England's Indian Summer - T20s, ODIs & Tests

First topic message reminder :

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.

Alfie,

If Bairstow isnt good enough for Englands top 5 ...who is?

Someone has to play there.

--Its a situation similar to the one India faced at the end of T2...then they were 2-0 down and now its 3-1 down...could be very demoralizing

--But its all to play for.....to get to 3-2 whihc will give us additional ICC ranking points....which won't be so bad a scoreline given that we lost 4 tosses and ran close in 2 defeat
Bear in mind in our 80+ years of cricketing history...we have won 2 tests in Eng only once before...that was 1986 on the back of Vengsarkar's heroics with the bat

--India's problem is only one...and a big one....it's nos 6, 7 not pulling their weight with the bat....exaggerated by the two openers not going on after their starts

there are many ways of fixing this issue...but only two good ones in my view:

1) Replace Pandya with specialist middle order batter Vihari...means we will have only 4 bowlers....but it's the last test...and 4 bowlers have looked good to pick 20 wickets

2) OR replace Pant with Rahul as the WK and that allows bringing Vihari as a specialist batsman
Tough on Rahul...BUT one test and all to play for.
And in this case India can retain their 5th bowler in Pandya or replace him with Jadeja...who is also an allrounder on paper, but equally inept as Pandya / Pant

Bringing Karthik back for Pant isn't enough to bolster the No.6 spot


and with one of those two changes, if we win the toss and get to bat first...we should still be favorites to win

LondonTiger wrote:The quality of Bairstow's keeping has improved out of sight, and should not be under discussion.

It is however reasonable to discuss his batting though. It has been referred to above but all the stats are below. His average is much higher in the first innings of a game, irrespective of whether England won the toss or not. It declines rapidly the more he keeps wicket, both in a game and through a series.

Now obviously hist batting has improved while he has been keeping but the question for the English management is whether they can be a better team with Bairstow playing as a specialist batsman. There seems to be a confidence issue with him that has been helped by feeling secure in the team as the keeper. However if we are to get the very best from him as a batter the fact he averages nearly 60 when batting before keeping and barely half that in innings after keeping wicket does suggest that the team would benefit from him concentrating as a batsman.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/297433.html?class=1;filter=advanced;keeper=1;orderby=default;template=results;type=allround

Think you've hit the nail on the head here Tiger - and these stats seem to back up the claims myself/Goose/others are making. Alfie - going to have to disagree with you on this one I'm afraid - game of opinions and all that!

Personally for me a 4-7 of Root, Bairstow, Stokes, Buttler (wk) looks a heck of a lot better than Root, Buttler, Stokes, Bairstow (wk). I think he's proven with the bat this summer that Buttler can match Bairstow's output with the bat from 7, and I'd wager money on Bairstow outperforming Buttler at 5 - so for me it makes sense from a team perspective. Harsh on Bairstow individually to relieve him of the gloves, as noted he has improved in this area - but this is a team game, and England need Jonny with the bat more than they do Jonny with the gloves...

Gooseberry wrote:Alfie,

If Bairstow isnt good enough for Englands top 5 ...who is?

Someone has to play there.

I did say he could play at five, but no higher . And I think Stokes can play there just as well. As - possibly - could Buttler.

They still need the top three : and that wont be any of them ; so all that is just shifting deck chairs...

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:The quality of Bairstow's keeping has improved out of sight, and should not be under discussion.

It is however reasonable to discuss his batting though. It has been referred to above but all the stats are below. His average is much higher in the first innings of a game, irrespective of whether England won the toss or not. It declines rapidly the more he keeps wicket, both in a game and through a series.

Now obviously hist batting has improved while he has been keeping but the question for the English management is whether they can be a better team with Bairstow playing as a specialist batsman. There seems to be a confidence issue with him that has been helped by feeling secure in the team as the keeper. However if we are to get the very best from him as a batter the fact he averages nearly 60 when batting before keeping and barely half that in innings after keeping wicket does suggest that the team would benefit from him concentrating as a batsman.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/297433.html?class=1;filter=advanced;keeper=1;orderby=default;template=results;type=allround

Think you've hit the nail on the head here Tiger - and these stats seem to back up the claims myself/Goose/others are making. Alfie - going to have to disagree with you on this one I'm afraid - game of opinions and all that!

