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.

Oh is there an actual cricket game happening as well?

Kohli's gonna score a bazillion runs on this pitch

Part time off spinner on already ...interesting!

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Kohli's gonna score a bazillion runs on this pitch

Dunno if its really THAT placid...its forecast to be very grey tomorrow, and theres likely to be something for the spinners later in the test especially with Sharma making some rough bowling round the wicket. England absolutely are getting the best of the batting conditions here, and Shami is still getting some swing.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

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!

Without paging down further : Bess , Crane , Westley and TRJ. ?

Ha. Got 'em all ...didn't look either , honest.

I was annoyed the BBC quiz thing didn't work on my ipad so this was a good consolation ...though Olly did all the donkey work

On the matter in hand : decent start for England. Looks a good pitch ; but at 57/0 you'd be at least hoping they might get to 100 before letting the all rounders in...

alfie wrote:Ha.  Got 'em all ...didn't look either , honest.

I was annoyed the BBC quiz thing didn't work on my ipad so this was a good consolation ...though Olly did all the donkey work

On the matter in hand : decent start for England.  Looks a good pitch ; but at 57/0 you'd be at least hoping they might get to 100 before letting the all rounders in...

Alfie - you being Buttler to Olly's Cook?! Well done anyway!

Yep, decent start. Both our openers doing what Test openers should be doing Forget that in the case of Jennings! Stupid, stupid shot.

"Jennings plays spin well"

Evidently.

Oh dear...Jennings trying to undo the good ground work - and my own optimistic "prediction" ...that was a poor dismissal.

I still suspect he will go to Sri Lanka , since they've persisted with him so long. But I do really doubt his career is ever going to take off : I just don't think he's good enough. TBH I reckon Stoneman is a better player ; though as he's no spring chicken I don't expect then to look in his direction again.

Must be some better openers around in eighteen counties , surely ?

(After crossing off Lyth , Robson , Hales , etc etc...)

No ?

68/1. Slow but (reasonably) solid...

And they managed 28 overs this time

And sunshine...time for a little drink...

Jennings though....im struggling to see how he can be retained for the winter other than worries about two debutant openers (and only one player making a strong case).
I couldcope with stoneman coming back to help settle Burns in. Hardly a great oprion but the choices are bleak

They surely can't take Jennings to Sri Lanka. He's been given a very decent run (longer than most openers tried for Strauss' replacement), and he's clearly below the required standard. No shame in that. He's had a chance, get two new openers in for Sri Lanka, and go from there.

I think they have to take him, but they should be taking three openers.

Duty281 wrote:They surely can't take Jennings to Sri Lanka. He's been given a very decent run (longer than most openers tried for Strauss' replacement), and he's clearly below the required standard. No shame in that. He's had a chance, get two new openers in for Sri Lanka, and go from there.

Over the past two summers Jennings has played 9 tests (not including this one), 16 innings, and has scored a total of 286 runs at an average of 17.88, with a high score of 48. As you note Duty, past openers have been discarded with far better records than that.

Totally agree that two new openers are needed - Burns obviously has to come in as the man "next off the rank" with the runs he's made (I share similar concerns as Guildford, as to how he will do at test level - but he deserves and has earnt his shot) - and then we need to look at either taking a punt on a youngster similar to what we did with Hameed (not even sure if there are any options here though...), or go with an experienced county pro like a Stoneman/Mitchell/Denly in the hope they can "do a Chris Rogers" for a period of time.

I'd take Jennings plus two more based on a) if Jennings plays, he could just continue or get worse and need replacing. Better having someone there. b) new guy could come in and tank too, might be good having another option there. Also means they don't have to go in and just plump for the two they've taken, they can see how they settle or form in build up.

So it looks like Moeen is England's answer to their top order batting deficiencies. Again he has been promoted to No. 3 batsman ahead of Root - to protect Root. So far he has lasted 34 balls, 51 minutes and scored 8. Yet he is a bowler rather than a top order batsman? Is he putting our top order batsmen to shame?

guildfordbat wrote:

On the matter in hand : decent start for England. Looks a good pitch ; but at 57/0 you'd be at least hoping they might get to 100 before letting the all rounders in...

Bit of an ask when you have an all rounder at 3 ....

No name Bertie wrote:So it looks like Moeen is England's answer to their top order batting deficiencies.  Again he has been promoted to No. 3 batsman ahead of Root - to protect Root.  So far he has lasted 34 balls, 51 minutes and scored 8.   Yet he is a bowler rather than a top order batsman?  Is he putting our top order batsmen to shame?

