England Lions team - interesting coach choice...

England Lions squad: James Taylor (Nottinghamshire, capt), Jonny Bairstow (Yorkshire), Ravi Bopara (Essex), Steven Finn (Middlesex), Stephen Parry (Lancashire), Harry Gurney (Nottinghamshire), Alex Hales (Nottinghamshire), Craig Overton (Somerset), Jason Roy (Surrey), Ravi Patel (Middlesex), Tom Smith (Lancashire), James Vince (Hampshire), David Willey (Northamptonshire).


Coach - Andy Flower

Pretty hipster squad that, not sure what they gain by having Bopara in as he's probably nailed down for the ODI side anyways.

As for Flower being coach, I'd have no issues with it as he is a fantastic coach but the one thing he did horribly whilst England coach was bring through the young players. So having him in charge of the Lions (and a lot of players he failed to bring through) doesn't make that much sense to me...

Where does Roy bat in the ODI stuff? Does he open like he does in T20? From that squad I'd like to see him open. Doesn't help there's been no One Day stuff yet, but someone like Patel has got his call up very much on T20 form. He's been exceptional.

Hales
Roy
Taylor
Vince
Bopara
Bairstow
Willey
Smith/Overton
Gurney
Finn
Patel

Would be what I'd like to see.

First Moores and now Flower!. When will England start looking forward!?

What next? Bring back Michael Vaughan or Mike Brearley as captain!?

What has poor Steven Finn done to deserve this? He was refinding himself at the county level, and now he's yet again thrust back to a Flower dominated setup!.

A few interesting selections there Ravi Patel? Jason Roy?
Does Patel's selection indicates anything regarding the pecking order of the senior side as far as the spin department is concerned?
And Roy, the much talked about Surrey batsman who has been making ripples in T-20s this year, is one to watchout for I understand.

msp83 wrote:A few interesting selections there Ravi Patel? Jason Roy?
Does Patel's selection indicates anything regarding the pecking order of the senior side as far as the spin department is concerned?
And Roy, the much talked about Surrey batsman who has been making ripples in T-20s this year, is one to watchout for I understand.

I'm not sure how far progressed Patel is as a FC spinner. He's only played 16 games and he averages 33 which is decent enough for a young spinner in England. He seems to have displaced Rayner as Middlesex's number 1 spinner in the CC which shows someone must like him as Rayner is the definition of a solid bowler who you can rely on. Patel has been exceptional this year in T20 though, given he's only played 3 List A games, that is what has got him selected. Look forward to seeing how he goes.

Roy has had the 'talented' moniker for a while now and he's certainly had a great season, but he's not looked good in the last two TV games I've seen Surrey on and I am worried that he might be a little streaky. Deserves his shot though and hopefully he can deliver, because he is devastating when on.

regression:

preparation :
to bring back Flower as Eng coach ???

realization:
"Minus Flower Cook is exposed "

An average of 33 isn't bad in English domestic cricket with the conditions, and the early start to the season and all that.

"The old coach is there, hiding somewhere behind his green curtain at Loughborough."
Wrote cricinfo's Jarrod Kimber yesterday.
No more hiding now, he's back out in the open!.

James Taylor responded well to his capatincy call up, 35* off 14 to win the game and help Notts chase down 201!

No Danny Briggs....... Mental

I am getting a bit sick of people having sly and not-so-sly digs at Flower or the ECB with more than every other post.

It is no secret that I am a big fan of Andy Flower. Just in case people forgot, but under his watch:
- England went from being in disarray (after a Pietersen breakdown, this time involving the then coach and the rest of the ECB) to number 1 in the world for a while
- England beat Australia 3 times in a row, the last two easily
- England won in India for the first time in heaven's knows how long
- England won the world T20 with a side which few would have given them much chance before the tournament
- James Anderson became the 2nd best pace bowler around, and probably the best English pace bowler since Botham
- Stuart Broad went from inconsistent and not sure of how he should be bowling to a very good international bowler
- Graeme Swann became world class, and the best English spinner since at least Underwood and possibly Lock and Laker
- Cook became a world class opener
- Trott was brought in and established himself as a very good number 3
- Matt Prior became the leading keeper-batsman in world cricket

I am sure people will be quick to point out the role played by a certain person in winning in India and the WT20 (whilst happily ignoring or minimising Flower's). I have no wish to discuss this person further, as I have said numerous times already, so I would ask in advance and without much hope that people desist.

