England's Indian Summer - T20s, ODIs & Tests

First topic message reminder :

Off goes Rahul...at least he doesn't waste a review ! That was stone dead.
Jimmy on course for ten ?

Rahane in next as Kohli was off the field too long...

Sorry LivinginItaly but recalling Hameed would be like some form of torture for the poor kid - having seen him at the Oval this week myself he looks a shell of the batsman he once was, no idea where his off stump is!

Early reports seem to indicate they’ll bring Vince in for Bairstow with Pope moving down to 5 and Buttler having the gloves at 7. No rumours re: openers yet

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Sorry LivinginItaly but recalling Hameed would be like some form of torture for the poor kid - having seen him at the Oval this week myself he looks a shell of the batsman he once was, no idea where his off stump is!

Early reports seem to indicate they’ll bring Vince in for Bairstow with Pope moving down to 5 and Buttler having the gloves at 7. No rumours re: openers yet

FFS.

Feel very sorry for Hameed. Completely collapsed. Wonder if he'll ever recover.

Vince

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Sorry LivinginItaly but recalling Hameed would be like some form of torture for the poor kid - having seen him at the Oval this week myself he looks a shell of the batsman he once was, no idea where his off stump is!

Early reports seem to indicate they’ll bring Vince in for Bairstow with Pope moving down to 5 and Buttler having the gloves at 7. No rumours re: openers yet

That wouldn't be the worst choice. Especially if Vince bats at three and Root back where he belongs. Suppose that doesn't rule out Burns for Jennings and Moeen for Rashid as well...

Might not be the Ultimate Way Forward...but it could serve for next week.

I'm sure there will be alternate suggestionsv

I’ve decided on my XI for the next test (this is presuming Cook can play, and Bairstow can’t)

Cook
Burns
Root
Clarke
Pope
Stokes
Buttler (wk)
Moeen
Woakes
Broad
Anderson

It’s been said for a while on here, but 7 slot should be the keeper, and imo this “injury” to Jonny could provide a nice natural transition to move the gloves to Buttler full time and leave Bairstow at 5 to concentrate on his batting when he returns.

I’d go Moeen for Rashid. Not a slight on Rashid, who has done ok, but in England it’s clear for us the spinner isn’t going to do much more than pickup the odd wicket and hold an end up, thus pick Moeen who has the better batting.

Clarke comes into the middle order at 4, with Pope shifting down one slot. Would much rather see Clarke come in than recycle some failure like Vince. Then when Bairstow returns it’s him in for whoever does least well of Pope and Clarke.

Burns gets his shot at the top of the order for Jennings, this ones a no brainer. If Cook can’t play, then heaven knows what we do!

Don't really see it being very productive making 3/4 changes tbh. We are still 2-1 up least people forget. We had a bad one at TB, the Indians did likewise at Lords. With an absolute cracker at Birmingham.

Maybe Burns for a debut and Vince/Moeen for Bairstow

Mo for Rashid, Burns for JB (presuming injury)

Cook
Jennings
Burns
Root
Alli
Pope
Buttler
Stokes
Woakes
Broad
Anderson

If there’s no Cook too:

Jennings
Burns
Root
Alli
Clarke
Pope
Buttler
Stokes
Woakes
Broad
Anderson

Arguably on Clarke going in before Alli, but I reckon Alli needs to go in as a proper batsman and put that responsibility on him to make him prove he should take his place back. Be undroppable

The problem England have: Hameed looked good and is now shocking. Ballance looked good and is now shocking. Jennings century on debut, now shocking. James Taylor had to retire young. In a parallel universe that's four of the top 5 that would all be playing together now

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Mo for Rashid, Burns for JB (presuming injury)

Cook
Jennings
Burns
Root
Alli
Pope
Buttler
Stokes
Woakes
Broad
Anderson

If there’s no Cook too:

Jennings
Burns
Root
Alli
Clarke
Pope
Buttler
Stokes
Woakes
Broad
Anderson

Arguably on Clarke going in before Alli, but I reckon Alli needs to go in as a proper batsman and put that responsibility on him to make him prove he should take his place back. Be undroppable

Agree on your top team. Its much better to debut Burns at 3 than chuck him right in at the deep end and make additional unforced changes to the side. Jennings is failing but giving Burns a fair chance to bed in is part of the pathway to having some chance of not just jumping from one failure to another. Its also allows the likes of Root etc to be moved down to more comfortable positions. Of course if Cook is out then theres not much choice, short of going back to Stoneman or something equally limp.

