The Ashes - official thread

[Gooseberry]

SR that's not how mental fatigue works.
Also Stokes had a long break last year ...which he came back from err ...mentaly fatigued. Buttler and Bairstow haven't had that luxury.

But anyway it's not a case of "attitude" , ask Trott and Trescothick.

[Soul Requiem]

SR that's not how mental fatigue works.
Also Stokes had a long break last year ...which he came back from err ...mentaly fatigued. Buttler and Bairstow haven't had that luxury.

But anyway it's not a case of "attitude" , ask Trott and Trescothick.

Mental fatigue and depression are two very different things, not even worth comparing. If Buttler is mentally fatigued not suffering from a stress related illness then that's pretty poor considering how little he did during the world cup compared to others.

[guildfordbat]

Sorry but averaging over 32 away from Taunton is hardly bad, in fact that's pretty good, it's lower than any other English spinners overall record and he's more economical than them all so can't understand that as an argument.

I'm definitely not rubbishing the guy but I do suspect that too much might be being expected of him when it's been his performances at Taunton that have contributed significantly to his impressive record. Only 3 overs which I didn't see but Leach was expensive against Ireland at Lord's.

The balance of the side also needs to be considered. At least on paper, Leach for Moeen weakens the batting - admittedly, Moeen batted like one of goose's tins of custard but that's not the point. The view may be taken that Leach is there to bowl and it's for others to make the runs. That's not unreasonable but consideration of the balance should at least go into the mix before settling on the next eleven.

[Soul Requiem]

Leach for Moeen doesn't weaken the batting, we're not talking about a player who can consistently score runs, he's become a tailender and it's time people stopped rating him based on what he could do years ago, it is exactly the point though, why are people persisting with the excuses?

An average of 32 away from Taunton is better than any other English spinner.

[No name Bertie]

Man for man which side is better? Which side has greater depth of talent to call upon. If it is Australia and Australia by a fair margin then fair enough. Otherwise maybe other factors come into play.

[guildfordbat]

Leach for Moeen doesn't weaken the batting, we're not talking about a player who can consistently score runs, he's become a tailender and it's time people stopped rating him based on what he could do years ago, it is exactly the point though, why are people persisting with the excuses?

An average of 32 away from Taunton is better than any other English spinner.

I thought I had acknowledged that with my references to ''at least on paper'' and ''one of goose's tins of custard''. I was trying to flag that Moeen's selection was in part due to his capability as a number 8 that the selectors believed he would bring to the side. Fair to say, that belief is no longer there in Moeen and you may be right in suggesting the selectors were daft to think it still would be. However, that batting capability which was sought for the first test will not be replaced by Leach in the second. You may say that does not matter. I'm not gunning for you if you do but I am saying that we need to be recognising it.

[guildfordbat]

Man for man which side is better?  Which side has greater depth of talent to call upon.  If it is Australia and Australia by a fair margin then fair enough.  Otherwise maybe other factors come into play.

You got me there, Bertie.

[Soul Requiem]

Leach for Moeen doesn't weaken the batting, we're not talking about a player who can consistently score runs, he's become a tailender and it's time people stopped rating him based on what he could do years ago, it is exactly the point though, why are people persisting with the excuses?

An average of 32 away from Taunton is better than any other English spinner.

I thought I had acknowledged that with my references to ''at least on paper'' and ''one of goose's tins of custard''. I was trying to flag that Moeen's selection was in part due to his capability as a number 8 that the selectors believed he would bring to the side. Fair to say, that belief is no longer there in Moeen and you may be right in suggesting the selectors were daft to think it still would be. However, that batting capability which was sought for the first test will not be replaced by Leach in the second. You may say that does not matter. I'm not gunning for you if you do but I am saying that we need to be recognising it.

I don't disagree with the premise and it's obviously what the selectors have wanted from their bowlers for some time now but I'd rather select the best spinner and the best new ball pair then worry about the relative batting of the first change seamer and all rounder.

With Anderson injured do we open with Woakes then have Archer as first change, it would seem the logical solution to trying to break the Smith conundrum, rely on Broad and Woakes to make an opening then hope Archer can exploit it?

[VTR]

I wonder if Anderson has played his last Test? What a bowler he has been whatever happens

[Gooseberry]

I think the selectors were optimistic about Moeen and have backed their guy as they have done many times through his career. But time and again one discipline or the other goes South.

Currently it's both.

Getting shunted out of the world cup side was an indicator that his stock has dropped, and his selection for the first test was a borderline call.

It is correct to say that he has more potential with the bat than Leach does, but having realising it and sometimes having an underperforming player can be more damaging than one who's not got high expectations placed on them.