Personally for me a 4-7 of Root, Bairstow, Stokes, Buttler (wk) looks a heck of a lot better than Root, Buttler, Stokes, Bairstow (wk). I think he's proven with the bat this summer that Buttler can match Bairstow's output with the bat from 7, and I'd wager money on Bairstow outperforming Buttler at 5 - so for me it makes sense from a team perspective. Harsh on Bairstow individually to relieve him of the gloves, as noted he has improved in this area - but this is a team game, and England need Jonny with the bat more than they do Jonny with the gloves...

Opinions fine , Olly

And I hear what you're saying. But : two points ...

1/ as I've already flagged ; they aren't looking to change keepers so YJB can bat at five. ( Don't need to , actually , judging by scores this year before Jonny fractured his finger ...he was doing well enough at five and Jos at seven , however artificial it looked to have a pure batsman at seven.). It is clearly aimed at pushing Bairstow to four or even higher...I will bet heavily that it will not work.
2/ whats wrong with 4-7 of Root Stokes Buttler Bairstow ? Keeps team harmony - Jos seemed happy enough playing as a batsman. And essentially what they ended up with the other day

Team game , sure. But I just think the risk in this (proposal ?...if it actually is ) is greeter than the hoped for rewards.

We shall see.

And as to those filtered stats : the clearest fact there is that Bairstow averages over 42 when he is the keeper ...but only 37 overall.

So his average when playing as a batsman only (not shown in that excerpt unless I've missed it ) is considerably lower.

I do accept that this may be somewhat skewed by Jonny's improvement over time . But the whole thing really does not amount to a ringing endorsement of the "will bat better without the gloves" theory.

If he were 22 or so maybe he could reinvent himself ; but not now.

Is Stokes much better at 6 than 5? I’d take Jonny at 5 anyway, but it’s bloody hard to judge someone at 5 or 6 in this England team based on the fact they are coming in consistently earlier than you would want.

Just pick three openers and try steady the ship. Then Root at 4. Now, to find three openers...

Cook has apparently signed a three-year contract with Essex. This opens the possibility - faint I know - of someone actually getting close to a hundred 100s again.
OK, Cook would have to score around six centuries per season for six seasons but that would still make him younger than Tresco who is still going strong. Realistically, I doubt whether Cook would play/want to play for that long. Ramps seems destined to be the last player to make a hundred 100s.

I would think England would go for an unchanged 11 with Moeen staying at 3. They've got to have 1 eye on the winter now.

Curran over Woakes is a must for me. Woakes has failed to perform outside of England, and the change of angle will be helpful for England to vary their attack and also for Moeen. So Curran stays for the Oval test.

A lot of talk about Pope in for Rashid, but what's that going to do for your batting order? And why drop Rashid to bring him back for the first test in Sri Lanka - assuming you go with multiple spinners?

If Ali, Root, Bairstow, Stokes, Buttler, Curran, Rashid are all going to play 3-9 in the winter, let them bed into their roles here. That would leave you with either Anderson and Broad or a third spinner and one of your front line seamers. There's little point bringing Pope in for Rashid, bringing Ali down the order and shuffling your middle order if you're just going to undo it next test. Let people settle into their roles.

The final question is the openers. Burns opened for the Lions with Gubbins at 3, so either or both of them could come in. You'd think those two names + Jennings are on the radar.

So for Sri Lanka:
Burns, Jennings, Ali, Root, Bairstow, Stokes, Buttler, Curran, Woakes, Rashid, Leach

With Gubbins, Pope, Bess and a quick bowler (Wood?) touring?

