

    Before meeting the bumbling Boris just now, I was reading Christopher Martin-Jenkins’ piece in The Times on the selection dilemma England are faced with. Will they opt for the greater experience (and age) of Owais Shah, or plump for Ravi Bopara’s allround nous and youthful potential? CMJ reckons the decision is as much down to the selectors’ own opinion - stats and figures can only tell us so much - but, like me, would pick Bopara for the first Test against Sri Lanka in Kandy on Saturday.

    It’s tough luck on Shah, who I have followed since he was captain of England Under-19s a decade ago, but now is the time for Bopara.

    Who would you go for and why?

    Tags: , , , , |

    8 Responses to “Bopara or Shah?”

  • Coalster wrote:
    November 29th, 2007 at 2.54 pm

    Well, I would vote for Shah, due to him being the superior batsman, but the poll tells me both options are invalid - does it know something we don’t?

    The argument about Bopara offering more with the ball is a red herring. In the tour match, I’m sure Collingwood would have bowled ahead of Bopara if he had been playing anyway. Also, MPV, KP, and even Bell and Shah are capable of bowling a few overs anyway. How many fill in bowlers does a team need, given they’ll bowl their main 4 for the majority of the time anyway?

  • Coalster wrote:
    November 29th, 2007 at 3.00 pm

    Clarification - if I vote using the options/button at the bottom of the post, it doesn’t work, but when I used the column on the right, then it did.

  • JF wrote:
    November 29th, 2007 at 3.37 pm

    Has to be Shah in a test match, has to be. By far a better batsman who can vary his game more…

    Rav the chav’s time will come. Shah deserves an extended run in the side.

    JimF

  • pod wrote:
    November 30th, 2007 at 3.59 am

    I’m not convinced that Shah is by far the better batsman of the two, as Coalster and JF opine. I admit I haven’t seen Bopara bat in domestic four-day cricket, but from whatever we’ve seen of him in the ODIs thus far, he seems to me to be the better batsman. I think he has a lot of time while batting, and is strokes are laced with sheer class… but like others have said, it comes down to a matter of opinion…

  • Jonathan Liew wrote:
    November 30th, 2007 at 11.38 am

    It’s got to be Shah. Shah will get big runs. Bopara is a 40s and 50s man.

  • Reverse Swing wrote:
    November 30th, 2007 at 6.14 pm

    Pod’s missing the point. This is a 5 day test match - not a 50 over ODI. Playing abroad (especially in the first test) you need as much batting as you can get - so Shah MUST come in at 6, or even 5 and drop ‘The Pies’ down to six.

    They should then go in with four bowlers, with Vaughan, KP and aforementioned ‘Pies’ to provide some fill in if necessary.

  • pod wrote:
    December 1st, 2007 at 3.59 pm

    Good to see Bopara getting his debut :)

    Anyway, I don’t see how I’m pissing the point. All I said is that Bopara to me seems the better batsman. I said I think his shots are laced with class, and I maintain that. I think Owais Shah is an ugly batsman to watch (I know that doesn’t detract from the fact that ultimately it is the runs one scores that counts ultimately). But considering that Bopara has not played test cricket thus far, I wonder how one can conclude that he’s not good enough.

    And as for it being the first game of an away series - what if Shah had played, and England would have gone on to lose the game? By the logic above, it is apparent that Bopara still wouldn’t get a game, because then “there would be too much pressure on a debutant, especially considering that the team is 1-0 down in an away series. What if they would have won? Well then, “what ain’t broke needs no fixing”… so by this logic, our young lad doesn’t get a game in the foreseeable future.

    I guess that now the selection’s been made, all we can do is wait and see what the guy has to offer…

  • pod wrote:
    December 1st, 2007 at 4.00 pm

    sorry, it should be how i’m “missing” the point… hahaha

    • Comments

    Receive email updates on new comments


    « A break from politics | Main | England start well »