England's Winter

First topic message reminder :

As per LT's original post:
New Zealand

T20 Internationals

Friday November 1st - Christchurch
Sunday November 3rd - Wellington
Tuesday November 5th - Nelson
Friday November 8th - Napier
Sunday November 10th - Auckland

Squad
Eoin Morgan (Middlesex) captain
Jonny Bairstow (Yorkshire)
Tom Banton (Somerset)
Sam Billings (Kent)
Pat Brown (Worcestershire)
Sam Curran (Surrey)
Tom Curran (Surrey)
Joe Denly (Kent)
Lewis Gregory (Somerset)
Chris Jordan (Sussex)
Saqib Mahmood (Lancashire)
Dawid Malan (Middlesex)
Matt Parkinson (Lancashire)
Adil Rashid (Yorkshire)
James Vince (Hampshire)


Tests

Wednesday November 20th - Tauranga
Thursday November 28th - Hamilton

Squad
Joe Root (Yorkshire) captain
Jofra Archer (Sussex)
Stuart Broad (Nottinghamshire)
Rory Burns (Surrey)
Jos Buttler (Lancashire)
Zak Crawley (Kent)
Sam Curran (Surrey)
Joe Denly (Kent)
Jack Leach (Somerset)
Saqib Mahmood (Lancashire)
Matthew Parkinson (Lancashire)
Ollie Pope (Surrey)
Dominic Sibley (Warwickshire)
Ben Stokes (Durham)
Chris Woakes (Warwickshire)



South Africa

Tests

Thursday 26th December - Centurion
Friday January 3rd - Cape Town
Thursday January 16th - Port Elizabeth
Friday January 24th - Johannesburg

Squad
Ill


ODI
Tuesday 4th February - Cape Town
Friday 7th February - Durban
Sunday 9th February - Johannesburg

Squad
Ill

T20 Internationals

Wednesday 12th February - East London
Friday 14th February - Durban
Sunday 16th February - Centurion


Sri Lanka

March 7th - Warm up 1, Katunayake (3 day)
March 12th - Warm up 2, Colombo (3 day)
March 19th - 1st Test, Galle
March 27th - 2nd Test, Colombo

Gooseberry wrote:Stokes retires faf in both sense ...had to be! International headline glory grabber of the year does it again. 

Feeling less twitchy now, but still some hard yards for England.

Will have to do it without me...back to work tomorrow so better get some sleep. Will see van der Dussen to his hundred and then leave it to you to carry the bowling , goose...

Very intelligent dismissal and that’ll be the game.

No South African centurions in this series.

Van Der Dussen gone, just didn't feel like he'd get his 100.

Aargh! Didn't mean to jinx Dussie - honest . Gone for 98 and I'm genuinely sorry to see it...was a damn good innings

Good catch Broad and just reward for the hard working Wood

Game has swung violently in five minutes. Could yet finish tonight. Might check later if the cat wakes me up...

Duty281 wrote:Very intelligent dismissal and that’ll be the game.

No South African centurions in this series.

Dont get ahead of yourself! 

But yes shares in Bess have dropped noticeably again in the last half hour. Deserved wicket for Wood, but he couldve waited an over to let the lad get his century. 

Some green shoots for SA in a  wretched series. Test 1 showed they have something when they get to bat first, lets be honest first off that England have been helped massively when not being idiots by the tosses. When their best opener is fit they have a potentially functional top 6, assuming that will help Faf refind his form. And England have shown you can get decent totals with a couple of passengers. 

Seam bowlers wise they've had awful luck with availability, Rabdada, Ngidia, and Mulder (FC batting 40, bowling 23) alongside Nortje mightve been a very different prospect to a broken Philander. 

Honestly feels like they are fitness and one batsman away from being a good side again inspite of how awful theyve been. England have had a bad habit recently of hitting teams on a high, I think they've lucked out a bit hitting SA at their nadir here with on and off field pressures.  But equally this was on th brink of being a tour from hell for them too, and theyve had their fair share of withdrawls and other issues.