Indications from India that Jadeja and Vihari are in with a chance to come in for Ashwin and Pandya. Not bad I would say. Ashwin didn't look fully fit last game and in any case he underperformed on a significant situation when the team was counting on him. Jadeja deserves his opportunity.
Vihari is the highest averaging current first classs cricketer. Lets se what is it that he has got and whether he has it in him to make the step up. Needds to also put Rahane on a bit of a notice.

robbo277 wrote:I would think England would go for an unchanged 11 with Moeen staying at 3. They've got to have 1 eye on the winter now.

Curran over Woakes is a must for me. Woakes has failed to perform outside of England, and the change of angle will be helpful for England to vary their attack and also for Moeen. So Curran stays for the Oval test.

A lot of talk about Pope in for Rashid, but what's that going to do for your batting order? And why drop Rashid to bring him back for the first test in Sri Lanka - assuming you go with multiple spinners?

If Ali, Root, Bairstow, Stokes, Buttler, Curran, Rashid are all going to play 3-9 in the winter, let them bed into their roles here. That would leave you with either Anderson and Broad or a third spinner and one of your front line seamers. There's little point bringing Pope in for Rashid, bringing Ali down the order and shuffling your middle order if you're just going to undo it next test. Let people settle into their roles.

The final question is the openers. Burns opened for the Lions with Gubbins at 3, so either or both of them could come in. You'd think those two names + Jennings are on the radar.

So for Sri Lanka:
Burns, Jennings, Ali, Root, Bairstow, Stokes, Buttler, Curran, Woakes, Rashid, Leach

With Gubbins, Pope, Bess and a quick bowler (Wood?) touring?

On the radio yesterday Alec Stewart said he expected an unchanged 11 making reference to how the Oval Test wicket was then looking. He added that Pope would join up with the England squad tonight but there remained a possibility he could be released on Thursday and then resume playing in Surrey's match against Essex at Chelmsford. Rather oddly, Surrey are entitled to defer if and when to call up a replacement as their current CC match had started before the England squad was announced.

robbo277 wrote:I would think England would go for an unchanged 11 with Moeen staying at 3. They've got to have 1 eye on the winter now.

Curran over Woakes is a must for me. Woakes has failed to perform outside of England, and the change of angle will be helpful for England to vary their attack and also for Moeen. So Curran stays for the Oval test.

A lot of talk about Pope in for Rashid, but what's that going to do for your batting order? And why drop Rashid to bring him back for the first test in Sri Lanka - assuming you go with multiple spinners?

If Ali, Root, Bairstow, Stokes, Buttler, Curran, Rashid are all going to play 3-9 in the winter, let them bed into their roles here. That would leave you with either Anderson and Broad or a third spinner and one of your front line seamers. There's little point bringing Pope in for Rashid, bringing Ali down the order and shuffling your middle order if you're just going to undo it next test. Let people settle into their roles.

The final question is the openers. Burns opened for the Lions with Gubbins at 3, so either or both of them could come in. You'd think those two names + Jennings are on the radar.

So for Sri Lanka:
Burns, Jennings, Ali, Root, Bairstow, Stokes, Buttler, Curran, Woakes, Rashid, Leach

With Gubbins, Pope, Bess and a quick bowler (Wood?) touring?

That lineup for The Oval makes sense (with the usual reservations about Moeen at three : you must make do with what you have , I guess) and I suspect that is what it will be. Unless they expect a real seamers delight in which case Rashid might be seen as redundant.

Think the Sri Lanka party is less certain. Three spinners didn't help them much in India ...quantity over quality doesn't always work. Still discussions to be had over which spin combination is most likely to be successful ...and if Leach is unplayable at Taunton and the Sri Lankans are going to serve up rank turners...

Sounds right to me in regard to the tour party and the next test ...alrhough theres still room for the usual random Smith/Bayliss curve ball.

I do think if Moeens batting 3 England would want a second spinner. Although India are strangley incapable of playing him in England the danger of him becoming overburdened if the test doesnt go well and his confidence breaking again is always there.