Of course, I am not for a moment suggesting that all or indeed any of this was solely down to Flower. Flower was fortunate to be surrounded by a good team of coaches; he was fortunate that Andy Strauss imposed himself as such an obvious choice for captain, and proved to be so good at it; he was fortunate that he had the right players at his disposal to start with.

Nor am I suggesting that everything was rosy during Flower's tenure. There was that terrible series in the UAE (although it is soon forgotten England got themselves into winning positions in all 3 test matches). There was undoubtedly a stubborn belief in his methods which went too far, and a slowness to acknowledge that with his main players' powers waning different tactics were required. There was the continued failures in the one-day format.

Nevertheless it is a strong list of accomplishments, and surely even Flower's most vocal detractors should be man enough to acknowledge that Flower was for a time at least an excellent head coach. He is also by all accounts an excellent coach (the two are very different). It would therefore by absolute madness if the ECB didn't carry on employing him in some respect.

There are frankly a lot of people on here who have no idea what Flower's role was, what he did, under what pressure, and who are all too happy to sit behind keyboards and with the cloak of anonymity and have pops at someone who is as well as everything else a decent human being who gave his all to the job. He deserves at least some respect for that.

With that off my chest, I admit to being surprised that Flower has been given the England Lions coaching job.

Maybe it is just because it seems like a clear demotion: you go from coaching the main side to the reserves. I am surprised somebody with Flower's pride would accept that easily. On the other hand, speaking to Farby when he got sacked from the Kent director of cricket job and was appointed Yorkshire 2nd XI coach, he said that whilst on the face of it it was a demotion actually he was enjoying the Yorkshire role because it involved more day-to-day coaching. It is likely that the Lions job is more hands-on than the England one, and perhaps Flower wants to do more hands-on coaching.

That would still surprise me, because Flower doesn't really strike me as the hands-on type, and I didn't think the ECB had him labelled this way either.

I know people will bring up Steven Finn again. I posted about this at quite some length at the time. Finn had a problem with his action in that he kept running into the stumps, and the MCC being particularly daft decided that this would be a no-ball. So Finn had to change his action. He will have done this in consultation with the bowling coach, his county coach and the head coach. What solution they came up with clearly didn't work. That happens: if coaching was an exact science where you got it right all the time then we'd all do it. It seems to me that Flower has gotten almost all the blame for the mishandling of Finn (if you call it that) and this is unfair.

At the end of the day Finn is himself responsible for his game. If you read his interview on deep extra cover (transcribed by cricinfo) and I strongly advise you do - it is the most interesting interview I've read all year - he has clearly understood this now and is making strides; to use a somewhat pompous phrase he has at last taken ownership of his game which is something I said he should do when he returned home from Australia in the winter. Great.

Why anybody would think Flower and the other Lions coaches are going to suddenly mess this whole thing up just for the sake of it is beyond me. I suspect they have called up Finn because they want a closer look at him and to see how his rebuilding is coming along. They may even make suggestions, but I think Finn is now strong enough to say "thanks but no thanks" which maybe he wasn't before.

As for the rest of the squad, it is pretty much what you would expect - a good mix of players who England are keeping an eye on and want to have a closer look at, and fringe players given a chance to stake a claim.

It is interesting that Patel has jumped ahead of Riley, at least for the limited overs stuff. I am surprised England still see Bairstow as a keeping option, but then as we have established they are not exactly spoiled for choice at the moment. I guess Foakes of Essex would be one to keep an eye on?

Re Flowe: He gave Eng one of their longest purple patch. My tributes to Flower are well documented such as here.

https://www.606v2.com/t54349-minus-flower-cook-is-exposed

in these corporate lingo laden time where end justifies the means Flower mastered the art of delivering results, by hook or crook, fair or diiabolical , shooting from others shoulders and sometimes completely shooting down those that came in his way....

