Who will cross the Whitewash for England on 19th May?

First topic message reminder :

England's summer opens with the first test against Sri Lanka at Headingley on 19th May

ShankyCricket wrote:

GSC wrote:If it were an Ashes series or tour of SA/India id consider Bell. I dont really see much benefit in bringing him back otherwise though. Hes had a pretty good England career, but its time to look to move on I think.

He averages 28 in India and 33 in Asia overall. He couldn't bat against spin in Asia at his peak, thats the last tour I'd consider him for!!

That's a very good point. Also worth noting that he was dropped for the last series which was a tour of SA!

I suppose what GSC is saying though is he has experience that could be valuable in a bigger series. I can see some merit in that argument but also wouldn't like to infer that SL will be a walkover. Have to remember that we lost to them at home last time out

http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/story/998673.html

Imagine the reaction of this was KP....

On a serious note if the equipment he is using is not within the safety regulations he shouldn't be allowed to play. Simple as that.

He should be allowed to make up his own mind, as should any batsmen - they understand the risks, after all.

Much like concussions in rugby, football etc, these type of things should be left to the professionals - take it out of the hands of the players

If you're concussed, you're not of sound mind, and quite rightly decisions are taken out of players' hands.

In a situation such as this, a person is perfectly capable of weighing up the positives and negatives and making their own informed decision. If Cook feels safer using the older helmet, then he should be allowed to use it.

It's health and safety gone mad, it looks like the same style helmet he's been using for years.

He doesn't even have to wear a helmet.

Looks like Mark Wood is out for the rest of the summer too - pulling out of his comeback for Durham second XI to potentially return to the operating table.

Shame that.

A highly impressive performance by Sam Robson for Middlesex yesterday at Lord's. Put in by Bell of Warks who elected not to toss the coin, Robson batted all day and was still unbeaten at the close on 175.

That won't get him an England recall by itself but it will have the selectors taking notice. Someone else who will have caught their eye yesterday was Adam Lyth who scored 111 for Yorks against Hants at Headingley. Probably helpful for Lyth that he was watched by England selector James Whitaker.

Pressure is certainly on Hales to start the summer well, of the two who played well yesterday I thought Robson was most harshly dropped

There's a lot to like about Robson. He has good temperament, knows his strengths and his scoring areas well, and is generally a very organised player.

Unfortunately, he has that glaring weakness around and just outside off stump. Yes all players struggle in that area, but with Robson you do feel it's only a matter of time before he nicks one. At county level he gets away with it, but at international level the bowlers are good enough to bowl enough balls in his danger area. I would keep an eye on him for the aforementioned reasons though.

Lyth I'm just not sure is very good, he was given a decent run and only made one score, didn't really look likely to make many runs to me.

On the Cook helmet thing, I have sympathy for both sides of the argument. On the one side, the ECB want youngsters to be as well protected as they can be, understandably so, and that means wearing helmets which fit the standards set. So allowing the England captain to wear a helmet which isn't as safe is not a particularly good look re setting an example.

However, Cook will have been used to his particular helmet for a while, and has tried the new ones without finding one he's comfortable with. At the highest level, the slightest detail does matter, and if Cook feels he's losing a split second of judgement with the new helmet that makes him more vulnerable, both in terms of his safety and his wicket. Cook is of course a responsible adult, and I suspect if he were a run-of-the-mill county player he'd be allowed to get on with it. But he's the England (Test) captain, and as such does have more visibility...

I suppose all Robson and Lyth can do is score a lot of CC runs and hope like Bairstow they are deemed to have improved enough to have a second crack at Test cricket. They are both young-ish so I wouldn't rule it out, and both have a Test Century to their name so were not complete failures either

Bad news about Mark Wood - I hope he isn't one of those bowlers that we never get to see much of due to injuries. I do worry about that explosive action though and the strains it must put on the body

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It's health and safety gone mad, it looks like the same style helmet he's been using for years.

