England news November 9, 2010

Blood clot rules Carberry out of Australia trip

ESPNcricinfo staff
  shares 9

Michael Carberry, the Hampshire opening batsman, has been ruled out of the England Performance Programme trip to Australia after suffering a blood clot in his lung. He has received treatment which has been successful but he can't take long-haul flights following the illness.

ESPNcricinfo understands that Carberry first felt the effects of the problem towards the end of last season when he started to suffer shortness of breath while batting and fielding.

He was due to be part of the squad that will be based in Brisbane and Perth alongside the main Ashes party until shortly before Christmas. No replacement has been named to cover for Carberry's absence.

Carberry made his Test debut against Bangladesh in Chittagong where he scored 34 and 30 but hasn't been able to add to his single cap.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • landl47 on November 16, 2010, 6:42 GMT

    Too bad for Carberry, he's had a great season in England and would have been the call-up if either of England's openers got injured (quite possible. they might pull a muscle trying to reach some of Mitch Johnson's usual balls). Carberry's also one of the best fielders in the world and worth watching just for that.

  • on November 12, 2010, 10:32 GMT

    @ D.S.A , now I see you think Australia will win comfortably I'm guessing I HAVE been transported back in time and it's the late 90's when Warne & McGrath were at the height of their powers and Australia's batting line-up was world class unlike now!

    Plus talking of Shane Warne does remind me that there will be one world class spinner in the series but he wont be bowling for Australia.

  • 158notout on November 11, 2010, 16:29 GMT

    DSA - are you kidding me? Firstly at no point did you make it clear you were talking about ODIs and in fact the evidence you cited suggests otherwise. Regarding Bells technical game - there are not many batsmen in the world better than him , its his mental strength that has always let him down, something he seems to have improved. Bopara on the other hand... hasn't.

  • wolfberries on November 11, 2010, 15:22 GMT

    Reading all this about Bell failing when it counts I thought I had been transported back to 2007!

    But thankfully I just realised that these people clearly haven't seen Bell's scores against South Africa in tough conditions against a class attack and his record since then.

  • D.S.A on November 10, 2010, 8:09 GMT

    Batting at number 6 is a joke for a player which you think is so great. I'll ask again. Why has this great player inked in at number 3, and now bats at 6? I'll answer actually...he failed at number 3 and he's been demoted to take advantage of tired bowlers, because he isn't skilled enough to get big scores at number 3. Lastly, your comparison of averages...how irrelevant again. Once again, I didn't say Bopara should be in the Test team, so moving on to Bell. hi's average of 43 is completely relevant as he averages 33 in Australia, and just as important, he averages 25.6 against Australia. Terrible stats...and he is meant to be one of the 6 best pure batsmen that England currently has...Most importantly, Australia will win comfortably, and we'll see if you come back and eat your words when Bell fails against Australia...AGAIN!

  • D.S.A on November 10, 2010, 8:00 GMT

    @trickstar: You obviously misread what I wrote. I didn't say he should be in the Ashes side. I said he should be in the limited overs squad. Read closely before you type. Also, I never directly compared Bell to Bopara but even if I had done so, Bell DOESN'T have a technical batting game, otherwise he wouldn't fail against the testing Australian bowlers so much. He doesn't have every shot in the book like you suggest either, and while he may exhibit talent, he is not capable to converting it to meaningful scores, apart from against Bangladesh (average is above 100 right?...and against Australia? Ha!). His batting at number 3 IS relevant if you read closely as it shows he has given many chances, more than most who have represented England and are not currently in the team, yet he always finds himself back there. I suppose you have never heard of bias have you, or you atleast do not think it would exist in the England team. Pressure at number 6? Are you serious? Ha! tbc

  • TheAbacus on November 10, 2010, 1:21 GMT

    I would be interested to know how he got a blood clot in his lungs (aka a pulmonary embolism) in the first place. Sportsmen with their levels of physical activity should not end up with pulmonary emboli unless they have some sort of a hematological condition causing their blood to clot more easily or are using anabolic steroids which can contribute to the same. Fascinating, medically speaking.

  • Trickstar on November 10, 2010, 0:08 GMT

    @D.S.A Why are you wanting Bopara in the side. Apart from the runs he scored on the flat decks of WI, Bopara has failed every chance he's got,he went to pieces in the Ashes last year and as far as rating him more than Bell,don't make me laugh. Bell out classes him in every department,a far more technical batting game,with every shot in the book and as far as mentally, Bopara makes Bell look like Tendulkar. What has batting at 3 got to do with anything,Trott bats there and since SA, where Bell had some great knocks under pressure he bats 6. You seem to have some kind of agenda to push here mate because Bell averages 43 and Bopara 33.