In terms of Moeens batting position though... If hes the sole spinner in the side its a tough ask to pick him as a top order batsman. The key complaint hes had in the past is confiusion as to his role in the side and feeling that hes being judged on faillures in either discipline rather than what he brings to one. As a mentally fragile player its a dangerous game to push him too hard.
Its fairer on Pope to demote him to a safer position, but ultimately hes the one thats being selected as a specialist bat. Theres been valid cricicism of England hiding Buttler down the order and pushing all rounders ( Stokes and Baistow) a position too high. I guess theres no real right answer ...someones going to have to play out of their comfort zone...and pretty much everyone if Cooks out (arguably being in the side at all is out of some players comfort zone currently).
For the additional batsman shoudl Cook be out ...Clarke is one option but another debutant? Vince has just plundered a whole bunch of runs on the same ground that the next test will be played on. Theres a case for short term stop gap in the instance that England are making wholesale changes, but hes not top of my list all the same. Bell? hmm. Englands ethos does seem to be to chuck young players in at the deep end rather than look for seasoned county pros so thats not likley. Gubbins was very close to being selected and that could still allow the likes of Root to hide down the order...but two debuntants in teh top 3 alongside a struggling player? Yikes.

The other thing to consider here is that Anderson or Broad may also need resting. If thats the case then the side reallyw ill llok radically different.

Priority for me is re-adjusting the batting order so it isn't a complete mess. At the moment it feels like every spot in the top 7 is under threat because no-one knows who's batting where from week to week.

1.Cook
2.Jennings
3.Root (c)
4.Bell
5.Pope
6.Stokes
7.Buttler (wk)
8.Woakes
9.Rashid
10.Broad
11.Anderson

That would be my selection whilst looking to make minimal changes. On Bell I would just as happily have Hildreth. I would select either simply because I think they are more likely to score runs in the top 4 than the other options available.

On Rory Burns vs Jennings - I think Burns is the better player as his average amply demonstrates but his poor conversion rate of fifties to centuries is not indicative of a player banging down the door for international selection. I'd give Jennings another test as there will already be changes in the top order. It's a shame Nick Browne has had his first poor summer for several seasons as he's a very solid opening batsman.

I'd give Pope some more time at 5 but selecting him at 4 was a mistake in my opinion. He's hugely talented but had the selectors wanted to bring a young buck in at number 4 it should have been Joe Clarke. I hope we see both playing in that middle order in the not distant future.

If Eng batting order is so much in shambles ...as it appears from common lamentations of most
and if Cook is still getting to play
and if Bell is in demand
why not bring back beloved KP

PS* On a serious note I believe Eng has hard-done Dawid Malan and Balance lately who showed enough potential in normal conditions to be given a longer run

Here's what I would do:

1) Cook (If unavailable, pray to the deity of your choice, and send for Jennings)
2) Burns
3) Hildreth
4) Root
5) Bairstow (If injured, send for Ian Bell)
6) Pope
7) Buttler
8) Stokes
9) Woakes
10) Broad
11) Anderson

There's no need for spin. Get Root to bowl a bit if necessary. Solidify the batting is the primary aim. The future can wait, England must secure the series first.

Indian team for 4th and 5th Test against England announced.

Virat Kohli (C), Dhawan, Rahul, Prithvi Shaw, Pujara, Rahane, Rishabh Pant (wk), Hardik Pandya, Ashwin, Jadeja, Bumrah, Ishant Sharma, Shami, Umesh Yadav, Shardul Thakur, Karun Nair, Dinesh Karthik (wk), Hanuma Vihari

Vijay has been dropped from the squad. Its impressive that they have included Shaw and Vihari in the squad but its highly unlikely that both will play in the XI.

My thoughts on selection

Top 3:

Yes Cook has had a leaner period than we’re used to, but I’m not as concerned as others yet.  The vultures circling seems a case of the usual English media/fan hysterics.  We have far bigger problems than Cook, and I’m confident if that if a suitable 2/3 were found he would thrive again.  At the moment all of the pressure is on him, as he knows that the rest of the top order are likely to fail.  The dropped catches are perhaps a little more concerning.  Again if we can find some new faces to support in the slips this might help, or maybe it’s time to hide him at mid-on for the last few years of his career.  He’s only 33 – plenty of top batsmen go on until their late 30s.

Jennings is done as far as I’m concerned.  I didn’t support the decision to bring him back this summer as it seemed clear in his first spell in the side that he was not up to it.  More than just the lack of scores, he has never looked comfortable.  Can’t see the good in keeping him for the sake of seeing out the series is, so I’d replace him now.  However, if Cook is unavailable it would be unfair to throw in a whole new top 3 so that could offer him one final chance to prove himself worthy of the recall.

Root needs to bat at 4.  Even more so given the lack of a stable opening partnership.

This leaves numbers 2 and 3 open (sounds familiar!).  As far as I can see the options are:

Burns – looks the outstanding candidate in the county game at the moment, considering weight of runs over the last 2 years.  County captaincy also a plus.  Would rather give him a start at 3 as others have said, with twofold benefit of letting him bed in a little further from the new ball and allowing Root etc to move down a place each.  However, as the only genuine opener on this list we may not have this luxury.

Vince – tried again and again, England seem determined to keep giving him chances and hard to argue with his county form.  I’d rather go with other options but wouldn’t be devastated to see him back, and would pick him over Jennings and Malan.  If he does play though he’ll need to put the cover drive away, at least until he passes 50.

Bell – personally I think England could worse than bringing Bell back as a stopgap, and he could bat at 3, allowing Root to move down.  But are Div2 / T20 runs really enough evidence to support a Test recall?  Similar boat to Vince for me, and could be a goer given lack of options.