Someone did actually die. Its hardly "Health and Safety Gone Mad " is it.
The safety standard isnt even set by the ECB, its a BSi standard adopted by the ICC and based on research of how serious injuries were occuring
Using kit that doesnt meet safety standards could invalidate his insurance if nothing else, so even if the ECB felt they didnt have a moral and legal duty of care (which they do, not to mention that all player contracts say their employers have to issue helmets that meet this safety standard) theres still a drive on them to proactively push all players to adhere to the international guidelines.
All they have done here is say you are issued a proper helmet, you should wear a proper helmet, we are not happy that you are taking risks beyond those we consider acceptable in line with internationaly recognised advice. If you are going to continue to take a level of risk we consider unnacpetable we need to have a discussion about that. Its what any responsible employer is expected to do, sport or otherwise. If you wear working in sellafield wearing a kitchen apron rather than a lead lined suit you'd expect someone to "have a word".
There is still some onus on the player to make sensible decisions too of course, such as putting it on when facing fast bowlers. Part of the issue seems to be that he has a kit sponsor and is stuck using the helmets they make, rather than one of the wide range avaialble that could be more to his liking. The same range that all the otehr cricketers (*except Trott who is well known for his "compulsions") are happy enough with. The argument has been put forward that he is sued to a ceratin helmet and chaging it could upset his batting.. thing is hes only be using the "old style" one for 2 years, so he must have come through the rigours of change in the past.

It is a bit of a strom in a tea cup all round really, and only hitting the headlines because its a slow news day and it does give the ex player pundits a chance to remind you that there arent any proper fast bowlers these days and why their avergaes were so much lower than todays players.


I hope he wear a seatbelt when he drives.

Genuinely saw a suggestion of a top 6 on BBC CC updates yesterday of:

Cook
Robson (based on one good innings )
Root
Stokes (you haven't read that wrong, Stokes at 4)
Buttler (also keeping wicket)
Bairstow (his thanks for giving up the gloves is to bat below his replacement)

Not sure who the 5 bowlers in addition to Stokes would be, thankfully they were only asking for the top 6

Gooseberry wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It's health and safety gone mad, it looks like the same style helmet he's been using for years.

Someone did actually die. Its hardly "Health and Safety Gone Mad " is it.

Best not to confuse issues as Cook is being asked to comply with having a the gap between grill and peak narrowed in order to prevent similar to the Broad and Keiswetter injuries. The StemGuard is not compulsory yet, though a lot of players are of course wearing it by choice following the Phil Hughes tragedy

Your point still stands though, as Broad's was a very bad injury that could have been worse and Keiswetter had to retire such were the nature of his injuries

Vince playing his way into contention with a cracking hundred against the best attack in the county championship

Not sure on who opens with cook at the moment. Hales, Lyth and Robson have all had opportunities and shown they are probably not quite good enough (fitting in that top quality county player but average international player)

Cook /?/Vince/Root/Bairstow/Stokes/Ali as a top 7 looks solid though

So thats pretty much the entire county circuit playing themselves into contention then.

Its almost as if any old fool could crack 300+ "on their day" and sart a tidal wave of support for a return to the side

It does give 4 5 options to open alongside Cook ( assuming his helmet issues are resolved)
Hales - never should have been given the job in the first place but the "man in"
Lyth - Not long dumped for being rubbish
Robson - Still young enough to be forgiven for being rubbish previously but hasnt exactly had an extended run of form
Compton - Hmmm.
Roy - because hes form Surrey and he can do anything.


Most likley Hales will start and be given a proper go regardless of County form.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/county-cricket-2016/content/story/1000709.html

Health and Saftey gone mad.

Meanwhile Trott scored a double century in the new style helmet right after moaning about having to switch.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricket/article-3550546/England-set-shake-order-ahead-Test-against-Sri-Lanka-Headingley.html

Paul Newman suggesting that Nick Browne, James Vince and Gary Ballance all in line to play as things stands with the team being

Cook
Browne
Root
Vince
Ballance
Stokes
Bairstow
Ali
Broad
Anderson
Finn

Browne is very left field, had a very good summer last year tbf, Vince makes sense in the middle order as does Ballance imo- would be harsh on Hales, but think he might need more work in the long format of the game.

