England vs Pakistan, 1st Test, Lords (14th-18th July)

First topic message reminder :

It has been confirmed that Jake Ball will make his debut tomorrow so England line up as

Cook
Hales
Root
Vince
Ballance
Bairstow
Ali
Woakes
Broad
Ball
Finn

Good effort from Pakistan, particularly Yasir, but England played well beneath their best. Another first test of a series that England lose - a common trait over the last six years.

A very poor and impatient mentality was adopted in this chase which cost England victory. Poor shot selection was a greater factor than clever field settings, or superb bowling.

England should come back and win this series, on pitches that will be more favourable to their bowlers, but a vast improvement will be required from the batting.

Anderson and Stokes must come back in. Moeen Ali has to be dropped and discarded permanently - his attitude is a flipping disgrace.

On the whole, though, it was an excellent Test match and sorely needed after the debacle of the last series. Good weather, decent quality, evenly-matched for large segments. The one drawback being the final wicket was taken by a fellow who shouldn't even be on the field.

Think Finn has to go. In one of those spells where he just offers nothing.

Duty281 wrote:Good effort from Pakistan, particularly Yasir, but England played well beneath their best. Another first test of a series that England lose - a common trait over the last six years.

A very poor and impatient mentality was adopted in this chase which cost England victory. Poor shot selection was a greater factor than clever field settings, or superb bowling.

England should come back and win this series, on pitches that will be more favourable to their bowlers, but a vast improvement will be required from the batting.

Anderson and Stokes must come back in. Moeen Ali has to be dropped and discarded permanently - his attitude is a flipping disgrace.

On the whole, though, it was an excellent Test match and sorely needed after the debacle of the last series. Good weather, decent quality, evenly-matched for large segments. The one drawback being the final wicket was taken by a fellow who shouldn't even be on the field.

What exactly is wrong with Moeen's attitude???

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Good effort from Pakistan, particularly Yasir, but England played well beneath their best. Another first test of a series that England lose - a common trait over the last six years.

A very poor and impatient mentality was adopted in this chase which cost England victory. Poor shot selection was a greater factor than clever field settings, or superb bowling.

England should come back and win this series, on pitches that will be more favourable to their bowlers, but a vast improvement will be required from the batting.

Anderson and Stokes must come back in. Moeen Ali has to be dropped and discarded permanently - his attitude is a flipping disgrace.

On the whole, though, it was an excellent Test match and sorely needed after the debacle of the last series. Good weather, decent quality, evenly-matched for large segments. The one drawback being the final wicket was taken by a fellow who shouldn't even be on the field.

What exactly is wrong with Moeen's attitude???

As well as his braindead shot in the second innings which would have embarrassed a 10-year-old, there was his pre-match comments where he (once again) stated that his religion is more important than playing cricket and that: "If I have to give up cricket tomorrow, it will be easy."

I don't think that displays the right level of motivation or attitude for someone playing at the elite level of cricket.

GSC wrote:Think Finn has to go. In one of those spells where he just offers nothing.

Seems like the story of his England career. It has been six long years where we've waited for his glittering potential to reveal itself into consistent spells of brilliance...but as yet, it hasn't materialised. And it may never do so.

Ease up chaps...

One loss. Agree Finn needs to go back to his county - when his rhythm is off he can be pretty useless ; and this season he just hasn't quite had it. Though he did bowl a decent spell late Saturday.
On the bright side , apart from Woakes stepping right up , Ball showed enough to suggest he may be one for the future (probably won't hold his spot for now , but useful experience and will come again) Jimmy and Stokes to return.

Moeen getting too much flak I think. Just yesterday he scored 150 , remember ? If he got out poorly in this game , he wasn't Robinson Crusoe... And his much derided bowling looked to be getting back in the second innings here. He is not nailed on for the year but isn't going to be binned just like that ; and nor should he be.

The problem here , apart from losing the toss and then dropping Misbah on 16 on day one , was a collective batting failure on day two. From 118/1 they should have gained a lead - carelessness more than (admittedly good) bowling from Yasir cost at least a hundred runs on the first innings and they were always playing catch up thereafter...

I'd still recast the batting a little . But they won't.

In my opinion the problem regarding the make up of the batting is all about filling the number three spot. Filling this spot would allow others to occupy a more natural position in the order and give a greater stability. Root should be at 4. Ballance at 5. Stokes and Bairstow at 6 and 7. I like the idea of Ballance in between Root and the stroke makers of stokes and Barston as it adds a bit of a gritty dependability to the middle order. However this is only possible if we can identify the correct person at 3.
Cook, Hales, ????, Root, Ballance, Bairstow, Stokes, Ali, Woakes, Broad, Anderson.