Hes been picked as a second spinner and batsman. Career wise he was a batsman who could bowl a bit, and won his first England caps as that. He bats 3 at county level.
This is also the easiest batting conditions England have faced so far this series ( evidenced by Cook not only lasting more than 5 minutes but also scoring runs...unlike Moeen)

But yeah hes cleared the first hurdle of defending his wicket (albeit after being dropped) and seeing off the new ball, so yet another tip of the hat to him there.

But this is a long way form putting the top order to shame (they have been quite capable of doing that to themselves without his help) ...both Cook and Jennings made more runs that he has so far, and he failed at 3 in the last innings.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:I think they have to take him, but they should be taking three openers.

That is my thought too.

Unsure who though...

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

Duty281 wrote:They surely can't take Jennings to Sri Lanka. He's been given a very decent run (longer than most openers tried for Strauss' replacement), and he's clearly below the required standard. No shame in that. He's had a chance, get two new openers in for Sri Lanka, and go from there.

Over the past two summers Jennings has played 9 tests (not including this one), 16 innings, and has scored a total of 286 runs at an average of 17.88, with a high score of 48. As you note Duty, past openers have been discarded with far better records than that.

Totally agree that two new openers are needed - Burns obviously has to come in as the man "next off the rank" with the runs he's made (I share similar concerns as Guildford, as to how he will do at test level - but he deserves and has earnt his shot) - and then we need to look at either taking a punt on a youngster similar to what we did with Hameed (not even sure if there are any options here though...), or go with an experienced county pro like a Stoneman/Mitchell/Denly in the hope they can "do a Chris Rogers" for a period of time.

Just to flip it around ...how many of those games that Jennings played India another opener actually score runs ( aside form this one where it looks like Cooks going to see himself off in style). I CBA to check last years as well but this year his 42 is the highest score by an opener in any of the tests hes played in (bar Cook now).
In India Jennings did score a century and make a 50, there is an argument its the Dukes ball in seamer friendly conditions that's the issue for all openers rather than just Jennings being rubbish. England when its grey is an absolute graveyard for openers.

I do think though this was his ideal chance to make a case for himself. Cook looking confident and focused for once, the pressure off, and relatively easy conditions. If he was ever going to make runs in England this really was his chance.

Batting has been more difficult since lunch. Bit more movement for the bowlers , oddly enough. And perhaps the bowlers have got their lines better. Fielders haven't backed them up though...

Moeen is obviously pencilled in as three for the tour ; and he might just about get away with it there. (Keeping Root at four so even without monster scores he'd be doing a job). Can't see him as a long term Trott replacement though . Not against pace-heavy sides on pitches with some bounce. For now , he is there fir want of an alternative.
He looks to be settling in a bit now ...hopefully he won't chuck this start away.

I share the scepticism most of us have surrounding Moeen at number 3 - he looked totally shot by the end of the Ashes tour. But given the lack of options, and the number of failures we have had in the top order, a bloke with 5 Test hundreds is definitely worth a consistent go.

JDizzle wrote:I share the scepticism most of us have surrounding Moeen at number 3 - he looked totally shot by the end of the Ashes tour. But given the lack of options, and the number of failures we have had in the top order, a bloke with 5 Test hundreds is definitely worth a consistent go.

Especially considering the conditions that are upcoming - which should be more suited to his game. Hopefully over the winter someone may emerge on a Lions tour, or early next season...but until then agree with you JDizzle - best of a lot of "not ideal" options.

Hundred up ...and they aren't four down yet

Decent pitch to bat on but you wouldn't say it's been easy going ...some good bowling since lunch. Hence the slow scoring...glad to see they're concentrating ...

Fifty for Chef

And surprisingly the first fifty by any opener this series ...which I understand is a Test Record for a five match series - if it stays the only one , or one of two.

Which given the series so far , might be a fair chance

Moeen - lots of plays and misses, to some excellent bowling - but some credit so far, he's playing the line of the ball and not following it. And has survived so far!

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

JDizzle wrote:I share the scepticism most of us have surrounding Moeen at number 3 - he looked totally shot by the end of the Ashes tour. But given the lack of options, and the number of failures we have had in the top order, a bloke with 5 Test hundreds is definitely worth a consistent go.

