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?

[VTR]

Yes, back in the real world I agree. Maybe not so much about individual scores either, but some evidence that the team is capable of building partnerships, rather than trying to give it a whack in any circumstances

[CaledonianCraig]

Well South Africa seem certain to level the series up. It could quite easily be wrapped up inside four days.

For England they have to still believe they can save this test. For them to do that then the road map has to be reaching lunch no worse than 75 for 1. Get through to tea on around 180 for 2 and reach close of play no worse than 260 for 4.

I can't see that scenario for England happening. Thinking ahead for England you would think Jennings (barring a big score in this second innings) and perhaps Dawson being prime candidates for the chop. Who to bring in is the question?

[alfie]

Assuming they don't set a new record : England won't lose this Test just because they picked Dawson...but because they got bowled out in fifty overs in their first innings. Admittedly by some very good bowling in difficult conditions ; but still : not very good batting.
There really should be changes to the batting for The Oval regardless of what they do with the attack...so indeed this innings does loom as a bit of a test for a couple of players.

Of course Craig is quite right about the big question : who should come in that will do better than the current mob? I'm sure we will be busy discussing that all week at least...

[Gooseberry]

Assuming they don't set a new record : England won't lose this Test just because they picked Dawson...but because they got bowled out in fifty overs in their first innings.  Admittedly by some very good bowling in difficult conditions ; but still : not very good batting.
There really should be changes to the batting for The Oval regardless of what they do with the attack...so indeed this innings does loom as a bit of a test for a couple of players.

Of course Craig is quite right about the big question : who should come in that will do better than the current mob?  I'm sure we will be busy discussing that all week at least...

But then maybe if theyd had a batsman in the place of Dawson they wouldnt have gotten bowled out so easily ...

But yes its far from the only problem England have, but picking a cricekter who isnt good enough to in any department to play at this level is only going to make the other issues more prevelant. I dont even really consider Dawson as part of the " attack" so much as a fudege between not wanting a long tail and wanting to do something paradoxical with Ali.

Even in the absence of Woakes they could have Plunkett at 8 and a proper second (or first if you follow the press conference logic) spinner in Leach instead of Dawson/Wood ....if the 6 bowlers (plus 2 part timers) approach is to be persisted with. Remember when we used to argue that 5 bowlers was a luxury? Stoneman could come in for Jennings or Ballance or as that extra batsman. 
Sam Robsons another top order bat who had a sniff with the Lions and is having a strong CC season. A pair in his last game wont have helped his chances mind. Tom Westley got an unbeaten century against SA for the Lions. Theres options to change the specialist bats too.

[Gooseberry]

Well an ideal opportunity for Balance to show if he has any cerdibility as a top 3 test player (well if you ignore the credibility he gained there in 2015 anyway) with Jennings gone quickly. Cooks continuing to play a Captains innings, or at least one Boycott wont slate him for.

[VTR]

Jennings and Ballance have got to go - not sure who replaces them though, nearly everyone seems to have been tried in the last two years!

[guildfordbat]

Excellent opening spell from Philander as he gets his second wicket and sends Ballance back to the hutch if not county cricket. My initial reaction was that the ball was hitting leg peg (it was) but that it pitched marginally outside (it didn't). A good review although, as too commonplace these days, it took an age to be made - umpires will need to get tougher on the time being taken.

I've seen Philander once or twice in Championship matches and been rather unimpressed. He seemed to lack effort or fitness or both. However, he's been firing accurately and on all cylinders this morning as he did when I watched him on tv before lunch on Saturday.

[dummy_half]

Well an ideal opportunity for Balance to show if he has any cerdibility as a top 3 test player (well if you ignore the credibility he gained there in 2015 anyway) with Jennings gone quickly. Cooks continuing to play a Captains innings, or at least one Boycott wont slate him for.

Ballance answers with a resounding 'No'. The problem is that he was the form player in the CC, so was an obvious choice to go back to, especially as he has some pedigree as a Test player. Who is the next cab off the rank in terms of top order batsmen?