KP_fan wrote:--Its a situation similar to the one India faced at the end of T2...then they were 2-0 down and now its 3-1 down...could be very demoralizing

--But its all to play for.....to get to 3-2 whihc will give us additional ICC ranking points....which won't be so bad a scoreline given that we lost 4 tosses and ran close in 2 defeat
Bear in mind in our 80+ years of cricketing history...we have won 2 tests in Eng only once before...that was 1986 on the back of Vengsarkar's heroics with the bat

--India's problem is only one...and a big one....it's nos 6, 7  not pulling their weight with the bat....exaggerated by the two openers not going on after their starts

there are many ways of fixing this issue...but only two good ones in my view:

1) Replace Pandya with specialist middle order batter Vihari...means we will have only 4 bowlers....but it's the last test...and 4 bowlers have looked good to pick 20 wickets

2) OR replace Pant with Rahul as the WK and that allows bringing Vihari as a specialist batsman
Tough on Rahul...BUT one test and all to play for.
And in this case India can retain their 5th bowler in Pandya or replace him with Jadeja...who is also an allrounder on paper, but equally inept as Pandya / Pant

Bringing Karthik back  for Pant isn't enough to bolster the No.6 spot


and with one of those two changes, if we win the toss and get to bat first...we should still be favorites to win

all indications are India going in with Option-1
Vihari likely to make debut and he is a handy part-time off-spinner also
And Ashwin has strained hip......so naturally Jadeja will come in

Dunno if they will bring back Kartik for Pant

I cant see them dropping Pant for Kartik. His struggles with the bat have to be put into context alongside those of almost every player in this series (including Kartik).
Is Kartik really that much of a better gloveman that its worth taking a short term decision over for a dead rubber?

For Rahul makes more sense as it allows a genuine chance to strengthen the batting without having to ditch a bowler.

What I read though it does sound more likely they are going to retain Pant and drop Hardik to get a spot for the specialist bat.

The enforced Jadeja / Ashwin swap looks problematic. If nothing else Jadeja is coming in very cold, hes only played one shortened game on tour. His last proper cricket was June against Afghanistan ...and before that the IPL.
Im sure hes been killing time in the nets but really it will be interesting to see if he can come straight in and perform to his best.

No question India are capable of winning, their seamers can take wickets and England are fragile regardless of how little the opposition score themselves, but it looks like the team selection problems are more on their side this time.

Gooseberry wrote:I cant see them dropping Pant for Kartik. His struggles with the bat have to be put into context alongside those of almost every player in this series (including Kartik).
Is Kartik really that much of a better gloveman that its worth taking a short term decision over for a dead rubber?

For Rahul makes more sense as it allows a genuine chance to strengthen the batting without having to ditch a bowler.

What I read though it does sound more likely they are going to retain Pant and drop Hardik to get a spot for the specialist bat.

The enforced Jadeja / Ashwin swap looks problematic. If nothing else Jadeja is coming in very cold, hes only played one shortened game on tour. His last proper cricket was June against Afghanistan ...and before that the IPL.
Im sure hes been killing time in the nets but really it will be interesting to see if he can come straight in and perform to his best.

No question India are capable of winning, their seamers can take wickets and England are fragile regardless of how little the opposition score themselves, but it looks like the team selection problems are more on their side this time.

Rahul keeping would be a good but radical move....dunno if Kohli will go down that line
ïf India win toss.,..they are already ahead in the game.......but Kohli doesn't win tosses

KP_fan wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:I cant see them dropping Pant for Kartik. His struggles with the bat have to be put into context alongside those of almost every player in this series (including Kartik).
Is Kartik really that much of a better gloveman that its worth taking a short term decision over for a dead rubber?

For Rahul makes more sense as it allows a genuine chance to strengthen the batting without having to ditch a bowler.

What I read though it does sound more likely they are going to retain Pant and drop Hardik to get a spot for the specialist bat.

The enforced Jadeja / Ashwin swap looks problematic. If nothing else Jadeja is coming in very cold, hes only played one shortened game on tour. His last proper cricket was June against Afghanistan ...and before that the IPL.
Im sure hes been killing time in the nets but really it will be interesting to see if he can come straight in and perform to his best.