Bowling wise Mo has spells where he is lethal and bowls some high risk reward stuff. Leach is much more dependable and maybe does need a bit more help to generate wickets but again if we wanted a leg spinner type lottrry bowler they'd pick Rashid.
And as with his batting Mo is struggling atbthe moment, just not for such an extended period as his batting.

It just seems a no brainer to change a failing bowler if youre looking for a way to create different problems for Smith.

They've been down this road so many times with No now. It might just take something lucky or a couple of weeks in county cricket to spark him again but I think we have to accept hes always going to be frutsratingly flakey and prone to going AWOL. England just can't afford that now they are behind in the series. The guys an absolute passenger

[robbo277]

Leach for Moeen doesn't weaken the batting, we're not talking about a player who can consistently score runs, he's become a tailender and it's time people stopped rating him based on what he could do years ago, it is exactly the point though, why are people persisting with the excuses?

An average of 32 away from Taunton is better than any other English spinner.

I thought I had acknowledged that with my references to ''at least on paper'' and ''one of goose's tins of custard''. I was trying to flag that Moeen's selection was in part due to his capability as a number 8 that the selectors believed he would bring to the side. Fair to say, that belief is no longer there in Moeen and you may be right in suggesting the selectors were daft to think it still would be. However, that batting capability which was sought for the first test will not be replaced by Leach in the second. You may say that does not matter. I'm not gunning for you if you do but I am saying that we need to be recognising it.

I don't disagree with the premise and it's obviously what the selectors have wanted from their bowlers for some time now but I'd rather select the best spinner and the best new ball pair then worry about the relative batting of the first change seamer and all rounder.

With Anderson injured do we open with Woakes then have Archer as first change, it would seem the logical solution to trying to break the Smith conundrum, rely on Broad and Woakes to make an opening then hope Archer can exploit it?

I agree that Moeen gets no points for his batting right now when it comes to selection. But he has more wickets than anyone else in the last 12 months of cricket worldwide and at a decent average.

The whole attack suffered because Anderson wasn't in. The seamers got amongst it early on Day 1, but after that 122-8 we took 9 wickets for around 650 runs. Yes you want more from Ali, but you also want more from everyone else.

I'd have Woakes and Broad as my opening bowlers. Everyone is talking Archer at first change, but I'd still be considering Sam Curran. The slope at Lords is good for a left hander and I think the change of angle may help. I'm also not sure if Archer is fully fit after his side strain or how many overs he has in the bank since then anyway. Curran took wickets in his last test at Lords (Ireland) and is also more capable of a game changing knock down the order. If we have Woakes opening the bowling, we could have Curran bat at 8, Woakes at 9, spinner/Broad at 10/11. Or we could play Curran and Woakes at 7 and 8 and drop a batsman to get Broad, Archer and a spinner in. This would possibly allow us to promote Stokes and tell him to worry less about his bowling.

Burns, Roy, Root, Stokes, Buttler, Bairstow, Curran, Woakes, Moeen, Archer, Broad

I'm not 100% happy with it. Would I feel better with Foakes in there at 6? Or maybe Sibley in for one of the wicket keepers and Roy moving into the middle order. But other than those two or a different unproven top 3 player of choice, there aren't that many more batsmen we can turn to.

I think it would be overly harsh to call Stokes a bits and pieces player, but he averages 34 with the bat and 32 with the ball. If you can't get both to move in the right direction, let's just get that batting average moving up, because that's where we need him most.

[guildfordbat]

Goose - to be clear, there's no support from me for Moeen playing in the second test. I'm not sure there would even be full support in Mooen's own household! But bringing in Leach for him will impact the balance we were after last Thursday.

[Gooseberry]

Well in amongst my argument is a counter to that.
It impacts the theoretical ballance, but it could actually improve confidence of that lower middle group to not have him there given the state he's been in. Also assuming Archer comes in for Anderson then England gain a little with the bat there.

Australia had much worse ballance with only 4 poper bowling options. They still won easily. So maybe England should be lppkong at ditching him for a bat (not really)

[robbo277]

Goose - to be clear, there's no support from me for Moeen playing in the second test. I'm not sure there would even be full support in Mooen's own household! But bringing in Leach for him will impact the balance we were after last Thursday.

It depends what we're looking for. A Moeen Ali counterpunch or someone like Leach to stick in while a proper batsman scores at the other end, as Leach did against Ireland?

Ali's defensive technique won't see him last long, so his only hope is to come out swinging really. Which infuriates many, but actually it's the only chance he has of scoring runs. Yes he's more likely to get 50, but he's also more likely to get out for single figures.

