England vs South Africa - test series thread

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

First topic message reminder :

In the fast paced nature of international cricket, we are just over a week away from the first of four test matches between SA and England - should be a good one.

South Africa have named their squad...missing some big names in Steyn, ABDV - also no Dane Piedt, Stephen Cook either.

South Africa squad: Faf du Plessis (captain), Hashim Amla, Temba Bavuma, Theunis de Bruyn, Quinton de Kock, JP Duminy, Dean Elgar, Heino Kuhn, Keshav Maharaj, Aiden Markram, Morne Morkel, Chris Morris, Duanne Olivier, Andile Phehlukwayo, Vernon Philander, Kagiso Rabada.

Still a very strong team - especially in the seam bowling ranks. Although with Faf missing the first test, the batting is reliant on Amla and De Kock I feel

England have a few injury concerns - particularly Stuart Broad - any thoughts on the SA squad, and potential England one?

[kingraf]

It's hard to believe that we came into this tour the #1 ODI side in the world, with a 7-1 record in Tests this season. To be fair, there are things happening behind the scenes which have probably not helped. The neverending AB drama. Domingo still being the coach even though his contract is sorta up, but not really, but he hasn't reapplied, so no one really knows what is happening. Faf's daughter or wife taking ill after birth. Domingo's mother getting into a car accident, and since passing on. Been a long tour this. Then the Rabada ban happened which isn't great. I'm still a little shocked he got a demerit for what he said, given that on the reverse tour Stokes told Bavuma quite audibly, that he was "f.ucking useless" without a demerit, while Ross Taylor called Virat Kohli a bhenchod (or a sister f******) without censure, but thems the apples. Of course this wasn't his first incident, but given the fact that the only other strike against him was a shoulder brush with Dickwella, this is as soft a suspension as I've ever seen. Hopefully the stump mic stays on, because there's no way Stokes goes 15 days of cricket without dropping an F-bomb, and then he gets a suspension. I think. He's only one demerit short himself, and that's the threshold set apparently. Yes I'm bitter.

[Mad for Chelsea]

It's hard to believe that we came into this tour the #1 ODI side in the world, with a 7-1 record in Tests this season. To be fair, there are things happening behind the scenes which have probably not helped. The neverending AB drama. Domingo still being the coach even though his contract is sorta up, but not really, but he hasn't reapplied, so no one really knows what is happening. Faf's daughter or wife taking ill after birth. Domingo's mother getting into a car accident, and since passing on. Been a long tour this. Then the Rabada ban happened which isn't great. I'm still a little shocked he got a demerit for what he said, given that on the reverse tour Stokes told Bavuma quite audibly, that he was "f.ucking useless" without a demerit, while Ross Taylor called Virat Kohli a bhenchod (or a sister f******) without censure, but thems the apples. Of course this wasn't his first incident, but given the fact that the only other strike against him was a shoulder brush with Dickwella, this is as soft a suspension as I've ever seen. Hopefully the stump mic stays on, because there's no way Stokes goes 15 days of cricket without dropping an F-bomb, and then he gets a suspension. I think. He's only one demerit short himself, and that's the threshold set apparently. Yes I'm bitter.

So bitter you had to say it three times

Like I said with Rabada my problem wasn't so much this demerit point, though it now sets a precedent which must be followed. If players swear during a tennis match they get a code violation (and a repeat will see them docked a point), and if this harder stance sees the level of swearing reduced it's not a bad thing IMO. The three demerit points for the Dickwella incident seem more than a little heavy-handed though, unless there's some footage I haven't seen.

[Corporalhumblebucket]

.... It's not as though we have a Warne or Murali hiding in the wings, or even a Swann - back to being like the days of England having to choose their primary spinner between Croft, Giles and Udal...

Feel a wave of nostalgia coming on - but I'm sure that will pass pretty quickly  

[Gooseberry]

Its moeens first reallu effective bowling performance at home since his debut series, and he was getting slated for being rubbish then.  I dint see much has changed off the back of this gsme.other than that hes made himself nigh on impossible to drop for the medium term.
The absence of a credible alternative as the main spinner is one thing.  That hes also in the top four performing batsmen for england over the last year or so is another.  I find it hard to believe hes actually one of the best but he does keep scoring more runs than many of the specialist bats bought in.
As much as I want to see england move on from being a team of all rounders lacking really top notch individual role specialists as things i have to begrudgingly admit hes made himslef seem indispenable.
As for Dawson if hes not even our best spinner and cant bat eithet whats he doing there. Ok Lords turned out to be very helpful to the spinners and as someone above said the decision to include him seems right with that knowledge despite his own impact being minimal.
Looking forward we really surely have to be picking higher quality players.

