England v Pakistan: 2nd Test,

First topic message reminder :

Location:

Old Trafford (Manchester)


Date:

22nd to 26th July 2016


Officials:

Match Umpires: Rod Tucker (Aus), Kumar Dharmasena (SL)
3rd Umpire: Joel Wilson (WI)
Referee: Richie Richardson (WI)



Media Coverage

TV Live: Sky Sports 2 from 10am daily.
TV Highlights: 1 hour shou Channel 5 20:00 daily. 2 hour show Sky Sports various times and channels
Radio: 5L Sports Extra and BBC Website links



Weather Forecast




Teams:

England:
Alastair Cook (capt), Alex Hales, Joe Root, James Vince, Gary Ballance, Ben Stokes, Jonny Bairstow (wk), Moeen Ali, Chris Woakes, Stuart Broad, James Anderson


Pakistan:
Mohammad Hafeez, Shan Masood, Azhar Ali, Younus Khan, Misbah-ul-Haq (capt), Asad Shafiq, Sarfraz Ahmed (wk), Wahab Riaz, Mohammad Amir, Rahat Ali, Yasir Shah.

dummy_half wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

dummy_half wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:So Anderson gets Masood again, making it six from six times that he has dismissed the Pakistani opener when the pair have faced off.

The record is eight straight dismissals, anyone care to have a guess at who's involved?

Wasn't it Jimmy and Gaultum Ghambir?

Nope, it involves an Australian and a South African.

Another less serious guess would be Inzamam Ul-Haq and run out...

Here you go

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvyAZkNM6TA

VTR wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

VTR wrote:Is Moeen the best "bad" bowler in Test history? Bowls some absolute tripe but has an amazing ability to take top order wickets. Like a spin bowling Devon Malcolm

That's really what I was getting at earlier. Certainly not a classically great spinner but he now has over 70 Test scalps and three times as many wickets in this match as Yasir Shah. I view that as effective and pretty remarkable, even more so that he's shut Gooseberry up for half an hour.

He is a very strange bowler - if you looked at his stats you would assume he was a legspinner. The question I suppose is whether there is a spinner out there who could keep it tight and take wickets as we don't really need his batting

Going old school, the likes of Tredwell and Batty could probably send down 20 or so overs in a Test day and only go for, say, 45 to 50 runs. However, unless on a real turner, I don't see that sort of bowler normally picking up more than a single wicket.

As you say, Moeen's figures far more look like those of a leggie - hence, my commenting that his analysis yesterday was Rashid-like. I can understand us wanting Moeen to be more economical but not the call for him to be replaced by Rashid with the mantra, ''Rashid goes for a few but he'll get a few''. That's exactly what Moeen is already doing and regularly so.

Goldenarm Woakes does it again. A nothing sort of delivery really, attempted yorker but it's well outside off, Misbah though pokes at it and drags on. Huge wicket for England. Misbah had just gone into his shell in the last 20-30 minutes or so, and maybe that passivity was his downfall.

And Woakes has another. Sarfraz is caught down the legside. He reviews it, and initial replays suggest the ball flicked his shirt, but hotspot shows a clear mark on the glove too, so he has to go. Good decision again by Dharmasena.

And that, surely, is that. Anderson hits Shafiq on the pads, it looks plumb but Tucker must feel there's an inside edge there. England opt for the review, replays shows it's hit both pads rather than bat and pad, and is indeed crashing into enough of the leg stump to overturn the decision. Good review from England, third wicket for Anderson, and Pakistan are out of recognised batsmen.

Pakistan might actually be out for less than their 1st innings score at this rate.

Not a single player able to even reach 50...pretty feeble.

#MentallyDestroyed

Well, looking for positives, at least Pakistan have scored more runs than Joe Root...

Even that has only been courtesy of their lower order putting up some resistance in both innings.

It's the Joe Root show again. Comes into the attack, loops one up into the sky and Wahab can't resist, having an almighty hoick and sending it straight up, Cook takes the catch, and England are one away.

Well this last pair were making it interesting for the Pakistan fans but they went in the end as I was typing.

Well done England.

And there it is, Amir drives Woakes to Broad at mid-off, and the demolition is complete.