Leach is more likely to hold Australia up, and as long as we have a top 8 batsman there with him who will look to score then Leach can look to play the Siddle role, and help turn a 122-8 into what turned out to be a winning total, or more optimistically a 320-8 into a 400.

Saying that, I'm not sure either would fare too well against this Aussie batting attack, so you have to throw it back to the bowling. And again, I'm not sure you can say either would be the correct choice with any certainty.

[Duty281]

Jofra's bowled 8 overs for Sussex's second XI so far today, taking two wickets and powering in at full pelt. I'd say he seems ready enough.

[Gooseberry]

Not really robi if Moeen csntvpass 10 in any circumstances then Leaches batting ability is an irrelevance. People seem to be really struggling with what's being said here...Moeen has been hopeless with the bat for over 2 years now. The chances if him delivering a rapid 30 are slim let's be batting out 10 overs. Leach is not a batsman of any more either, but the point is by putting him in you aren't losing an all rounder ...you're losing a player who has consistently made bad situations worse by flailing around and putting more pressure on the mid lower order.
Moeen can only be picked to ballance the side if he's capable of scoring runs, and he looks totally hooded in that regard.
So pick the best spinner. Mo had some credit on the bank on that bug he's not been great since the winter tours and last game was pretty awful despite having everything on a plate for him.

You can't sit around waiting for Mo to get his act together forever. It gets to the point where you'd be picking that lad who can't even get in the Lancashire second eleven and Jennings to open the batting because they once made decent test scores.

Moeen is not a test batsman or all rounder. And he's barely functioning as a lead spinner either. Unless there's something other than "confidence in him" to indicate that's going to change overnight his selection is problematic. Especially when there is a player who could be better with the ball waiting to come into the side.

[Gooseberry]

8 overs at Sussex second 11 is pretty much the same as 20 at Smith and a tin of custard right.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

All the indications are that Archer is gonna play. It felt notable how often he was on as sub.

Honestly, if they don’t think they have the right spinner, I’d bin one and use Root and Denly

[VTR]

As it's at Lord's can we call up the wrecker Tim Murtagh on a one-off loan from Ireland?

[JDizzle]

All the indications are that Archer is gonna play. It felt notable how often he was on as sub.

Honestly, if they don’t think they have the right spinner, I’d bin one and use Root and Denly

To be fair, Stone was on permanently on Sunday as far as I could tell - and Archer was on and off, so not sure that is the best guide! But fully expect Jof to play at Lords.

[robbo277]

Not really robi if Moeen csntvpass 10 in any circumstances then Leaches batting ability is an irrelevance. People seem to be really struggling with what's being said here...Moeen has been hopeless with the bat for over 2 years now. The chances if him delivering a rapid 30 are slim let's be batting out 10 overs. Leach is not a batsman of any more either,  but the point is by putting him in you aren't losing an all rounder ...you're losing a player who has consistently made bad situations worse by flailing around and putting more pressure on the mid lower order.
Moeen can only be picked to ballance the side if he's capable of scoring runs, and he looks totally hooded in that regard.
So pick the best spinner. Mo had some credit on the bank on that bug he's not been great since the winter tours and last game was pretty awful despite having everything on a plate for him.

You can't sit around waiting for Mo to get his act together forever. It gets to the point where you'd be picking that lad who can't even get in the Lancashire second eleven and Jennings to open the batting because they once made decent test scores.

Moeen is not a test batsman or all rounder. And he's barely functioning as a lead spinner either. Unless there's something other than "confidence in him" to indicate that's going to change overnight his selection is problematic. Especially when there is a player who could be better with the ball waiting to come into the side.

Yes but my entire argument is that if you completely discount the batting side of it then who's the best bowler for the Lords test isn't clear cut.

I then went on to add that if you look at the batting, both offer different things, but aren't really reliable enough to be counted on.

I'd probably pick Moeen. But not because I think he'll get more runs with the bat, because he's a wicket taking bowler.

[robbo277]

Archer took 6-27 in 12.1 for Sussex 2nd XI. Unfortunately he bowled them out too quickly to get more bowling practice. He's now 77* off 61 batting at 6 with 11x 4s and 2x 6s.

He could probably do with a few more overs still, but in terms of fitness he should be fine.

[VTR]

With those sort of returns the experts on BBC comments will be asking for him to bat at 3!

[robbo277]

Archer trapped lbw on 108 from 99. Should get the ball in his hand again at some point tomorrow.

