England's Indian Summer - T20s, ODIs & Tests

guildfordbat wrote:

Nathaniel Jacobs wrote:The toss has proven to be most significant factor in the entire series. Root was fortunate he won the toss in every match - despite he moronic decision to bowl in Nottingham. Had the tosses been the opposite way around we could easily be 0-4 down as Kohli would've batted in Nottingham anyway.

The side is clearly in decline once Anderson and Broad leave the scene we may well struggle to even win at home.

Curran has been a decent find more for his batting, bowling isn't anything to write home about yet.

Moeen a decent comeback but his issues are he's hopeless away from England.

Cook and Jennings need scores at the Oval or i would hope both are dropped for Sri Lanka.

Root has shown in this series he's not of the class of a Smith, Kohli or Williamson. His stock has fallen big time.

Dropping is easy. Replacing is less so.

Burns and Vince. Need someone to get after the bowling on the Sri Lankan sandpits and Vince is a decent player of spin. Burns the guy the try and hold up an end.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Let us remember that India are ranked No 1 in the world. England have won the series despite a non-functioning top batting order but down to excellent middle order batting and seam/spin attack. Sure England need to address their top order batting but at the end of the day winning tests is what matters and at the moment England are doing that. The Sky pundits (think it was Nasser) made a good point in that for the lambasting the top order are taking India's top order has faired perhaps even worse.

India were number one last time the came over, and England royally humped them.
This time they are very lucky not to be 3-1 down.
England have been talking about wanting to get to a level they can challenge to be number one again. That was the level that took them there, they have some strengths now but also such glaring weaknesses.

Indias top 3 have been as bad ...but their 4 has scored nearly 4 times as many runs per innings as Englands full time specialist bats combined have. England are also supposed to be better at handling English conditions. They also aren't facing Anderson.
So yes while both sides have struggled with the bat Englands top order have been worse.
We also cant mask that Englands struggles go back a number of years, and are getting worse not better. India too are a bit short on quality openers, but have nothing like the long term problems England do at the top of their order. They wont play many tests in conditions like this against Anderson, and unlike England their top 3 is functional when playing elsewhere.

No i don't buy this luck thing. You make your own luck. In the two tight tests England were in holes but dug themselves out and with not too big totals to defend they did that. How does that make India unlucky?

Sure there are batting defficiencies on a big scale for England but what is the answer? A number of openers have been tried and failed. Perhaps things will improve if Ramprakash is moving on. Whatever they do the batting needs sorted but aside from trying Clarke or Gubbins I don't see other options (untried) screaming out to be selected.

The toss was influential in the outcome of each match so yes luck played a major part.

Nathaniel Jacobs wrote:The toss was influential in the outcome of each match so yes luck played a major part.

Winning the toss makes little difference when both top orders are so weak. In any case in one of them when England chose to bat Kohli said he would have fielded. It is what you do when the pressure is on. In the two tight tests India have crumbled failing to chase down 193 and 245. Take your pick - that was either down tovpoor Indian batting and unable to handle the pressure or fine England bowling. No luck.

So chasing on the fourth innings on worn pitches is crumbling under pressure? Anyone can bat first when the pitches are generally better. Batting later after the opponents had set a score is an entirely different game. As we saw in Nottingham where on a decent pitch we got rolled.

Look at the posters on here today (one a big India fan) had India as favourites and they lost. Why? KP fan thought the pitch had gotten really slow and was fancying their chances. So what happened?

Another gusty win by England - and a very good series win in the bag, against an Indian side that came over here looking to not only solidify their status as number 1 in the world, but to also create a place for themselves in Indian cricketing folklore.

Whilst there are still some glaring weaknesses in the side, which I’m sure they’ll continue to try to addresss (whether they will be successful is another matter) - I do think the selectors should be commended for the selection of Buttler and call up of Curran this summer - both moves were definitely gutsy ones, which have paid off massively. Hopefully they’ll stick by Curran through his inevitable ups and downs, as he really could be a fantastic cricketer. Would like to see him play in Sri Lanka personally, I think his skiddy action could be useful as well as his lower order runs.