I don't think there's a lot there for SA when it comes to the batting, aside from De Kock nobody has scored any meaningful runs when it mattered and have just ground out a few when the games have been foregone conclusions; the 98 today for VDD looks good but effectively means nothing.

England have come out after tea and bowled pretty woefully. Bavuma and De Kock making hay

Soul Requiem wrote:I don't think there's a lot there for SA when it comes to the batting, aside from De Kock nobody has scored any meaningful runs when it mattered and have just ground out a few when the games have been foregone conclusions; the 98 today for VDD looks good but effectively means nothing.

They have missed Makram for the entire series, whilst his run of form had been poor hes still one of the better openers around in test cricket currently. Elgar is a solid old pro, and frankly England wouldve jumped at the chance to have him in the side 6 months ago. 
Fafs confidence is shot but hes still capable of being a decent test bat. VDD batting 5 is good enough. De Kock at 6 is a strong option. 
SA struggled a lot in this series with the bat no question, but I fancy they will get better sooner than worse in that regard. And England did have the pick of the conditions.Its very difficult to win tests batting second unless you put yourself there (cough England), and when SA did bat first they won at a canter. 

When you look at England scoring big with Crawley (averages 18) and Denly (is Denly) and a couple of players still finding their way in test cricket its not like everyone needs to be Kholi, and all sides except England have to make do without Stokes. The lad Mulder seems pretty highly rated as an all rounder, and whilst Id be sceptical about the quality of first class cricket and his stats he could be the answer to give them the depth at 7/8. 

With a strong stable of seamers (when fit) they shouldn't be as bad a side as they have been for most of this series even if they don't quite have the quality of stars they did in the their hay day. 

Lots of fair comment around though about the state of their first class game and the loss of a couple of players like Abbot and Harmer to kolpaks who could've done a job for them in this series. Even ignoring the impact on the test side which is marginal,the weakening of the domestic game is made worse by most of the internationals choosing the T20 circuit over playing in it when they can. Bavuma making 180 then being Bavauma again for this test maybe a case in point about ow big a step it is. But England and other test nations face much the same problem, I've argued tirelessly that England would be better served with a smaller concentration of better players in the CC rather than the turgid mediocrity that breeds average and flawed players (also note Bess saying he didn't realise how much he relied on the pitches at Taunton till he bowled on a test surface), I do think England have started to make better use of specialist coaching though to help bridge the gap. SA could do with getting a few of their batsmen of to a concentration  patience camp to learn how to convert 98s into centuries (hosted by Joe Root?)

Anyway I still hold that SA were absolutely at their low point by the end of this series. I dont mean to suggest they will be top of the world next week, but there are players who can get better and players to come in who can make the side better than the one thats limping out of this series.

*bavuma got out whilst I was crafting this waffle!

The end of Philanders career, ends with a remarkable average a shade over 22 with the ball, a very good bowler on his day but can't help but feel that average is somewhat misleading.

Wickets tumbling now. SA had been getting some joy for a period but we might well be done tonight and even without the new ball (and a chance for Curran to pad his figures with a go at the tail  )

The end is nigh!

Soul Requiem wrote:The end of Philanders career, ends with a remarkable average a shade over 22 with the ball, a very good bowler on his day but can't help but feel that average is somewhat misleading.

Dont I got slaughtered for pointing out that Rabadas average was somewhat tempered when you compared it to other seamers in the same games he'd played! 

It is a ridiculous stat and yes partly the consequence of SA going through a period of producing raging green tops and him only playing sparingly abroad....but no question hes hugely skilled. Similar comments can be chucked at Anderson and Broad, bu their averages are nowhere near Philanders. He was as good as anyone at doing what he did, and going by to Curran Id be happy to see him learn how to bowl with that level of skill and control rather than keep straining himself to extract an extra mph. 

Definitely the right time for him to have ended his career, maybe even a series too far. It will be sad for him to have ended it the way he did, but no regrets its not like hes going to be sitting their in 6 months thinking he still had another couple of years in him.

Comedy run out!

Oh come on getting run out is just lame.

Gooseberry wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:The end of Philanders career, ends with a remarkable average a shade over 22 with the ball, a very good bowler on his day but can't help but feel that average is somewhat misleading.