Two things:
1 - Moeen would be there or thereabouts for the team as a specialist batsman at the moment. Also, all rounders (as long as they are scoring runs) are the key to being able to pick a balanced side.

2 - I'm sure the selectors would pick higher quality players than Dawson if they thought there were any. A case can be made for Rashid as #8 and front line spinner, but he's similar to Moeen in some ways - likely to bowl some good balls but also some filth. Dawson at least is supposed to offer some control of the run rate, and probably deserves a bit more of a chance. It's not as though we have a Warne or Murali hiding in the wings, or even a Swann - back to being like the days of England having to choose their primary spinner between Croft, Giles and Udal...

I think we are in danger of artguing the same point here.

Essentialy Im still niot convinced that Moeen is that great a bowler, and its 100% his batting thats carried him through the last year or so. He has outperformed most of the specilist batsmen England have tried in that period.
Hes also out equalled or out performed other spinners (bar Rashid over the winter) that England have picked.
Im not convinced hes especially great at eitehr discpline, but as it stands noones pushing him out. Leach could have been given a go, but Crane still looks a long way off test ready. We have discussed at length elsewhere the paucity of Englands spin options.
I recognise the reasoning for Dawsons inclussion when theres a lack of quality options or players who are living up to their potential in a test shirt. Its just I wish we did have Chuck Norris available.
The notion that Moeens number 2 and an occassional bowler is probably about right given what I think feel his talent level is (vs what happned in the last test and the hype around him). The problem is when your number one is such an average county bowler he ends up not being number 2 and still leading the spin attack. Dawson also uterly failed to provide the control required, although yes did have "target" written all over him...which is sort of what the management wanted as well. But then they say Moeens best when being agressive and tempting the opposition to go at him (it was certainly a case in his debut series that the Indian batsmen tended to get themsleves out trying to hit him out of the attack). So which is they actually want?
Then as a batsman who bowls a bit and who has better batting figures in the last 18 months than most of the top 6 ...why is he at 7 behind the bowler who bats a bit, keeper who bats a bit, and batsman whos consistently struggled when asked to go up the order? Is he a good batsmen or not?

Woakes becoming available will open up a new question, is he one of the best 3 seamers England have? Hes not going to takes Stokes' spot as the real all rounder seamer so is competing as one of the full time bowlers. Or with Dawson. As a pure cricketer I know which Id rather have in the side...but this model of protecting Moeen requires Dawson. And of course the " what on earth do you need 5 seamers for? " question remains.

The posaitive for England is that they wont ever find themselves short of bowling options as SA did. Nor are they having to pick Duminy for racial quotas.

[Gooseberry]

.... It's not as though we have a Warne or Murali hiding in the wings, or even a Swann - back to being like the days of England having to choose their primary spinner between Croft, Giles and Udal...

Feel a wave of nostalgia coming on - but I'm sure that will pass pretty quickly  

Croft had far better career stats than Moeen currently does as a bowler.

But yeah fair point, its not like England have had great options in the spin cupboard for a long time. The momentary joint success of Swann and Pannesar is the anomoly in the last few decades. Giles' repuation is far better than his figures were.

[Corporalhumblebucket]

Then as a batsman who bowls a bit and who has better batting figures in the last 18 months than most of the top 6 ...why is he at 7 behind the bowler who bats a bit, keeper who bats a bit, and batsman whos consistently struggled when asked to go up the order? Is he a good batsmen or not?

Not sure that it makes too much difference where Moeen bats = 5, 6, 7 if the others occupying these slots are also good batsmen ... after all he scores his runs at a good rate.

[Mad for Chelsea]

Moeen's form over the last year would see him picked as a specialist batsman certainly. Worth remembering that when he was first picked, it was at six, essentially to provide some overs of spin because England didn't have a front line spinner worth picking, so he was viewed as a fifth bowler type option. At the time I said I had no real concerns over his ability to fill that bowling role, but that I wasn't convinced his batting was good enough for Test level, I basically thought he was a bit too loose. In that respect I have been proved wrong. You will always get the odd frustrating dismissal when he plays a loose shot, but his consistency over the last year and more has been impressive. I also think he's more than ably filled the "back-up" type bowler role. The issue is he's been asked to do more than that, and become England's front line spinner, with mixed results.