As for this “luck” debate - sure winning the toss helps, but it’s very far from the be all and end all in a game of cricket. If we want to point out areas of luck, if not for a ridiculous drop of Kohli in the first innings at Edgbaston by Malan, england win that game by 150-200 runs (and maybe Kohli doesn’t have the series he’s has). Everyone needs a little luck on their side to win

Granted the pitch didn't offer much swing but I wouldn't deem a pitch that had massive footmarks as flat and the ball was turning of the good parts as well. But opinions make discussions.

England have been massively lucky in this series. But, it happens, swings and roundabouts etc.

I still remember when Panesar had a plumb LBW turned down in 2007 v India, which cost England a test match (and the series).

Credit to India for their performances in a very good series...but I think this "England were lucky" stuff I'm reading on here is way overdone...

The toss ? Really ? In this match , for example : yes , India had to bat last - which was tough. But by the same token they had a good first day for bowling ; and indeed had England on their knees at one point , and couldn't quite finish them off. They then had rather better batting conditions on day two and failed to take full advantage...swings and roundabouts indeed.

It was a terrific series ; but with one very one sided win each the fact that England were able to close out both the tight matches says they were perfectly worthy winners . "Could have been 1-3 etc" is pretty meaningless ...and the sort of comment that would be laughed out of court if made by an England supporter after a losing series. You are allowed to take a victory for what it is....and celebrate it when you get one !

Doesn't "paper over any cracks" either. Everyone knows the weaknesses that remain in the team. Though fixing them isn't as easy

Selection discussion to resume when the dust has cleared...

And those that are throwing the lucky term around read Kohli's post match comments. He re-iterated many times England deserved their wins and felt India had just come up short at key moments.

Speaking to Sky Sports after the defeat, Kohli said: ‘We thought we had a 50-50 chance but we didn’t get the start we wanted.

‘Credit to England, they were relentless and we just weren’t good enough in the end.

‘We were always under the pump, under pressure. and they capitalised. I think England played better and deserved to win.

Did someone just say they wanted Vince in as an opener?

Kohli's interviews are almost as good as his batting. He's precise, clear-headed and honest.
It could be argued the difference between the two teams has been the lower-order batting. In the two tight matches, England dug themselves out of a hole and even in the Test England lost, it was a fifth-wicket stand that produced the most runs.
England also had to make recoveries when all the top-order batsmen had gone. When India offered tail-end resistance in the 1st and 4th Tests, it was Kohli and then Pujara who led the charge.
England know they have weaknesses and I'm not sure that putting Moeen at three is going to help, although they will probably do that at The Oval. Woakes, if fit, should replace Rashid. Otherwise it will probably be an unchanged side.

Agnew reporting he's expecting a major announcement from the ECB at midday today - intriguing...

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Agnew reporting he's expecting a major announcement from the ECB at midday today - intriguing...

Cook retiring? Can’t think what else would merit it otherwise.

JDizzle wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Agnew reporting he's expecting a major announcement from the ECB at midday today - intriguing...

Cook retiring? Can’t think what else would merit it otherwise.

+1 and/or Anderson as well

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Agnew reporting he's expecting a major announcement from the ECB at midday today - intriguing...

Probably a player retirement (Cook or Anderson, maybe even Broad), possibly a shake-up/restructuring to the current county system, or (unlikely) Root stepping down/being removed as captain.

My moneys on cook retiring.

Nathaniel Jacobs wrote:

JDizzle wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Agnew reporting he's expecting a major announcement from the ECB at midday today - intriguing...

Cook retiring? Can’t think what else would merit it otherwise.

+1 and/or Anderson as well

Be shocked if Jimmy or Broad went, both are still going well and Jimmy is only a few short of McGrath’s record.

Unless it is some nonsense about the 100? But they normally just push that out and hope no-one notices.

JDizzle wrote:

Nathaniel Jacobs wrote:

JDizzle wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Agnew reporting he's expecting a major announcement from the ECB at midday today - intriguing...

Cook retiring? Can’t think what else would merit it otherwise.

+1 and/or Anderson as well

Be shocked if Jimmy or Broad went, both are still going well and Jimmy is only a few short of McGrath’s record.

Unless it is some nonsense about the 100? But they normally just push that out and hope no-one notices.