Dont I got slaughtered for pointing out that Rabadas average was somewhat tempered when you compared it to other seamers in the same games he'd played! 

It is a ridiculous stat and yes partly the consequence of SA going through a period of producing raging green tops and him only playing sparingly abroad....but no question hes hugely skilled. Similar comments can be chucked at Anderson and Broad, bu their averages are nowhere near Philanders. He was as good as anyone at doing what he did, and going by to Curran Id be happy to see him learn how to bowl with that level of skill and control rather than keep straining himself to extract an extra mph. 

Definitely the right time for him to have ended his career, maybe even a series too far. It will be sad for him to have ended it the way he did, but no regrets its not like hes going to be sitting their in 6 months thinking he still had another couple of years in him.

To be honest I'd put Philander closer in ability to Broad than I would Anderson and as you say he's been the beneficiary of selective selection. Brilliant bowler don't get me wrong but he's not Donald or Pollock.

Can we also reflect on Joel Wilson not giving Bavuma out and what a difference it makes having a bowler in Wood who can bowl consistently in the mid 90's.

Well done England. Did what was necessary and extended England’s excellent record in South Africa.

Good stuff. It is an excellent record England have over there, three series win and a draw since the last series defeat 20 years ago

About as clinical an England performance overseas I can remember for a while - game was never really in doubt from the first session on day one.

Fantastic series win, could've been 4-0 had they not had some sort of death disease sweeping through the camp ahead of, and during the first test.

Great to see replacements (Crawley, Bess), youngsters (Pope, Sibley, Curran) and the usuals all chip in with performances. Certainly something to build off now, going ahead to the summer

Composite Team:

Sibley
Crawley
van der Dussen
Root (c)
Stokes
Pope
de Kock (wk)
Maharaj (just ahead of Bess considering Root can offer OB)
Wood
Nortje
Broad

9 100 for Wood ... couldve been 10 but for the stupid run out

Never ever thought he would be this good. Great story lets hop he can stay fit.

Soul Requiem wrote:The end of Philanders career, ends with a remarkable average a shade over 22 with the ball, a very good bowler on his day but can't help but feel that average is somewhat misleading.

I'd argue that his figures sum his bowling up very well when you take them all in context. Economy of 2.63 an over, strike rate of 50.8, 15 five-fers and 2 ten-fers.

Outstanding average (actually lower than Steyn) and economy rate (0.5 runs per over lower than Steyn) but a strike rate lagging behind most bowlers with that good average.

Rabada already has 4 ten-fers compared to Philanders 2 for instance. 10-fers are a rare but sure indication of match winning performances from seamers. On par in my mind with a batsman scoring a double ton or two centuries in a match.

Philander is a brilliant bowler who tended to nip in with 2-3 wickets an innings that floated under the radar. He was also very economical throughout his career, even when the pitch wasn't seaming for him. He did however produce fewer devastating spells and outright match changing performances than many peers with a similarly outstanding average.

Gooseberry wrote:9 100 for Wood ... couldve been 10 but for the stupid run out

Never ever thought he would be this good. Great story lets hop he can stay fit.

I can see the England set-up rotating Wood a huge amount to try to get him fit for key series and tournaments. It's been said a few times but England's best hope in Australia will likely be Archer and Wood playing a good number of those tests.

The frustrations with Wood's injury issues are eased somewhat by him being a brilliant character. He's just a very entertaining cricketer to watch regardless of what form he's in, whether he's bowling, batting or fielding!

Thing that stands out with these young cricketers is the catching. Crawley and Pope have made Stokes look a bit of a sideshow in that department. After a period of England being abject in that regard its great to see. 

Pope with the bat is having a great winter after a rough start to his test career, no reason not believe he isn't the real deal going forward although promoting him to 3 again feels a bit premature at this point. 

Crawleys done all that was expected of him. Still not entirely convinced hes a polished player but it should be good experience for him and heartening to know that being a good test player isn't beyond him in the future.

1.Sibley
2.Crawley
3.Denly
4.Root
5.Stokes
6.Pope
7.Foakes (wk)
8.Bess
9.Leach
10.Archer/Wood
11.Broad

Reserves: Jennings, Buttler, Woakes, Curran, Overton, Parkinson

I could see that being the make-up in Sri Lanka.