Fine performance from England

With this England team I'm always happier about the next Test after we've lost than I am if we've won. However, I can see this tour being, for Pakistan, similar to the one "enjoyed" by India in 2014. Namely, a good win at Lord's followed by a complete turn-around.

A highly convincing win even though Ballance and especially Vince haven't turned the doubters round.

Good as well that Cook was spared the dilemma of taking the extra half-hour or resting his bowlers.

sirfredperry wrote:With this England team I'm always happier about the next Test after we've lost than I am if we've won. However, I can see this tour being, for Pakistan, similar to the one "enjoyed" by India in 2014. Namely, a good win at Lord's followed by a complete turn-around.
   

Still really worried about just how much we seem to depend on Cook and Root for runs. Hales, Vince and Ballance need to make a mark on the series.

LondonTiger wrote:

sirfredperry wrote:With this England team I'm always happier about the next Test after we've lost than I am if we've won. However, I can see this tour being, for Pakistan, similar to the one "enjoyed" by India in 2014. Namely, a good win at Lord's followed by a complete turn-around.
   

Still really worried about just how much we seem to depend on Cook and Root for runs. Hales, Vince and Ballance need to make a mark on the series.

Just to stress that point, Cook and Root scored 506 runs (the rest 227 even with half centuries from the keeper and a man in the team primarily as a bowler)

Pak it seemed were still celebrating Lords......didn't arrive in Manchester.
*let's see who wins the toss in the next test*

Pak need to bring in someone else in place of Shaan masood....they have only sami aslam who can open...

and Iftikar ahmed a specialist batsman who can also bowl handy off spin.

Stokes is injured but dispensable......as Woakes is the new allround star..and Ali shuts his critics...for 1 more test

If Stokes isn't fit, England should replace him with a seamer, either Ball or Wood would be my choice. We can bat Bairstow at 6, Woakes at 7, Ali at 8 and Broad at 9 and still have a strong batting line-up.

I'm still not convinced about Ali as a spinner, although he did have a good game. I did hear a good bit of analysis by Simon Hughes on the Channel 5 highlights show, saying that Pakistan's 3 left-handers create rough for Ali outside the right-hander's off stump which helped him in the second innings. The wickets would have done his confidence the world of good, so maybe Cook's decision to bat again and put 19 more overs of left-arm seam into the deck will end up being a huge positive for Moeen over the remainder of the series and going into the winter.

I don't know how Pakistan can continue with Mansood, for this series at least. He's completely lost against Anderson and he'll be dreading going out to face him again, although I don't know much about Pakistan's options here.

Looking at Pakistan's middle order, I think they've got it wrong slightly. I like Azhar Ali, but I don't think he's currently their best player in that position. Could they move Shafiq up to 3, who looks like their best batsman at present.

I also think Pakistan need to drop a middle order batsman and bring in another bowling option. They need a 5th bowler for when things get tough, although I don't think they can afford to have another specialist bowler and a tail that starts at 7. Do they have an all-rounder? Or a batsman that can bowl a bit (but a bit better than Azhar Ali)? Although Hafeez may be getting re-tested for his bowling action and could fill in that role.

Both teams have a couple of questions to answer, but England will have the momentum after this. If England can play Yasir Shah better in the first innings, I think England should be able to take a big first innings lead and negate the potential effect of losing a toss, as our seamers should have too much for the Pakistan batsman in home conditions, especially with Anderson back.

Why has Plunkett seemingly fallen off the test radar? He'd be my pick to replace Stokes - was really only dropped due to injury, has done well in the one day stuff and I doubt the Pakistan batsmen will fancy his 90mph+ bouncers - also a very handy late order bat

Not a slight on Ball - just don't think it makes a huge deal of sense to replace an all rounder with a bowler - when England's only trouble in the series has been with the bat (in the 1st test), see Ball as more of an Anderson replacement/backup

Good to see England win after Wee weeing away the first Test.

Edgbaston should be a walkover.

Pakistan just aren't in England's class in these conditions.