[Gooseberry]

Not really robi if Moeen csntvpass 10 in any circumstances then Leaches batting ability is an irrelevance. People seem to be really struggling with what's being said here...Moeen has been hopeless with the bat for over 2 years now. The chances if him delivering a rapid 30 are slim let's be batting out 10 overs. Leach is not a batsman of any more either,  but the point is by putting him in you aren't losing an all rounder ...you're losing a player who has consistently made bad situations worse by flailing around and putting more pressure on the mid lower order.
Moeen can only be picked to ballance the side if he's capable of scoring runs, and he looks totally hooded in that regard.
So pick the best spinner. Mo had some credit on the bank on that bug he's not been great since the winter tours and last game was pretty awful despite having everything on a plate for him.

You can't sit around waiting for Mo to get his act together forever. It gets to the point where you'd be picking that lad who can't even get in the Lancashire second eleven and Jennings to open the batting because they once made decent test scores.

Moeen is not a test batsman or all rounder. And he's barely functioning as a lead spinner either. Unless there's something other than "confidence in him" to indicate that's going to change overnight his selection is problematic. Especially when there is a player who could be better with the ball waiting to come into the side.

Yes but my entire argument is that if you completely discount the batting side of it then who's the best bowler for the Lords test isn't clear cut.

I then went on to add that if you look at the batting, both offer different things, but aren't really reliable enough to be counted on.

I'd probably pick Moeen. But not because I think he'll get more runs with the bat, because he's a wicket taking bowler.

OK fair enough, but so is Leach, Hes very much an attacking spinner and has consistently been the top attacking spinner in the CC for a number of seasons. Just without leaking as many runs. My point above also stands, if you want a spinner as a wildcard any surface wicket taker... pick a leg spinner (Rashid not Denly), Mo took a lot last season but overall his SR has slipped consistently after a pretty wild start to his career and hes not been taking wickets in the most recent games. You may not care about his economy if you prize wickets above all else, but its awful. Moeens a flake, and right now hes on a low, I dont think hes the best attacking spin option England have, hes certainly not the cheapest.

Hes only played a handful of games but Leach has a better test SR, Average and economy than Mo does.

[compelling and rich]

if i was root id defiantly be getting some off spin practice in the nets. if leach were called up it would give us nice balance of having two spinners being able to move the ball away from either right or left handers

ive given up on mo, he just isnt there mentally. against others teams he might get away with it, but in a ashes series no chance. you need fighters and players who are strong mentally

[Dolphin Ziggler]

Archer is the definite, i'd suggest, and Leach is the only other possible. They're right, it's one test without the best bowler in the world (in these conditions) and in a match where the best bat in the world was imperious.

[king_carlos]

In terms of spinner options longer term I could definitely see Matt Parkinson getting chances in one day cricket then pushing onto Test honours.

8.Woakes
9.Archer
10.Broad
11.Leach

Usually well placed media sources seem to think that will be the bowling attack for Lords.

[Gooseberry]

Archer is the definite, i'd suggest, and Leach is the only other possible. They're right, it's one test without the best bowler in the world (in these conditions) and in a match where the best bat in the world was imperious.

Yeah I agree those are the likely changes on the cards, although if Buttler is goosed as reported and has said he doesn't feel up to it it would be remiss oif the leadership to pressure him into continue playing. Im assuming the injury that limited Woakes' second innings bowling was pretty innocuous (judging by the way he went about his batting) so theres no fitness doubts for him? 
But the only tactical change they are likely to make is Leach for Moeen, and thats not guaranteed.  Mo has been written off time and again (by me) and suddenly produced series winning performances, but right now he looks to be spiralling further down into one of his bad patches. You can carry that when its just one discipline, not both. the leadership have backed Mo time and again, but ditching him mid world cup even when Rashid was struggling shows hes not considered indispensable or protected by the kind of politics that can keep certain people in the Indian team. 

Archers performance yesterday has risen his stock even further. Bringing in someone with that level of self confidence is good for the team, and his presence should be a lift. It seems like a bit of a fairy tail rise so far, I thought he was getting seriously overhyped in the winter but so far hes stood up beyond expectation and coming into an Ashes series seemingly ready to continue that. 

Woakes and Broad have absolutely shown they can use the new ball as well as Anderson. Add in a different type of threat from Archer and swap the soft runs of Moeen for some pressure from Leach ( and the potential of a left / right arm spin combination with Root), plus hopefully Stokes turning up for the first innings this time, and potentially England have a more potent attack for the second test even without Anderson. 

Whilst all the focus pre Ashes was on the batting it was very much the second innings bowling ( and Steve Smiths batting) that cost England the game. Theres still issues in the batting line up but i dont see any obvious quick fixes to that, and at least Burns is headed in the right direction. The second innings collapse and failure has to be taken into context of the game, its poor that noone stood up and managed to grind out 20 overs  but the game had already gone south and that seems to have been a team psychology reaction to the failures of day 4 as anything else. England are mentally weak, its not just a lack of batting talent or the order they come out in. Mo is an extreme example of that, Archer doesnt give the impression he knows how to fail. 

