Monty got a raw deal

Posted by
< 1 minute read

Monty Panesar has a bit of a lie down - LAZY!

England drop Monty Panesar readily. Whether it’s because of form, the pitch or ‘the balance of the side’, they don’t seem shy about leaving him out.

Maybe the decision will be vindicated, but he seems to have been collateral damage following a line of thinking that betrays England’s lack of confidence in the batsmen. Broad went home and they wanted Finn to replace him, because he’s promised so much recently. However, they didn’t want a tail of Finn, Panesar and Anderson. Bresnan instead of Finn? No, Bresnan instead of Panesar.

England still have Samit Patel’s left-arm spin, so this isn’t perhaps as eye-catching a decision as the guy who ordered a fried spam, egg and cheese sandwich in the bacon butty shop the other day. It’s just a feeling we get – that Monty Panesar is easy to drop.


Mike Gatting wasn't receiving the King Cricket email when he dropped that ludicrously easy chance against India in 1993.


Why risk it when it's so easy to sign up?


  1. Old Chinese saying: A man who drops easily is easy to drop. And also they drop Bresnan often but he doesn’t drop as easily as Panesaar does. Either. I feel an attack of the dropsy coming on. A drop of Nelson’s blood might help. Perhaps Bresnan is Panesaar’s droppleganger. Aaaah I just can’t drop it now I’ve started.

  2. South Africa need 2 players to replace Kallis, is Broad considered as good as Kallis now?? Should he be referred to as a great now?

  3. I think it’s the other way round, he’s not easy to drop, but hard to include. His inclusion in the 2nd UAE test was forced on England and they were probably looking for the first opportunity to return to three seamers and Swann.

  4. I think he was hard done by. But not as hard done by as Bresnan was to be dropped for the first test. When the batsmen are struggling they make a change to the bowling attack. It is basic posho-batsman logic.

    Playing three spinners was completely daft, although playing two was a good idea. Patel only got about 9 overs in each innings in the last test. You can’t bowl spin from three ends at once, and spinners can bowl all day.

    1. They just wanted five bowlers and Ravi can’t turn his arm over at the minute. Pretty sure he’d’ve played otherwise.

  5. Obviously, Monty was picked because England wanted two frontline spinners on a spinning track like Galle. Since Monty only got two wickets (not to mention the dropped catches), it makes sense for him to make way for Bresnan on a less spin friendly track than Galle. Bresnan is a win-win whichever way you look at it – batting, bowling and fielding.

  6. I vaguely remember a match when Chetan Sharma scored a hundred in an ODI and was dropped. I have a slightly better recollection of what a columnist wrote in my local newspaper. Roughly translated, it would have read – “We can’t afford the luxury of retaining a bowler who does not bowl, for his one-off battling batting innings when we carry enough batsmen who do not bat.” Monty was dropped earlier for his failure as a bowler and despite his batting efforts in a drawn opening test which appears significant in hindsight consideing the outcome of that series. Bresnan despite his allround efforts neither gets selected automatically when fit nor any sympathy. I guess his performances will be noticed when he isn’t part of a winning team.

Comments are closed.