England's summer test bowling line up.

Assuming we stick with six batsmen, one wk, and four bowlers we can pencil in Swann as the lone spinner thus leaving us with three pace bowling places. In my opinion we have at least six players vying for selection: Anderson, Tremlett, Bresnan, Finn, Broad, Shazad.

I would pick
1) Anderson - the leader of the attack and an obvious choice.
2) ...
3) ...

As you can see i am undecided on the last two places, as I can see valid arguments for each of the remaining players to be selected given that they all bring something slightly different to the table.

Who would you pick for the summer test matches against Sri Lanka and India, and why? Any left-field selections?
Who do you think England will select?

I am not fully up to date with the latest injury situations, which could make the selections more straight forward.

Broad and Tremlett for me, though Finn deserves a shout.

Tremlett bowled very well in the Ashes tests and deserves a full chance after Finn was so expensive.

I agree that Finn's economy level probably rules him out for the time being.

However, if you include tremlett based on his good performances during the ashes then shouldn't a case also be made for bresnan. Especially as Bresnan may offer something different to Broad and Tremlett who to my mind are quite similar. There just seems be too many options and not enough places.

Broad was first choice before injury, and played very well last summer. Also bowled well in the first couple of tests in Aus without much luck (on the two flatest pitches IMO). I'd be very surprised if they didn't pick him.

That leaves one spot, and IMO Shahzad is probably a little bit behind the other three in the pecking order right now, so I'd make it a choice between Tremlett, Bresnan and Finn. Bresnan always seems to be underrated to me, he did a great job in Australia, and had a more than steady world cup. Tremlett also looked very much the part in Aus, and his injury problems seem behind him at last. Finn was excellent last summer but can be expensive, as seen in Aus (though he took plenty of wickets too).

Abundance of riches methinks, I'd pick Tremlett, but wouldn't be unhappy if they picked any of the others. Also India and Sri Lanka can struggle with bounce, so having two tall guys in Broad and Tremlett is a good option I think.

On a slight tangent, I expect Morgan to be given first shot at the extra batting spot freed up by Colly's retirement, at least for the SL tests. Thus

Strauss (capt)
Cook
Trott
KP (I assume he'll be fit again)
Bell
Morgan
Prior (wk)
Swann
Broad
Tremlett
Anderson

Strauss, Cook, Trott, Pietersen, Bell batsmen

Prior wicket keeper

Broad all rounder

Anderson, Tremlett, Bresnan, Swann Bowlers

This will be the probable side, given the success of the ashes.

Personally would like to see Rashid given a chance, but they are
not going to play 2 spinners, espically in England.

tigerrobins

they will certainly not play two spinners in England in May against Sri Lanka. Rashid is certainly one for the future though, would like to see a bit more of him over the summer (maybe play in some ODIs).

TBH I'd be surprised if they went with five bowlers, the selectors seem to think that four bowlers and six batsmen is the way to go.

Agree with Mad for Chelsea, I can't see the selectors going with only five batsmen as their preferred structure seems to be six batsmen and four bowlers.

Mad for Chelsea is definitely right there, it will be a six batsmen line up. For me, if Broad is fit he plays. he was key in the 2009 Ashes and bowled well in his brief appearances in the world cup.

That leaves one position left. Finn will go back to county cricket and if he takes bucket loads of wickets and improves his economy i expect him to be back in the side by the India series as the management seem really determined to keep him in the set up considering his age and potential.

I think the decision for the SL tests will be based on conditions. If theres a possibility of swing, Bres will be given a go, Hard bouncy track will give Tremlett a chance. Personally I'd like to see Bresnan given a good go as he has been our stand out bowler all winter.