[VTR]

I'd have thought Stoneman is the next lucky person in line, as he was in the Lions squad and has showed some decent form this season. I have a feeling one of Jennings and Ballance will survive, so Stoneman could find himself opening or at three

[Gooseberry]

I was surprised that Ballance got the nod over Stoneman in the first plac, but its clear Root has some lotyalty there ...and to be honest Im tainted by what happened to him in the last stint of games he had rather than the excellent returns he made in his early test career. Something has to be done about this top 3. For the next test that could be just bumping Ballance down to 5 or it could be bringing in Stoneman.

Or even if they are going to keep insisting that Ali isnt in the side as a spinner then make him an opener again.

[VTR]

As feared this is looking every bit like a capitulation. The game wasn't lost here though, batting fourth at Trent Bridge is always extremely difficult. The first innings batting was atrocious and needed more application. Once England failed to get anywhere near the South African score, that was game over

[guildfordbat]

As feared this is looking every bit like a capitulation. The game wasn't lost here though, batting fourth at Trent Bridge is always extremely difficult. The first innings batting was atrocious and needed more application. Once England failed to get anywhere near the South African score, that was game over

Yes, and it wasn't even like South Africa topped 500.

[jimbohammers]

Quinton De Kock is an outstanding keeper.

On team selection. Even as a hants fan i don't think Dawson has had a great game. But the abuse he's got is a bit ridiculous. This country loves a scapegoat.
Jennings had made a total of 3 runs in the game. Balance, 31.

[VTR]

I don't think anyone is blaming Dawson for the defeat, rather questioning why another spinner was in the team here. Trent Bridge always favours the pace bowlers - another batsman or pace bowler would surely have been a better option

[kingraf]

Going into this game I was genuinely looking at draw as the best case scenario. This is brilliant. We've got problems of our own, of course. Kuhn can't buy a run, so I'd think he gets dropped for de Bruyn. Alternatively, QdK may give up the gloves and go up and open, while Kuhn drops to seven and keeps? He's a better keeper than him.

I wasn't a fan of the Morris selection, because he was obviously picked as the fourth seamer, and batted 8. I'm still not a fan of a guy who bats 8 and bowls 5th change essentially (as will be the case when KG comes back), but he's bowled well, and Olivier has been given his proper baptism of fire into international cricket (Sri Lanka 2-0 down at the Wanderers was pretty much the cricket equivalent of canned hunting). I don't think you should be playing cricket if you bat 8 and only bowl 10-12 overs, but he's certainly made it interesting.

Anyway, barring rain, onto the Oval tied up. Gonna be good

[dummy_half]

Jimbo

I largely agree with VTR - there was no need for 2 spinners, and with Dawson not posing much of a wicket threat (nor proving as capable of drying up the runs as was hoped), his inclusion in this test undoubtedly comes into question. He might produce some amazing batting heroics today / tomorrow that will change my opinion, but so far he looks like a lower middle order batsman rather than someone who would justify selection primarily for that side of his game.

Undoubtedly an additional front line batsman would have been a better selection for this match (although perhaps not for the first test), although this raises the point as mentioned above - who is next in line as a batsman?

[jimbohammers]

I don't think anyone is blaming Dawson for the defeat, rather questioning why another spinner was in the team here. Trent Bridge always favours the pace bowlers - another batsman or pace bowler would surely have been a better option

Probably a fair point, but you could also argue, why change a winning team?

[jimbohammers]

Jimbo

I largely agree with VTR - there was no need for 2 spinners, and with Dawson not posing much of a wicket threat (nor proving as capable of drying up the runs as was hoped), his inclusion in this test undoubtedly comes into question. He might produce some amazing batting heroics today / tomorrow that will change my opinion, but so far he looks like a lower middle order batsman rather than someone who would justify selection primarily for that side of his game.

Undoubtedly an additional front line batsman would have been a better selection for this match (although perhaps not for the first test), although this raises the point as mentioned above - who is next in line as a batsman?

I see both your points + i agree Dawson looked pretty ineffective as a bowling threat in this game. Regarding his batting, he has opened for his county + is normally very reliable with the bat, in fact i would say he is a batsman who can bowl. I can see why they've picked him as he is a feisty cricketer who will rarely let you down. I know this is a big step up from county cricket + im sure he would admit that himself!
Is he a the sole reason we're going to lose this game? No. In fact if the likes of Ballance and Jennings had scored runs, his position in the team would be so heavily scrutinized (in my opinion)

[VTR]

I don't think anyone is blaming Dawson for the defeat, rather questioning why another spinner was in the team here. Trent Bridge always favours the pace bowlers - another batsman or pace bowler would surely have been a better option

Probably a fair point, but you could also argue, why change a winning team?

