England squad for 3rd test

First topic message reminder :

BBC Sport ‏
[ltr]@BBCSport[/ltr]
  29s
England squad for 3rd Test v India: Cook, Robson Balance, Bell, Root, Moeen, Buttler, Stokes, Broad, Jordan, Woakes, Plunkett, Anderson

Prior dropped, no Kerrigan

ChequeredJersey wrote:

Stella wrote:Pietersen wasn't dropped for poor form alone though was he.

Maybe the management and other senior players needed a bit of being challenged...

Pietersen was rightly or wrongly told to pi.s off for being a nuisance. I'm a bit on the fence regarding that, but some people (not you) need to get over it. Ballance, and Root look like they have a future in the middle order, and along with Bell, give us a decent middle order. The problem has been, Cook, no spinner, and injured players.Give it a year, and it might be Kevin who?

KP_fan wrote:

Stella wrote:Pietersen wasn't dropped for poor form alone though was he.

the argument against KP playing here in the last few posts is being made on form an fitness only   

I think we know the real reason.

Right, that's it, no more Pietersen from me   

Taking a stab at the XI

Cook
Robson
Ballance
Bell
Root
Ali
Buttler
Jordan
Stokes
Plunkett
Anderson

Buttler in is obvious, suspect Broad might get a rest given he doesn't look completely right.

Bell's form is also an issue, could be confidence? Once Cook gets a big score I hope that will be back to service as normal

Bells generally been a streaky player

Easier to have a streaky player who can win you a match when your other batsmen are firing, harder with Cook not getting runs, a new opener who is having some success but not wild success, Prior out of form and Stokes and Broad forgetting how to bat

You can't replace an entire side in one go. In an ideal world Bell would be firing, but take him out and you go into the 3rd test with only Cook with any sizable experience.

When India went to South Africa late last year, there was hardly any experience in the batting department other than MS Dhoni who's not at his best in overseas conditions usually. Dhawan, Vijay, Pujara, Kohli, Rahane and Sharma, the top 6 hardly had 50 tests among them. Yet they thrived.
Yes of course experience matters and matters a great deal. But if the experienced players aren't delivering for a long stretch and letting the side down consistently, something needs to be done, you can't hide behind the experience factor for ever, India learned it the hard way.......
The Indian side that played at Lord's had a combined 26 test hundreds, while England's had more than 60....... James Anderson has more than 350 test wickets, the entire Indian attack combined has around 250.

Bell scored 562 runs in last years first Ashes series, and a test average just south of 45. That tends to buy you more time than 2 unremarkable test series before being put out to pasture.

So while yes, experience doesn't cover extended runs of non performances, it also buys you a chance to show you can do it again.

Bell averaged 34.37 for an extended period of almost 2 years between the end of the 2011 summer and the start of the 2013 summer, a period in which he played no less than 17 tests. Then he had a fabulous series against Australia before reverting to pattern. It is not exactly a case of leaving out the best performance to make a point. Even if you include that fabulous series and look at his average from the end of the 2011 summer to present, he's averaging an unacceptable 35.35. To underperform for best part of 33 tests and then hold on to a place in the side in the name of experience, well very, very much debatable. And I find it really hard to accept that there is no upcoming player capable ofaveraging 35 at least who can come into the side.

I'm torn on Bell, I agree with GSC in that he's earned himself enough credit, but he does find ridiculous ways to get out when he's playing well. Often gets in and then out. Again another to review come the end of the Oval test