6 wickets at the oval isn't out of the question for Anderson and retiring on a high beating the number 1 team would be a decent way to say goodbye imo

The only other thing I've noticed is that it seems to be entirely BBC related (Agnew) at the moment - nothing from other journos saying an announcement is coming. Maybe TV broadcast related? Maybe Bayliss going? Maybe Strauss not coming back from leave?

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:The only other thing I've noticed is that it seems to be entirely BBC related (Agnew) at the moment - nothing from other journos saying an announcement is coming. Maybe TV broadcast related? Maybe Bayliss going? Maybe Strauss not coming back from leave?

Well this was wrong.

It is indeed Cook retiring from international cricket - his last game will be at The Oval.

A masterful player. The last of a kind. One of the greats. Hope he signs off with a century.

And now, a very tough task for the England selectors.

Right time for the Cookie Monster to go. He's been in decline for a couple of years

Can't say I'm surprised.  I've noted his body language this series. I have little doubt that he very much wanted to get back into form and continue ; but since he just wasn't able to do so - despite often looking quite good , until making another mistake - I think he decided , possibly before this latest match , to call it quits at summer's end. Wonder if he'd have changed his mind if he'd got a score at the weekend ?
It isn't ideal , as Jennings is hardly secure at the other end but will almost have to go to Sri Lanka now. And no real opportunity to blood a new man before the tour. I'd hoped Chef would continue for the winter while they worked on settling the other opener ; but I guess he feels it just ain't coming back for him and doesn't want to drag it out any longer.
Suppose some will say they now shouldn't play him at The Oval but I think that's a bit mean minded. Hope he gets a score to finish and can go honorably into international retirement to spend a but more time with his family - and make a few runs for Essex , who could use them ...

Edit

I see his quote : "nothing left in the tank"... Sums it up best , I think. Glad he's going out with a series win...

The antithesis of the Aussies of this era, the nice man who just went about getting runs and being a great example of being a great sportsman

Onwards, does it offer Jennings hope of retaining his spot?

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Onwards, does it offer Jennings hope of retaining his spot?

Think it just about guarantees it for now... He can play spin ; so likely to be at least in the squad for Sri Lanka ; wouldn't make much sense to leave him out of the one remaining match now.
He did play a decent second innings the other day. And the newcomer (Burns ? Browne ? AN Other ) is probably just as well introduced on tour as being pitched in against Bumrah and Shami in what will doubtless be tricky conditions again.

A thought : Whoever does come in better be a competent slip ; as Cook's departure leaves a big hole at first. Ironically he seemed to get his catching mojo back in this last match ...

I wouldn't be so sure it guarantees it Alfie - they may see it as an opportunity to have a clean break and get two new guys in. They may not, only time will tell. I imagine Jennings will get The Oval test anyways.

I would be shocked if Rory Burns isn't the direct Cook replacement. (should be noted Burns has fielded slip/gully often for Surrey too - when needed. Often as captain he likes to situate himself at mid off, for obvious reasons)

And there has been rumours and suggestions they may take Joe Denly to Sri Lanka as the number 3 - after good seasons for Kent.

The well-deserved eulogies to Cook's Test career are already piling up. There is a great warmth to the tributes, indicating that Cook was not merely a great Test batsman but also a thoroughly nice bloke.
Difficult to place him among the England elite. He's clearly miles ahead in terms of runs and 100s and would have to be in most people's top 10 at the very least. There's stiff competition for the title England's Greatest Test Batsman. Contenders could include Hobbs, Hammond, Hutton, Compton, Barrington, May, Gooch, Gower and.....Pietersen.

Its a huge blow and a sad end, but he knows best. Its been on the cards for a long time.

The two double centuries aside hes been goosed for some years, and I guess the tour to Sri Lanka offers nothing in terms of achievements for him. With the fielding slipping (yep) too he must be feeling the heat, and what thats putting onto the other senior memebers of the side.

To me this highlights more an error made by England not to try to ease Burns in at 3, rather than selecting Pope. A small amount of hindsight as Pope had earned the opportunity, but England had much greater need for a top 3 player (well 3 of them!) than they did a mid order batsman being pitched in above his head.
I feel they really must find a place for him in the side for the fifth test. It would be much better for him to be debuting at home in a relatively low pressure game against an Indian side who will be deflated (and possibly not playing their first choice attack) than chucked in at the deep end in sri lanka alongside either Jennings or another debutant.