So with Dawson coming in it's almost as if he's reverted to that original role. You now have the three main seamers, and three "back-up" options in a way. I thought Dawson bowled nicely in the game TBH. Yes his first spell he was given some stick, maybe a bit nervous and also being targeted by SA, but he came back well and picked up some useful wickets. Certainly didn't look out of place. If England had either a clearly better spinner, or a middle-order batsman knocking down the door by piling on runs at County level, then they could reasonably replace him with one of those, but they don't. They're struggling to fill the specialist batsmen positions as it is...

Re the Woakes question, I agree that five seamers seems more than a bit silly, and doubt England will go that route, so Woakes is realistically competing with Wood for the third specialist seamer spot.

[Mad for Chelsea]

Then as a batsman who bowls a bit and who has better batting figures in the last 18 months than most of the top 6 ...why is he at 7 behind the bowler who bats a bit, keeper who bats a bit, and batsman whos consistently struggled when asked to go up the order? Is he a good batsmen or not?

Not sure that it makes too much difference where Moeen bats = 5, 6, 7 if the others occupying these slots are also good batsmen ...  after all he scores his runs at a good rate.  

You're going to hate this answer, but it's (in part) because 7 is where Moeen scores most of his runs. I know looking at data etc. is usually scorned on here, but Moeen's average at 7 is remarkable, and significantly higher than his average in other positions. Equally while I haven't checked the stats, Stokes I reckon has a highest average at 6. Bairstow almost certainly also averages more at 7, but that might be skewed by having played in the middle-order when he first struggled in Test cricket. Off to do some checking on cricinfo.

[Corporalhumblebucket]

Croft had far better career stats than Moeen currently does as a bowler.

Following MfC's advice on looking at the stats I'm not sure that the figures bear out that assertion - at least at test level.  What's clear is that they played different roles*, with Croft more attritional, keeping things tight and Moeen Ali more likely to take wickets, albeit at the cost of the runs tending to flow.

Croft
Balls bowled: 4619; wickets:  49; strike rate: 94.2; economy rate: 2.37

Moeen Ali
Balls bowled: 6876; wickets: 108;  strike rate: 63.6;  economy rate: 3.7

* And of course character of test cricket has changed a lot - with much higher scoring rates tending to be the norm. Plus DRS tending to stop batsmen endlessly padding up against the spinners. OK it's going back a bit further but astonishing now to think how rarely it was the top line spinners like Sir Lancelot Gibbs actually won an LBW appeal....

[CaledonianCraig]

Ali offers far more to the team than Croft did. I'd say he's the better bowler and a far better batsman as well. The question I find interesting now is what to do with Dawson. In his second spell he looking really decent and worth persevering with but first innings was forgettable and no contribution whatsoever with the bat. Tricky one.

[Gooseberry]

In terms of the stats yes it does very much bare out a difference in strike rate vs economy. But im not sure why you'd choose to omit the average figure which is generaly the go to stat and shows the balance between those two ... Crofts was a bit better ( if hardly great).
Its a side point anyway ...we all agree that Moeen is only good by modern England spinner standards, and the current lack of a real star spinner is nothing new.

And yes he was never initialy selected to be that genuine 30 over front line spin machine. The continued point regarding lack of viable alternatives stands. In hindsight it was a mistake to put the pressure in him to try and be a full time bowler.

Thing is when he was initially selected as a part timer he ended up doing well. And the same has happened again when supposedly hes just a fill in.
Even normally hes as good as Dawson, which is where I feel theres still n
Some confused thinking or perhaps that reality is not bearing out whats being said.

The same goes for the batting positions. Sure Moeen and Stokes and Bairstow can all be shuffled around ...but my point was that if youre going to call one of them a batsman who bowls a bit why are they batting down the order? Again its that almost contradictory thinking. In India he was in as a front line bowler but got banged up to a specialists spot.
Meanwhile you had a keeper come in as a specialist bat below two all rounders and a keeper.

Is he so fragile that he needs hiding by a worse batsman and protecting by a worse bowler?