Browne would be a bit left field. He appears to have the support of Cook (which could count for something) but hes another fairly stodgy opener, if England want to move away from tyring to find the new Warner then Robson is doing a lot more to press a claim right now and Compton could feel a little aggreived to get dropped so soon as well.
As it stands Browne hasnt exactly set to county season alight. Nor has he been in the England Lions/Performance squads. He scored a lot of runs last year ...but in Div 2.

Root up to three, Vince and or Ballance in seem realistic possibilities.
Compton would be hard done by to miss out again ...but since hes not playing as an opener for his county hes going to need runs to justify keeping someone like Vince out.

Whoever the opener is, I hope England will bloody well stick with him for the long-term! Not too sure about Browne looking at the stats, would much rather Robson or Lyth had another go.

Think Vince would be a good selection, hopefully no going backwards towards Bell.

To be honest I'd rather we brought back Bell than Compton at this point, he's pretty meh and if we're looking forward it makes sense to chop him at this point too

Bell must not be repicked, we need to move away from the old guard. Also ballance is not the answer at 3, maybe down at 5 or 6 though

Vince has to be picked though

So after they've just turned over the (then) number one Test team on their own turf , they're going to use the unfortunate loss of one of the middle order bats as an excuse to dump two more of the top six without further ado ? And introduce two new players along with one recycled in a new spot ?
Well ; maybe. But it runs counter to all recent England selection policies (which seem to have been , generally , quite successful) : they seem to have embraced the notion of continuity as a virtue , without allowing it to become a license for continuing underperformance.
Frankly I'll be astonished if they drop both Hales and Compton without further trial. The players mentioned as new prospects may well get a go sooner rather than later ; but I reckon the incumbents - or at least one of them - will be given the whole Sri Lankan series to claim or lose their place(s).

We usually pick someone who has been on a Lions tour. I can't believe Nick Browne is in contention.

You've got to start with the team that played against South Africa, and then ask if there is anyone better to come in.

Taylor's misfortune opens up a place at 5 for a player like Vince or Ballance, and then there are the question marks over Hales or Compton, but it's a long summer. Sticking with the incumbents in home conditions might be the wiser move, and they can be replaced later if they don't hit top form.

For what it's worth, I think Hales has as much potential as an opener as Robson, Lyth or whoever else, so I would be tempted to give him another go.

Hales and Compton at 2 and 3 for me, but places only guaranteed for the first two tests of the Sri Lanka series (is it 3 tests?)

Despite my moniker, I have doubts about Jason Roy as a Test Batsmen as of now. But it's interesting that:
1/ his batting for Surrey at 5 coincided almost to the day with the desperately sad enforced retirement of England's presumed shoo-in in that role, James Taylor; meanwhile...
2/ Sangakkara - who's not given to rash statements says this: http://www.skysports.com/cricket/news/12123/10262901/kumar-sangakkara-believes-jason-roy-could-easily-play-test-cricket

if JR can stop chucking it away once he's got himself in, and starts banging off CC1 hundreds for fun, then he might be worth a shout. Till then, he's still a work in progress in my book.

If we go on county form the Collingwood averaging 145 should get a look in

Looking at averages, Ali only has 1 wicket in Div 2 this year in 42 overs that have cost 161 - although he has hit a ton.

Rashid has picked up 7 wickets for 45.71 in Div 1, and also has a better economy. He has hit a 50 as well.

So Moeen or Rashid for the first test?

Ali has a very decent and recent Test record. If he is to be binned for the first Test this summer, it should only be because a spin rival has made an unanswerable case for selection. 7 at 46 doesn't cut it.

I would consider again after the opening Test and look to bring all things into the mix then.