Especially considering the conditions that are upcoming - which should be more suited to his game. Hopefully over the winter someone may emerge on a Lions tour, or early next season...but until then agree with you JDizzle - best of a lot of "not ideal" options.

The Bayliss inbterview straight after the last test talked about this, saying he too has reservations about Moeen at 3 ...but specifically against fast bowling. With the winter tours being on slow pitches, thats a long term rather than short term concern. He was keen to find a way of getting Root back to 4 and Mo's return to confidence may have given him that.

As it is we've seem a lucky 40 from him down the order, the usual desperate flaiing around at 3 for a low score, and now staying in as much through luck as skill but again doing the most important thing...keeping his wicket intact.

Its hardly confidence inspiring just yet but even as a Moeen sceptic I can see the logic in giving him a go again when hes not the only spinner ( and likely to be one of 3 in Sri Lanka) when things are goign well for him and hes on form with bat and ball. As per my desperate attempt to be a Jennings apologist Moeen looking a bit sctrachy at 3 today when viewed in context of how others have faired this summer isnt so bad.

End of a fine spell from Shami... No reward ; but he's kept them honest.

Not exactly thrill-a-minute cricket. But really good to see England bats playing proper five day cricket. Could still all go wrong later , of course. But they are setting things up rather nicely for the later bats - most of whom like to play shots.

Good toss to win , you'd think.

alfie wrote:End of a fine spell from Shami... No reward ; but he's kept them honest.

Not exactly thrill-a-minute cricket.  But really good to see England bats playing proper five day cricket.  Could still all go wrong later , of course. But they are setting things up rather nicely for the later bats - most of whom like to play shots.

Good toss to win , you'd think.

Yeah if you're an Indian bowler you're scratching your head as to how you didn't take a wicket that session - albeit as well pointed out on comms by Hussain, the drops of Cook and Moeen (albeit the Moeen one a tough chance) right at the start of those spells from Bumrah/Ishant, could be match altering. Root/Bairstow coming in against the swinging ball, early in the session could have triggered the collapse...as it is somehow England are only 1 down at tea - and the Indian seamers have another 8/9 overs in their legs.

And as you point out Alfie - time out of the game, overs in the legs - only good news for Bairstow/Stokes/Buttler/Curran...who will be hoping to face some tired bowlers at some point tomorrow

lol at that review - never in a million years out

Kohli has lost it a bit here...wastes India's last review on one that didn't look remotely close.

Guess this isn't going to be an lbw pitch - or a bat-pad one either , at least for the first few days , so it might not matter much. Shows he's a little short of ideas at the moment though.
India have beefed up their batting for this match...but they may regret not having a real fifth bowler.

Its the best start England have had to an innings in quite some time

Ah...bother. No farewell hundred for Chef - a drag on does for him at 71

That came rather out of the blue : well as India have bowled , Cook was looking pretty safe. Moeen looked the one who was likely to go...

Anyway a fine innings after a trying summer for Cook

But Roots gone for a duck ...

Oh dear. Cook and then Root out in the same over.

For all the talk of Jennings, Root's form this summer has been poor as well.

Umpire took an age to give that ...lord knows why , looked stone dead...
If he hadn't given it Joe would have survived as India had no reviews left !
Root also wasted an England review . Poor judgement , I think.

Suddenly game looks very different ...

The Boycott Scenario as 133/1 becomes 133/3.

And Bairstow goes to a good ball, feathering it.

3 wickets, for 1 run in 9 balls. Be tragic if you didn't half expect it.

And now Sharma has Bairstow caught behind...another duck !

Unravelling fast...

Anyone still think Bairstow belongs in the top four

Have to say India have bowled well today...and starting to reap the rewards , a little belatedly.
But disappointing from England with that good platform. In trouble now.

Hopefully Curran will do his usual rescue act

This was supposed to be a batters wicket.  Flat with no surprises.  What has happened?

Moeen came in at three to protect Root, does his job, but Root only lasts three balls.

No name Bertie wrote:This was supposed to be a batters wicket.  Flat with no surprises.  What has happened?

Good bowling. They've got the ball moving , although the bounce has been true. Guess anyone can get out first few balls - though you don't expect two in a row !

You'd say a batting pitch ; but only Cook has looked at all comfortable on it ... Batting problems remain.