Hildreth – possibly the most unlucky player of the last 5 years, should probably have had a chance long ago, particularly with all of England’s batting woes.  But he’s getting on now and his form from earlier in the season seems to have waned a little.

Moeen – he’s just scored 200 batting at 3 and captaining Worcester.  He’s always been a top order batsmen for his county, so if we’re going to think about bringing him back, why not let him bat there?  That would really take the pressure off his bowling and back him as a batsman.

Bairstow – left field option that was mooted earlier in the summer, and I think it could have potential.  I’m a proponent of letting Buttler keep at 6/7, releasing Bairstow as a specialist batsman, and he’s done a great job at the top in the ODI side.  Of course it’s very different in Tests but I think he has the skill and temperament to do a good job. We have good middle-order options and no real top-order options, so let’s look outside the box.  He’d certainly be in the Sehwag/Warner boom or bust mould, but this is what England were looking for with Hales, and could be a good foil for Cook and possibly Burns.  I don’t subscribe to the argument that letting him keep the gloves takes pressure off his batting – he’s been one of the top batsmen in the world the last few years and should have full confidence in this side of his game!

Middle order:

Root at 4 needs to be set in stone.  Don’t agree with compromising our best player to try and patch other gaps.

Clarke and Pope both look to have a lot of potential.  Was a little surprised to see Pope picked ahead of Clarke initially, but as he’s been given the chance it’s only fair to keep him in for now.  Hasn’t made a score yet but looked encouraging at Lord’s, especially considering he was in a lot earlier than he’d ever been before.  These guys need to be given a chance at 5 and/or 6.

Buttler (wk) and Stokes and 6 and 7, order depending on form and game situation.  Could possibly even shift Stokes down to 8 if we want to give him a greater bowling workload and if we have a useful bowling option in the top 5.  This would allow the extra batsman at 6 and further solidify the current weakness.  This wouldn’t be my preferred option but good to have some flexibility.

Bowlers:

Third seamer – Woakes and Curran obviously at the head of the queue and it’s good to have the variation and potential to rotate so I’m not too concerned about definitively picking one over the other.  Porter could also come into it – would be good to give him a chance alongside Anderson and Broad before it’s too late.

Spinner at 9 – Rashid the man in possession and hasn’t done a lot wrong.  Still unconvinced about his long-term viability as the sole spinner, particularly overseas.  Leach finished today with 10 wickets, including 8 in the second innings to bowl out and beat the reigning county champions.  He was the man in possession before injuries, and clearly still ahead of Bess in Somerset’s pecking order.  Would be harsh to drop Rashid but I’d be tempted to give Leach a go after today’s performance.

Broad and Anderson 10 and 11.  Wonder if we’d have given them a game off each in the next two tests had we been 3-0 up?  As I said it might be nice to give Porter a go at some point, or see what Curran can do with the new ball.


All this said, I’d be looking at trying to establish a team something like:

Cook, Bairstow, Burns, Root (c), Clarke/Pope, Buttler (wk), Stokes, Woakes/Curran, Leach, Broad, Anderson.

With Moeen, Rashid, Bess, Porter and Bell/Vince also earmarked to tour this winter.


For next week, with Bairstow injured, Pope in possession over Clarke, Woakes in possession over Curran, and recent county form taken into account, I’d go:

Cook, Burns, Moeen, Root (c), Pope, Buttler (wk), Stokes, Woakes, Leach, Broad, Anderson.

I'd go with:
Cook
Burns
Vince
Root
Bairstow/Pope if injured
Stokes
Buttler
Moeen
Woakes
Broad
Anderson

alfie wrote:India did well from getting Bumrah into the team...and (somewhat surprisingly ) from recalling Dhawan.
Less sure about young Pant :  I know msp and KP-f are quite keen on him ; but he didn't much impress me with his keeping in this match and his batting was inconsequential .  Certainly he will continue for this series but I withhold judgement at the moment.

If Ashwin doesn't come up they can surely consider Jadeja ?

Hi Alfie,
I wasn't either way on Bumrah to start with though I could see the logic behind his selection over Umesh. My concern with Bumrah was more about his match readiness. He proved more than ready, his action, the unusual angles that he creates, his pace and bounce, could make hims a good all-conditions bowler India in tests and I am happy with the call. He does tend to get a carried away at times with the new ball in helpful conditions and waste them away, but he's only 4 tests old and would surely improve.
As for Pant, yes, both KPF and I have been keen on him. It has as much to do with the failures of the Saha/Patel/Karthik generation as much as his talent and potential. His keeping needs improvement, he tends to move legside far too often even before the ball arrives, though his hand-eye coordination bailed him out mostly, the drop chance of Buttler, all be adificult one at that, demonstrates he surely have to work on that particular aspect.
With the bat he showed flair when he smoked the 2nd ball he faced for 6. Then showed decent discipline when facing up to the new ball. In fact, the shot he got out to in the first innings was the one really bad shot he played in the innings.
In both departments, he seemed miles ahead of Dinesh Karthik is the important bit. Karthik too was often wrong footed, dropped chances and looked like dropping more each time. Never looked like making runs, Pant outscored his 4 innings tally in his debut effort. Pant is not the ready product, pretty much a work in progress. Karthik is a work in regress. So it is a question of picking the better option, and that clearly is Pant. Hope he's a quick learner.