No question India are capable of winning, their seamers can take wickets and England are fragile regardless of how little the opposition score themselves, but it looks like the team selection problems are more on their side this time.

Rahul keeping would be a good but radical move....dunno if Kohli will go down that line
ïf India win toss.,..they are already ahead in the game.......but Kohli doesn't win tosses

As it stands at the moment the trickiest batting could be day 2 which is forecast for cloud all day. More sun and rising temperatures as the game progresses ...maybe some encouragement for spinners later on. So yes the toss could be very important, almost certainly a bat first situation.
(Although the weather forecasts have been pretty unreliable and conditions very changeable the last month or so)

Bairstow looking like he’ll have the gloves

Wheres that coming from Dolphin? All the stuff Id read from previous days, including the Bayliss interview, seemed to indicate Buttler would be the keeper.
If they do make that change they have to swap batting positions surely ...with Buttler at 5 and YJB down at 6/7

https://www.ecb.co.uk/england/men/news/845099/england-name-team-for-fifth-india-test

They seem to be listing Moeen at 3, Bairstow 5 and Buttler 7.

If Moeen does bat at three it's about four places too high for him at Test level. Test attacks will be delighted to see him coming in at three but wary of what he can do coming in at seven.
Can't agree with Bairstow keeping again. Make him concentrate on his batting, I say.

Saw it on TMS Twitter, although that is based on him doing a public and heavy keeper session. Arguably, he could be choosing to do that or myriad other reasons that don’t include him playing keeper

LondonTiger wrote:https://www.ecb.co.uk/england/men/news/845099/england-name-team-for-fifth-india-test

They seem to be listing Moeen at 3, Bairstow 5 and Buttler 7.

Yep and Bairstow will keep - not a decision I agree with, but at least they’ve got Root back to 4

Fair enough. More muddled thinking from England! But Bairstow 5, Stokes 6, Buttler 7 is about right.
I guess his sulk worked. Cricinfo is now reporting it as a done deal.

Moeen at 3 Im begrudingly accepting based on the reasoning Bayliss gave. Firstly it puts the next 4 back into more comfortable positions. Secodnly Moeen is seen as a genuine 3 for slow pitches, and the next two series will be in Sri Lanaka and the West Indies. In the short term hes now worse than any other options.
My only caveat to that would be that Id have prefered to see Burns in at 3 for this test and rashid dropped...then Moeen moved up for the autumn/winter once Cooks gone. But given theyve overlooked Burns again (as he outscores a host of former test players again) I can see this as a well reasoned option.

Considering selectors or Bayliss voiced no concerns whatsoever with Bairstow's keeling/batting prior to his finger injury then it is only fair he gets the gloves back.

All the question marks over batting order make me laugh. At the moment, our inconsistent batting, where people bat becomes more irrelevant.

Traditionally, someone coming in 5,6,7 might have been expected to be able to 1) face the second new ball and/or 2) accelerate the score along with runs already on the board.

Now batting 5,6,7 means you could come in at any point from the first session onwards

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:https://www.ecb.co.uk/england/men/news/845099/england-name-team-for-fifth-india-test

They seem to be listing Moeen at 3, Bairstow 5 and Buttler 7.

Yep and Bairstow will keep - not a decision I agree with, but at least they’ve got Root back to 4

And leaving Root at four is the most important thing...

I can't see Moeen lasting at three but must be a fair chance he will bat there in Sri Lanka , if they want to squeeze in another spinner.

Agnostic on the five - six - seven order as I think they're basically interchangeable. I'm of course happy to see the - presumably fit again - Bairstow back behind the stumps ; though I know the Buttler Fan Club will be grinding their teeth They shouldn't worry : Jos is currently making enough runs his place is hardly under threat.
Most would - I think - concede Jonny is the better keeper to spin ; and there might be lots of that on tour ; so it would be an odd time to make a switch.