Until the uni-dimensionalism of his ways, his karma and Magic Johnson caught up with him and broke him down, and he reached the "end of life" with England side.

after such high profile, largely successful, high voltage in the lime -light career, sitting back and working with clubs or kids would not have not cut it for too long.
such a profile in desire for renwed action would find natural progression taking up the coaching of a smaller side like BD or SL, drop his price but the job would not be short on action and he could take total control.
And success would bring international acclaims and with that an ego satisfaction.
Eng-A job lacks the high voltage, high profile.

unless this is a stepping stone towards taking back control of main Eng team in some form should Cook continue to flounder.

Re ECB: their travails are aptly described in Jarrod Kimber best-selling article "there is a hole in your bucket" , based on facts , written with beautiful brutality.
Many of us here also observed what he write but the CI platform give those thoughts wider reach and higher credibility.

There does appear an implicit air that Flower and ECB are deemed immune from negative criticism.
I haven't seen that as an explicit guideline here or on cricinfo or elsewhere in blogosphere though.

Excellent post Mike. I kinda hope the mods will step in at some point because these debates are tiresome and often end up retreading old ground.

GSC wrote:Excellent post Mike. I kinda hope the mods will step in at some point because these debates are tiresome and often end up retreading old ground.

yeah maaan......good suggestion......this forum should forbid certain subjects......regardless of their cricketing relevance proven by the fact that Cricinfo, blogs , print and electronic media are all talking about it.
WHY?
because it makes some people here sick 

I agree with a lot of that on Flower KPF, although I have no idea what underhand methods he is supposed to have used. Which is why I admit to being surprised at seeing him at the head of the England Lions, unless it is that he wants to be a bit more hands-on (like you that strikes me as a bit unlikely, but neither of us can claim to know Flower all that well). I would more have expected him to take charge of the accademy, or even elite coaching or something.

I have no problem with people criticising Flower or the ECB and have done so myself. My issue is with those who place all the world's evil at their door, change their narrative to suit the facts, use every other post as an opportunity to make snide remarks, or simply repeat the same points ad infinum without debating or taking on board what anybody else is saying.

As for the Kimber piece, I find it one-sided and riddled with inconsistencies. He does make some interesting points as well, but for me when you offer such a partisan/one-sided view of things you lose a lot of credibility.

Mike Selig wrote:I have no problem with people criticising Flower or the ECB and have done so myself. My issue is with those who place all the world's evil at their door, change their narrative to suit the facts, use every other post as an opportunity to make snide remarks, or simply repeat the same points ad infinum without debating or taking on board what anybody else is saying.

Thats my issue. If people want to have a topic dedicated to the evils of the ECB, then by all means, but when the same tired debate spills into every England related topic with the same people repeating the same arguments it gets very tiresome.

Flower is not all black...he like most humans has many shades of Grey....and from what I see, most people here analyze all aspects of Flower....the good the bad ( i don't think there is an ugly element to him)

and this thread is about Flower.....so he will be analyzed and dissected.
and where Flower appears....KP appears too....for Flower it was who reportedly made KP a "condition". And through official statements as well as well timed leaks made KP so central that Flower cannot be discussed or remembered without KP.

just like Bush Jr. and Iraq war , Nixon and Water Gate.

Jarrod Kimber's piece on ECB is one of the most beautifully brutal criticisms of ECB.

some may not agree with some elements but in big parts the incidents and anecdotes are factual...validated by CI editors before release.

and 100s of appreciative comments are a testimony to it's positive appeal.
the way to disagree with an article or a person is to counter with facts and logic.

a Blanket "dismissal" invokes credibility question marks on the "dismisser"

Funny that I thought the thread was about the England Lions team and their coach. Not just the coach then.

I have no interest in discussing Pietersen further.

I don't accept the general principle that you can't discuss Bush or Blair without referring to Iraq, if you are discussing specific and completely separate issues of their time in power. For example if you discuss the merits of Tony Blair's education reforms, or reforms of the NHS, or his role in Northern Ireland, bringing up the Iraq war is completely off-topic and irrelevant, and would only serve to devalue the debate (it would quickly become a populist mudslinging match). Where this thread is mentioning Flower it is talking of his suitability to coach the Lions, and in general bring on young players. KP doesn't feature here.