That was the argument used by Bayliss himself! I think that's poor from the selectors though - it's not like Dawson is an established player. I assumed he'd been brought in at Lord's as it would take spin, and so it did and Dawson had an ok game. But then onto Trent Bridge, pretty much the home of swing bowling, you either want extra batting to negate that or another bowler to exploit it. 5 pace bowlers might seem excessive but would have at least avoided the predictability of bowling Anderson and Broad in tandem, then Wood and Stokes, then running out of ideas. That final session on the first day was crucial and England let it drift - a fresh pace bowler coming in would have been ideal

[Gooseberry]

Jimbo

I largely agree with VTR - there was no need for 2 spinners, and with Dawson not posing much of a wicket threat (nor proving as capable of drying up the runs as was hoped), his inclusion in this test undoubtedly comes into question. He might produce some amazing batting heroics today / tomorrow that will change my opinion, but so far he looks like a lower middle order batsman rather than someone who would justify selection primarily for that side of his game.

Undoubtedly an additional front line batsman would have been a better selection for this match (although perhaps not for the first test), although this raises the point as mentioned above - who is next in line as a batsman?

I see both your points + i agree Dawson looked pretty ineffective as a bowling threat in this game. Regarding his batting, he has opened for his county + is normally very reliable with the bat, in fact i would say he is a batsman who can bowl. I can see why they've picked him as he is a feisty cricketer who will rarely let you down. I know this is a big step up from county cricket + im sure he would admit that himself!
Is he a the sole reason we're going to lose this game? No. In fact if the likes of Ballance and Jennings had scored runs, his position in the team would be so heavily scrutinized (in my opinion)

Rashids county batting record is the match of Dawsons, and less padded from playing in Div 2. Theres no evidence that either is credible as a genuine all rounder as opposed to a bowler who can bat a bit (like Woakes). Moeen couldnt hack it as a top 6 bat but is a noticeable step up from Dawson in both discplines.

[eirebilly]

Will England reach 150 from here...

[VTR]

Let's hope Bairstow is now moved back to 7. Either that or take the gloves off the poor guy. Would never advocate dropping him but having him bat at 5 and keeping I think turns a potential strength into a bit of a weakness

Hopefully England now go with 5 batsman, Stokes, Bairstow, Ali, 3 pace bowlers. That is genuinely deep batting and still enough bowling

[alfie]

Haven't been able to watch the play before lunch except for a few balls...mercifully , it seems

Not exactly surprised : this England team doesn't do gallant rearguard actions and this game was effectively lost in fifty overs on Saturday - if it wasn't in the last hour or so on Friday evening.
Not the end of the world : anyone who thought SA were rubbish just because they were crushed at Lord's hadn't been paying attention... By the same token , this England team haven't completely lost their collective skill sets overnight : the next Test could go either way.

What they have lost is their balance ( no pun intended) . This six bowler idea started on the Bangladesh/ India tour as a means of fitting extra spinners in without sacrificing the third seamer - quantity to cover for a lack of quality , it seems. It didn't work. It almost never does - which is why few teams ever go down that route. (One might say it worked at Lord's ; and I will agree it did no harm in that case . But I am fairly sure that match would have gone the same way if either Wood or Dawson been replaced with a batsman ; can't prove it , of course)
Anyway I think this match ought to ensure they ditch that idea so we can look forward to a more normal 5/1/5 at The Oval. Which won't solve all the problems instantly but will enable them to start setting up a team that can compete at home and also travel to Australia with at least some hope of mixing it with their hosts.

I will have more detailed instructions for Bayliss & co when this is put to bed

[alfie]

Let's hope Bairstow is now moved back to 7. Either that or take the gloves off the poor guy. Would never advocate dropping him but having him bat at 5 and keeping I think turns a potential strength into a bit of a weakness

Hopefully England now go with 5 batsman, Stokes, Bairstow, Ali, 3 pace bowlers. That is genuinely deep batting and still enough bowling

Spot on

Bairstow is an adequate five. He is an exceptional seven. Why lose a strength to try and plug a weakness ? Surely there must be another adequate batsman somewhere in 18 FC Counties who can fill the five slot ?
As others have said , Stokes and Moeen as all rounders are an asset. Why waste the flexibility they give by shoehorning other lesser bits and pieces players into the team ? Dawson - or another spinner - should be an alternative to the fourth seamer , not an addition...

