Ian Bell hits a big hundred

Bowled on 16th April, 2009 at 19:08 by
Category: County cricket news, Ian Bell

He made Elite, you know - Google itThat title’s tongue-in-cheek. You know that, right?

You do now.

Ian Bell hit 172 for Warwickshire as part of his bid to return to the England side. It’s a handy start and we’d be tempted to get ever-so-slightly agitated about it, if it weren’t for the fact that he scored 215 against Northamptonshire last season when his Test place was in a bit of doubt. We’ve been here before.

That said, Bell’s magnificent 199 against South Africa followed that innings, so he wasn’t merely indulging in county cricket batting average bolsteration – and yes, there is such a thing.

Everyone ignore Ian Bell. Maybe he’ll carry on.

The King Cricket mug implies that its owner is fully cool

Make an appeal
  1. GoodCricketWicket   //   April 16th, 2009 at 21:01

    Ian Bell county runs = irrelevant to England

    Or at least they should be. Ian Bell will always score lots of county runs because he has a good technique and the pressure is off.

  2. Dave   //   April 16th, 2009 at 21:13

    That’s his spot secured for the summer, then.

  3. Gaz   //   April 17th, 2009 at 01:41

    I like the title of the article of the BBC. ‘Hungry Bell Compiles Big Century

    It makes it sound like he’s been writing C++ code all day rather than scoring runs. Now he’s nipping off to the shops for a can of coke and a mult-pack of hula hoops.

  4. Ged Ladd   //   April 17th, 2009 at 06:41

    Never mins second division achievements being discounted – surely runs at Taunton should come with a huge discount as well?

  5. Captain Kirk   //   April 17th, 2009 at 07:46

    He’s the modern day Ramprakash and Hick. Runs for fun in the championship, deer in headlights at international level.

    The bowling equivalent is Harmison.

  6. King Cricket   //   April 17th, 2009 at 08:54

    There’s truth in those comments Ged and Kirk.

    A tough winter playing for a South African side would do him the power of good. On his own. No-one to look after him.

    Essentially we’re saying: Ian Bell needs to grow up.

  7. D Charlton   //   April 17th, 2009 at 09:09

    And here’s the reason he didn’t make any at Lord’s

  8. Benno   //   April 17th, 2009 at 10:11

    I wouldn’t discard Bell as a Ramps or Hick just yet. I feel a bit sorry for him because he’s been moved around in the order so much.

    He’s not an international #3. He’s got the shots, but not the mental toughness. KP should take responsibility for the #3 spot and then somehow we shuffle four out of Bell / Collie / Ravi / Freddie / Prior into the next four slots.

    I know I would rather see Bell in the XI than Shah or Vaughan if they are the only alternatives that are going to be offered up.

  9. Bert   //   April 17th, 2009 at 10:38

    The problem is that a #3 batsmen needs to be, to all intents and purposes, an opener. It’s nice to think of them walking out in the 40th over with the score on 135/1, but more often than not they’ll be walking out at 10/1 to face a new ball. The best #3s in recent years have been batsmen who can shift with ease from solid and obdurate to classy and effortless, from new ball watchfulness to arms-free cover-driving. I’m thinking here about Ponting, Dravid and Younis Khan.

    Ian Bell isn’t that player (I’m not sure quite what he is, a #5 probably), but then neither is Owais Shah. Neither, crucially, is Kevin Pietersen. The best we’ve had recently, and a perfect example of the species, is Michael Vaughan (2004 edition, obviously).

    Management Theory Rule 7 – Define the problem, don’t provide the solution.

  10. King Cricket   //   April 17th, 2009 at 11:08

    If only there were an English opening batsman who was comfortable enough at three to be able to score double hundreds at Test level.

    He’d need the shots of Bell, but a more relaxed, unflappable temperament. Ideally, he’d have a wealth of experience – 30 first-class hundreds at least.

    If only such a ruddy-cheeked embodiment of perfection existed…

  11. Suave   //   April 17th, 2009 at 11:23

    Nice work King:

  12. Suave   //   April 17th, 2009 at 11:27

    Bugger, doesn’t allow embedded pictures! There was supposed to be this picture after the colon.


  13. Bert   //   April 17th, 2009 at 13:14

    Oh well, here goes nothing.

    17, 30, 34, 1, 1, 47, 23, 0, 52, 3, 14, 18, 4, 221, 15, 29, 4, 6, 93*, 10, 0, 41, 83, 19, 1, 9

    I make no comment. I don’t need to. The numbers speak for themselves.

  14. String   //   April 17th, 2009 at 15:51

    Last test outing was in Jan 2005. He’s matured greatly since then, both as a cricketer and as an athlete. He’s got the hunger as well. If you know what I mean. I think it’s worth a punt.

  15. marmarzet   //   April 17th, 2009 at 22:17

    Bert, are you a management theorist by trade? Saw your cat rant in TWC and it had me doubled up in hysterics for the second time (I presume it’s yours, Bert– otherwise, there’s a plaigariser on here KC!).

  16. Dave   //   April 18th, 2009 at 16:48

    James Hildreth has rather made a mockery of Bell’s 172 by scoring 303 not out.

    Now that’s a big hundred.

What we mostly seem to write about


Cricket history