2nd T20I: England v South Africa

First topic message reminder :

2nd T20I: England v South Africa at Old Trafford.

Match scheduled to begin at 18:30

This series will once again end up with one team either retaining or becoming the No1 ranked team. After being soundly beaten in the Tests and drawing the Odi's England will be hoping for victory against South Africa to give them a confidence boost before heading off to the World Cup later this month.

Other than a series winning confidence boost this is a big chance for a few players to stake their claim for a starting spot in the World Cup and also for one or two {Broads pace, Boparas batting} to try and regain some sort of form.

England need to bounce back to stay in the series after the shambles at Durham.



Squads

England; SCJ Broad {c}, JM Anderson, JM Bairstow, RS Bopara, TT Bresnan, DR Briggs, JC Buttler, JW Dernbach, ST Finn, AD Hales, C Kieswetter{w}, MJ Lumb, EJG Morgan, SR Patel, GP Swann, LJ Wright

South Africa; AB de Villiers{c,w}, HM Amla, F Behardien, J Botha, JP Duminy, F du Plessis, JH Kallis, RE Levi, JA Morkel, M Morkel, JL Ontong, WD Parnell, RJ Peterson, DW Steyn, LL Tsotsobe

Still an injury concern for Tim Bresnan though.


Good luck to both teams.

skyeman wrote: 32 is the second most expensive over in T20 international history

I thought Yuvi hit Broad for 6*6s in the 2007 T20 WC?

LondonTiger wrote:

skyeman wrote: 32 is the second most expensive over in T20 international history

I thought Yuvi hit Broad for 6*6s in the 2007 T20 WC?

Hence this being the second most expensive.

That Parnell over was the most decisive passage in the game, Buttler the player of the match for me.

Lumb dropps Kallis, but fortunately for England it has come after the match was secured.

Keissweter held it together but Buttler was the difference that put the pressure on SA. Sometimes it comes off for you, but he has to do that more than once every 10 games.

So that ends the tour, England couldn't win the series in any of the formats. But they gave a better account of themselves in the limited over games, and ends the summer on a good note, and they would be going off to Sri Lanka with some confidence.

rubbish finish from England really, a couple of wides and an awful miss, but doesn't really matter when the opposition need 41 from the last over does it? very good effort from England with the ball and in the field.

Buttler MOM for me, if you turn that 32 run over into say 10 SA are chasing 95-odd which would have been much closer.

did Broad really just call Kieswetter "Kiesy"? Dreadful nickname

That's the type of performance we want from England Needed that to hopefully, along with a win against Afghanistan, turn the momentum round.

Not much to have a go at England for today but issues for SA with the bat. I hope their line up in SL will be Levi, Amla, Kallis, de Villiers, Duminy, A. Morkel, Botha, Peterson, Steyn, Morkel, Tsotsobe.

That might look a batter light but both Botha and Peterson can bat, and I see no point in picking du Plessis when he's not in form - even when he's in form its probably his fielding which clinches his selection. Ontong just isn't of international standard - some people on here moan about Bopara but Ontong is 32 and averages an identical 13 in both ODIs (28 of them) and T20s (9).

Just to put things into context Amla has scored three more times as many runs on this tour as Ontong has in his 39 match international career.

Well Parnell lost that match for us in one very poor over.

We were on a hiding to nothing after that.

Do any of you agree that T20 matches shouldn't be reduced?

It makes it a bit of a lottery for the result.

Biltong wrote:
Do any of you agree that T20 matches shouldn't be reduced?

It makes it a bit of a lottery for the result.

I'd rather a reduced T20 match than no match at all.

Well done Briggsy

Would like to see that team start in the world cup (except for Hales in for Lumb)

jimbohammers wrote:Well done Briggsy

Would like to see that team start in the world cup (except for Hales in for Lumb)

I'd still have Finn for Bresnan and Patel for Briggs.

Briggs is a good T20 bowler, but I can just see him being hit by sub-continental batsmen; Patel would be hit too, but in a dead heat his batting and relative experience come in.

jimbohammers wrote:Well done Briggsy

Would like to see that team start in the world cup (except for Hales in for Lumb)

Bresnan ahead of the consistent Finn on the basis of 1 match???????

can we afford a tail of Finn, Derbach and Briggs? you'd think them (+ Broad and Swann of course) is our strongest bowling attack. I just think that leaves our batting looking a bit light. Now of those five Swann, Broad and Dernbach are all must-starters for me. Which leaves two spots, and then your two natural combinations are Finn-Patel and Bresnan-Briggs. Patel-Briggs and Finn-Briggs are the more left-field picks.

I'm a bit undecided TBH, which would you go with shanky?