Duty281 wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Good effort from Pakistan, particularly Yasir, but England played well beneath their best. Another first test of a series that England lose - a common trait over the last six years.

A very poor and impatient mentality was adopted in this chase which cost England victory. Poor shot selection was a greater factor than clever field settings, or superb bowling.

England should come back and win this series, on pitches that will be more favourable to their bowlers, but a vast improvement will be required from the batting.

Anderson and Stokes must come back in. Moeen Ali has to be dropped and discarded permanently - his attitude is a flipping disgrace.

On the whole, though, it was an excellent Test match and sorely needed after the debacle of the last series. Good weather, decent quality, evenly-matched for large segments. The one drawback being the final wicket was taken by a fellow who shouldn't even be on the field.

What exactly is wrong with Moeen's attitude???

As well as his braindead shot in the second innings which would have embarrassed a 10-year-old, there was his pre-match comments where he (once again) stated that his religion is more important than playing cricket and that: "If I have to give up cricket tomorrow, it will be easy."

I don't think that displays the right level of motivation or attitude for someone playing at the elite level of cricket.

At the end of the day it is only a fairly meaningless sport (played by a massive minority of nations at the top level). A silly shot yes, but he isn't the first and not the last one this summer to play one of those...

His place is under increasing pressure - although he gets the next test at least for me

Assuming players are fit Id like to see Rashid take Alis place, Stokes and Anderson back for Finn and Ball.
The top 5 .. Im not convinced by Root at 3 but who would go to get Borthwick in there? Vince finally got an acceptable score but must be feleing the pressure of continuing to struggle. I can t see any change being made in the batsmen ...despite that being the area of failure for England. Shuffling the deckchairs wont change their collective inability to play competant spinners.

Conditions in the next games may favour england a bit more, although Pakistan have the raw pace as well as the spinner.
That was a huge toss for Pakistan to win and has really set them up now.

KP_fan wrote: pak team with below par batting...and as long as their 20 wickets scramble and combine to give 500 runs or more per test...they will be competitive.

Pkaistans top 7's combined average is 37 higher than Englands with only one real weak link. The middle order is as solid as any in world cricket with bags of experience
Whilst Woakes and Broad even that out in the tail its harsh to call Pakistan a below par batting side (unless you apply the same to England who are the ones that utterly imploded), certainly in conditions that werent exactly Trent Bridge on a cold gloomy morning.

Im not sure this game was exactly won by bowlers or lost by the complete inability of English palyers to cope with spin. Maybe some poor preperation over concentrating on the Pakistani quicks didnt help either, along with the new look batting line up ...but really they should have done better.

Pakistan's openers are fragile, but I struggle to think of a middle order that is stronger than Pakistan's in world cricket right now

Azhar Ali, Younis Khan, Misbah, Shafiq as a 3, 4, 5 and 6 is pretty incredible.

Masters of making the ball talk
MARK NICHOLAS
http://www.espncricinfo.com/england-v-pakistan-2016/content/story/1035971.html

The one constant in Pakistan cricket is the inherent quality and variety of the bowling. The use of the ball, its leather and its seam, is a culture, forensically explored and widely envied

and nicholas picks out the difference...makes the same point....Pak bowling was doing something all the time....reversing was a norm for Wahab and Amir.

alfie wrote:Ease up chaps...

One loss.  Agree Finn needs to go back to his county - when his rhythm is off he can be pretty useless ; and this season he just hasn't quite had it.  Though he did bowl a decent spell late Saturday.
On the bright side , apart from Woakes stepping right up , Ball showed enough to suggest he may be one for the future (probably won't hold his spot for now , but useful experience and will come again)  Jimmy and Stokes to return.

Moeen getting too much flak I think.  Just yesterday he scored 150 , remember ?   If he got out poorly in this game , he wasn't Robinson Crusoe...   And his much derided bowling looked to be getting back in the second innings here.  He is not nailed on for the year but isn't going to be binned just like that ; and nor should he be.

The problem here , apart from losing the toss and then dropping Misbah on 16 on day one , was a collective batting failure on day two.  From 118/1 they should have gained a lead - carelessness more than (admittedly good) bowling from Yasir cost at least a hundred runs on the first innings and they were always playing catch up thereafter...