England really are a mess in those top 3 positions now. Jennings is almost certain to continue, a rugged 30 doesnt really make up for the way he got out in the first innings. Whilst I was supportive of his initial selection hes simply not been delivering. Sticking Moeen at 3 was worth a gamble in the circumstances ..and if hes one of 3 spinners / 6 bowlers in Sri Lanaka he may have to bat a bit higher up the order ...but right now hes in the side for his bowling, and the last thing they want to do is break that when its working well by over pressuring him. Vince could work out there, but its depressing to be going back to a guy whos been dropped twice already.

In some ways though maybe it should take the pressure off Burns or whoever else gets a spot now. The expectation levels shopuld be tempered by whats gone on before, and no longer is it a case of filling the shoes of the greatest opener of his generation ... just a guy whos struggling to pass 30.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

And there has been rumours and suggestions they may take Joe Denly to Sri Lanka as the number 3 - after good seasons for Kent.

At 32 and playing in Division 2?

(something about Chris Rogers)

But jeez...is this what we have come to?

Surely not Joe Denly....lol maybe its because he bowls leggies as well

There are worse picks than Joe Denly to be fair. Had a good last few years on a bowler friendly home ground - and has experienced and succeeded in alien condition, albeit in T20 stuff, in the PSL which would be as close as you would get to Sri Lankan conditions.

Joe Denly, that would be a long road. Didn't he play one ODI about ten years ago as the next big thing?

sirfredperry wrote: There's stiff competition for the title England's Greatest Test Batsman. Contenders could include Hobbs, Hammond, Hutton, Compton, Barrington, May, Gooch, Gower and.....Pietersen.

Cook is England's greatest batsman in my lifetime, but very difficult (impossible?) to compare him to those hailing from another era.

Burns will be a certainty for Sri Lanka (wonder if he'll come in for Jennings for the final test?), and it appears as though the selectors will be going for Denly (as already said) to partner him.

Denly's plus column is a high average over the past two seasons in county cricket, and he's regarded as a good player of spin. Oh, and he can bowl a bit, which English selectors have loved since time immemorial. The debit column? Well, it wouldn't be a long-term move, would it?

Jennings does play spin well, be hell of a move to drop him and have to introduce two new openers. Jennings could have a go at three, certainly away.

Wheres this coming from re: Denly?
Its gone from someone mention " rumours" at 3 to him partnering Burns as an opener in the space of two hours!

Denly played 9 ODIs and a T20 back in 2009 when they still used it as a stepping stone to tests. He used to get mentioned a bit but has been way off the radar. Picking him for tests would be treating the Lions with the same disdain they had for county cricket over the past few years, and shows the development programmes are utterly failing.
I guess a change in the selector would mean some outsiders stock suddenly rising, and there would be a case for a seasoned pro to help bolster up the top rather than another kid. But really it would be a pretty negative move, especially as spots for out and out batsmen will be limited in the side.
His bowling is very occasional in first class cricket , and England have better part time options in Root and Jennings ( plus Vince, Malan on the edge of the squad). I dont see that really being a factor when their all rounders already enable them to play a host of full time bowling options.

I think if Gubbins got left behind for him he'd be left very disappointed, although his form has dipped since missing out on the current squad despite a good score in the Lions game.

PS I don't know how anyone who only plays county cricket can really be regarded as a good player of spin when the best they face are guys who can only average in the 40s internationally.
Seems everyone who isn't in the current side, and a fair chunk of it, "are good players of spin" till they actually face it in a test. Yet whoever England pick the minute they face a semi competent slow bowler abroad they collectively go into meltdown.

The end of an era but by no means a surprise. Cook's form has been on a downward spiral for a couple of years and a series win at home to India is as good a time to call it a day as any.

He has written his name into the record books over the years with some vital knocks but all good things come to an end. Now the question is:- What will the new opening partnership be?

I’ve seen an article that suggests 4 men who could take Cook’s place. It’s...not fun to read. Burns, Bairstow, Stoneman and Hameed.