In any case, I don't accept Pietersen was central to the Flower reign in this way. It is only his so-called fans who think he must be central to every discussion involving England, Flower, the ECB, etc.

As for the Kimber article, nobody has as far as I can see dismissed it. I have merely pointed out that for me an article loses credibility when it is clearly unbalanced. Reading it for me was like reading a one-sided editorial on the current crisis in Gaza - it makes perfectly valid points, but takes them out of context and refuses to acknowledge anything (facts, opinion, interpretation) contrary to its point of view.

The fact that something is popular really doesn't make it good. Neither does the fact that it appears on cricinfo mean it is a model of factual and ethical journalism.

And now I would wish to discuss the topic of the thread without being side-tracked further.

I am happy to see James Taylor captain the side. I was disappointed he wasn't taken to Australia for the ashes, as for me he had worked hard on his game and improved certain aspects (such as hitting the ball harder when driving) which the England management had wanted him to, and ignoring that IMO was a mistake. It is good to see he is still involved in the England set-up.

James Vince is one of my favourite county players, so I do hope he can score some big runs to really put himself in the mix. It would be a tragedy for cricket overall if he didn't go on to have a successful test career, simply because he is that good to watch.

The one thing against both of those is that the England middle-order is (apart from Bell) young, and (again, apart from Bell) doing reasonably well. I do think both Vince and Taylor will eventually be better players than Moeen Ali (they may very well already be) but I guess for reasons of balance Ali has to play at the moment. I suppose it's good that England have a number of good young batsmen waiting in the wings, and if competition for places does drive up standards (I don't personally think it does) then this is good news.

Roy is another talented player, who may be earmarked for the shorter stuff but we have seen Warner, Shewag, Gayle open with success in tests, so who knows?

I am very interested to see how Patel goes. I haven't seen much of him, but my instinct is he bowls a bit slowly for international cricket. We shall have to see.

I only saw Patel play in the t20 game on TV against Surrey but he looked to be quite canny, think he bowled his stock ball about 51-52mph.

He's got a good action that doesn't differ, and one thing I took away is how he watches the batsmen and can alter his delivery accordingly.

Not sure how he goes in red ball stuff (if Shelsey is about he can tell us more), but to me looks a promising one day bowler (from what very limited I've seen)

Also interesting that Bairstow is in as a keeper. One would assume he's next in line after Buttler then

51-52 does sound slow especially for an off-spiner. Kind of reinforces my concerns, most offies are around the 54-55 mph as their stock ball.

Bairstow, well, not many other options are there? As I said, Foakes would be one to look out for in the future.

Mike Selig wrote:51-52 does sound slow especially for an off-spiner. Kind of reinforces my concerns, most offies are around the 54-55 mph as their stock ball.

Bairstow, well, not many other options are there? As I said, Foakes would be one to look out for in the future.

Patel is a slow left armer my friend! He certainly seems to have the temperament for it, which is always good to see in a youngster

Bairstow's been batting well this year by all accounts, but might've already blown his international chance.

While the Flower appointment does surprise me, I don't find it as strange as most here seem to.

Anyway. The Taylor Train is back on track. I really do like the guy, and I thought he was hard done by.x

Olly wrote:

Mike Selig wrote:51-52 does sound slow especially for an off-spiner. Kind of reinforces my concerns, most offies are around the 54-55 mph as their stock ball.

Bairstow, well, not many other options are there? As I said, Foakes would be one to look out for in the future.

Patel is a slow left armer my friend! He certainly seems to have the temperament for it, which is always good to see in a youngster

Bairstow's been batting well this year by all accounts, but might've already blown his international chance.

Erm you know that means left-arm off-spin right? I was talking about the action and distinguishing between off-spin and leg-spin (or to be more precise finger-spin and wrist-spin, as some off-spinners e.g. Murali are really wrist-spinners) rather than caring what hand he bowled with.