[VTR]

Let's hope so - if you've got a player like Stokes, who is a decent number 6 and fourth seamer then make use of him. England seem hell-bent on wasting that by shoe-horning in an extra not-needed player in the side, the likes of Ansari in the winter and Dawson here.

On a good day you'll get away with it, on a bad day as per the last three innings in the series the opposition see a big opening from 3 down

[eirebilly]

Does Ali bat too far down the order?

If Jennings is to be dropped then Ali is an option to open, he has done before and lets face it, he is in better batting form than most...

[eirebilly]

I really should not post sometimes...

[VTR]

Ali up the order, no thanks. Not to do with his inevitable dismissal here (he's had a swing in a hopeless situation), but keeping to the theme, we can have an exceptional number 7 or 8, or a probably average opener or three who is then also the front-line spinner

[guildfordbat]

I really should not post sometimes...

You could still be in the money with your all out for under 150 post.

[alfie]

Does Ali bat too far down the order?

If Jennings is to be dropped then Ali is an option to open, he has done before and lets face it, he is in better batting form than most...

Hi eirebilly

Moeen as opener - particularly in Australia - would be a pointless sacrifice. Even in UAE we saw he is totally unsuited to the job ; "iffy" against the short ball - and a far better player late in the order. Seven/Eight is fine - he is doing a fair job again as a bowler and his record shows he is well capable of making runs with the tail ; or with whatever batsman is left for company.

As for your other query : no , they won't make 150 Even trebs couldn't save this game...

[VTR]

This is abject from England though - hopefully a wake up call. They may not or will barely have batted 100 overs in the whole match, that is totally unacceptable

[alfie]

Disappointing...well mildly so ...that England have folded so meekly today. Bit like SA at Lord's really : once teams know there is no hope these days they tend not to prolong the agony.
Lack of skill ? Or just that the mental approach to play like Atherton in SA , Amiss in WI ; Greatbatch in Australia ; Kirsten in England or lots of other past players some of you will recall is pretty rare among today's players.
Does it matter ? In this case ; not much. Even one of the great rearguard actions couldn't have saved them without help from the weather , given the time left in the match and type of pitch. You might say they've put us out of our misery quickly
And I doubt it will leave much in the way of "mental scars" - SA bounced back pretty well from their limp second innings at Lord's.

But I think Ken Barrington will be turning in his grave , just a little

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

I think Jennings should be given the summer personally, but Ballance needs to go. Stoneman to come in imo.

I'd like to see them give Duckett another go personally - I don't think it'll happen, but he was thrown into the fire in alien conditions, and did ok but not great. Maybe in more familiar conditions he'd be better

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Disappointing...well mildly so ...that England have folded so meekly today.  Bit like SA at Lord's really : once teams know there is no hope these days they tend not to prolong the agony.
Lack of skill ? Or just that the mental approach to play like Atherton in SA , Amiss in WI ; Greatbatch in Australia ; Kirsten in England or lots of other past players some of you will recall is pretty rare among today's players.
Does it matter ?  In this case ; not much.  Even one of the great rearguard actions couldn't have saved them without help from the weather , given the time left in the match and type of pitch. You might say they've put us out of our misery quickly
And I doubt it will leave much in the way of "mental scars"  - SA bounced back pretty well from their limp second innings at Lord's.

But I think Ken Barrington will be turning in his grave , just a little

We've seen before from England how they usually bounce back from defeat great, but follow up wins with performances like this!

[alfie]

I think Jennings should be given the summer personally, but Ballance needs to go. Stoneman to come in imo.

I'd like to see them give Duckett another go personally - I don't think it'll happen, but he was thrown into the fire in alien conditions, and did ok but not great. Maybe in more familiar conditions he'd be better

Jennings at three , then , Olly ? And you fancy Duckett at five ? Possible. Unlikely though , I think.