A good win. Would beware of getting too confident : Pakistan might crumble now ; or they might win the toss at Edgbaston and bounce back with a strong performance...I do favour England , as I did before the series commenced , but do not assume it will be easy.
Stokes is a loss. He brings energy and firepower to the mix , and helps to cover for some doubtful middle order batting. I tend to like Olly's notion of recalling Plunkett ; but I think it will more likely be Ball , or perhaps Wood - which I don't mind , if he is now fit again.

Does Vince get another chance , after the team won ? Wouldn't if I were in charge ; I think with perhaps three batting positions in flux they really need to look at someone else - and I just don't trust him to be much help if Cook and Root don't continue to carry the batting.

Moeen still looks very fallible as the spinner. But he does what a spinner is supposed to do - take wickets in the fourth innings (however he does it) - and I'm not sure anyone else could walk in and do better. The India tour may test him ; but I think his place is secure this summer.

And finally , all the fuss over the follow on seems to have been something of a waste of words ...the team won inside four days , the public got a full day of cricket...

A dominant performance by England with bat and ball. As Alfie said above, the fuss over the follow-on doesn't really matter given we won handsomely in 4 days.

Agree about not getting over-confident, as there are still questions to be answered - none of Hales, Vince or Ballance really made the most of opportunities on a good batting wicket, the latter two in particular getting in then getting themselves out. As with others, I'm still not entirely sold on Bairstow as a keeper, but I doubt we'll see a change to a specialist keeper who doesn't make big contributions with the bat (at least before the Indian tour squad is announced), and I'm not certain that Buttler is an upgrade on the keeping front (and is he fit again yet?).

Moeen continues to be a wicket-taking pie chucker - it's working for now, and again are any of the alternatives seriously better? I doubt it will be changed this summer.

Unfortunate for Stokes to get injured, but it happens lots when someone is coming back from one thing that they get muscular injuries around that area. I think we'll likely see Ball or perhaps Wood recalled, but agree that Plunkett would be a good option for an aggressive bowler who can bat at 9.

As for Woakes, he's gone from a sub-par replacement for Stokes to being probably the 3rd name on the team sheet (after Cook and Roooooooooot).

I think its time for Vince to be given the chop - he has done next to nothing in 5 Tests now. A replacement can't really do any worse but could well do better - some players take to Test cricket better than others

Ballance just about stays, he looks out of form but I can see why England want him back in as he is a fighter and has shown that he can make Test runs before

Hales also just about stays following a good series vs SL, and the lack of obvious replacements

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Why has Plunkett seemingly fallen off the test radar? He'd be my pick to replace Stokes - was really only dropped due to injury, has done well in the one day stuff and I doubt the Pakistan batsmen will fancy his 90mph+ bouncers - also a very handy late order bat

Not a slight on Ball - just don't think it makes a huge deal of sense to replace an all rounder with a bowler - when England's only trouble in the series has been with the bat (in the 1st test), see Ball as more of an Anderson replacement/backup

Not sure Plunkett takes enough wickets to be a decent test player. I cannot see them making any unenforced changes - and suspect the batters will get till the end of the series. I would like them to move Ali up to 6 for the next game and tell him to behave like a batsman who can bowl (he seems to bowl better when he is batting well, not a surprise really). then I would quite like to see an additional spinner called up. Trouble is who the heck would that be?

I can't see England playing 2 spinners at home. Presumably the man in possession of the second spinner spot is Rashid, which would make sense as he turns the ball the other way to Moeen

I think Moeen will play anyway, as we will be backing our pace bowlers to be even more effective at Edgbaston

VTR

Agree with the idea that we need really to only be making one change at a time.

Vince is frustrating, because it's clear there is some stroke-playing ability there, but he's got a habit of just about getting in then getting out - he's only had one complete failure, otherwise all his innings have been going on half an hour at least. In a way it would probably look better if he'd had a couple more failures and a couple of innings of 60 or 70 - same sort of average but looking more like he can contribute. The next question though is who comes in to replace him - I don't want to see us going back to Ian Bell, no matter how good he's been in the past, and I guess Jason Roy would probably be in consideration based on recent ODI form. I actually have a feeling that Roy could be one of those players who blossoms on the big stage and over-achieves compared to his county record.

Agree re Hales - unless someone in County cricket (besides Trescothick...) really holds their hand up with the kind of form Bairstow showed last year, then he did enough in the SL series to be given a bit longer. Has though looked suspect against Amir in particular.