Yes the Denly shout is very much only a rumour from the Telegraph - by far from set in stone. There was some outside rumours for him to come in for the 4th test of this series too, so maybe he is one of their radar. They do note that Burns is set to get a shot for certain however.

In other opener news - Haseeb Hameed is left out of the Lancashire squad for their upcoming county championship game against Somerset.

A very good series with one test to go and we Indians have to wait for another 4 years. India failed to capitalise the crucial moment and let off the game easily. Clearly changes are required here. The openers need to go. Vijay is out of the team and time is clear to soon kick Dhawan out. Rahul has temperament issues, he need to bat in Ranji before making into the team. Clearly the overrated all rounder that we are relying on is of no use, as rightly said by the WI great. The only positive from the series are the bowlers. Well Played England, though you were not that good but you won the crucial moments.

Cook retired! All here are sad, and its genuine to be sad. But I have a question, Is this sudden retirement a step of saving his honour of not being kicked out of the team, as was done to Kevin Peterson?

When Kevin was kicked out, he was the highest run scorer of the last series. Cook is no where close in this series.

subhranshu.kumar.5 wrote:Cook retired! All here are sad, and its genuine to be sad. But I have a question, Is this sudden retirement a step of saving his honour of not being kicked out of the team, as was done to Kevin Peterson?

When Kevin was kicked out, he was the highest run scorer of the last series. Cook is no where close in this series.  

KP was booted out for non playing reasons. Theres no question Cooks going to get "sacked" for his conduct. Its a meaningless comparisson. Ian Bell might be a better corelation I guess, but he lost his place through pressure from below more than his own performances...other players at that time were stepping up to push him out (or so it seemed). Hes the only really big name England batsman I can think of in recent years whos been genuinely dropped for playing reasons without retiring.

He wouldve been feeling the pressure for sure but its highly unlikley they wouldve made a decision on him ahead of the fifth test. Had his retirement come after Id be more inclined to believe that he was "given the chance to go on his own terms", but i really dont see that here.
Even more so in light of how short England are for options. Jennings really is already at the " one test too many" point, and going on an away tour with 3 new top order bats wouldnt have been high on Englands prioirty list. Even more so with Broad and Anderson rumoured to be getting rested, that would leave them desperatekly short of leadership and experience across the squad.

Despite his struggle I see this as more the right time for him than it is England (lets not forget he scored a 180 for the Lions pre series, which is a score only Moeen has matched in first class cricket from all the England bats this year)

He'd openly toyed with retirement since losing the capataincy, so yes hes not gone out on a high but I dont see it as a genuine case of falling on his own sword to avoid the embaressment of being stabbed in the back.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:
In other opener news - Haseeb Hameed is left out of the Lancashire squad for their upcoming county championship game against Somerset.

His career could be over. Such a sad decline. Only averaging 9.44 this season, with a high score of 31.

A shame to see Cook retire after a spell of poor form but it's not an unexpected decision. I expect his heart was set on finishing up with the Ashes but as always he's been a true sportsman with the simple honesty of, "there's nothing left in the tank".

To keep churning out the number of runs he has whilst seeing the England side go through such change - and some fairly average sides - over the years is very impressive.

A cracking example of someone who got the most out of their talent and remained commendably humble whilst reaching the heights he did.

His performances during the Ashes win down under stand out for me.

I'm delighted to hear he is staying in county cricket next season with Essex.

king_carlos wrote:A shame to see Cook retire after a spell of poor form but it's not an unexpected decision. I expect his heart was set on finishing up with the Ashes but as always he's been a true sportsman with the simple honesty of, "there's nothing left in the tank".

To keep churning out the number of runs he has whilst seeing the England side go through such change - and some fairly average sides - over the years is very impressive.

A cracking example of someone who got the most out of their talent and remained commendably humble whilst reaching the heights he did.

His performances during the Ashes win down under stand out for me.

I'm delighted to hear he is staying in county cricket next season with Essex.

Very much go along with Carlos and particularly his final line. That will hopefully go a little way to addressing Gooseberry's understandable concern that players don't improve sufficiently in the county game to be ready for Test cricket as they don't come up against Test class opponents.