They might move Ballance to five - he surely can't remain at three. Not sure I'd keep him at all - I fear he is another Ramprakash and will never be part of a truly top quality England team : though his recall wasn't entirely crazy it isn't looking like a success.

All over very quickly !

Well done SA A seriously comprehensive victory.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Dawson denied a match winning double hundred there

[alfie]

Disappointing...well mildly so ...that England have folded so meekly today.  Bit like SA at Lord's really : once teams know there is no hope these days they tend not to prolong the agony.
Lack of skill ? Or just that the mental approach to play like Atherton in SA , Amiss in WI ; Greatbatch in Australia ; Kirsten in England or lots of other past players some of you will recall is pretty rare among today's players.
Does it matter ?  In this case ; not much.  Even one of the great rearguard actions couldn't have saved them without help from the weather , given the time left in the match and type of pitch. You might say they've put us out of our misery quickly
And I doubt it will leave much in the way of "mental scars"  - SA bounced back pretty well from their limp second innings at Lord's.

But I think Ken Barrington will be turning in his grave , just a little

We've seen before from England how they usually bounce back from defeat great, but follow up wins with performances like this!

Indeed ! I must confess I had an uneasy feeling that this one might go badly - for the perverse reason that they won so well at Lord's and that SA seemed rather out of sorts , as well as missing Rabada. Though I'd hoped that Trent Bridge might have been a safe home...

Need to bounce back next week in London now !

[alfie]

So back to selection :

Six bowlers - never again !!!
Five bats +.Stokes/Bairstow/Moeen 6-8 , order however you like.

We know Cook and Root are 1 and 4 , Broad and Anderson 10 and 11.

So all that remains is to choose three bats and one more bowler (pace or spin) to fill the other four spots. And unfortunately it can't - yet - be Woakes.

Notice I've not dropped anyone yet : but Jennings Ballance Dawson and Wood are all on ice and cannot complain if discarded. I doubt all four will be ; but I think there should be at least two fresh batsmen in the next side.

Calling for nominations : Stoneman ; Robson ? I'm sure the right ones are out there somewhere ...

Discuss.

[jimbohammers]

Probably Olly. Just waiting for him to be blamed for the stupid shots from Moeen, Bairstow and Broad.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Probably Olly. Just waiting for him to be blamed for the stupid shots from Moeen, Bairstow and Broad.

I can't believe he didn't score more opening tbf

[guildfordbat]

I think Jennings should be given the summer personally, but Ballance needs to go. Stoneman to come in imo.

I'd like to see them give Duckett another go personally - I don't think it'll happen, but he was thrown into the fire in alien conditions, and did ok but not great. Maybe in more familiar conditions he'd be better

Jennings at three , then  , Olly ? And you fancy Duckett at five ?  Possible.  Unlikely though , I think.

They might move Ballance to five  - he surely can't remain at three.  Not sure I'd keep him at all - I fear he is another Ramprakash and will never be part of a truly top quality England team :  though his recall wasn't entirely crazy it isn't looking like a success.

All over very quickly !

Well done SA   A seriously comprehensive victory.

That's where I would have had Jennings for the first Test with Cook and Stoneman opening. However, moving him now from the top slot, rather comes across as a demotion and lack of faith.

That doesn't mean it's not the way to go but it's no longer ideal imo.

[alfie]

I suspect if Stoneman does come in it will be for Jennings with Ballance shuffled down the order - which will still need another new man at 3/4.
Not ideal to be making wholesale changes to the top order but this series now looks seriously tough and they are running out of time to stitch together an Ashes party. May have to cut their losses...
I know some players take time to get established ; but to be honest I can recall very few really good bats for England over the last few decades who didn't announce themselves pretty much from their first game : Cook Strauss KP ...Root. Going back earlier Thorpe , Trescothick...you could see from the start that they belonged.

I don't see that with Jennings. Or Duckett . Or Ballance. Do you , guildford ?

I actually thought I saw such a one in young Hameed ; and I still harbour hopes he will come again. Though I am truly surprised he has suffered such a horror run this summer and would love to know what is being done with him at the moment by his coaches...