In terms of speed 51-52 is slow for a finger-spinner, whether he's right or left-handed. That doesn't mean it won't work - I am sure we can find examples of successful finger spinners who have bowled those kind of paces or even slower (I can't think of too many recently, but then there aren't many recent successful finger spinners at all).

I have seen a fair bit of Patel; I first saw him play against Australia in a one-day game back in 2010 when he was taken apart by M. Hussey and White, admittedly none of the spinners had much success and there was a short boundary up towards the grand stand. He bowled much too slowly then and White and Hussey were able to play the vast majority of his balls on the back foot in great comfort, however at the time he was not even 19!

I've watched him grow in stature since, and this season he has by and large taken Ollie Rayner's place in the side as the main spinner and performed pretty well. Like you I've been impressed with his temparament, and the way he's grown into his role.

However the step-up from county cricket to internationals is big, and my concerns over the pace of his bowling remain (note: I am not arguing for him to dart the ball in, you can still bowl at 54-55 with flight, e.g. Graeme Swann; flight and pace are two separate, if at times overlapping, issues). It is very good to see him being given a chance in the Lions, and the Lions does exist precisely to bridge the gap between county cricket and full internationals. I am interested in seeing how he goes.

As for Bairstow I would have thought the fact he has been picked for the Lions shows he is still in the selectors' radar.

Be interesting to see if Hales gets a go in the ODIs this summer.

GSC wrote:Excellent post Mike. I kinda hope the mods will step in at some point because these debates are tiresome and often end up retreading old ground.

Well, we all have had our disagreements and will have it in the future, but I am sorry, this is a ridiculous suggestion, just like the England skipper's pathetic whining against Shane Warne. There are fundamental differences on the KP issue and it is not going to go away all that easy. Lets hope England start performing and the ECB behave with sensitivity and sensibility more often.
BTW I hope India perform better than England in the series though!.

Problem for Patel is that like all left arm orthodox bowlers raised in "Anglican" cricket countries, there's really only so much he really offers. Many will point at Derek Underwood as an exception, but I don't think he really was. Sure he took more wickets than the likes of Harris, or Hauritz, but, well, wickets have to be taken, and they don't necessarily mean you're more penetrating, which I don't think he was. Anyway, like I'm saying, left arm orthodox have a tougher time of it simply because the majority of batsmen are right handed, and going over the wicket, they don't make the batsman play as much outside off, while going round the wicket, the lack of footmarks means a right hander isn't in as much doubt as a left hander facing the right arm off over the wicket. I may of course be wrong, but, I really do doubt it.

Mike Selig wrote:

Olly wrote:

Mike Selig wrote:51-52 does sound slow especially for an off-spiner. Kind of reinforces my concerns, most offies are around the 54-55 mph as their stock ball.

Bairstow, well, not many other options are there? As I said, Foakes would be one to look out for in the future.

Patel is a slow left armer my friend! He certainly seems to have the temperament for it, which is always good to see in a youngster

Bairstow's been batting well this year by all accounts, but might've already blown his international chance.

Erm you know that means left-arm off-spin right? I was talking about the action and distinguishing between off-spin and leg-spin (or to be more precise finger-spin and wrist-spin, as some off-spinners e.g. Murali are really wrist-spinners) rather than caring what hand he bowled with.

In terms of speed 51-52 is slow for a finger-spinner, whether he's right or left-handed. That doesn't mean it won't work - I am sure we can find examples of successful finger spinners who have bowled those kind of paces or even slower (I can't think of too many recently, but then there aren't many recent successful finger spinners at all).

I have seen a fair bit of Patel; I first saw him play against Australia in a one-day game back in 2010 when he was taken apart by M. Hussey and White, admittedly none of the spinners had much success and there was a short boundary up towards the grand stand. He bowled much too slowly then and White and Hussey were able to play the vast majority of his balls on the back foot in great comfort, however at the time he was not even 19!

I've watched him grow in stature since, and this season he has by and large taken Ollie Rayner's place in the side as the main spinner and performed pretty well. Like you I've been impressed with his temparament, and the way he's grown into his role.