I'd still recast the batting a little .  But they won't.

Totally agree about Moeen getting too much flak. Goose wants to replace him with Rashid. However, Moeen took 2/49 off 13 overs in Pakistan's second innings. A bit expensive and his wickets partly due to the control being exercised at the other end - however, isn't that exactly what we would be looking for Rashid to do on a decent day for him?

His dismissal was awful yesterday but I'm not going to bin him on the basis of one dismissal. If I did, he would have a lot of company. I could understand his wish to dominate the spinner and get him taken off (I've seen him successfully do that against Batty and Ansari in the County game) - just not the execution.

As for any (even little) recasting of the batting, I'm not against that - the line up didn't work in this Test and I'm unconvinced it will in the next one. However, I don't know what to do there. I get the impression that Borthwick is starting to appear a better batsman simply because he hasn't been involved.

LivinginItaly wrote:In my opinion the problem regarding the make up of the batting is all about filling the number three spot. Filling this spot would allow others to occupy a more natural position in the order and give a greater stability. Root should be at 4. Ballance at 5. Stokes and Bairstow  at 6 and 7. I like the idea of Ballance in between  Root and the stroke makers of stokes and Barston as it adds a bit of a gritty dependability to the middle order. However this is only possible if we can identify the correct person at 3.
Cook, Hales, ????, Root, Ballance, Bairstow, Stokes, Ali, Woakes, Broad, Anderson.

I agree with this . Root at four is a strong stabilizing influence ; and with other positions a bit fluid he really ought to stay there.
I note guildford's point that Borthwick may be gaining in appeal through not actually having to play ; but I still feel he is worth trying : how else do we see whether he can transfer his county form into the Test arena ? He looks a natural fit at three (if he is good enough) ; is a pretty handy fielder from all accounts ; and would provide another bowling option ...I know he doesn't bowl as much as we'd like at present ; but at one stage during Pakistan's second innings , when not much was happening for bowlers or bats , I felt it would have been handy to have had a wrist spinner just to provide some variation. If you don't play a man when he's making runs in the first division whats the point of selectors watching the county game ?
Failing that I'd put Vince at three and let him sink or swim. Would expect him to sink : but at least that would settle that particular experiment . I know he made a few yesterday ; but on what I've seen of him so far I fear that if he makes the next Ashes party England might as well hand over the urn now : Starc will eat him for breakfast. If he can play spin (have heard he can though I'm not quite seeing it ) then I've no problem with him touring India ; but he needs a big improvement if he is to be an England regular in all conditions.

Reckon they need to make their changes now. Wait another Test and the series could be gone.

Duty281 wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Good effort from Pakistan, particularly Yasir, but England played well beneath their best. Another first test of a series that England lose - a common trait over the last six years.

A very poor and impatient mentality was adopted in this chase which cost England victory. Poor shot selection was a greater factor than clever field settings, or superb bowling.

England should come back and win this series, on pitches that will be more favourable to their bowlers, but a vast improvement will be required from the batting.

Anderson and Stokes must come back in. Moeen Ali has to be dropped and discarded permanently - his attitude is a flipping disgrace.

On the whole, though, it was an excellent Test match and sorely needed after the debacle of the last series. Good weather, decent quality, evenly-matched for large segments. The one drawback being the final wicket was taken by a fellow who shouldn't even be on the field.

What exactly is wrong with Moeen's attitude???

As well as his braindead shot in the second innings which would have embarrassed a 10-year-old, there was his pre-match comments where he (once again) stated that his religion is more important than playing cricket and that: "If I have to give up cricket tomorrow, it will be easy."

I don't think that displays the right level of motivation or attitude for someone playing at the elite level of cricket.

Poor shot and under-par bowling, fair enough although as I've already said, I'd keep him in the team a little while longer yet. But dropping him for saying his faith is the most important thing in his life? Give me a break.

Alfie - as regards Borthwick and current form, he's made a total of 11 runs from 3 completed innings in his last two County Championship matches. Scores of 1 and 1 in his two RL50 knocks in the same period plus a 29 in t20. If the selectors think he's got what it takes, they should still pick him. But as for any call up on form, that should have been a few weeks ago.