Coming back in the series is going to be very difficult, but I can make up an argument that convinces me England can do better in this test and that the margin of Australias victory is not indicative of the true gap between the teams. Really its all about Smith, and he will be facing some different bowling in this test. He cant be that good all the time and they did come close to getting him early a couple of times in the first innings.

[guildfordbat]

In terms of spinner options longer term I could definitely see Matt Parkinson getting chances in one day cricket then pushing onto Test honours.

8.Woakes
9.Archer
10.Broad
11.Leach

Usually well placed media sources seem to think that will be the bowling attack for Lords.

Although I gave a shout to Dawson, I think that is definitely the most likely bowling attack for Lord's. Whether people here like it or not, I don't reckon there will be any changes from Edgbaston between numbers 1 and 7.

[Gooseberry]

In terms of spinner options longer term I could definitely see Matt Parkinson getting chances in one day cricket then pushing onto Test honours.

8.Woakes
9.Archer
10.Broad
11.Leach

Usually well placed media sources seem to think that will be the bowling attack for Lords.

Although I gave a shout to Dawson, I think that is definitely the most likely bowling attack for Lord's. Whether people here like it or not, I don't reckon there will be any changes from Edgbaston between numbers 1 and 7.

Why though? He doesn't even play for Surrey 

But jokes aside...WHY. Hes a very average cricketer with neither the wild card bowling threat of Moeen or the " more than one test century" batting of Moeen. Hes done nothing in his tets career to suggest hes anything more than a bits and pieces player. Hes averaging over 50 in the CC this year, Leach and Bess both under 20. Samit Patel with less access to a pie shop.

[Soul Requiem]

A lot of it comes down to people not wanting to admit they were wrong, in the past it's been said that Leach is a Taunton track bully so that's still the rhetoric despite it being nonsense.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Leach for Moeen doesn't weaken the batting, we're not talking about a player who can consistently score runs, he's become a tailender and it's time people stopped rating him based on what he could do years ago, it is exactly the point though, why are people persisting with the excuses?

An average of 32 away from Taunton is better than any other English spinner.

An average of 32 away from Taunton is not really anything to write home about...at the end of the day we are where we are with spinners. Moeen when on form is a very good bowler, but is clearly out of form and has a mental block against the Aussies, and Leach is a decent option but not really going to win a game.

As someone suggested earlier I'd be tempted to just play Curran, and use Root/Denly as spin options - and make sure the Lords wicket is like it was for the Ireland game.

[Soul Requiem]

Overall spinner averages

Moeen- 38.1 (Lot of test cricket granted but that in fact improves his stats)
Rashid- 35.05
Dawson- 34.93

In the context of other spinners, Leach averaging 32 away from Taunton is pretty good, he's statistically home and away the best English spinner, his county stats are comparable to Graeme Swann so yes they are something to write home about.

[guildfordbat]

In terms of spinner options longer term I could definitely see Matt Parkinson getting chances in one day cricket then pushing onto Test honours.

8.Woakes
9.Archer
10.Broad
11.Leach

Usually well placed media sources seem to think that will be the bowling attack for Lords.

Although I gave a shout to Dawson, I think that is definitely the most likely bowling attack for Lord's. Whether people here like it or not, I don't reckon there will be any changes from Edgbaston between numbers 1 and 7.

Why though? He doesn't even play for Surrey 

But jokes aside...WHY. Hes a very average cricketer with neither the wild card bowling threat of Moeen or the " more than one test century" batting of Moeen. Hes done nothing in his tets career to suggest hes anything more than a bits and pieces player. Hes averaging over 50 in the CC this year, Leach and Bess both under 20. Samit Patel with less access to a pie shop.

Ok, goose - I'll bite but it'll have to be brief as I haven't got long.   I probably see more of Surrey players than most (?all) here and my doubts and reservations about Burns, Roy and Sam Curran are well documented on this forum. Foakes is the best English wicket keeper currently registered with any county (expressed that way for Carlos so as to negate the need for discussion about the much missed Michael Bates  ) but the balance of the side still needs to be considered and so he still isn't an automatic pick for me. I saw Sibley when he was a schoolboy at Surrey and tipped him for possible England selection then but further chat about that can wait until he gets an official call up and I can properly milk it   .