As for Collingwood - his England ship has sailed but he's perfectly playing the part of the wise old pro in the county game. I saw him batting on Tuesday at the Oval - more comments on the ''Surrey v Durham'' thread if anyone here wants to slum it on the domestic cricket part of the forum.

Not the old Rashid to replace Moeen thing again!

Moeen has been ever improving as a test spinner ever since he has been in the side, and offers great runs in the side at 8

Any talk of replacing him based off a few early season games is severely misguided imo

Hasn't Cook noticed Westley at the other end? It's not Browne he should be recommending. Westley the leading run scorer with 542 runs to Cook's 523.

Don't forget that useful little all-rounder Essex seem to have as well, he looks like a future England great. I can't exactly remember his name but its something like Bavi Ropara

Jetty wrote:Hasn't Cook noticed Westley at the other end? It's not Browne he should be recommending. Westley the leading run scorer with 542 runs to Cook's 523.

I noticed he'd made into onto the poll on cricinfo.
Its a bit ridiculous really, happens every year ..someone make a few runs in Div 2 and suddenly they are Kevin Pietersen ( hang on....)
OK he would be vaguely on the RADAR as he toured with the Lions ...but he didn't exactly do much with them.

Collingwood averaging 145 so far this season.

Lees (who a lot of people were pitching for ahead of Lyth as an opener a couple of years ago) has hit big scores back to back.

Hales steals the headlines with a couple of 30 somethings (apparently getting bogged down and being unable to score is now a good thing, despite him being selected for England to specifically stop that happening to the top 3)

Meanwhile Leicestershire with a bunch of cricketing nobodies and no one anywhere near an England call up continue to dominate all their games.

Its almost as if County Cricket is becoming largely irrelevant.

Sam Robson the form opener in D1 - but have his issues been addressed?

Have any of the potential opening partners for Cook addressed their issues?

Hales - A great striker of the ball but struggles against high class pace bowling, the moving ball, lacks off stump awareness and needs to improve his shot selection. IMO those are just about the 4 most important strengths a test opener needs to have. There's a reason Hales averages fractionally less in FC cricket than Chris 'he can't bat well enough to be an international wicket-keeper' Read.

Lyth - Is capable of taking an attack apart but has technique issues. He tends to play away from his body and looks to drive to often and too early which got him found out against Test bowling. Driving loosely is fatal for a left handed opener as all a right arm seamer needs to do is bowl over the wicket and hang the ball outside his off stump on a length with a decent slip cordon and gully.

Sam Robson - On first sight he looked solid in defence and a compact driver of the ball through the off side. He struggled to keep things ticking over against the step up in bowling during his first attempt at test cricket though.

Nick Browne - On the face of it another who looks promising. He has a tendency for turning 50s into centuries and is a watchful player with a compact game and good defence. With his current exploits having come against Div 2 attacks there must be questions over how he'll cope against faster attacks with more control and movement.

Personally I'd go with the one who's in best form.

You could make a good argument for Robson on form ; but I'd be a little surprised if they dumped Hales so quickly , after just the four Tests in SA. Have to say I am by no means convinced he has the game to survive at Test level - but he is surely worth the Sri Lankan series to either suggest improvement or be marked "limited overs only".
Robson I think made some runs against Sri Lanka when he started , before tailing off later in the summer : if Hales fails then he may well be worth another look...but probably against Pakistan.

With Taylor sadly out of calculations the middle order looks a bit unsettled: Compton isn't making runs , Bell apparently nursing an injury , Ballance not setting the county game on fire ... with Root Stokes and Bairstow locked in there is probably more scope to play someone completely new at five if they wish to experiment.
The first aim of course has to be to win the two home series ; but it is worth keeping in mind the upcoming tours to Bangladesh (no longer a total pushover) and India: with Taylor lost to England it is important they find someone competent against spin.

Pleased to see all the bowlers seem to be getting some decent spells under their belts. Just hope they stay healthy...

Id stick with Hales to be honest.