In the mean time, some drastic and surprising selection calls from India. Remember the team was picked initially for the first 3 games only.
Struggling senior opener Murali Vijay, dropped for the 3rd test from the team, has now been dropped from the squad.
The other notable call is to drop Kuldeep Yadav who has been picked to play for the A team against Australia.
teenage opener Prithvi Shaw has been given his first senior team call up. He played for the A team in England last month and had a few notable performances including a counterattacking 188 against the West Indies A.
The other interesting pick is middle order bat Hanuma Vihari. Among non-India players playing domestic first class cricket currently, he has the highest FC average. Has been making runs for India A As well.
The return of seamer Bhuvneshwar Kumar currently undergoing rehabilitation after injury layoff hasn't unfortunately not happened, presumably as he is not yet fully fit.

Vijay hasn't been his consistent self for some time now. Unlike the previous round of away tours, Vijay has struggled in South Africa and England. In the Johannesburg win, he made a typical, Vijay like 25 that was as good as a ton, but that didn't prove to be a turn it around moment. Harsh, at 34 it is not certain there is a chance now to return. But understandable. I would have kept him in the squad, particularly as I am not at all sure young Shaw is anywhere near ready despite his Sachin Tendulkar like start in FC cricket in terms of numbers. He most defenitly is one for the future, hopefully it not far away before he and Rahul would constitute a world class opening combination, but he is not there yet, he has technical issues to sort out...
As for Kuldeep, I would certainly not have him as the led spinner, would not have him in a 4 man attack, would not have him without Ashwin in the side. He has a craft that Is unusual, has had good early success in limited overs, showed he can do a job in tests on helpful tracks in the limited opportunities he got. But he doesn't have the level of control to keep things tight, something a spinner would be expected to to more often than not in English like conditions. Struggled with his lines and length in the opportunity he got, was really all over the place.
If Ashwin doesn't play, it surely has to be Jadeja. Not just for his batting, but importantly for his control as well. With Pant and Hardik already in the top 7, and the rest other than Kohli being rather inconsistent, it is important the number 8 can hold a bat. Among the bowlers, only Shami can be expected to slog his way to double figures 4 out of 10 times. Ishant can put a price on his wicket but can't play shots, but Bumrah belongs to the Walsh Chris Martin club!

Coach Ravi Shastri indicated that Ashwin will be fit and ready for the next test as there is a long enough window. If not it has to be Jadeja coming in.
And hopefully, the Kohli tradition of different teams for different tests would come to an end. Including the times he stood in for Mahendra Singh Dhoni, Kohli led India in 38 tests, and he never played 2 consecutive tests with the same team even once.

msp83 wrote:In the mean time, some drastic and surprising selection calls from India. Remember the team was picked initially for the first 3 games only.
Struggling senior opener Murali Vijay, dropped for the 3rd test from the team, has now been dropped from the squad.
The other notable call is to drop Kuldeep Yadav who has been picked to play for the A team against Australia.
teenage opener Prithvi Shaw has been given his first senior team call up. He played for the A team in England last month and had a few notable performances including a counterattacking 188 against the West Indies A.
The other interesting pick is middle order bat Hanuma Vihari. Among non-India players playing domestic first class cricket currently, he has the highest FC average. Has been making runs for India A As well.
The return of seamer Bhuvneshwar Kumar currently undergoing rehabilitation after injury layoff hasn't unfortunately not happened, presumably as he is not yet fully fit.

unfair on vijay to drop him on mere on two test failures...though Prithvi is fair call once they decided to drop Vijay....and not too many know Hanuma Vihari but an applause for selectors to call one who is a solid / proven FC performer
I thought though Shreyas Aiyer should have gotten that middle order slot.....I am relieved tough that they did not fall in the trap to bring back Rohit or Raina

dropping kuldeep ain't a good idea either......if ashwin is unfit, Kuldeep is still our best bet.
and karthik should have been dropped also......to bring in Ishan Kishen or Samson

KPF, Jadeja is a proven test performer, a proper match-winner in spinning conditions. He's not atrocious overseas by any standards. In fact, he took an overseas 5for before Ashwin managed it. Last time in England, his batting and the job he did with the ball played a significant role in India winning at the HQ. Ashwin clearly is the better bowler overall. But Jadeja won't be a bad replacement. Kuldeep is unproven really at test level. Even in FC cricket, it has taken him time to get going. He hasn't been very consistent even in domestic cricket.
His potential is obvious, and he has a rare craft. His limited overs record is good. But at this stage of his career, not sure we can really say he's already better than Jadeja. What Jadeja has is experience. He has done the job asked of him in all his recent outing. Not sure we should be lulled into Kuldeep's Chinaman just like that. If India play 2 spinners then Kuldeep gets in with Ashwin, but if Ashwin's not fit, then it most certainly has to be Jadeja. Anyways now Kuldeep is out of frame...
Think of an India batting lineup of Pant, Pandya and Shami at 6 7 and 8!!!

