Jones and Prior?

[Matt]

Surely we are missing a trick here and Prior should be keeping wicket with
Bell playing in place of Jones?

I'm not anti Jones but Bell's inclusion would strengthen the batting if
Prior is also playing.

[Fred]

You'd think. Never really understood the value of playing two
keepers...

[Alan Osborn]

In article <1134647769.4...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, Fred
<longh...@hotmail.com> writes

>You'd think. Never really understood the value of playing two
>keepers...
>

At the academy it was thought Prior's England hopes would be as a
batsman rather than a wicketkeeper
If the supersub format is to continue just gives the additional option
to bring in another batsman and sub out Jones.
This as some suggest should have happened in the 2nd ODI rather than
bringing in a substitute batsman at No. 10

Under the supersub system batsman and bowlers are both subject to being
subbed out of the game, so you are only safe if you are an all-rounder
such as Flintoff. Playing Prior allows for subbing the wicket keeper as
well.

Mind you I wish they drop the idea after the 1 year experiment it is
just making the game more complicated, similarly the Powerplays most of
the time the captains are taking them as soon as possible, so they can
then concentrate on a normal game.

If they want to liven up the middle of the game, how about a period when
boundaries count as 8, and for the bowlers if a wicket is taken in the
allocated period, it counts as 2, one of the batsman due in is forfeited
(i.e. No.11 is not permitted to bat)
This could really be a "Powerplay" session.
--
Alan