  • D.S.A on November 9, 2010, 20:48 GMT

    It'll be interesting to see if a replacement is named. If so, it should probably be Ravinder Bopara as he'll probably be in the ODI and/or Twenty20 eleven. I doubt the ECB will do this as it would add more competition on their boy, Ian Bell and they can't jeopardise him and his "secure" number 6 position. For the Bell fans out there, why don't you explain how he has failed at number 3 like his average suggests, except against Bangladesh of course, yet he always finds his way back in the team. Do you really think he hasn't been given preferential treatment with more chances than most? He hasn't changed at all. He isn't a better batsman or more mentally stronger. He'll fail, but it will not affect his career in the long term because he will be back after getting temporarily dropped.

  • landl47 on November 16, 2010, 6:42 GMT

    Too bad for Carberry, he's had a great season in England and would have been the call-up if either of England's openers got injured (quite possible. they might pull a muscle trying to reach some of Mitch Johnson's usual balls). Carberry's also one of the best fielders in the world and worth watching just for that.

  • on November 12, 2010, 10:32 GMT

    @ D.S.A , now I see you think Australia will win comfortably I'm guessing I HAVE been transported back in time and it's the late 90's when Warne & McGrath were at the height of their powers and Australia's batting line-up was world class unlike now!

    Plus talking of Shane Warne does remind me that there will be one world class spinner in the series but he wont be bowling for Australia.

  • 158notout on November 11, 2010, 16:29 GMT

    DSA - are you kidding me? Firstly at no point did you make it clear you were talking about ODIs and in fact the evidence you cited suggests otherwise. Regarding Bells technical game - there are not many batsmen in the world better than him , its his mental strength that has always let him down, something he seems to have improved. Bopara on the other hand... hasn't.

  • wolfberries on November 11, 2010, 15:22 GMT

    Reading all this about Bell failing when it counts I thought I had been transported back to 2007!

    But thankfully I just realised that these people clearly haven't seen Bell's scores against South Africa in tough conditions against a class attack and his record since then.

  • D.S.A on November 10, 2010, 8:09 GMT

    Batting at number 6 is a joke for a player which you think is so great. I'll ask again. Why has this great player inked in at number 3, and now bats at 6? I'll answer actually...he failed at number 3 and he's been demoted to take advantage of tired bowlers, because he isn't skilled enough to get big scores at number 3. Lastly, your comparison of averages...how irrelevant again. Once again, I didn't say Bopara should be in the Test team, so moving on to Bell. hi's average of 43 is completely relevant as he averages 33 in Australia, and just as important, he averages 25.6 against Australia. Terrible stats...and he is meant to be one of the 6 best pure batsmen that England currently has...Most importantly, Australia will win comfortably, and we'll see if you come back and eat your words when Bell fails against Australia...AGAIN!

  • D.S.A on November 10, 2010, 8:00 GMT

    @trickstar: You obviously misread what I wrote. I didn't say he should be in the Ashes side. I said he should be in the limited overs squad. Read closely before you type. Also, I never directly compared Bell to Bopara but even if I had done so, Bell DOESN'T have a technical batting game, otherwise he wouldn't fail against the testing Australian bowlers so much. He doesn't have every shot in the book like you suggest either, and while he may exhibit talent, he is not capable to converting it to meaningful scores, apart from against Bangladesh (average is above 100 right?...and against Australia? Ha!). His batting at number 3 IS relevant if you read closely as it shows he has given many chances, more than most who have represented England and are not currently in the team, yet he always finds himself back there. I suppose you have never heard of bias have you, or you atleast do not think it would exist in the England team. Pressure at number 6? Are you serious? Ha! tbc

  • TheAbacus on November 10, 2010, 1:21 GMT

    I would be interested to know how he got a blood clot in his lungs (aka a pulmonary embolism) in the first place. Sportsmen with their levels of physical activity should not end up with pulmonary emboli unless they have some sort of a hematological condition causing their blood to clot more easily or are using anabolic steroids which can contribute to the same. Fascinating, medically speaking.

  • Trickstar on November 10, 2010, 0:08 GMT

    @D.S.A Why are you wanting Bopara in the side. Apart from the runs he scored on the flat decks of WI, Bopara has failed every chance he's got,he went to pieces in the Ashes last year and as far as rating him more than Bell,don't make me laugh. Bell out classes him in every department,a far more technical batting game,with every shot in the book and as far as mentally, Bopara makes Bell look like Tendulkar. What has batting at 3 got to do with anything,Trott bats there and since SA, where Bell had some great knocks under pressure he bats 6. You seem to have some kind of agenda to push here mate because Bell averages 43 and Bopara 33.