Think that Bairstow is vastly overrated tbh. He's good at hiding at 6/7 getting runs when the top order crumbles. Essentially under no pressure as if he fails he can say no one else got any or if he gets a score oh look I saved the day. 5 hundreds in 101 innings is dreadful for a boy who's first class average is north of fifty

alfie wrote:Have to say India have bowled well today...and starting to reap the rewards , a little belatedly.
But disappointing from England with that good platform. In trouble now.

Hopefully Curran will do his usual rescue act

Alfie - hopefully so as you say although Sam has too often struggled for runs at the Oval this season.

As you know, I'm totally with you on Bairstow. I appreciate the comments from goose and others that someone has to bat at 5 but I still don't believe that shunting Bairstow there is the answer and especially when it appears to undo the good he was doing at 7.

Meanwhile, Moeen still there and battling hard. For all his luck and limitations, he deserves a lot of credit today as so often.

Is it a shame that Cook is retiring? Cook says he feels empty - so I guess he has to retire if that is the case. But who else can replace him? An empty Cook versus a non-empty who?

Luke wrote:Oh dear. Cook and then Root out in the same over.

For all the talk of Jennings, Root's form this summer has been poor as well.

Root has solved all the criticism of his failure to regularly turn 50s into 100s by...not making 50s!

He has averaged 35.5 in New Zealand, 39 against Pakistan and a very disappointing 24 in this series (only two scores above 50 in the entirety of this summer).

No name Bertie wrote:This was supposed to be a batters wicket.  Flat with no surprises.  What has happened?

It's England.

Moeen suddenly looks the right call at 3 given what has followed

Nathaniel Jacobs wrote:Think that Bairstow is vastly overrated tbh. He's good at hiding at 6/7 getting runs when the top order crumbles. Essentially under no pressure as if he fails he can say no one else got any or if he gets a score oh look I saved the day. 5 hundreds in 101 innings is dreadful for a boy who's first class average is north of fifty

I'm beginning to come round to this view....if you look at his average in his test career per year - he's basically had one golden summer in 2016 and the rest has been just bang average...

2012 - 7 innings, 196 runs at an average of 32.67
2013 - 15 innings, 379 runs at an average of 27.07
2014 - 2 innings, 18 runs at an average of 9.00
2015 - 12 innings, 372 runs at an average of 31.00
2016 - 29 innings, 1,470 runs at an average of 58.80
2017 - 19 innings, 652 runs at an average of 34.32
2018 - 16 innings, 466 runs at an average of 29.13 (pre this innings today)

Overall average of 37.80, which is on the way down...

The much maligned Jos Buttler...

2014 - 3 innings, 200 runs at an average of 66.67
2015 - 21 innings, 430 runs at an average of 23.89
2016 - 6 innings, 154 runs at an average of 38.50
2018 - 10 innings, 421 runs at an average of 46.78

Overall average of 35.44, which is on the way up...

Just to throw a few flames to the fire...not sure we (England) should be bending over backwards to meet the needs of Mr Bairstow...when he's hardly been a standout performer for the best part of two years now...

It seems that after Tea the atmospheric conditions and the condition of the ball, has caused the ball to swing ... so the batting has become more difficult. But the wicket is still flat and the bounce is "true".

Nathaniel Jacobs wrote:Think that Bairstow is vastly overrated tbh. He's good at hiding at 6/7 getting runs when the top order crumbles. Essentially under no pressure as if he fails he can say no one else got any or if he gets a score oh look I saved the day. 5 hundreds in 101 innings is dreadful for a boy who's first class average is north of fifty

Rather unfair , Nathaniel. "Hiding" at seven ? Hardly. Logical spot for the keeper (no one ever accused Gilchrist of "hiding") and he batted very well there. Not just the hundreds , but pretty consistent results.

However his success there has fooled a lot of people into overlooking the flaws in his technique which render him unsuitable for batting too early in the order - I believe five is his limit ; and it isn't ideal for him either.

The worst thing is , all this pushing up the order - and speculation about the keeping duties - may have messed with his confidence . Hopefully not irrevocably .

The injury didn't help , of course. And , arguably , his (highly successful !) efforts to win a place in the ODI side might not have done his technique any favours.

I think he should drop back down to six/ seven. But that area is getting a bit crowded...

Boycott reckons Stokes could play at 3...

Whisky that seems insane to me, could he go 5? Hard to see why Buttler is 7 if he’s not got the gloves. Not many teams just have a specialist in batting at 7, do they?