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

I'd personally go with this for the oval

Cook
Stoneman
Westley
Root
Bairstow
Stokes
Foakes
Ali
Wood
Broad
Anderson

[VTR]

Whoever comes in, we have somehow got to get through the first 50 or so overs without the likes of Bairstow, Stokes and Ali coming to the crease. They can be an asset but require a platform to play from, preferably taking advantage of tired bowlers. A possible order they might try:

Cook
Jennings/charity raffle winner
Stoneman
Root
Ballance

Am not entirely convinced by that, but at least puts Ballance where he actually plays. Absolute last chance for Jennings and Ballance if they do play

[NickisBHAFC]

Drop Jennings and Ballence. Not good enough.

Stoneman should 100% come in. I'd also like to see either Bell Drummond or Northeast from Kent.

[Gooseberry]

Bit of double standards here with bairstow.
Stokes and ali are both in the side as bowlers as well as bats ....they have two jobs as well.
Bairstow is thd third best proven batsman england have ....putting him at 7 when the top order is in crisi is a total waste.
See what happened with south africa and de kock when they inexplicably put him at 7.

I do think would be too high for bairstow but 5 or 6 is a comfortable place given the paucity of proper bats in the side.

Moeen could well continue to be a confused mess. Hes never going to be good enough to nail a top 4 batting spot and can only be consudered for it if they persist with two spinners and find one whos actually better to be a genuine lead. (Leach?)

Stokes is far too inconsistent with the bat to go any higher. Hess priduced some wonderful innings of attacking batting and even built a few but hes far from the next KP. Far too many times he gets out cheaply to bat higher than 6.

[NickisBHAFC]

For the oval I'd go for

Cook
Bell Drummond
Stoneman
Root
Stokes
Bairstow
Ali
Rashid
Broad
Wood
Anderson

[alfie]

Bit of double standards here with bairstow.
Stokes and ali are both in the side as bowlers as well as bats ....they have two jobs as well.
Bairstow is thd third best proven batsman england have ....putting him at 7 when the top order is in crisi is a total waste.
See what happened with south africa and de kock when they inexplicably put him at 7.

I do think would be too high for bairstow but 5 or 6 is a comfortable place given the paucity of proper bats in the side.

Moeen could well continue to be a confused mess. Hes never going to be good enough to nail a top 4 batting spot and can only be consudered for it if they persist with two spinners and find one whos actually better to be a genuine lead. (Leach?)

Stokes is far too inconsistent with the bat to go any higher. Hess priduced some wonderful innings of attacking batting and even built a few but hes far from the next KP. Far too many times he gets out cheaply to bat higher than 6.

It isn't "double standards" at all , Goose. Just that when Bairstow bats at seven he has a superb record , and has frequently bailed England out after early collapses. At five he hasn't done nearly as well - so how is that a waste ?
I know we will never agree on this ... I should stop arguing it with you . But you're wrong

[VTR]

I don't like the look of that team at all - Stokes's 20 odd runs here see him promoted to 5? If it's a 2 spinner track do we need the four pace bowlers? Is Bell-Drummond that good? Two new caps out of 4 specialist batsmen

Risky stuff.....

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Bit of double standards here with bairstow.
Stokes and ali are both in the side as bowlers as well as bats ....they have two jobs as well.
Bairstow is thd third best proven batsman england have ....putting him at 7 when the top order is in crisi is a total waste.
See what happened with south africa and de kock when they inexplicably put him at 7.

I do think would be too high for bairstow but 5 or 6 is a comfortable place given the paucity of proper bats in the side.

Moeen could well continue to be a confused mess. Hes never going to be good enough to nail a top 4 batting spot and can only be consudered for it if they persist with two spinners and find one whos actually better to be a genuine lead. (Leach?)

Stokes is far too inconsistent with the bat to go any higher. Hess priduced some wonderful innings of attacking batting and even built a few but hes far from the next KP. Far too many times he gets out cheaply to bat higher than 6.

It isn't "double standards" at all , Goose.  Just that when Bairstow bats at seven he has a superb record , and has frequently bailed England out after early collapses.  At five he hasn't done nearly as well - so how is that a waste ?  
I know we will never agree on this ... I should stop arguing it with you .  But you're wrong

I have to say I'm with Goose on YJB - he should be top 5 and I think the De Kock comparison is a very apt one. Yes both were great at 7, but I think they'll add more value and improve the team more in the long term batting higher up the order.

[Sponsored content]