msp83 wrote:KPF, Jadeja is a proven test performer, a proper match-winner in spinning conditions. He's not atrocious overseas by any standards. In fact, he took an overseas 5for before Ashwin managed it. Last time in England, his batting and the job he did with the ball played a significant role in India winning at the HQ. Ashwin clearly is the better bowler overall. But Jadeja won't be a bad replacement. Kuldeep is unproven really at test level. Even in FC cricket, it has taken him time to get going. He hasn't been very consistent even in domestic cricket.
His potential is obvious, and he has a rare craft. His limited overs record is good. But at this stage of his career, not sure we can really say he's already better than Jadeja. What Jadeja has is experience. He has done the job asked of him in all his recent outing. Not sure we should be lulled into Kuldeep's Chinaman just like that. If India play 2 spinners then Kuldeep gets in with Ashwin, but if Ashwin's not fit, then it most certainly has to be Jadeja. Anyways now Kuldeep is out of frame...
Think of an India batting lineup of Pant, Pandya and Shami at 6 7 and 8!!!

Yeah when I look back....jadeja isn't that bad....he had a fair series in SA and Eng......his batting is weaker than ashwin's in seaming conditions....
we missed the batting of Bhuvi who would have been in the plying 11 but if he was availbale , we would struggle to fit him in now
a mismanagement by coaching staff to have burnt him down and broken him in IPL and ODIis

Ashwins been stated as fit, Kuldeep dropped from the squad. That does leave Jadeja as the backup but unlikely to be needed.
Couple of bats including the youngster Shaw called up, but unlikely to start the fourth test. I guess if the series is lost India may give one or both a run out for the fifth.

Gooseberry wrote:Ashwins been stated as fit, Kuldeep dropped from the squad. That does leave Jadeja as the backup but unlikely to be needed.
Couple of bats including the youngster Shaw called up, but unlikely to start the fourth test. I guess if the series is lost India may give one or both a run out for the fifth.

The message is...its over for Vijay, the test career.....Prithvi is injury cover for openers and new kid Vihari is middle order cover
....I suspect  Kohli is not 100% and for a last minute injury pull of him or Rahane or Pujara..... they have Nair and Vihari in squad

Kuldeep never merited a spot in the Test squad in my opinion. He's the new Ajantha Mendis, decent enough in limited overs cricket where even rubbish balls get wickets. He's too inconsistent to play Test cricket. I don't see how Jadeja is being written off. The boy is #3 in the bloody rankings.

Nathaniel Jacobs wrote:Kuldeep never merited a spot in the Test squad in my opinion. He's the new Ajantha Mendis, decent enough in limited overs cricket where even rubbish balls get wickets. He's too inconsistent to play Test cricket. I don't see how Jadeja is being written off. The boy is #3 in the bloody rankings.

Don't think Jadeja is being written off at all. But the general thinking is that in non-spinning conditions, he doesn't have the variations to prise out wickets though he can do a containing job. As such, Kuldeep's Chinaman could be a greater wicket taking option.
As for Kuldeep, He did alright in the couple of opportunities he got in the test team, prising out wickets on day one on tracks that didn't exactly offered spin from the first over. But interestingly, in those very test matches, when the ball was spinning, he was a bit all over the place, and Jadeja and Ashwin with some help from the seamers had to finish off the job. That suggests how Kuldeep still needs to work on his consistency. Unlike in limited overs where the batsmen will go after him thus amplifying his threat, Kuldeep needs to be consistent, has to work batsmen out in test cricket. He is still developing, while I do think he has to be India's 3rd spinner, 3rd in the pecking order in regular circumstances, and depending on the circumstances, probably the 2nd spinner with Ashwin in unusual circumstances. Otherwise, it has to be Ashwin first, Jadeja 2nd. And if Ashwin's not fit, most certainly Jadeja.

Cook is a minor problem for England. Certainly one that I wouldn't be looking to fix before the more major problems that are 2 and 3.

Vince has been recalled to the squad, but Moeen is also in the squad having been an unused extra for the first 3 tests. I think if Bairstow doesn't make it, then we don't have a strong enough batting line-up.

Cook, Jennings, Root, Pope, Stokes, Buttler, Ali, Woakes/Curran, Rashid, Broad, Anderson

8-11 is fine, but everyone at 3-7 looks a place too high. At least by bringing in a top order batsmen we can get our best players in their favoured roles.

I'm struggling to recall off the top of my head a test we've lost in recent times where the batting line-up hasn't failed at least once. I'm going to look into it, but at first impression that's our weakness and that's what we have to sort.

If we go with a top 3 of Cook, Jennings and Vince, at least 4-11 will look pretty solid. We should then be on the lookout for players who can come in 1-3 if we think any of those players who need replacing. Fitting Bairstow, Ali and Curran back into the team should be if they merit selection over the lower order the players they'd come back in for, not to replace a top order player and shift people up.