Its tickling the edges but smashing a depleted and tired SA team doesnt feel as big a deal to me as it should

[dummy_half]

CC

My introduction of Croft (and others) to the discussion was not particularly to make a direct comparison, but more to emphasise that England have only occasionally (at least during my time watching cricket) had a genuinely top class spin bowler (I'm too young to remember Underwood, but do remember Emburey and Edmonds). In the context of our front line spinners from about 1980 onwards, Moeen's bowling stats are much of a muchness with the likes of Emburey, Tuffers, Giles and Croft (at least regarding wickets per game and average) and he clearly adds a lot more with the bat. There have definitely been notional front line spinners picked who have done a lot worse...(no names ... <cough> Ian Salisbury <cough> )

In the time I've been watching England, only really Swann has been far superior (and the start of Panesar's career). Perhaps we are expecting a bit too much, especially as the County game at the moment doesn't seem to be producing may real spin bowling specialists.

[CaledonianCraig]

Cheers dummy_half.

England is not blessed with great spinners but Ali is the best option at present for the team. He gets wickets and scores invaluable runs with the bat as well. 

There may be technically better spin options (not too sure though) but they'd need time to bed into the side, would need to be strong-willed and prepared to take tap and have temperament as well. Now if they ticked those boxes they would then be preferred to be able to contribute with the bat - thatvis where Ali would probably far outshine them.

[Gooseberry]

Yeah Im not arguing any of that ...I just find it sub-optimal to be picking a very medicore spinner because your best option is pretty mediocre.
It may be the best of a bad situation but its still not ideal.
If we had 5 proper batsmen who were actually capable of at least holding down a spot or better being genuine test class and all avergaing well into the 40s then maybe the middle order wouldnt be so reliant on all rounders.
As it is the versatility of Stokes and Moeen is whats keeping England competitive. But the previous 3 series have shown that there needs to be more than that to get back to number one.
No easy magic wand of course and it is encouraging to see Moeen rip through a team in a way he hasnt come close to for 3 years (albeit in helpful conditions against a weakened side who cant play spin for toffee).
After the way this gsme panned out Im less down on the selection of Dawson than I was but Im still never going to be 100% comfortbale with such an unspectacular player in the side ( nice way of saying county dibbler).

(In true make Goose look like an idiot style this mean he will take 10 and score a double century next test)

[CaledonianCraig]

All I can say to that is you can only p*** with the c*** you have got. England don't have a Swann-esque spin option at present but a spinner is needed in the side as we saw the other day. An all seam attack is a no-goer so the best spin option (given falacies in England's upper batting order) is Ali.

[Gooseberry]

Absolutely. I still remember the days when England had Hick as their only spinner. Although for many of those games could have had Tufnell who was a decent attacking option on any pitch.
It doesnt help Englands case that they insist on coaching legal bowling techniques of course.

[dummy_half]

...
No easy magic wand of course and it is encouraging to see Moeen rip through a team in a way he hasnt come close to for 3 years (albeit in helpful conditions against a weakened side who cant play spin for toffee).
After the way this gsme panned out Im less down on the selection of Dawson than I was but Im still never going to be 100% comfortbale with such an unspectacular player in the side ( nice way of saying county dibbler).

(In true make Goose look like an idiot style this mean he will take 10 and score a double century next test)

I think this is quite a significant point. It seems to me that at the moment there is a bigger disparity between teams that can bat against spin and those that can't than has been the case for as long as I remember. Moeen is a good enough spinner to pose a challenge to the teams like SA, Aus and NZ, who are not particularly good against spin (especially in somewhat helpful conditions), but gets absolutely murdered by India regardless of how much the ball is turning.

Now, do we have a spin bowler in the county game that could pose a threat to the sub-continental teams in their conditions? My understanding is there are a few promising youngsters, but no-one who is really at a level that demands selection yet.

[Gooseberry]

...
No easy magic wand of course and it is encouraging to see Moeen rip through a team in a way he hasnt come close to for 3 years (albeit in helpful conditions against a weakened side who cant play spin for toffee).
After the way this gsme panned out Im less down on the selection of Dawson than I was but Im still never going to be 100% comfortbale with such an unspectacular player in the side ( nice way of saying county dibbler).

(In true make Goose look like an idiot style this mean he will take 10 and score a double century next test)

I think this is quite a significant point. It seems to me that at the moment there is a bigger disparity between teams that can bat against spin and those that can't than has been the case for as long as I remember. Moeen is a good enough spinner to pose a challenge to the teams like SA, Aus and NZ, who are not particularly good against spin (especially in somewhat helpful conditions), but gets absolutely murdered by India regardless of how much the ball is turning.