Maybe Rashid will be underemployed again ; but since Burns wasn't in the squad inserting him at three was not an option. And Pope wasn't going to bat there . Presume Stokes is OK to bowl or they might have thought of bringing in Woakes , who might be a bit cheesed off at carrying drinks again...perhaps better to see this as further "rotation" : but there is a bit of a problem with he and young Sam both seeking the same spot. You could say it's a nice problem to have...

I guess some will bemoan the fact that they haven't used this dead rubber for experimentation ; but I am a believer in picking your best team for any Test Match rather than handing out free caps...injuries etc will eventually provide opportunities for fringe players to make a mark. Patience.

And 4-1 would be nice : that should be the primary aim. It won't be easy.

alfie wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:https://www.ecb.co.uk/england/men/news/845099/england-name-team-for-fifth-india-test

They seem to be listing Moeen at 3, Bairstow 5 and Buttler 7.

Yep and Bairstow will keep - not a decision I agree with, but at least they’ve got Root back to 4

And leaving Root at four is the most important thing...

I can't see Moeen lasting at three but must be a fair chance he will bat there in Sri Lanka , if they want to squeeze in another spinner.

Agnostic on the five - six - seven order as I think they're basically interchangeable. I'm of course happy to see the  - presumably fit again - Bairstow back behind the stumps ; though I know the Buttler Fan Club will be grinding their teeth   They shouldn't worry : Jos is currently making enough runs his place is hardly under threat.
Most would - I think - concede Jonny is the better keeper to spin ; and there might be lots of that on tour ; so it would be an odd time to make a switch.

Maybe Rashid will be underemployed again ; but since Burns wasn't in the squad inserting him at three was not an option.  And Pope wasn't going to bat there .  Presume Stokes is OK to bowl or they might have thought of bringing in Woakes , who might be a bit cheesed off at carrying drinks again...perhaps better to see this as further "rotation" : but there is a bit of a problem with he and young Sam both seeking the same spot.  You could say it's a nice problem to have...

I guess some will bemoan the fact that they haven't used this dead rubber for experimentation ; but I am a believer in picking your best team for any Test Match rather than handing out free caps...injuries etc will eventually provide opportunities for fringe players to make a mark. Patience.

And 4-1 would be nice : that should be the primary aim.  It won't be easy.

Pretty sure I saw yesterday on twitter that Woakes was having a fitness test on the outfield during training - so he may not be fully fit, and in either case I think sticking with Curran makes sense - especially if he is going to tour this winter, when in all likelihood Woakes won't (he may tour, but can't see him troubling the starting test XI unless there are injuries, god forbid, to Broad and Anderson)

Dead rubber for experimentation sounds good on paper, but we have to remember a certain Simon Kerrigan. Or possibly worse Tino best smashing 95 from number 11

Hadnt noticed that Currans retained his place ahead of Woakes this time, thats a big vote of confidence in him and reward for what he has done with his chances. A little surprised tbh but I wonder if they didnt want to do the same thing to him twice, or risk Woakes re-injuring himslef in a game he will learn little from. Being an all formats player its not a bad thing if hes not over played.
As well as Currans done Woakes has done better (75 with the bat, 21 with the ball to 45 - 23) , and is the better bowler. Curran does give England a different option to asks questions of batsmen if India do somehow manage to put a stand together though.
Playing a settled side probably isnt a bad thing either, theyve rarely had the chance to do that recently.

Either way Moeen at 3 seems to be the big call after overlooking Burns.

VTR wrote:Dead rubber for experimentation sounds good on paper, but we have to remember a certain Simon Kerrigan. Or possibly worse Tino best smashing 95 from number 11

...or Scott Borthwick having the best test average of any still active England spinner and never being capped again

I do agree experimentation or blooding of players for the sake of it is pointless. But when its done with a specific forward view in mind (yes Im still banging on about Burns) to deal with a genuine issue that the current team has then its legitimate.

One could argue that Moeen at 3 falls into the experimentation (with clear puporse) bracket, but I dont think his place for the winter will be significantly affected by his performance with the bat in this test.