However the step-up from county cricket to internationals is big, and my concerns over the pace of his bowling remain (note: I am not arguing for him to dart the ball in, you can still bowl at 54-55 with flight, e.g. Graeme Swann; flight and pace are two separate, if at times overlapping, issues). It is very good to see him being given a chance in the Lions, and the Lions does exist precisely to bridge the gap between county cricket and full internationals. I am interested in seeing how he goes.

As for Bairstow I would have thought the fact he has been picked for the Lions shows he is still in the selectors' radar.

Ah my misunderstanding Mike!   

I'd imagine Patel can probably work on putting a bit more pace on his stock delivery, maybe something coaches will work with him on, but he certainly looks a very promising one day prospect, can't say I know anything about him in the red ball stuff

GSC wrote:Be interesting to see if Hales gets a go in the ODIs this summer.

I'd hope so, I don't agree with the calls from some on Twitter for an opening batsman in tests to be an attacking one ala Hales, but certainly in ODI's I think we need one. Otherwise there's just too much pressure on our middle order to up the rate every time

msp83 wrote:What has poor Steven Finn done to deserve this? He was refinding himself at the county level, and now he's yet again thrust back to a Flower dominated setup!.

Finn was quite comfortably the worst Bowler on either side in the recent game at Scarborough against Yorkshire. Shame really, as it seems the biomechanics experts have fecked up another bowler.

A hundred for Alex Hales today against Sri Lanka A

Almost a lock for the ODI side now

Also a 21 ball fifty for Jason Roy.

Anybody see any of the match?

I am intruigued by Roy at 4. I would like to see him at the top of the order. He's always had serious talent but seems to be having a breakthrough season. Honestly I'd like to see him given a crack in the ODI side, I think he could be inspired.

Disappointed Vince didn't make any.

England have a problem in ODIs because if we're honest their captain is not in the strongest XI. I'd like to see a batting line-up like Hales Roy Bell Root Morgan Buttler Bopara then the bowlers.

Ranking and Gurney seemed to do well up front. Sri Lanka looked closer thanks to 37 extras.

Ravi Patel got some tap but picked up some wickets as well. I'd be interested to hear from someone who watched as to how he went.

I've only read the reports online so I can't pass any further comment barring agreeing with your summary that Cook isn't actually in our strongest ODI side!

http://t.co/MI3ylifE05

Best highlights I could find unfortunately. Tough to say how Patel bowled without seeing the whole spell, but how easy did JJ Roy make hitting those sixes look? Lovely stuff.

I'm not sure I understand the point of the Lions. Bopara batting at 3 when he won't for the senior side and when he has already played 108 ODIs meaning Jason Roy at 5 when he's only ever batted in the top 3 for Surrey. Today he hasn't even got a bat because Bopara's got a century, what exactly are we proving here? Just getting practice for the upcoming ODIs?

I actually prefer the England Lions. Think they are a better side than the 'first team'

Full of excitement. Hales, Vince, Roy, Willey, Bairstow, Finn, Patel

With solid players like Bopara and Taylor...

Alex Hales 141 off 96 and James Taylor 100* off 55 for Notts against Middlesex on Sky today.

As good an innings as Taylor's was there was some of the worst bowling I've seen in a long time, I'm hoping big Gus tears the Middlesex bowlers a new one because they were dreadful.

I'd argue that Taylor threw them off their lines and lengths by consistently moving about the crease and moves the field around beautifully. But I'm an unashamed Taylor fanboy.   

Maybe, but what about the last over from Harris? That was just dreadful, wouldn't see that in a village game

Naaaaa. Just quality batting.   

lovely weather they've got now as well.

JDizzle wrote:Alex Hales 141 off 96 and James Taylor 100* off 55 for Notts against Middlesex on Sky today.

Question should be who opens the batting with Hales in ODI's really

Taylor seems to be one of those players who scores runs yet isn't really in the frame for England weirdly.

hampo171 wrote:As good an innings as Taylor's was there was some of the worst bowling I've seen in a long time, I'm hoping big Gus tears the Middlesex bowlers a new one because they were dreadful.

Agreed. Some of the worst bowling I have seen in many a year. Taylor seemed to know that last ball would be a full toss - loved the wag in the crowd who demanded an underarm delivery.