So there we have it : Vince added in place of Porter in the 14 man squad.
Jennings survives for now. Waiting on a fitness call re YJB.

No huge reconstruction ; though still scope there to change the spinner perhaps ? In fact that is the only way they can really improve the batting , unless Vince comes in at three and lets Root go back to four ...which frankly I'd hope he does. Even if that means young Pope sitting out.

Very uninspiring from England. Bringing a failed player back when they are collectively steuggling with exactly the issues that got him dropped in the first place.
If they arent going to back Pope why pick him. Vince just isnt a test 3 who will be comfirtable against the new ball ... If they want an option to protect Root why not one if the young
(ish) openers they nearly selected in the first place?
Most likley though he is the cover for Barstow playing at 4 and pope getting done breathi g space at 5. Very much a short term pick and to me a missed opportunity to start to look at Burns or Gubbins as long term projects.
Vince just isnt ever going to be a player who addresses any of the big issues England have.

Moeen and Leach are both knocking on the door for the spinners spit. Moeen more than anything for what he could do to shore up the batting further.

I get Roots philosophy that they are still winning and that game was to some extenet a blip ...but he cant be blind to the glaring issues england have for the long term. Sure some of that could be fixed by the existing team pulling their socks up and batting to theor potential ...but thats where bringing in a guy like Vince who just keeps doing the same thing to get out and cant be coached out of it seems so contradictory.

Missed opportunity and further evidencebof the muddled thinking thats plagued the root bayliss era to me.

In my opinion Vince is not the answer to England's batting woes. Why was he ditched from the team exactly? Poor technique and unable to resist nibbling at anything outside his off stump. This is now his third (or fourth) crack at it whereas others with no battle scars and youth on their side are being ignored. I also do not see how Moeen is going to shore up the batting. His recent form suggests the opposite and why should he leap above the promising youngster Sam Curran?

Just to add I'd really like Vince to prove me wrong but I just cannot see it. He can play some lovely drives through the covers. Eye-catching shots and you think he is in and set for a big score and then he wafts at a wide delivery and nicks it behind for a tame dismissal in the blink of an eye.

Presume this is a team for this one match (I completely agree the general selection is all messed up but I'm not expecting that to be fixed overnight ) Smith seems shy of using young players : even when they do quite well they get dropped quickly - ask Curran , or Bess. Probably influenced a recall for Vince over a second new young bat like Clarke.

I thought they might try Burns . But apparently they want to give Jennings another chance - probably not for his slip fielding

Do we really think Vince is there only as cover for Bairstow ? Because if so , it means that if Bairstow is fit to bat then it will be exactly the same (failed) batting lineup as the last game !  Doesn't make sense to me. Surely they are playing Vince at three and either YJB or Pope at five ? Though with this selection mob anything is possible...

I said before the start of the series that I didn't want England to win this five-test contest because, if they did, it would mask a great number of troubles that they have, most specifically in the selection department.

And here we see it again. Going back to James Vince who has failed at the highest level. Yes, he's doing well in the CC, but some players excel there and never transfer it to Tests (Ramprakash!). Vince had 22 test innings, and proved himself to be technically deficient and an easy out for the opposition. Nothing will have changed. A backward selection.

Why not give someone new a chance, like James Hildreth, probably the greatest English batsman to not play a Test? He might just do a Chris Rogers.

And Jennings is still in, for goodness sake.

alfie wrote:Presume this is a team for this one match (I completely agree the general selection is all messed up but I'm not expecting that to be fixed overnight ) Smith seems shy of using young players : even when they do quite well they get dropped quickly - ask Curran , or Bess. Probably influenced a recall for Vince over a second new young bat like Clarke.

I thought they might try Burns . But apparently they want to give Jennings another chance - probably not for his slip fielding

Do we really think Vince is there only as cover for Bairstow ? Because if so , it means that if Bairstow is fit to bat then it will be exactly the same (failed) batting lineup as the last game !  Doesn't make sense to me. Surely they are playing Vince at three and either YJB or Pope at five ?  Though with this selection mob anything is possible...

I think there is a very good chance Bairstow's injury will rule him out and Vince will come in. I reckon the team will look like this:-

Cook
Jennings
Vince
Root (c)
Pope
Buttler
Stokes
Woakes
Rashid
Broad
Anderson

Thats my assumption too Craig, except Root staying at 3

Regarding your earlier comment about Moeens form ...hes just hit a huge double century in a county following up from good scores in T20. Hes a better bat than Rashid, and is now in form again.
He also took 8 wickets in the match...which I guess sums up what a confidence player he is.

So he could come in fror Rashid and strengthen the batting whilst still offering pretty much the same with the ball.

Long term I still think hes a problemtaic player and England should be using a specialist alongside him (and possibly rashid) in sri lanka. Leach is taking lots of wickets again now hes fit. Not much use for a series thats going to be decided by who has the wirst batsmen and catching, but looking ahead to the winter hes sticking his hand up as is moeen.

Gooseberry wrote:Thats my assumption too Craig, except Root staying at 3

Regarding your earlier comment about Moeens form ...hes just hit a huge double century in a county following up from good scores in T20. Hes a better bat than Rashid, and is now in form again.
He also took 8 wickets in the match...which I guess sums up what a confidence player he is.