  • D.S.A on November 9, 2010, 20:48 GMT

    It'll be interesting to see if a replacement is named. If so, it should probably be Ravinder Bopara as he'll probably be in the ODI and/or Twenty20 eleven. I doubt the ECB will do this as it would add more competition on their boy, Ian Bell and they can't jeopardise him and his "secure" number 6 position. For the Bell fans out there, why don't you explain how he has failed at number 3 like his average suggests, except against Bangladesh of course, yet he always finds his way back in the team. Do you really think he hasn't been given preferential treatment with more chances than most? He hasn't changed at all. He isn't a better batsman or more mentally stronger. He'll fail, but it will not affect his career in the long term because he will be back after getting temporarily dropped.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • D.S.A on November 9, 2010, 20:48 GMT

    It'll be interesting to see if a replacement is named. If so, it should probably be Ravinder Bopara as he'll probably be in the ODI and/or Twenty20 eleven. I doubt the ECB will do this as it would add more competition on their boy, Ian Bell and they can't jeopardise him and his "secure" number 6 position. For the Bell fans out there, why don't you explain how he has failed at number 3 like his average suggests, except against Bangladesh of course, yet he always finds his way back in the team. Do you really think he hasn't been given preferential treatment with more chances than most? He hasn't changed at all. He isn't a better batsman or more mentally stronger. He'll fail, but it will not affect his career in the long term because he will be back after getting temporarily dropped.

  • Trickstar on November 10, 2010, 0:08 GMT

    @D.S.A Why are you wanting Bopara in the side. Apart from the runs he scored on the flat decks of WI, Bopara has failed every chance he's got,he went to pieces in the Ashes last year and as far as rating him more than Bell,don't make me laugh. Bell out classes him in every department,a far more technical batting game,with every shot in the book and as far as mentally, Bopara makes Bell look like Tendulkar. What has batting at 3 got to do with anything,Trott bats there and since SA, where Bell had some great knocks under pressure he bats 6. You seem to have some kind of agenda to push here mate because Bell averages 43 and Bopara 33.

  • TheAbacus on November 10, 2010, 1:21 GMT

    I would be interested to know how he got a blood clot in his lungs (aka a pulmonary embolism) in the first place. Sportsmen with their levels of physical activity should not end up with pulmonary emboli unless they have some sort of a hematological condition causing their blood to clot more easily or are using anabolic steroids which can contribute to the same. Fascinating, medically speaking.

  • D.S.A on November 10, 2010, 8:00 GMT

    @trickstar: You obviously misread what I wrote. I didn't say he should be in the Ashes side. I said he should be in the limited overs squad. Read closely before you type. Also, I never directly compared Bell to Bopara but even if I had done so, Bell DOESN'T have a technical batting game, otherwise he wouldn't fail against the testing Australian bowlers so much. He doesn't have every shot in the book like you suggest either, and while he may exhibit talent, he is not capable to converting it to meaningful scores, apart from against Bangladesh (average is above 100 right?...and against Australia? Ha!). His batting at number 3 IS relevant if you read closely as it shows he has given many chances, more than most who have represented England and are not currently in the team, yet he always finds himself back there. I suppose you have never heard of bias have you, or you atleast do not think it would exist in the England team. Pressure at number 6? Are you serious? Ha! tbc

  • D.S.A on November 10, 2010, 8:09 GMT

    Batting at number 6 is a joke for a player which you think is so great. I'll ask again. Why has this great player inked in at number 3, and now bats at 6? I'll answer actually...he failed at number 3 and he's been demoted to take advantage of tired bowlers, because he isn't skilled enough to get big scores at number 3. Lastly, your comparison of averages...how irrelevant again. Once again, I didn't say Bopara should be in the Test team, so moving on to Bell. hi's average of 43 is completely relevant as he averages 33 in Australia, and just as important, he averages 25.6 against Australia. Terrible stats...and he is meant to be one of the 6 best pure batsmen that England currently has...Most importantly, Australia will win comfortably, and we'll see if you come back and eat your words when Bell fails against Australia...AGAIN!

  • wolfberries on November 11, 2010, 15:22 GMT

    Reading all this about Bell failing when it counts I thought I had been transported back to 2007!

    But thankfully I just realised that these people clearly haven't seen Bell's scores against South Africa in tough conditions against a class attack and his record since then.

  • 158notout on November 11, 2010, 16:29 GMT

    DSA - are you kidding me? Firstly at no point did you make it clear you were talking about ODIs and in fact the evidence you cited suggests otherwise. Regarding Bells technical game - there are not many batsmen in the world better than him , its his mental strength that has always let him down, something he seems to have improved. Bopara on the other hand... hasn't.

  • on November 12, 2010, 10:32 GMT

    @ D.S.A , now I see you think Australia will win comfortably I'm guessing I HAVE been transported back in time and it's the late 90's when Warne & McGrath were at the height of their powers and Australia's batting line-up was world class unlike now!

    Plus talking of Shane Warne does remind me that there will be one world class spinner in the series but he wont be bowling for Australia.

  • landl47 on November 16, 2010, 6:42 GMT

    Too bad for Carberry, he's had a great season in England and would have been the call-up if either of England's openers got injured (quite possible. they might pull a muscle trying to reach some of Mitch Johnson's usual balls). Carberry's also one of the best fielders in the world and worth watching just for that.