Now, do we have a spin bowler in the county game that could pose a threat to the sub-continental teams in their conditions? My understanding is there are a few promising youngsters, but no-one who is really at a level that demands selection yet.

Yeah and thats what happened over the winter with 4 "spinners" being used for the test series only one of which could be considered a proper bowler (and even he bats 6/7 at county level).
Leach was a possibility but left out. Crane is the other whos stock has risen on the grounds that hes english qualified and described on cricinfo as a spinner. Leach is now having another strong County season, and whilst he didnt do a great deal for the Lions is arguably being overlooked because he cant bat to save his life. Hes not even that young or inexperienced and has fabulous career stats showing good economy and strike rate....the perfect solution you'd think. As a left armer he'd offer a different challenge to compliment Moeen.
I didnt have a problem at the time he was left out over the winter, but after another good season and seeing what a failure trying to rely on mediocre bowlers was I've changed my tune on him.
Instead of taking a gamble and maybe comprimising Wood for Plunkett to retain some batting depth we have Dawson who isnt as good as the bowler hes supposed to be taking the lead over.

[dummy_half]

Goose

On the assumption that Woakes comes back in once fit (presumably for Wood), the batting of the second spinner becomes something of a non-issue anyway - Broad is still good enough to bat 9, so we've the option of picking a 10 / 11 bat.

My understanding with Leach was that there were concerns about the legality of his action that was worked on. He's having an OK county season - 24 wickets at 30.1 in 8 games. Interestingly, immediately above him in the CC Div 1 championship is Liam Dawson with 18 wickets at 30.0 in 6 games.

[Gooseberry]

Leach suffered a bit from a poor start to the season, but hes has improved and importantly taken a lot of first innings wickets. I had forgotten about the action issue but yes you are correct on that (and goes back to the earlier point that it would be a lot easier if we stopped caring about it like certain other boards).
And yep when Woakes returns it would make the decision to include him over Dawson less impactful on the teams balance...if Woakes is considered an equal seamer to Wood.
As it is though they've been cornered into picking Dawson, and will be hard pressed to make that change in this series.  The West Indies tour, which could be spin friendly, would be a great chance to blood him ... but If does does ok will be a hard call to make.

[LondonTiger]

I think this is quite a significant point. It seems to me that at the moment there is a bigger disparity between teams that can bat against spin and those that can't than has been the case for as long as I remember. Moeen is a good enough spinner to pose a challenge to the teams like SA, Aus and NZ, who are not particularly good against spin (especially in somewhat helpful conditions), but gets absolutely murdered by India regardless of how much the ball is turning.

Interestingly Moeen's average against Aus and NZ is 46 & 50, but 37 against India (admittedley helped by that first series where he ripped through them at times).

On wickets with a bit of pace almost all teams seem to be pretty poor playing spinners.

[Pete C (Kiwireddevil)]

I think this is quite a significant point. It seems to me that at the moment there is a bigger disparity between teams that can bat against spin and those that can't than has been the case for as long as I remember. Moeen is a good enough spinner to pose a challenge to the teams like SA, Aus and NZ, who are not particularly good against spin (especially in somewhat helpful conditions), but gets absolutely murdered by India regardless of how much the ball is turning.

Interestingly Moeen's average against Aus and NZ is 46 & 50, but 37 against India (admittedley helped by that first series where he ripped through them at times).

On wickets with a bit of pace almost all  teams seem to be pretty poor playing spinners.

I see Moeen as almost the anti-Daniel Vettori. Moeen is very good if the pitch offers him something as he can give the ball a good rip, and basically ineffective if it doesn't as he's not great at flight. Vettori otoh got over 60% of his wickets in the first or 2nd innings of a match, at a 2 runs lower average - and his highest average runs per wicket came in the 4th innings. He didn't turn it much but was a master at varying his pace & flight

[sirfredperry]

England have named an unchanged X1 for the second Test. But why? Surely they don't need two spinners at Trent Bridge. It's not as if Broad and Anderson bowled a lot at Lord's.

[Gooseberry]

I think this is quite a significant point. It seems to me that at the moment there is a bigger disparity between teams that can bat against spin and those that can't than has been the case for as long as I remember. Moeen is a good enough spinner to pose a challenge to the teams like SA, Aus and NZ, who are not particularly good against spin (especially in somewhat helpful conditions), but gets absolutely murdered by India regardless of how much the ball is turning.