Ballance, as you said, has at least shown the mentality of a Test cricketer, and was showing some improved CC form when recalled, so it would be unfair to ditch him after 2 matches.

VTR wrote:I can't see England playing 2 spinners at home.

Neither can I, but I would like to see it considered, especially when currently our spinner is really a batting all rounder.

I'd rather not go back to the days of dropping players after they have a poor couple of Tests, so to me talk of dropping Hales is slightly ridiculous. He was our second best batsman in the SL series. Also think his new trigger movements will help once he beds them in properly, which he should do by next Test.

Vince I suspect will be given the last two Tests, but needs to take his chance. I think Bayliss was looking at him when he talked about how much work Root had done in learning from his mistakes at Lords, and how others needed to do the same.

Although, Ben Duckett. Scoring runs, and IIRC is a fine player of spin from when I saw him in the U19 WC a few years ago, when he helped make a tricky chase against Pakistan on a turning track look easy. Could be worth a look at, with the tour to India coming up.

Stokes, assuming he is out, will be a loss. England are firm believers in the pecking order, and I expect they'll go to Ball, though Finn also has a chance, and they'll be keeping a close eye on Wood who's been doing well for the Lions. I suspect they'll worry he's not ready for Tests yet. Ball will weaken the batting, but England still have a decent batting line-up with Bairstow, Ali and Woakes at 6,7,8 (Broad at 9 of course). Still, five bowlers seems to work better nowadays (particularly with Ali unlikely to tie things down for long-ish spells), so can't be helped. I see Plunkett being mooted, but he doesn't seem to be quite in the pecking order right now.

Pakistan of course have slightly bigger issues, mostly with their batting. I'm not overly familiar with their squad, but Masood has to go. Apart from the fact Anderson has his number, he just looks too loose just outside off stump, and doesn't have enough shots to score runs at Test level. Options could be to open with Azhar Ali, and hope the extra responsibility helps him, but he has problems of his own. He's been dismissed LBW to balls hitting/clipping leg stump three times out of four, which suggests England have found a weakness there. He has the temperament and ability to work it out, but needs to do so pronto.

Younus Khan looked a bit better in his last innings, and Pakistan will be desperately hoping his decline is temporary rather than permanent. Misbah and Shafiq have played well, and an option could be to move them up the order a bit, but I'd be loather to move them too high (Shafiq at 3 or even open has been talked about by some pundits), a spot at most.

Ideally, Pakistan would want to replace Masood with someone who can bowl a bit too (off spin?), but they definitely need to make that change. Don't think they'll change much else, though they'll want Hafeez and Sarfraz to start capitalising more on their starts, and more from Wahab Riaz. Think Nasser Hussain is right in saying that Wahab should really be used in shorter more aggressive bursts.

Plunketts not been setting the wolrd on fire for Yorkshire and looks down the pecking order for whatever reason. To be haonets England have a lot of similar Fast Medium seamers they could select from. Obviously Plunkett brings that extra batting which is lost through Stokes but really it should be the player England think will most be able to replace Anderson eventually as a genuine front line out and out bowler. Right now they seem to think thats Ball.
Theres really only one decision that would flambaffle me ..and that would be Finn.

Batting ...Hales still has some credit in the bag and to be fair on him hes facing top quality seamers up front. I didnt like the idea of him in tests at all but he did get some good scores and looked to be turning a corner on the format, he still has potential and with the sheer number of changes that have happened in the top 3 over the past 4 years he has at least till the end of this series. If he steps up a notch England have a truely formidable top 3, espeically going to the sub continent where Cook has a great history and Hales could be truely destructive.