So he could come in fror Rashid and strengthen the batting whilst still offering pretty much the same with the ball.

Long term I still think hes a problemtaic player and England should be using a specialist alongside him (and possibly rashid) in sri lanka. Leach is taking lots of wickets again now hes fit. Not much use for a series thats going to be decided by who has the wirst batsmen and catching, but looking ahead to the winter hes sticking his hand up as is moeen.

I just don't see Moeen as one for the future. Sure his recent County form looks good but so do several specialist batsmen (which England need) and they haven't been given the chance. Also Ali or Rashid should come down to who will do more damage with the ball and at present (on test form) that would be Rashid. Personally, I'd prefer it if neither were in the side and a youngster could break through and hold their place down. At present that is not happening.

Is there any realistic chance of Bairstow playing with a broken finger?

Those who have a broken finger and play cricket will know
1) It doesn't heal in 10 days
2) you can pad it while batting but movements are curtailed not normal
3) worst is fielding....you catch a hard hit ball & even if you have a taped finger with some permissible thin padding / cushion below it......it will shatter on impact of a hard hit leather ball

robbo277 wrote:I'm struggling to recall off the top of my head a test we've lost in recent times where the batting line-up hasn't failed at least once. I'm going to look into it, but at first impression that's our weakness and that's what we have to sort.

Since 1 Jan 2016:

Across all won games (14), England have averaged 38.09 per batting wicket.
Across all lost games (17), England have averaged 25.50 per batting wicket.

Only 3 times have England averaged over 30 in losing courses (300 per innings). Our bowling stats in lost tests are pretty ugly, but when the bowling doesn't fire the batting subsides.

The 3 times England have lost when the batsmen have put on 600 runs are:

Chennai and Perth - where the opposition put more runs on in home conditions and won by an innings. Blame on both sides (England should have scored more runs and condeded less).
West Indies in Leeds - where the batsmen scored enough runs but West Indies chased 322 (for 5) to win the match. Blame on bowlers.

Looking at times England have won when the bowling side hasn't performed as well - only once have the batsmen won the test for us when the other team have scored 600 runs (Pakistan in 2016 when England scored 297 and 445/6). Only on two further occasions have we won when the other team have scored 500 runs. If the bowlers don't blast a team out, the batsmen rarely dig us out the hole.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:Thats my assumption too Craig, except Root staying at 3

Regarding your earlier comment about Moeens form ...hes just hit a huge double century in a county following up from good scores in T20. Hes a better bat than Rashid, and is now in form again.
He also took 8 wickets in the match...which I guess sums up what a confidence player he is.

So he could come in fror Rashid and strengthen the batting whilst still offering pretty much the same with the ball.

Long term I still think hes a problemtaic player and England should be using a specialist alongside him (and possibly rashid) in sri lanka. Leach is taking lots of wickets again now hes fit. Not much use for a series thats going to be decided by who has the wirst batsmen and catching, but looking ahead to the winter hes sticking his hand up as is moeen.

I just don't see Moeen as one for the future. Sure his recent County form looks good but so do several specialist batsmen (which England need) and they haven't been given the chance. Also Ali or Rashid should come down to who will do more damage with the ball and at present (on test form) that would be Rashid. Personally, I'd prefer it if neither were in the side and a youngster could break through and hold their place down. At present that is not happening.

Im not disagreeing on that Craig. Moeens just too flakey. But touring Sri Lanka hes a very handy option to help balance the side and ensure they have the required bowling options whilst also making sure theres batting to enable specilsit bowlers who have the potential to be real wicket takers to be picked. As they dont have an express pace bowler, and rumour is Anderson and Broad will be rested, England will have to get their spinners firing.

In the short term (the remaining two tests) the issue is the batting. Who the spinner is in bowling terms is pretty irellevant, they will hardly get to bowl at all...but if they can score runs thats a bonus. Now you could argue that Bess did that, but hes really not that great a bowler and doesnt offer much to me as a long term prospect, and has been stuck largely playing second XI cricket since his test chance (which he only got because of two injuries, Moeens mental breakdown and Rashids exile).

If England are in a position where they dont have to worry about the batting then I agree Moeen isnt the future. Rashid possibly could improve and is likely to fare better on Asian pitches, Leach hasnt ever had a proper chance and is tearing up county cricket, Mason Crane is supposed to be the golden boy but hes out of the picture for some time because of his injury.

So for Sri Lanka you could see all 3 of Rashid Mooen and Leach in the side, along with Stokes Woakes and AN Other seamer (that express paced 7ft left armer who can bowl 20 overs in a day without breaking ). Theres still batting depth even with only 4 specialist bats. Depending which of them stand up and delivers you may have the answer regarding the long term.

But right now I honestly think Moeen has something to offer in terms of patching this side up. Certainly more than Vince, who also is not offering a long term solution to any of Englands glaring weaknesses.