Interestingly Moeen's average against Aus and NZ is 46 & 50, but 37 against India (admittedley helped by that first series where he ripped through them at times).

On wickets with a bit of pace almost all  teams seem to be pretty poor playing spinners.

Moeens stats are massively skewed by that first series. It was as much to do with a lazy direspectful approach from the Indians looking to hit him out of the game as any great skill on his part.
In India he was as ineffective as the other England spinners.

[jimbohammers]

England have named an unchanged X1 for the second Test. But why? Surely they don't need two spinners at Trent Bridge. It's not as if Broad and Anderson bowled a lot at Lord's.

They won the first test easily?

[Nathaniel Jacobs]

South Africans looks a damn sight better with de Kock in the top 4. I remain uncertain whether he can continue to keep wicket and bat up the order though.

[Pete C (Kiwireddevil)]

South Africans looks a damn sight better with de Kock in the top 4. I remain uncertain whether he can continue to keep wicket and bat up the order though.

4 seems high to me - would've thought Faf could do a job there.

SA may be buying themselves a little trouble on transformation targets dropping Duminy - 7 "white" players for this match means they'll need to select to increase their players-of-quota average later in the year.

[Nathaniel Jacobs]

South Africans looks a damn sight better with de Kock in the top 4. I remain uncertain whether he can continue to keep wicket and bat up the order though.

4 seems high to me - would've thought Faf could do a job there.

SA may be buying themselves a little trouble on transformation targets dropping Duminy - 7 "white" players for this match means they'll need to select to increase their players-of-quota average later in the year.

Don't really understand all this transformation selection stuff, but I read South Africa will shoehorn a series in against Zimbabwe(limited overs) to average out the problems caused by this current series. Again I don't understand it properly so could be wrong.

[James100]

Nathaniel - New guidelines are, over each season, SA Test, ODI and T20 sides must each average 6 non-white players, of whom 2 are black Africans.

Most of the SA players seem to prefer these kind of clear guidelines to the previous behind-the-scenes rules that were never discussed publicly. Faf also seems more on-board with transformation policies than AB from both of their public comments.

[Nathaniel Jacobs]

This seemed the perfect situation for Roland-Jones to make a Test debut. This isn't a two spinner pitch ever. If TRJ isn't going to debut on a surface like this, you've got to wonder whether get a Test cap

[Nathaniel Jacobs]

Nathaniel - New guidelines are, over each season, SA Test, ODI and T20 sides must each average 6 non-white players, of whom 2 are black Africans.

Most of the SA players seem to prefer these kind of clear guidelines to the previous behind-the-scenes rules that were never discussed publicly.  Faf also seems more on-board with transformation policies than AB from both of their public comments.

Thank you.

And gathered by that if Rabada had kept his mouth to himself, Du Plessis wouldn't be in this situation

[kingraf]

South Africans looks a damn sight better with de Kock in the top 4. I remain uncertain whether he can continue to keep wicket and bat up the order though.

4 seems high to me - would've thought Faf could do a job there.

SA may be buying themselves a little trouble on transformation targets dropping Duminy - 7 "white" players for this match means they'll need to select to increase their players-of-quota average later in the year.

Not necessarily. For one, the sports committee isn't so dumb as to demand completely out of form players to be selected on account of their colour, and more importantly we've averaged seven players of colour in T20 for the year thus far, so I'd think overall, we're either on pace or just behind enough for it not to matter. Most importantly, though, the targets are for the season. And by CSA regulations our season ends after this tour, so a rush job tour of Zimbabwe really doesn't help for this season. At all

[Pete C (Kiwireddevil)]

South Africans looks a damn sight better with de Kock in the top 4. I remain uncertain whether he can continue to keep wicket and bat up the order though.

4 seems high to me - would've thought Faf could do a job there.

SA may be buying themselves a little trouble on transformation targets dropping Duminy - 7 "white" players for this match means they'll need to select to increase their players-of-quota average later in the year.

Don't really understand all this transformation selection stuff, but I read South Africa will shoehorn a series in against Zimbabwe(limited overs) to average out the problems caused by this current series. Again I don't understand it properly so could be wrong.

Basically over a season they've got to average 6.6 "players of colour" (and at least 1 of those needs to be black) per playing XI or they get in trouble with the SA government
http://www.espncricinfo.com/southafrica/content/story/1039575.html

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Can we get the better spinner (ie. Moeen) onto bowl already?