Root...even India gfans must be running out of reasons to critisize him. Last month it was that he doesnt convert enough 50's to hundreds. He appears to be addressing that, declaration aside. Hes no longer "hiding" down the order and has made big runs at 3. Maybe it will be that he doesnt bowl as much as Tendulkar did

Longer term on the batting ...Vince surely gets the summer. He was on the cusp of a call up for some time and wasnt just a one seaon county wonder. He does depserately need runs but with Taylor gone their isnt anyone immediately demanding a place. Ballances spot is really in more danger IMO.
For whatever reason England dont seem interested in Borthwick as a batsman/spinner even with an eye on the winter. Malan though made good runs for the Lions (and had a good winter with them too) against a joke Sri Lanka A side and could take that on, as could Ansari. At leats one of the three should tour for the winter to give England options. Its unlikley they will get a test this sumer though.
Duckett though is the one whos really stood out for the Lions ...but the opposition really doenst appear to have been actual bowlers. Hes an opener...maybe he could come in to pressure Hales but I just dont see that yet. Not at 21, England are very conservative about these things. Long term prospect likely to work his way into the limited overs side at some point.

Ali ..yes he had a good test. Theres a bit of hyperbole and exageration from some of the posters above though. Silences his critics? He still cant bowl very well, and given hes had over two years of concentrating on that it doesnt appear thats ever going to change significantly as hoped. Regulalry doing this? hes only taken 5 wickets in a game 3 times in his career and its the first time hes talken more than 2 in an innings this year. Mention was made of Tredwell who we couldnt imagine doing what Ali did ...except he took 5+ wickets in both tests he played. At an average of 40 and a Strike Rate of 64 hes not taking wickets reguallry enough to justify the poor economy, or at leasts not so much that he is what you would call a genuine test spinner. And lets face it that was the kind of situation where he really should be expected to take wickets. The worry remains when teams arent falling apart and are happy to milk him for easy runs he offers no real threat to prise out a set batsman or help control the scoring.
For now though yes he has secured his place short term. Theres signs hes turned around a poor run of form, 3 decent innings in a row. He needs to keep that up to retain the job as lead spinner though if England are going to be a real number one test team. The lack of candidates banging down the door (as per Hales) shouldnt be reason enough to be content with someone. And certainly isnt reason to dress him up as something he isnt.
With Stokes out the case for picking the better bat of the two contenders is strengthened as well. So hes another make do pick.

Its odd to be looking at and England side that keeps winning and keep seeing the obvious flaws in it.

Gooseberry wrote:

Root...even India gfans must be running out of reasons to critisize him. Last month it was that he doesnt convert enough 50's to hundreds. He appears to be addressing that, declaration aside. Hes no longer "hiding" down the order and has made big runs at 3. Maybe it will be that he doesnt bowl as much as Tendulkar did

Ohhh he's yet to prove himself in India

KP and Cook in recent times and Mike Gatting in "ancient era" are the only English batsmen to have really done well with some mastery in Indian conditions

Root averages 90 in India

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Root averages 90 in India

Devalued runs, that was against Dohnis hand picked cronies.

And I suppose its legit to point out he's only played two tests in the sub continent and didnt score well in UAE even though Pakistan werent able to play Yasir Shah or bowl Hafeez. So fair enough hes yet prove he can hack it on Asian pitches. This winter is a chance for him to address a gap in his test CV.
But that really is clutching at straws. He has to be in anyones top 3 active test batsmen.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Root averages 90 in India

over how many test matches

Stokes out of the 3rd test as expected.

Ball and Finn included in the squad, hoping for Ball, expecting Finn.

unfortunately we do not get to read articles / columns / insight on Pak camp preparations, strategies, troubles etc.
Earlier there was a Kamran Abbasi writing for CI...now there is no Pak perspective

--It would be interesting to know if Hafeez action has been retested and can he bowl....he is not a bad option for  a 5th bowler

--else of note Pak tried the batting options in the squad in the game vs. Worcs
and unfortunately shaan masood did better than aslam the reserve opener

Iftikar the batting all-rounder scored runs as did Rizwan the reserve WK.
They can make only one change.....dump masood and get a guy in who is deemed better batsman than Masood and make him open

not an easy situation...so they might stick to Masood i suspect..
They may play Imran in place of rahaht

Yeah the lack of writing about Pakistan is frustrating. I wonder if they are keeping the media at arms length following the mess last time they were here.

Hafeez ...yeah Pakistan are really short on bowling options when the going isnt good for them. Heis bowling in itself isnt likely to fundamentaly change the series but it will take some pressure off Shah and help spread rhe workload to get the best out of every over.
Really though they need the seamers to start delivering as a unit.