Why Dawson? Look, I accept he's more Salisbury than Saqlain - see what I did there, one for the Surrey mafia! I just think he's a more like for like replacement for what the selectors were hoping and expecting Moeen to do. He could comfortably bat anywhere between 7 and 9 (6 at a push) and be capable, imo, of taking 1 or 2 for 50 or 60 from around 22 overs. That's not match winning stuff by itself but it's not match losing either which sadly Moeen served up last time and doesn't look like moving away from quickly. 

I've seen Dawson a few times and regard him as a (?very) decent and experienced cricketer who knows his game. Some (? JimboH) might regard that as damning with faint praise and you, goose, might regard it as meaning he's just another ''bits and pieces'' player above Div 2 standard but not even good enough for Div 1. However, I'm saying what I think and why as you asked.

I accept that if either of Dawson or Leach were to produce a fivefer and win the game on the last day it would far more likely be the latter. I'm just not convinced the Lord's track will be serving up that opportunity which is why - primarily for team balance - I would omit the better spinner.

[robbo277]

Leach for Moeen doesn't weaken the batting, we're not talking about a player who can consistently score runs, he's become a tailender and it's time people stopped rating him based on what he could do years ago, it is exactly the point though, why are people persisting with the excuses?

An average of 32 away from Taunton is better than any other English spinner.

An average of 32 away from Taunton is not really anything to write home about...at the end of the day we are where we are with spinners. Moeen when on form is a very good bowler, but is clearly out of form and has a mental block against the Aussies, and Leach is a decent option but not really going to win a game.

As someone suggested earlier I'd be tempted to just play Curran, and use Root/Denly as spin options - and make sure the Lords wicket is like it was for the Ireland game.

The last point I very much doubt we can swing. You've got a 4 day test against Ireland and you need to produce a results pitch. The accountants at Lords will want this test going at least into Day 4 if not Day 5, so I expect the pitch to be much flatter and therefore we'll probably need a proper spinner.

Whether we have one is I guess the debate we're currently having!

[guildfordbat]

If we went in with a 5 man seam attack (Archer, Broad, Woakes, Sam Curran and Stokes), we would very likely end up some way behind the over rate even with a few overs of slow stuff from Root and Denly.

I don't know but wonder if there might then be repercussions for the third test. Anyone know? We certainly wouldn't want Root banned for a test.

[Gooseberry]

Leach for Moeen doesn't weaken the batting, we're not talking about a player who can consistently score runs, he's become a tailender and it's time people stopped rating him based on what he could do years ago, it is exactly the point though, why are people persisting with the excuses?

An average of 32 away from Taunton is better than any other English spinner.

An average of 32 away from Taunton is not really anything to write home about...at the end of the day we are where we are with spinners. Moeen when on form is a very good bowler, but is clearly out of form and has a mental block against the Aussies, and Leach is a decent option but not really going to win a game.

As someone suggested earlier I'd be tempted to just play Curran, and use Root/Denly as spin options - and make sure the Lords wicket is like it was for the Ireland game.

The last point I very much doubt we can swing. You've got a 4 day test against Ireland and you need to produce a results pitch. The accountants at Lords will want this test going at least into Day 4 if not Day 5, so I expect the pitch to be much flatter and therefore we'll probably need a proper spinner.

Whether we have one is I guess the debate we're currently having!

What makes you think Leach isnt one? Test average 26, no game splayed at Taunton.  First class average 25. 
Now i doubt he would maintain that through a sustained test career and I do understand Guilfords point that a dead track he might struggle a bit, but he can keep things tight (test and first class economy 2.6) which in itself creates pressure and is a heck of lot better than what Moeen can do. There would be the option of picking a leggie (rashid) to try and make something happen on any surface, but I think the combination of Leachs left arm accuracy and Archers right arm pace would give about as much for Smith to think about as anything else. I dont like the idea of picking a player like Dawson who isnt good enough as a bowler or a batsman to make a difference on any surface. 

I know Leach isnt proven yet and the theories about his stats being inflated by Taunton but he is a proper spinner, noone should be debating that much. 

If you arent going to select him its the 8th choice seamer or a batsman who wasnt good enough to keep Denly out of the side. Or stick with Mo.

[Gooseberry]

If we went in with a 5 man seam attack (Archer, Broad, Woakes, Sam Curran and Stokes), we would very likely end up some way behind the over rate even with a few overs of slow stuff from Root and Denly.

I don't know but wonder if there might then be repercussions for the third test. Anyone know? We certainly wouldn't want Root banned for a test.

You think Sam Curan bowling at 78mph is more likely to take wickets on day 5 at flatlords than leach is?

[guildfordbat]

If we went in with a 5 man seam attack (Archer, Broad, Woakes, Sam Curran and Stokes), we would very likely end up some way behind the over rate even with a few overs of slow stuff from Root and Denly.