Strauss
Cook
Trott
Piertsen
Bell
Morgan/Rashid, he could bat seven and put prior at 6
Prior
Swann
Broad
Anderson
Finn/Tremlett

cricketfan90 wrote:Strauss
Cook
Trott
Piertsen
Bell
Morgan/Rashid, he could bat seven and put prior at 6
Prior
Swann
Broad
Anderson
Finn/Tremlett

I would think Broad will bat above Swann cric? he did all last summer and in his brief appearances in Aus. As for Rashid, as much as I would love to see him in the test side, I don't think its going to happen this year (it'd be a baptism of fire against India and SL anyway). I think Morgan, Bopara, Hildreth and Taylor will all play in the Test side before Rashid, assuming Swann doesnt get injured.

it was just a rough line up lol

Not to be too pedantic but thought Broad was batting at nine last summer, certainly his century against Pakistan was scored from n°9...

yeah you're right Mad for Chelsea, my mistake. He was dropped to 9 for the Pakistan series having batted at 8 during the Ashes series in 2009. He made his 169 in the final test of the Pakistan series and was as a result promoted back to 8 for the first Ashes test in 2010. In thatds game he was of course the hat-trick wicket for Peter Siddle.

1) Strauss
2) Cook
3) Trott
4) Pietersen
5) James Hildreth (better first class player than Morgan)
6) Bell
7) Prior
8) Broad
9) Swann
10) Anderson
11) Finn/Bresnan/Onions (if fit)

i said what i think the line up will be but i want prior at 6 and rashid at 7, cos it strengthens the batting, rashid is a better f/c batsman than morgan, and he gives another option with the ball. Might not use him but he gives option, so is all round better option than morgan at the moment, morgan needs to work on his longer form of the game with middlesex

I think that Bopara should get a chance over Morgan again, he had a good world cup for england

please not Bopara, he has had his number of chances in the team and has failed to hold a place and therefore a new person should be tried in the team imo

Strauss
Cook
Trott
Pietersen
Bell
Morgan
Prior
Broad
Swann
Temlett
Anderson

Lets Go Buffalo wrote:Strauss
Cook
Trott
Pietersen
Bell
Morgan
Prior
Broad
Swann
Temlett
Anderson

Would like to see this line up at the start of the summer but would be interested what kind of comeback onions makes when fit. Think it could be down to him or tremlett for the last spot

Strauss
Cook
Trott
Pietersen
Bell
Taylor
Prior
Bresnan
Swann
Anderson
Tremlett

GG- no broad??

For me Broad has to be in the team very quick bowler with different varieties also adds something with his batting.I would also have Onions instead of Tremlett and Finn.Hes just came back from injury and is already taking wickets my first team line up would be

1.Strauss
2.Cook
3.Trott
4.Pietersen
5.Hildreth
6.Bell
7.Prior
8.Broad(possibly moved to 7 depending on form of hildreth)
9.Swann
10.Anderson
11.Onions

I would have Bopara,Morgan,Tremlett and Davies in the squad though.

I would like to think that now England have a few decent bowling options they could pick their bowlers based on the pitch and conditions, rather than just picking the same team as last time out. Rotating the bowlers a bit worked quite well in the Ashes after all (although it wasn't entirely by choice in all cases).

England need to have consistency switching there bowlers in every match is not going to work.They need to always play there best bowlers and them bowlers should be able to apapt to the pitch and conditions.Although I can see where your coming from and it would be difficult for the batters having different bowlers each match but England need to have consistency and more importanly confidence in there bowling side it should be the same throughout a series unless players get injured etc.

I don't mean changing the entire line-up, but maybe just one or two players when the situation demands, i.e. not every game. You can't always play your best players - what if your best eleven cricketers were all batsmen! I suppose what I am saying is pick the best players at a given skill for what is needed. If your best bowlers are all swing bowlers and then you have a bouncy wicket and bright sunshine, that could be a problem. As far as confidence goes, well it is a team game, so if the players knew that they were all regarded as part of the team/squad but were selected to do different jobs on different days it wouldn't be an issue. That does require a strong team ethos and spirit though.

I've got to say I agree with Schrodinger. A " horses for courses" approach to the bowling line up makes a lot of sense, especially in English conditions which can be so varied. Such an approach is taken regularly in County cricket ( assuming that the bowling resources are available to the county in question of course) and is generally effective.

It makes very little sense, for example, to select Tremlett on a damp green wicket just because he is in possession of a place at present if you have options such as Bresnan, Onions or Woakes available who are more suited to the conditions. Likewise a hard bouncer should lead to a reversal in selection.

I'm all for supporting the man in form, but if there are several men in form then why not try to keep them all happy? and when are bowlers at their happiest? When they are taking wickets on their favourite kind of surface!