Should say that I can see why Bayliss wants to settle Root at three  - though I think he's wrong : he certainly has the technical ability to play there ; and if they could find two satisfactory players to fill the four and five spots before the all rounders at 6-8 it would create a solid lineup for the Ashes series towards which I am sure he is looking.
The trouble is with the middle order so undecided , and Hales still a work in progress at the top , moving the main player up appears to be putting too many eggs in one basket - lose early wickets and recovery is left to players themselves not secure in their place ; while even when a good start has been made ( as it was on Friday) the following players remain less than confident to build on it.  Admittedly the temporary absence of Stokes hasn't helped , and both Bairstow and Ali are also currently one spot higher than before.
It may well be that Bairstow eventually relinquishes the gloves and bats at five - he looks capable of playing there - but for now I prefer having him as a safety net at seven , while the higher positions are sorted out. A good team can probably afford one unsettled spot in the top seven ; but not two - especially together in the middle. And despite Ballance's decent second innings effort I am not ready to anoint him for the future just yet.

Much rather give a player a reasonable run to prove himself ; but you have to weigh developing a team with making sure you can win your current series. And I think the Indian tour would be a better place to try the "Root at three" theory if you feel you absolutely must do it.

Apologies if the above is a bit long winded and circular...am rather thinking aloud here...

guildfordbat wrote:Alfie - as regards Borthwick and current form, he's made a total of 11 runs from 3 completed innings in his last two County Championship matches. Scores of 1 and 1 in his two RL50 knocks in the same period plus a 29 in t20. If the selectors think he's got what it takes, they should still pick him. But as for any call up on form, that should have been a few weeks ago.

True :I did see those scores ; though I also note he made sixty or so against Lancashire yesterday. I think I would tend to disregard just three first class innings after the interruption to the four day game brought about by the t20 business , after a good string of scores earlier - though I concede his timing might have been better !
They couldn't really have picked him " a few weeks ago" though could they ? Tossing Compton before the third Sri Lanka Test would have been harsh ; and then they were off playing ODI...
To be honest I don't know whether he has it or not ; but they were hinting he was in the frame , before opting for Ballance and the reshuffled order. If they still have a thought to try him I'd think it makes more sense to do so now rather than send him to India , still untried ? Suppose it depends how long they want to give Vince...

Where does Roy normally bat in the longer form of the game?

LivinginItaly wrote:Where does Roy normally bat in the longer form  of the game?

LivinginItaly - Roy normally bats at 5 or 6 although he's in poor Championship form this season.

Alfie - had missed Borthwick's 60 yesterday, apologies. Just knew he had been having a lean run recently and so went to his cricinfo page (overlooking it doesn't show matches in play). I'm not trying to suggest a small poor run means he isn't good enough, more that there's nothing like any certainty he'll come off (I realise you know that already). Also, his confidence might have been higher a few weeks back.

Saw first three days of Lord's Test. Quite nostalgic, in that it was a throwback to the bad old days when most of those picked played far below their capabilities, with awful shot selection and poor technique.
With KP gone, Bell dropped and poor Taylor having to retire, this is arguably the poorest batting line-up England have chosen for a very long time. We really only have two Test standard front-line batsman, which made Root's ridiculous shot in the first innings (haven't seen his second inning dismissal) all the more inexcusable.
Stokes return is timely, as is Woakes's emergence. We can still beat Pakistan, especially if we can bat first and bat sensibly.

Eng has named a 14 man squad for T2
that's never a good sign for a home game

Indecison, apprehension, doubts and dilemmas...is what it signifies

Or 2 of the extra players are first team selections who missed the first test through injury.

Adil Rashid called up I see. In as first choice spinner or just a warning to Ali to get his act together?
Anderson, Stokes and Rashid in, Ball, Finn and Ali out for me. Vince to get one last chance.

Agree with the selections in the squad - they'll want to assess that Anderson/Stokes are properly fit before putting them into the side (thus have to keep Ball/Finn around in case they aren't fit) and Rashid called up to hopefully give Moeen a heads up that he needs to up his game on a more consistent basis

And just some possibility that they might pick two spinners...

Doubt it will happen ; but they will have the option.

I didn't think they would change the batting ; though it is a little ironic that after losing a Test through bad batting the only players who will likely be dropped for the next match are a couple of bowlers...

Vince must be on his last chance.

Have we ever picked someone who is not 100% fit and they have broken down in a game? Anderson has said he was fit. I would think he knows his body after all these years. Stokes on the other hand said he needed to play a first class game to test his knee. They were going to select him as a batsman only in the 1st Test. If they did play him as a batsman only he still wouldn't have tested his knee. Now he has bowled 34 overs and is ready to go.