Cook
Hales
Vince
Root
Bairstow
Buttler
Stokes
Ali
Broad
Anderson
Finn

alfie wrote:You could make a good argument for Robson on form ; but I'd be a little surprised if they dumped Hales so quickly , after just the four Tests in SA.  Have to say I am by no means convinced he has the game to survive at Test level - but he is surely worth the Sri Lankan series to either suggest improvement or be marked "limited overs only".
....

Hi Alfie - yeah, I would go along with that. At least for the first two SL Tests. Robson (another ton yesterday) must though have already made himself a contender for this summer.

Btw, don't know if you've been following all this thread and the Surrey v Durham one on the domestic section but suspect you would have very much appreciated Collingwood's performance the other week. Realise his England days are gone but he got a flippant mention here earlier and I thought it only fair to flag above that he's still excelling in his current playing role.

Jimbo, that's a team that won't happen! Your suggestion is too much "my team" rather than "who is likely to be selected". Barring injury I expect its a case of filling in the two gaps below:

Cook
Hales

Root

Stokes
Bairstow
Ali
Broad
Anderson
Finn

VTR

Will probably be Compton and Ballance. But id prefer to see Vince and Buttler in there. (not being biased as a Hampshire fan of course....)

I'd go for:

Cook/Robson/Ballance/Root/Vince/Bairstow/Stokes/Ali/Broad/Anderson/Finn

Hi guildford

I actually read all the Surrey threads on here (have to keep up with the nicknames !) though I hesitate to look at what you are all saying today in light of the latest scoreline
and I did note the Collingwood mention. (Back in the fifties , they brought back Washbrook in an Ashes Series : but times have changed)
As you say , his time has passed. Did he pack it in too early , after one lean tour of Australia ? No , I think he got it about right ; but given what happened a couple of years later it is rather a pity he wasn't around as a stabilising influence when It All Went South in a Hurry...
Reckon he will make an excellent coach eventually.

I think it'll be

Cook, Hales, Compton, Root, Vince, Bairstow, Stokes, Ali, Broad, Anderson, Finn

Personally I'd go with

Cook, Robson, Vince, Root, Ballance, Stokes, Bairstow, Ali, Broad, Anderson, Finn

Hi again Alfie - by my standards, probably keeping a low profile on the latest Surrey scoreline. Perhaps payback for what Pietersen did for us against others!

I also think Colly got it about right, including the immediate next stage for him of going back to the county game as ''the wise old pro''. An excellent coach for sure and already on the way.

Washbrook was before my time as a player (your's too, surely) but I know David 'Bumble' Lloyd still remembers him fondly at Lancs.

jimbohammers wrote:VTR

Will probably be Compton and Ballance. But id prefer to see Vince and Buttler in there. (not being biased as a Hampshire fan of course....)

Makes sense, glad you took the comment in the spirit intended i.e. the squad is out tomorrow so its good to try and predict that!

Buttler will be back in time I am sure, and I could therefore see Jonny B at 5 again in the future

I would have said Compton/Ballance a few weeks ago but I wonder if their form might have played them out of a place - though the selectors value continuity and experience as well

Better stick my own neck out then, so I'll go with Ballance at 3, Westley at 5

To be fair Westley has now added a century against Sri Lanka to his seasons total which is a bit mor erelevant than plundering runs against Div2 sides and Cambridge uni. Its a pretty stonking run of form hes on.
If county runs count for anything he should be in the mix.
Vince on the other hand has had a fairly mediocre season (seems to be going well today mind...but has long been on the path to a call up. I think hes still a far more realistic first cap prospect.

Recall for Ballance? It that happens it proves that County form is pretty much ignored by the selectors

Squad to be announced at 7am on Thursday morning (one for you early birds!)

I think its a bit different for players who have been involved before and mostly had a good record as Ballance did. In short, we are not so blessed with top quality players to discard ones that have proven in the past that they can do well.

To add to that, I would also be very surprised if they throw 2 new caps into the top 5 in one go.

So if its one new cap they have to have some basis to pick on which could be form, or seeing something in a player that they think can translate to international level