I don't know but wonder if there might then be repercussions for the third test. Anyone know? We certainly wouldn't want Root banned for a test.

You think Sam Curan bowling at 78mph is more likely to take wickets on day 5 at flatlords than leach is?

Not at all. I would guess you don't either but other posters have put that possible attack into the mix and that's what I was commenting about.

As you are here, do you know the answer to the question in my post above?

[VTR]

Whoever we pick, Lyon in the better bowler. Groundsman must now have the message not to prepare a spinning track, not sure how easy in reality that is. What I have difficulty with is what sort of track would give England an advantage vs Australia. Genuinely can't think of one. I'd say swinging conditions would be advantage England but that's nothing to do with the pitch, and Australia still have good bowlers in that instance

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Some worrying news - Olly Stone ruled out for a fortnight with a lower back injury...having a scan today to assess the full damage. As someone who just recovered from a stress fracture of the back that is not good...

[Duty281]

Some worrying news - Olly Stone ruled out for a fortnight with a lower back injury...having a scan today to assess the full damage. As someone who just recovered from a stress fracture of the back that is not good...

Jolly good, England falling apart at the seams. All we need now is for Broad to tread on a cricket ball, Root rolling his ankle after playing football with the lads, and Woakes to start taking the magic powder, and we'll be all set for the second test!

[Gooseberry]

If we went in with a 5 man seam attack (Archer, Broad, Woakes, Sam Curran and Stokes), we would very likely end up some way behind the over rate even with a few overs of slow stuff from Root and Denly.

I don't know but wonder if there might then be repercussions for the third test. Anyone know? We certainly wouldn't want Root banned for a test.

You think Sam Curan bowling at 78mph is more likely to take wickets on day 5 at flatlords than leach is?

Not at all. I would guess you don't either but other posters have put that possible attack into the mix and that's what I was commenting about.

As you are here, do you know the answer to the question in my post above?

Fair enough, Im confused as to why anyone would have that option on the table ...especially after the mauling Englands reserve spinners took. 
Leach is a legitimate bowler, many posters on here seem to have a very odd level of doubt in him. 

In terms of Root I dont know how close he is to a ban no, but its definitely a thing to be wary of regardless of who is selected.

[Gooseberry]

Whoever we pick, Lyon in the better bowler. Groundsman must now have the message not to prepare a spinning track, not sure how easy in reality that is. What I have difficulty with is what sort of track would give England an advantage vs Australia. Genuinely can't think of one. I'd say swinging conditions would be advantage England but that's nothing to do with the pitch, and Australia still have good bowlers in that instance

Flat pitch could suit England. Australia rode their luck and flogged their seamers in the first innings by only having 4 bowlers. Whilst they have the pace to trouble England on any surface they wouldnt be able to sustain a 4 man attack with Wade and Head taking 20 overs between them if England batted 120 overs+. that would mean either accepting a very long tail or picking junk like Mitch Marsh. 
Englands balance is much better equipped to deal with a long innings when they aren't carrying to injuries. Archer is a make something happen on anything type bowler. Leach can provide the accuracy Moeen lacks to build pressure. 

And in the batting it might be exactly what the likes of Roy need to get going. if he has a future at all its as a flat track bully.

[robbo277]

Leach for Moeen doesn't weaken the batting, we're not talking about a player who can consistently score runs, he's become a tailender and it's time people stopped rating him based on what he could do years ago, it is exactly the point though, why are people persisting with the excuses?

An average of 32 away from Taunton is better than any other English spinner.

An average of 32 away from Taunton is not really anything to write home about...at the end of the day we are where we are with spinners. Moeen when on form is a very good bowler, but is clearly out of form and has a mental block against the Aussies, and Leach is a decent option but not really going to win a game.

As someone suggested earlier I'd be tempted to just play Curran, and use Root/Denly as spin options - and make sure the Lords wicket is like it was for the Ireland game.

The last point I very much doubt we can swing. You've got a 4 day test against Ireland and you need to produce a results pitch. The accountants at Lords will want this test going at least into Day 4 if not Day 5, so I expect the pitch to be much flatter and therefore we'll probably need a proper spinner.

Whether we have one is I guess the debate we're currently having!

What makes you think Leach isnt one? Test average 26, no game splayed at Taunton.  First class average 25. 
Now i doubt he would maintain that through a sustained test career and I do understand Guilfords point that a dead track he might struggle a bit, but he can keep things tight (test and first class economy 2.6) which in itself creates pressure and is a heck of lot better than what Moeen can do. There would be the option of picking a leggie (rashid) to try and make something happen on any surface, but I think the combination of Leachs left arm accuracy and Archers right arm pace would give about as much for Smith to think about as anything else. I dont like the idea of picking a player like Dawson who isnt good enough as a bowler or a batsman to make a difference on any surface. 