Jetty wrote:Have we ever picked someone who is not 100% fit and they have broken down in a game?

Flintoff

Old Trafford I believe helps spinners...so toss again would be important.
he who loses the toss is bound to contend with spinners in the 4th inning

msp83 wrote:Adil Rashid called up I see. In as first choice spinner or just a warning to Ali to get his act together?
Anderson, Stokes and Rashid in, Ball, Finn and Ali out for me. Vince to get one last chance.

Rashid was much the more effective bowler in the limited overs games and got in ahead of Ali when they picked just one. Alis form with the ball has been awful in tests for a year now, and his batting hads been bad all this year aside form one very good century ...hes still averaging well below 30 though. If Stokes and Woakes play theres just no need to worry about whether or not your number 9 has had a century in the last 3 months ....and its not like Rashifd cant hold a bat.
Ali wont be carrying the can for the last game if he gets dropped,m its for extended run of poor form with the ball and being no more than a handy lower order bat.


Finn and Ball were only place sitting so cant feel hard done by if they are dropped, and didnt produce anything worth retaining them for. Finns had many chances now and keeps failing, maybe not the greatest conditions for him but he was the least effective of a pretty medicore bunch of performaces (Woakes aside!).


As Alfie says its a bit ironic that the batsmen are likley to remain unchanged (unles they do something crazy like pick 5 seamers and a spinner)...but aside from ditching Ballance after just one test back or Vince after they both made some vague attempt at standing up in the sedcond inings theres not a lot that can be done ...and its not like Englands former reserve spinner at 3 is likley to massively influence the middle orders collective ability to play quality spin.

Lets hope that was just an aberation and they get their heads together. Shah will remain a threat but he shouldnt be taking wickets that easily on fairly benign pitches. Pakistan too have shown they can get the collective wobbles over a bowler and despite having a strong top 7 are brittle.

Had England won the toss that game could very well have been won by them. Im dissapointed and angry about their performance against the spinner and always had a fear about the middle order batting but they are still good enough to win this series. With Anderson and Stokes back they could be a different prospect, although the weather may play into Pakistans hands

LivinginItaly wrote:Where does Roy normally bat in the longer form  of the game?

Hes played one first class game in over a month, scored 0 batting at 5. Hes averaging 27.5 in the CC so far this year.

Put a fit Anderson in the team for that first game and we win the match I reckon. So not a great performance but not that far off winning I would say.

I actually think we will improve and end up just about taking the series

Two main changes would make a huge difference.

Anderson back as already mentioned, plus Joe Root stopping the damned brainfarts.

alfie wrote:And just some possibility that they might pick two spinners...

Doubt it will happen ; but they will have the option.

I didn't think they would change the batting ; though it is a little ironic that after losing a Test through bad batting the only players who will likely be dropped for the next match are a couple of bowlers...

Vince must be on his last chance.

Yep, England selectors often like to raise the possibility of playing two spinners although they rarely do.

Agree on the irony. Connected with the bad batting, I feel Foakes is getting closer to a call up. Even though it would be merited for his keeping, I can't help but feel the selectors would be a bit relieved that it would remove one batting spot for them to fret over.

Gooseberry wrote:

LivinginItaly wrote:Where does Roy normally bat in the longer form  of the game?

Hes played one first class game in over a month, scored 0 batting at 5. Hes averaging 27.5 in the CC so far this year.

He was also out for five ball duck in the first innings of the current Surrey match.  (This was though on a tough batting wicket - where Foakes got his highest first class score and Gareth Batty batting at no 9 managed to score his first first class century for Surrey yesterday!  )

Some interesting performances from the Lions. CurranT and Mark Wood showing up well with the ball, but perhaps outdone by a wonderful ton from Ben Duckett. Small of stature but huge on talent - I do wonder how long he will stay at Northants.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Agree with the selections in the squad - they'll want to assess that Anderson/Stokes are properly fit before putting them into the side (thus have to keep Ball/Finn around in case they aren't fit) and Rashid called up to hopefully give Moeen a heads up that he needs to up his game on a more consistent basis

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricket/article-3698146/Andrew-Strauss-sack-England-s-selectors-end-season-Jimmy-Anderson-s-controversial-omission-Lord-s.html

Jetty wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Agree with the selections in the squad - they'll want to assess that Anderson/Stokes are properly fit before putting them into the side (thus have to keep Ball/Finn around in case they aren't fit) and Rashid called up to hopefully give Moeen a heads up that he needs to up his game on a more consistent basis

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricket/article-3698146/Andrew-Strauss-sack-England-s-selectors-end-season-Jimmy-Anderson-s-controversial-omission-Lord-s.html  

success has man fathers........
one defeat and so many cracks come to surface

Like you say though this isnt an overnight thing, its obviously been bubbling for some time and lets face it I doubt theres ever been a capatin/coach whos ever been entirley happy with the selectors.