Id like to see Briggs in the side ahead of Patel, but having him dernbach and Finn in side becomes problematic with a long tail ( although its not like we ever see Patels batting "talent")

Must picks are Morgan, Swann, Broad, Finn, keiswetter ( as the only proper keeper), and I guess Hales off the back of one good score ever plus the lack of anyone else who looks like a proper batsman. One of Bopara or Wright. Two of Lumb, Buttler or Bairstow. Its hard to leave out Dernbach....but that creates a briggs patel debate ( id rather see the two stronger bowlers, but perhaps that questions Bresnan over Dernbach). I dont see England going with the three spinner option

Its a quandry...best bowlers and a long tail or Bresnan for Dernbach or Patel for Briggs

Mad for Chelsea wrote:can we afford a tail of Finn, Derbach and Briggs? you'd think them (+ Broad and Swann of course) is our strongest bowling attack. I just think that leaves our batting looking a bit light. Now of those five Swann, Broad and Dernbach are all must-starters for me. Which leaves two spots, and then your two natural combinations are Finn-Patel and Bresnan-Briggs. Patel-Briggs and Finn-Briggs are the more left-field picks.

I'm a bit undecided TBH, which would you go with shanky?

Same team as the second T20 against SA

I see Finn as a better bowler than Briggs on any surface. So it comes down to Patel vs Bresnan. Patel offers a bit more destructive ability with the bat and in this format and in Bresnan's current form(I know he was good yesterday but still...) and in those conditions offers more with the ball too IMO. So a fairly straight forward choice for me. Briggs + Bresnan weakens the batting significantly(Patel is a much better batsman) and I am not sure really strengthens the bowling. Briggs has played 2 international matches, so picking him over a proven, in form bowler like Finn(who has done well in ODI cricket in similar conditions) is definitely not worth it particularly if that means Bresnan has to bat at 7 instead of Patel.

Is Bresnan a better bowler than Finn? No.
Is Bresnan a better batsman than Patel? No.
Is Briggs a better bowler than Finn? No. Definitely unproven
Is Bresnan a better bowler than Patel? Not necessarily, in these conditions, in this format.


Easy Choice...

So youd go with Patel over Briggs on the grounds he averages 11 with the bat and is an ineffective bowler?

I see this as one of those "no right answer" questions. It may of course depend on how fast Finns back gets better.

Briggs over Patel for me. A better fielder, a better bowler, and Patel has hardly excelled with the bat as it is for England.

Brilliant from Buttler yesterday, very pleased for him. He's a nice young man, an ambitious cricketer and a great talent. Hopefully that gives him the belief that he can take the game to this kind of opposition, and should stand both him and England in good stead ahead of the tournament.

If KP was added to this side in place of Hales, I'd actually feel quietly confident.

People saying can we afford to play these bowlers who aren't great at batting, erm..... isnt that what the batsmen are for? Why do we pick our BOWLERS based on their BATTING?

because if you go with five proper bowlers you need some of them to be able to bat, otherwise you're left with too long a tail. Would you be happy with (for example) Tredwell Anderson Finn Dernbach and Briggs as your five? I wouldn't. (I know this is extreme as we'll have at least Broad and Swann in there).

Patel may not have excelled with the bat for England, but he's a decent option for a n°7, with Broad and Swann to follow. I know you don't really rate Bresnan shanky, but he's a very good bowler, his T20 record is solid if unspectacular (roughly 1-30 for his four over spell, given where he bowls you'd take that more often than not). Certainly a better bowler than Patel. But you want two spinners in T20 so one of Patel or Briggs has to play. I like Briggs, and he's certainly a better bowler than Patel, but I'm not sure how to fit him in (as that would mean IMO dropping Finn, which I wouldn't want to do). A bit like Bairstow with the ODI side recently.

Well, I am not opposed to the idea of 5 specialist bowlers in T20. Broad at 7 and Swann at 8 works fine for me in a T20. Bresnan for Finn would be silly though, particularly on current form.

Kieswetter
Wright
Bopara
Morgan
Buttler
Bairstow
Broad
Swann
Briggs
Finn
Dernbach

Fists of Fury wrote:Kieswetter
Wright
Bopara
Morgan
Buttler
Bairstow
Broad
Swann
Briggs
Finn
Dernbach

Bopara?

knew you'd say that! I think we have enough hitting in there, so it might be wise to have at least one that can accumulate if need be. If we get off to a good start you simply slide him down the order.

Also, his dobbers might work quite well in Sri Lanka.

On current form, he is far more likely to accumulate a series of single digit scores than anything else..

Hales for me. He has improved a bit against spin recently.

Haha, I can't argue with that assessment.

Hales opening and Wright at 3?

Yep.

Just going to put something out there, Lumb scored 252 runs at an average of 36 whilst Hales scored 127 at 25.4 in the FLT20 this year. Admittedly Lumb played 3 more innings, but he still had a much higher average than Hales. Let's not forget Lumb has the experience of winning a World T20 and him opening the batting keeps the right-left combo at the top which could prove crucial in squeezing some more bad balls out of the opposition. Whilst Hales has his 99 against the Windies going for him. I wouldn't rule Lumb out yet.