I know Leach isnt proven yet and the theories about his stats being inflated by Taunton but he is a proper spinner, noone should be debating that much. 

If you arent going to select him its the 8th choice seamer or a batsman who wasnt good enough to keep Denly out of the side. Or stick with Mo.

My issue with Leach is that he took 2-113 in NZ with a strike rate of 153 and was very poor against Ireland (albeit in only 3 overs). His average is helped by a low sample size and 75% of his overs being bowled in Sri Lanka.

Looking at that New Zealand test again, he was wicketless in the first innings. Both his wickets came in the second innings where he bowled 32 overs. Root also bowled 13, which gives you an idea of what the pitch was like. The 8th wicket partnership lasted 30 overs at the end of Day 5, thwarting England's chances of a win. That's when you want your spinner coming to the fore.

His economy is good, very good against NZ. He was more expensive against Sri Lanka as he went on the attack more, but obviously got the wickets.

Maybe Leach would be a better option to offer first innings control and then a wicket taking option if the pitch started to show signs of real turn. Maybe he would offer a good option away from the right hander with Root's offies able to cover as the second spinner. But I don't think his selection guarantees better returns than Moeen and I don't think there is enough evidence (yet) that he will be successful outside the subcontinent. Yes, he's done well at county level, but county success doesn't always translate.

Ultimately I'm torn. I think Moeen is more likely to take a match winning 5-for, but he's also more likely to go 0-60 off 15 and put more pressure on the seamers as Moeen won't be able to hold up an end. Which is why I'd possibly go 4 front-line seamers (Archer in for Anderson, Curran in for Denly) with Stokes as a back-up and Moeen as my spin option as I can use him to attack. Not saying this is the right way, just an idea I'd consider.

[Soul Requiem]

It might give an idea of what the pitch is like if it suits a preconceived idea but it was a game dominated by seamers where Sodhi barely bowled so a bit disingenuous to suggest it was a spinners pitch when it was not.

[Gooseberry]

It might give an idea of what the pitch is like if it suits a preconceived idea but it was a game dominated by seamers where Sodhi barely bowled so a bit disingenuous to suggest it was a spinners pitch when it was not.

Whereas the Edgbaston pitch absolutely offered a lot of assistance ( as noted by moeen himself) from the first innings onwards. Mo took 3 - 172 in that test which is every but as a bad as Leachs NZ test, but at a far far worse economy rate. I accept fully that in both cases we are not looking at a sample size to make a definitive statement, but its a decent straight rebuttal to a point made on that basis. 

Leach can create pressure through keeping it tight, thats something Mo has never really achieved in his career. He is also a wicket taking threat when there is something in it. For a game like Lords I see his selection as pretty much a no brainer. they will need someone who can exert some pressure and allow the seamers to rest and rotate and bowl to attacking fields. if Mo's going at 4 and half an over again on a helpful pitch in the second innings England might as well burn him and give him to the Aussies in an urn.

[sirfredperry]

England supporters should not give up all hope for Lord's. Looking back to 2009, Australia made a stack of runs at Cardiff and were one wicket from winning. They then collapsed in a heap at Lord's.

Similarly, England came back from a horror show in the 4th test of that 09 series to win at the Oval, thanks to another collapse by Aus.

Then in 2015, Smith made a double hundred at Lord's only for England to win the next two Tests, with Smith failing to reach double figures in four innings. So things can turn round.

Main trouble is this is a very weak England batting line-up. I'm not sure I can remember a weaker one. What on earth Denly is doing in the side is anyone's guess.

[robbo277]

It might give an idea of what the pitch is like if it suits a preconceived idea but it was a game dominated by seamers where Sodhi barely bowled so a bit disingenuous to suggest it was a spinners pitch when it was not.

Possibly to do with the fact that NZ were behind the game, he got smacked out the attack in the first innings and was expensive in the second innings as well? Plus the seamers were going well. All his second innings overs would have been on Day 3/4 rather than Day 4/5 that England and Leach bowled on.

In many ways, that's a parallel to the test just played. The team batting first nullified the home spinner in the third innings and got well ahead of the game. The difference is Lyon tore through England to win the game, Leach didn't tear through New Zealand. In fact, 2 wickets in 32 overs is pretty poor going.

This doesn't mean that Leach is worse than Ali, but it also doesn't mean his selection is a no-brainer.

[Sponsored content]