The general point under the lurid headline I do have sympathy with ...what actually is the point in a sleectors panel at all nowadays regardsless of whether we think they got things right or not? It saves a lot of hassle to cut out the middle man and gives Strauss' role a bit more point.

Thereservation I have is that it may tend to push England further towards the cosy club mentally that KP whicnged about, Cook will want to defend his established teammates and friends and may be a bit too close to some players to make an objective assement of a county player hes never met properly and barely seen.

Also some of the selections suggested (picking Anderson against Medical advice, Stokes as a pure batsman) worry me just as much as the rubbish put out for the last game.

when Dhoni' in his evil nexus with Srinivasan became too powerful .....he could veto the selectors who just became redundant paper pushers....

result--> dhoni's half dozen favorites were recycled with really no serous pressure of being dropped for good.....the wider pool of performing players in Ranji, A tours could not break thru even into the extended squads of 17......and team's performance nosedived.

in a democratic process checks and balances are necessary.......so the selectors should pick the squad...captain and coach the 11. The captain / coach can make suggestions but the rights of picking the squad...based on through review  FC / A tours / academy / fitness etc is that of selectors.

If the selectors do a bad job...replace them.....but if you short circuit their roles and hand-over selection rights to captain / coach..... invariably the wider pool of talent will be ignored and team performance nose-dive over mid term

The selectors can actually watch some County Cricket to make a relatively informed decision. The captain and coaches are rather busy usually.

James Whittaker is the only full time selector though, with Newell and Fraser combining t with their jobs at Notts and Middx.

I think that article is best filed as clickbait. Classic DM article where it looks like something that was going to happen anyway is linked to a current event

LondonTiger wrote:The selectors can actually watch some County Cricket to make a relatively informed decision. The captain and coaches are rather busy usually.

James Whittaker is the only full time selector though, with Newell and Fraser combining t with their jobs at Notts and Middx.

Hence the talk of getting an additional resource (Flower) to act as a full time scout on top of what Fabrace already does.

Article seems to contain more speculation and assumptions than actual story...

Bayliss wanted Buttler and Stokes in the team ? Well he mentioned them as possibles , but I hardly think that means he was totally wedded to the idea and resents the selection of Ballance ! As for the Anderson decision : presumably the medical staff had an input and the choice not to risk him was taken with an eye to ensuring he'd be OK for the rest of the summer. They weren't to know this Test was going to be a low scoring affair - it might have been one of those 500 each , bowlers slogging away for two days at a time games ; which would not have been the best reintroduction for a bowler coming back from injury.
Time will tell what Strauss wants to do about selection. I'll wait to see rather than trust the Daily Mail , thanks.

Gooseberry wrote:

msp83 wrote:Adil Rashid called up I see. In as first choice spinner or just a warning to Ali to get his act together?
Anderson, Stokes and Rashid in, Ball, Finn and Ali out for me. Vince to get one last chance.

Rashid was much the more effective bowler in the limited overs games and got in ahead of Ali when they picked just one. Alis form with the ball has been awful in tests for a year now, and his batting hads been bad all this year aside form one very good century ...hes still averaging well below 30 though. If Stokes and Woakes play theres just no need to worry about whether or not your number 9 has had a century in the last 3 months ....and its not like Rashifd cant hold a bat.
Ali wont be carrying the can for the last game if he gets dropped,m its for extended run of poor form with the ball and being no more than a handy lower order bat.

....

Meanwhile, another England Test spinner took a match winning sixfer today to go with his two first innings wickets and unbeaten century.

guildfordbat wrote:
Meanwhile, another England Test spinner took a match winning sixfer today to go with his two first innings wickets and unbeaten century.

  Norah for England!

More measured assesment here form cricinfo http://www.espncricinfo.com/england-v-pakistan-2016/content/story/1037037.html

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:
Meanwhile, another England Test spinner took a match winning sixfer today to go with his two first innings wickets and unbeaten century.

  Norah for England!

Why "Norah" and not "Nora"?