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Amla dropped on 56

We've seen multiple times what happens when England drop Amla....

[VTR]

Poor so far - Wood is turning into a wicketless wonder, and I swear Stokes gets hit for a four every single over in all formats! Need Woakes back desperately and Dawson really shouldn't be in the team at Trent Bridge

1-1 in the series coming our way

[alfie]

Perhaps a little early to be praying for rain

But certainly SA batting themselves into a good position. England attack looks a bit toothless when Broad and Anderson are not bowling...

Aha : first ball after tea ! Broad

[guildfordbat]

This seemed the perfect situation for Roland-Jones to make a Test debut. This isn't a two spinner pitch ever. If TRJ isn't going to debut on a surface like this, you've got to wonder whether get a Test cap

Nathaniel - it shouldn't be whether it's perfect for Roland-Jones to make his Test debut but whether it's right that he gets picked. No one should be picked on the basis that he hasn't been picked before.

With you having ''watched Tests since the War'', I thought you would be with me in being more old school.

[Gooseberry]

TMS team arent Dawson fans

[JDizzle]

TRJ in over Dawson would mean 5 right arm seamers in too! Would be mental.

[VTR]

Pretty poor day from England. Still in the game, but Wood and Stokes most of the time were awful. First innings runs are priceless so I put South Africa ahead after that partnership

[Gooseberry]

Yeah i wouldnt put a pure seamer in for him but another batsman would make sense.
Two spinners was just about vibdicated on a dry spinning pitch last week but they barely used Moeen today after a 10 wicket hall in the last game. Dawson has been easy to play on a seamers wicket.

[VTR]

Dawson was rolling the ball out at Lord's. Looked very average. I would be ok with another seamer, even if it's right arm over as it would mean Stokes and Wood can bowl shorter spells. Stokes is a batting all rounder not a front line seamer anyway

[alfie]

SA on top at end of day after a good fluctuating day of Test Cricket. Will see how this develops but my feeling is there won't be a great deal for the bowlers over the next few days - which doesn't mean either of these teams aren't capable of collapsing !
SA will be looking to push on towards 400 - England can still hope an early wicket in the morning will see them wrap things up under 350. Either way England really need to get it right with the bat first time around as batting last is probably going to be a significant disadvantage. May be already regretting the decision to go with six bowlers as it appears the spinners won't get much work and an extra batsman might yet prove handy ...I can see why some people might like TRJ in to provide an alternative to the underwhelming Wood and the mercurial Stokes as change bowlers but I do think five pace bowlers is a bit too much of a good thing...

Question for the Bairstow (as W/K) doubters : is he starting to win you over ? Would not Foakes have been proud of the du Plessis catch ? )

[guildfordbat]

Hi Alfie - I haven't seen the du Plessis catch yet but will try and locate it. Actually seen incredibly little of this Test. More chance of me winning the lottery without a ticket than watching cricket on tv when Wimbledon is on and Mrs Bat is in the house!

Whilst I have been a serious and serial detractor of Bairstow's keeping from when he first took the gloves in Tests, I readily accept and have acknowledged he's improved considerably in the last year or so. I don't see Foakes replacing him for a while yet at least - not when there's been so much previous investment and current improvement.

As for this Test and very much based upon my readings on cricinfo, it was obviously a blow not to win the toss and bat. If we had and with South Africa then having to bat last, our line up with Moeen and Dawson would probably atm be looking more suitable. As it is, they might still come good when the visitors have their second dig. Anyway, I'm not convinced that South Africa are that far in front (if at all) at the end of day one - 400 generally seems to be a par score first Test innings these days and they're still some way shy of that.

This isn't the England side I would have chosen for the first Test but, having won that game so convincingly, I feel it was certainly understandable to go with the same eleven again. Whilst Dawson is largely being picked for his bowling, he's a far better batsman than his pair last time out suggests and that might come into the mix now.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

Morris has the most unlikeable face

[guildfordbat]

Morris has the most unlikeable face

I spoke to him at Guildford last year. He seemed to fit in quite well there.

[guildfordbat]

Excellent start to the morning for England as Anderson takes the last 4 wickets and wraps up South Africa's innings for 335.

Now for the even more crucial bit ....

[compelling and rich]

cook gone early, big blow that. going to need root to play another big innings here

[eirebilly]

I do not look at rankings very often but surely Joe Root is the number 1 test batsman at the moment?

[Sponsored content]