Massod is long term problematic. Do they have anything resembling a spare opener?

Finn to replace Stokes. Not sure about that, think there are probably a few more deserving seamers around in present form. But England have shown previously that their faith in tried and trusted over new players verges into blind at times.

I'm more bemused that they're replacing an all rounder with a pure bowler

Woakes gives them that flexibility in present form.

Doesn't matter who England pick - they're going to steamroller Pakistan so easily.

4/7 odds on an England win - print some more money and relaaaaax. Tempted as well by the 10/1 that Anderson gets man of the match; might be worth a nibble.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:I'm more bemused that they're replacing an all rounder with a pure bowler

Simple. England want five bowlers, and Woakes's form makes him a plausible replacement for Stokes in the all-rounder role. If England had a second Stokes on hand they'd pick him, but they don't. You could argue Plunkett I suppose, but he's not at Stokes's level with the bat, and England obviously feel the trade-off they get from his batting vs Finn's bowling isn't enough.

As for Finn above Ball, I'm not particularly fussed. Ball did pretty well in the first Test, but Finn looked better in the second innings and was unlucky with dropped catches. With three other seamers who'll keep things very tight if necessary I'm not bothered about going for the more attacking option.

Agree with MFC on this : I would have been happy to see Ball again ; but if Finn has his rhythm back ( and from what Cook said I presume they are pretty assured that is so) then his type of bowling is probably more of a variation from Anderson/Woakes/ Broad and is therefore a better replacement for what Stokes brings to the bowling.

Not covering for his runs of course ; but neither would Ball. And I didn't really think they'd pick a second spinner at Edgbaston.

Fact is they'll miss Stokes whatever they do : he brings extra energy - as well as fine fielding - on top of his potential to turn a game quickly with bat or ball. Can't be helped...let us hope some of the non-firing batsmen get some runs this time.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:I'm more bemused that they're replacing an all rounder with a pure bowler

To be fair Woakes is an all rounder replacing a proper bowler. With Ali in as well they have 2 more i the side than Pakistan do.

And who is the other seam all rounder they would pick?

Im happy they are going with the players they believe are the best bowlers available for the conditions and their current form.
Like other people Im a touch worried about Finn being considered the best tall bouncer around but apparently you can only pick from actual players.

So yeah weaker side but lets wait and see on Finn if he really is back on point. Longer term though do we really want to keep flip flopping on him?

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:I'm more bemused that they're replacing an all rounder with a pure bowler

Simple. England want five bowlers, and Woakes's form makes him a plausible replacement for Stokes in the all-rounder role. If England had a second Stokes on hand they'd pick him, but they don't. You could argue Plunkett I suppose, but he's not at Stokes's level with the bat, and England obviously feel the trade-off they get from his batting vs Finn's bowling isn't enough.

As for Finn above Ball, I'm not particularly fussed. Ball did pretty well in the first Test, but Finn looked better in the second innings and was unlucky with dropped catches. With three other seamers who'll keep things very tight if necessary I'm not bothered about going for the more attacking option.

I'd argue and have argued Plunkett would be my choice to come. We want someone who is a tall, fast hit the pitch bowler then Plunkett is my choice. In a five man attack he can bowl 4 over spells of fast stuff. A very good bat to come in at 9 as well. Just feel with the middle order misfiring, weakening the batting anymore than we have to is dangerous (people will point to Broad at 9 still - but he's a bunny rabbit against bowlers like Wahab and Amir)

Plunketts hardly been setting the County scene on fire this year but yeah he was another viable option.
I wouldnt over egg his batting though, his record is nothing special internationaly or domesticaly...hes not in the Woakes/Stokes/Ali bracket and really no more a bat than Broad ust a decent lower order clubber in limited overs. Worrying about the quality of your 9/10's batting when the opposition have a bunny at 8 really shouldnt be top of the list of priorities in selecting a side either. Fixing the Hales/Balance/Vince issue shouldnt be the responsibility of the bowling unit and if we start picking bowlers on that basis we really get back into trouble again.
England clearly think Finn (and Ball) has the better potential as a strike bowler. From the reports Finn is back on his game in the nets which is good news.
I do still have doubts about such a flakey player though. He keeps