Sorry, I dont rate Lumb. Despite his stats this season, I think its a joke that he has been selected over the likes of Shah, Prior and Bell. Not really anywhere near international standard IMO.

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:Sorry, I dont rate Lumb. Despite his stats this season, I think its a joke that he has been selected over the likes of Shah, Prior and Bell. Not really anywhere near international standard IMO.

Hales has earned his place over Lumb and I wouldn't have picked Lumb.

But what he does offer is a 'fearless' attitude and thats what England are looking for. In the grand scheme of things he didn't score many runs in the Caribbean, but he was good at hitting boundaries before getting out, and that got England off to a start - note that yesterday's start (from Kieswetter) is the type of thing we're looking for.

There is a difference - in 2010 they set a platform for KP, and now he's not there - but it should be the same principle. The openers need to have no inhibitions - that's my one doubt about Hales.

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:Sorry, I dont rate Lumb. Despite his stats this season, I think its a joke that he has been selected over the likes of Shah, Prior and Bell. Not really anywhere near international standard IMO.

So what would you pick Shah on? His international record? Even Botham hardly mentions him these days
Bell I can see the argument for but England simply dont seem to believe in classical stroke players for this format (also see KPs views on T20 batting vs ODI). Prior ...the discussions been had a million times, ask Mike Selig. Really if he came in it would be for keisweter anyway.

I can't see how Prior is a better option than Lumb. He has had numerous more chances at International level, in ODI's and T20's, and has always been average there. You bowl into his body and he can't score boundaries, and that will always be his problem in T20's.

Bell, I would have liked to see perhaps opening the batting, but he is not in the squad so it is irrelevant discussing him in terms of opening this time.

As for Shah, his time passed years ago. I did feel he was unlucky to be dropped after playing a cracking innings in the Champions Trophy against SA, but in the age of high intensity modern cricket where games can be lost on not turning ones into twos, and on misfields and dropped catches then he is outdated.

I'd like to see England go with
Craig Kieswetter
Alex Hales
Luke Wright
Eoin Morgan
Jos Buttler
Jonny Bairstow
Samit Patel
Graeme Swann
Stuart Broad
Steven Finn
Jade Dernbach.
Patel is a decent option with the ball and bat in this format, and him at 7 rather than Broad, Swann or Bresnan gives the lineup that extra bit of solidity. I don't certainly see Briggs in the Narine league so that he could just make massive international strides in this format right away. Looks like a decent bet for T-20s, nothing more than that at the moment. Dispensing with Patel's experience and all-round ability for Briggs at this stage just doesn't make any sense for me.
Neither Tim Bresnan nor Ravi Bopara in their current form would come into my XI for the first couple of games. Wright for Bopara also solves the issue of that extra over or 2 as well.

msp83 wrote:I'd like to see England go with
Craig Kieswetter
Alex Hales
Luke Wright
Eoin Morgan
Jos Buttler
Jonny Bairstow
Samit Patel
Graeme Swann
Stuart Broad
Steven Finn
Jade Dernbach.
Patel is a decent option with the ball and bat in this format, and him at 7 rather than Broad, Swann or Bresnan gives the lineup that extra bit of solidity. I don't certainly see Briggs in the Narine league so that he could just make massive international strides in this format right away. Looks like a decent bet for T-20s, nothing more than that at the moment. Dispensing with Patel's experience and all-round ability for Briggs at this stage just doesn't make any sense for me.
Neither Tim Bresnan nor Ravi Bopara in their current form would come into my XI for the first couple of games. Wright for Bopara also solves the issue of that extra over or 2 as well.

Briggs is an option we can bring in in case of an injury, if Patel goes badly or the unlikely event that we come across a pitch where we want a third spin option.

Lumb provides cover for the batsmen, whilst I can only conceivable see Bopara returning if Wright were injured (because we'd need the overs).

Bresnan is obviously seam bowling cover.

msp83 wrote:
Patel is a decent option with the ball and bat in this format,

His figures suggest otherwise

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:Sorry, I dont rate Lumb. Despite his stats this season, I think its a joke that he has been selected over the likes of Shah, Prior and Bell. Not really anywhere near international standard IMO.

So what would you pick Shah on? His international record? Even Botham hardly mentions him these days
Bell I can see the argument for but England simply dont seem to believe in classical stroke players for this format (also see KPs views on T20 batting vs ODI). Prior ...the discussions been had a million times, ask Mike Selig. Really if he came in it would be for keisweter anyway.

Better player of spin than anyone in this squad.

He has done well in the BBL, SA T20 and the IPL(in similar conditions). Anyways, he won't be picked. Can't see Lumb is a better option however.