Yeah I was only joking really. Burns or whichever opener they are eyeing up could have come in here. It's bit different to bowling experiments which have more scope to unravel. England's strongest team did have a reputation for shocking performances in dead rubbers. Ashes 2015 being quite memorable if that's the right word

Yeah agree. I think theres a fair bit of pressure here for them to keep momentum going too. Performances and results have been below par for some time, and after such an awful winter and bad start to the summer this series really needs to be a significant win for people to stay secure in their jobs and build confidence for the players.

Also realisticly what options did they have to experiment with bowlers?
Had there been a left arm 95mph 7 footer tearing up the CC then sure chuck them in. But really it wouldve been more county solid county pro swingers (like Porter) or maybe giving Leach another cap just because.

As for India, I don't see them dropping Pant for Karthik. DK was dreadful with bat and gloves. Pant hasn't done a great deal better, but in comparative terms, did look a little better. DK is 33, has been around for 14 long years, got chances now and then though it was difficult during the Dhoni era to compete with India's best ever wicketkeeper batsman. But it should be remembered that DK had made his test debut before MSD did, in fact the latter came into the test squad not only on the basis of his limited over performances, but aalso because of the same old inconsistencies from DK. The only time DK looked like a possible test cricketer was the brief period in which he opened a lot playing as a specialist bat, in 2006-7 season. He should never have been picked in the test side based on a winning 6 that he hit in a T-20I chase against Bangladesh!
Not sure Rahul is good enough to keep wickets at test level, that too straight away, without proper preparations. Even for regular keepers, with the ball often swinging wickedly after passing the stumps, England is a tough place. For a man who has done very little keeping at first class level, it would be asking for far too much, particularly as he isn't among the runs either. It is not difficult to keep in a T-20 game in the IPL on dead pitches where hardly anything would beat the broad and meaty blades that they use these days!

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote: I think sticking with Curran makes sense - especially if he is going to tour this winter, when in all likelihood Woakes won't (he may tour, but can't see him troubling the starting test XI unless there are injuries, god forbid, to Broad and Anderson)

What makes you say that?
Woakes is the more senior bowler...and would certainly go for any limited over games ( Im assuming theres some on the sri lanka tour?) He has more pedigree with bat and ball and has actually played test cricket on Asian pitches. He has more of chance of troubling the first team than a guy who bowls in the low 80s who isn't called Anderson.

That aside its increasingly likely that Broad and Anderson will get rested for those tests after not being rotated in these 5. Woakes is a no brainer if that does happen as the most experienced bowler ( aside form Stokes) available. Id still expect Curran to tour, but a third seamer spot in the team is crying out to be the non existent fast bowler (probably will be Wood )

If Woakes is still in the slightest bit a doubt it does make absolute sense to stick by Curran, and fair too after his previous dropping ( whatever Woakes did with his chance)

msp83 wrote:Not sure Rahul is good enough to keep wickets at test level, that too straight away, without proper preparations. Even for regular keepers, with the ball often swinging wickedly after passing the stumps, England is a tough place. For a man who has done very little keeping at first class level, it would be asking for far too much, particularly as he isn't among the runs either. It is not difficult to keep in a T-20 game in the IPL on dead pitches where hardly anything would beat the broad and meaty blades that they use these days!

People said the same thing about Bairstow and Buttler. Now they are both the first choice keeper!

msp83 wrote:As for India, I don't see them dropping Pant for Karthik. DK was dreadful with bat and gloves. Pant hasn't done a great deal better, but in comparative terms, did look a little better. DK is 33, has been around for 14 long years, got chances now and then though it was difficult during the Dhoni era to compete with India's best ever wicketkeeper batsman. But it should be remembered that DK had made his test debut before MSD did, in fact the latter came into the test squad not only on the basis of his limited over performances, but aalso because of the same old inconsistencies from DK. The only time DK looked like a possible test cricketer was the brief period in which he opened a lot playing as a specialist bat, in 2006-7 season. He should never have been picked in the test side based on a winning 6 that he hit in a T-20I chase against Bangladesh!
Not sure Rahul is good enough to keep wickets at test level, that too straight away, without proper preparations. Even for regular keepers, with the ball often swinging wickedly after passing the stumps, England is a tough place. For a man who has done very little keeping at first class level, it would be asking for far too much, particularly as he isn't among the runs either. It is not difficult to keep in a T-20 game in the IPL on dead pitches where hardly anything would beat the broad and meaty blades that they use these days!