Or Ed Smith might just pick Dawson

Vince reminds me a lot of Mark Ramprakash and Graeme Hick. Big talent, capable of scoring big runs in the county championship and very hard to get out once his eye is in - hence his impressive conversion rate.

So far he has been found wanting by the bowling and pressures of test cricket though. He's a player that many want to succeed as he has earned his chances in county cricket and is an excellent player to watch in full flow. I'm still don't believe him more likely to score short term runs than Bell or Hildreth, I can't see him filling a middle order spot long term like Joe Clarke hopefully will. Hopefully this opportunity (3rd or 4th?) works out as he is a great player to watch when batting well.

That said if he bats 3 it would allow Root to bat 4 where he looks far more comfortable.

Is it technical with Vince? Just seems he’s got a mindset/concentration issue to me.

No point bringing him in at 3 though. He’d be a great 6, but everyone in this team seems to want to be the guy who has less pressure on his batting.

Mo at 3 makes more sense to me. Prove you can do it in a position of need and you get your place back. If Root really does wanna be 3, Ali at 4.

There shouldn't be any scenario where Moeen ends up batting at 3. Ishant is somewhat of a left hander hoover, he's got Cook on toast and he's got Jennings a couple of times. We need to break up the left handers not have them all line astern

Vince back? Is this the 1990s or what? I thought we were beyond this with selection. We kept doing this with the likes of Hick and Ramps - dropping them and bringing them back. More recently, we've done it with Ballance.
Moeen, IMHO, should never have been dropped in the first place. He's hit five Test 100s and taken more than 100 Test wickets. Yes, he had a poor Ashes series but he should be in the team.
Somehow, though, I expect England to muddle through in this series. They've got their bad match out the way and they rarely lose two home Tests in a row.

I know Vince has his detractors, but he has gone away, and is second highest run scorer in division 1 this season - and as Jimbo will say I’m sure, for Hants he has played some long, gritty knocks (one at Taunton comes to mind). Maybe he has gone away since he was dropped post New Zealand (where he did get a 70), and ironed out his issue?

I don’t think the question anyone has about him is talent - it’s just that mentality of not having a waft outside off stump. Has he fixed that? Well this is his last chance to show it!

GGIO - Well, I for one would like to see Vince succeed. But the selectors now - and back in the 1990s too - have/had to ask themselves the question - has a player got Test match temperament?
It was clear that two brilliant county players - Hick and Ramps - did NOT have Test match temperament, although Goodness knows they were constantly mucked about by the selectors.
Vaughan and Trescothick had had only reasonably OK county careers before they were picked. But it was felt they had the temperament for Test cricket and both went on to have fine England careers. Later, the selectors repeated the trick with the likes of Strauss, KP, Prior, Cook and Trott. Bell took a little longer to settle but was persevered with and came good in the end.
Now we are picking players and finding they are not really up to it. The list is endless.

I get the impression Vince is a big confidence player. Maybe the selectors are hoping that he manages the one big score that gets the ball rolling and allows him to bring his county form into the Test arena.

Shaun Marsh could be a good example, and he was dropped a lot more times than Vince!

Not saying it's the pick I'd have made but can see some sort of logic.

I'm more concerned with Jennings.

I support Vince coming back, he has too much talent to not at least get another go on his home ground and in form as well. Similar with Moeen, he has five more Test centuries than nearly every other batsman tried in the last few years

If they were considering the replacement batsman for 3 it wouldve been Burns or Gubbins, surely not Vince. Hes got exactly the issue they are trying to eradicate from the top order,..sticking him in there is totally counter productive.
He was added to the squad as cover for Bairstow, so its more than likely he'd play in that position.

The word is that Bairstows expected to play as a batsman and Buttler keep, but moving up to 4 to allow Pope a bit more protection.
Asking your best batsmen to play in the top 4 and do their jobs well seems pretty sensible.

Moeen is never going to be a test 3. Its the worst possible place to put a wildly inconsistent mentally fragile player who has expressly said he doesn't want to play as a batsman and a lead bowler. One or the other. Whilst he has had the odd game and one series where he excelled in both disciplines its usually be the case that hes been good in one and bad in the other, or bad in both.
Much like with Vince, if you're trying to stop your top order wafting at innocuous balls why on earth would you pick a player who was dropped specifically for doing that at 3 (twice).

In Popes position or lower Vince could conceivably have a future, but England wont resolve their issues by asking one day batsmen and stroke players to play at 3 with weak openers and get exposed to the new ball on seamers pitches. But being clear he was a short term home pitch form pick for the squad as cover.
Long term they need players with stickability in the top 3.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:I know Vince has his detractors, but he has gone away, and is second highest run scorer in division 1 this season - and as Jimbo will say I’m sure, for Hants he has played some long, gritty knocks (one at Taunton comes to mind). Maybe he has gone away since he was dropped post New Zealand (where he did get a 70), and ironed out his issue?

I don’t think the question anyone has about him is talent - it’s just that mentality of not having a waft outside off stump. Has he fixed that? Well this is his last chance to show it!

Kind of agree with this. Also Vince is a right hander which seems a good idea given the way Ishant is cleaning up the lefties...