If you have horses for courses bowlers wouldn't get to learn to bowl on all different pitches. You could also have a situation where a bowler in form is dropped for a Test, waits two weeks and has lost his rhythm. What do you do with a bowler who needs to keep bowling all the time. Also having played in the first Test the bowler would have got used to the batsmen and the bowling plans.

I think you pick your best bowlers. If there is an injury then the next best bowler. It unsettles a bowling unit that is being chopped and changed all the time. Bowlers lose confidence, who knows it might be one of them the next time who gets dropped.

How is it possible to know what the wicket is going to be like, who will win the toss, what the weather is going to do to pick horses for courses.

as Anderson got injured, the question has become more important. I thought Shahzad deserved something more. if Anderson isn't playing, I would have gone for Shahzad. he can reverse it as well, if the pitch at the home of cricket tends to be on the flatter side as England found out against South Africa a few seasons ago, that will be an important skill. and if needed, he can hit a few as well. Tremlett offers lots of bounce, Broad, if he's in the right frame of mind can offer movement and bounce, Shahzad can offer pace and reverse. but alas, the England management seems to think otherwise, think its going to be Fin, in a way the right call, as it ensures consistency in selection.

Well Jetty you make several good points, i'll have a go at answering them.
1. In my opinion this is exactly what county cricket is for. it gives players the opportunity to learn how to utilize different pitch and overhead conditions. Further to this the Lions and performance sides are where our young talented cricketers can get experience of conditions abroad. In my opinion the test side is not where players should be "learning to bowl".
2. Obviously an in form bowler is retained. I'm not suggesting ruthless wholesale changes, I'm suggesting selecting the best side for the available conditions...playing to your strengths.
3. A bowler who needs to be playing all the time, a la Steve Harmison, should be immediately released back to his county when it is clear he will not play, and so will still be playing competitive cricket.
4. This works both ways, granted the bowler could get a feel for the batsmen, but likewise the batsmen will learn how best to play the bowlers in question.

As for the bowling line up for tomorrow's second test. I feel that Broad, Finn, Tremlett are all a little samey... I'd like to see Dernbach play as he is in the squad, although i would have preferred for Onions to be selected.

If England go with a specialist 4 man bowling lineup, it has to be the 4 bowlers who are most likely to bowl the opposition out twice. Therefore these 4 have to be Anderson as the new ball spearhead, with Tremlett as his opening partner, and Finn at 3. The spin bowling duties are done by Swann with Pietersen as his spin bowling assistant.

gboycottnut
agree with you if its a 4 man attack, then your top 4 wicket taking bowlers should be in there. Stuart Broad has to go some way in that regard. but at the same time one has to also remember Finn also tends to travel a lot around the ground, thus preventing building up of any kind of pressure on the batter. if Broad can sourt his head and length out, I think in a situation of Broad vs Finn, being a better overall package, the former has the advantage.

onions should be back for england side very soon one would think.

For me
Strauss
Cook
Trott
KP
Bell
Morgan
Prior(wk)
Bresnan/Onions(at 11)
Swann
Tremlett
Anderson


Broad's test record is abysmal.He shouldnt be anywhere near our side.

criticsim of broad is harsh

Sadly mate it is a fact.Bresnan,Onions,Finn are better test bowlers than Broad and broady doesnt deserve to be in the side atm although he clearly has potential.
He needs a good county season with Notts to sort his bowling out IMO.

matter of opinon.

Theres a difference between deserving and will be.

Only injuries will stop the lineup from being Broad Tremlett and Anderson, its not even a question really.

Strauss
Cook
Trott
KP
Bell
Morgan
Prior
Bresnan
Swann
Anderson
Tremlett

Would have bresnan instead of board and he is a much more accurate bowlers who also bowls at about the same pace as Board.

Raymond wrote:

Would have bresnan instead of board and he is a much more accurate bowlers who also bowls at about the same pace as Board.

He's also a better batsman.

Hoggy_Bear wrote:

Raymond wrote:

Would have bresnan instead of board and he is a much more accurate bowlers who also bowls at about the same pace as Board.

He's also a better batsman.

Wouldn't say better, wouldn't say worse. Very similar batting ability.