Reckon it would be harsh to drop Pant so quickly... His batting has been , well ..."pants" but he hasn't been too bad behind the stumps and if he was worth trying at all he's surely good for a few matches on end ?

If Ashwin is fit I think I'd still pick Jadeja for Pandya and hope they win the toss...

msp83 wrote:As for India, I don't see them dropping Pant for Karthik. DK was dreadful with bat and gloves. Pant hasn't done a great deal better, but in comparative terms, did look a little better. DK is 33, has been around for 14 long years, got chances now and then though it was difficult during the Dhoni era to compete with India's best ever wicketkeeper batsman. But it should be remembered that DK had made his test debut before MSD did, in fact the latter came into the test squad not only on the basis of his limited over performances, but aalso because of the same old inconsistencies from DK. The only time DK looked like a possible test cricketer was the brief period in which he opened a lot playing as a specialist bat, in 2006-7 season. He should never have been picked in the test side based on a winning 6 that he hit in a T-20I chase against Bangladesh!
Not sure Rahul is good enough to keep wickets at test level, that too straight away, without proper preparations. Even for regular keepers, with the ball often swinging wickedly after passing the stumps, England is a tough place. For a man who has done very little keeping at first class level, it would be asking for far too much, particularly as he isn't among the runs either. It is not difficult to keep in a T-20 game in the IPL on dead pitches where hardly anything would beat the broad and meaty blades that they use these days!

The arguments you have against Kartik imply he should not have been selected
But he is in the squad and that's a realoty

and from all I have seen....he's a better batsman than Pant....now he had 3 bad innings on this but so did Rahane and Pujara and Vijay and Pandya
Pant is not a batsman for this level.....and these days a WK has to be an averaging 35 batsman if your aim to play 5 bowlers or even 4.5......back home India should re-look WK-ing options.....Sheldon Jackson is a proper FC solid batsman and saurashtra's first WK


On another note India should have brought Vijay Shankar....on tour as a back-up for Pandya......who he replaced in T20s
He's proper Ranji batsman averaging 48.....and bowl medium pace in the 78-81mph range...shade slower than Pandya's fastest....but the job allocted to this position is not to take wickets but only bowl 12 tight overs in a days...wickets are a bonus and get 30 runs with the bat

Rumour seems to be India will go Jadeja for Ashwin and Vihari for Pandya

Toss should be gotten rid of in test matches

Fun game on the bbc website ...name all 25 players england have used in tests in the last year

Gooseberry wrote:Fun game on the bbc website ...name all 25 players england have used in tests in the last year

Cook
Jennings
Stoneman
Root
Vince
Malan
Pope
Buttler
Bairstow
Stokes
Moeen
Rashid
Curran S
Curran T
Woakes
Ball
Overton
Anderson
Broad
Leach
Wood

21 i can remember...feel like im missing someone obvious!

Westley was in the last year, wasn't he?

Bess definitely

Roland Jones played this game last summer too

Its even tougher on the test ... you have to get the first names and spell everything correctly (Just as well Peterson retired )

Yeah ll of Ollys plus Westley and some more

Yes Bess, TRJ is probably the toughest! I thought he'd last played ages ago but he did make a brief comeback

Youll kick yourselves on the last one ... but he has slipped way out of conversation recently despite getting some hyperbolic reviews about his talent when he did play

Lads we're missing the #cranetrain as the 25th!

bumrah lacking the rythm
need to bring shami earlier than later

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Lads we're missing the #cranetrain as the 25th!

Olly - how could you? Hope Jimbo doesn't see!