If Moeen is available then I think Parkinson will miss out. 3 off-spinners in the squad with Root as part time doesn't look too balanced but I think the coaches will select Moeen if they can.

If Jimmy wasn't going to be considered for Sri Lanka even if fit then I wonder if Sam Curran will be rested as well. His all round ability and left arm angle adds needed difference to the seam attack though.

If one of Woakes and Curran are rested due to the conditions could we see an extra quick given a chance? Olly Stone? Josh Tongue? Richard Gleeson has been picked with the Lions before and is playing in the Big Bash currently.

Broad doesn't even want to play in Sri Lanka, and they wont risk Anderson there. If they want three seamers its Stokes Wood Archer or another of the all rounders (Woakes/Curran) and a third spinner at the expense of a batsman.

Still huge questions about Rashid Broad and Leaches fitness/availability. The white ball games in SA might give the players and selectors more idea on Mo and Rash. Leach is anyones guess, just hope he has a good doctor. If Bess is the only senior spinner fit England are in a hole. 

Id probably have Jennings over Crawley for SL to be honest. Crawley is due to be on the Lions tour and I think its better for him long term. Whilst he did better than expected he hasnt exactly set the world on fire and is extremely raw. To ask him to take on the chuckers in a sand pit is a bigger step than playing on pitches and against bowlers that aren't dissimilar to counties. let him step out the spotlight for a period and work on his all round game in a lower pressure setting rather than having a poor series then getting dropped when Burns is fit anyway. For all his faults Jennings knows how to bat out there.

Silverwood said speaking to Ward and Atherton they'll sit down with Moeen during the ODI stuff in South Africa and talk about the Sri Lanka series, so we'll find out sooner rather than later about his availability. Would be really handy if he is available, not sure a tail starting with Bess at 8 is ideal...and last time lower order runs were really crucial as ever in England wins.

I also agree with Goose re: Jennings - I think take him and play him. You could make an argument he could play at 3 instead of Denly, with the way Denly has played spin in this series...it's a tough call whatever way they decide to go. Might be a case of take them all, and see who's in the best form in the warm ups.

Will be interested to see how Sibley goes in Sri Lanka - he struggled against Santner in NZ, and also got out softly to Maharaj in this series. I wonder if he has a "scoring shot" against spin, because he doesn't seem like a huge sweeper of the ball like a Jennings is for example. Be a big learning curve for him!

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Will be interested to see how Sibley goes in Sri Lanka - he struggled against Santner in NZ, and also got out softly to Maharaj in this series. I wonder if he has a "scoring shot" against spin, because he doesn't seem like a huge sweeper of the ball like a Jennings is for example. Be a big learning curve for him!

Agree with this completely. When the ball is spitting and turning in Sri Lanka just padding up isn't really an option either.

David Byas (going a fair way back there I admit!) often talked about learning to sweep as he couldn't read spinners from the hand. Instead he used his 6'4" frame and huge reach to get to the pitch by sweeping pretty much everything and taking the spin out the equation as much as possible. By the end of his career he was a respected player of spin back in a time when Saqlain Mushtaq, Mushtaq Ahmed, Warne and Murali played county cricket. He wasn't Matty Hayden but hardly bad going either!

I see Sibley bat against spin and think he needs to take a similar view. I don't see him being a player who will use quick footwork to get the pitch of the ball. He's not naturally going to hit back over the bowlers head as Trescothick could either.

Oh great so bassicly Englands top order are all rubbish after all and we pretty much dont have a spinner.

Lovely stuff.

Big calls on who gets the gloves for it. The internet says Foakes but I'm not sure how much the selectors are on that bus this time, although I'd fancy the current bunch would like him more naturally than Bayliss did. It would help if hed been playing cricket and I'd they are trying to fiddle spinners who arent Mo into the side the temptation to got with a batsman keeper would be stronger.

Pope it is then

Confirmed that Sibley, Crawley and Bess will all take part in the red ball games during the Lions tour of Australia in early February, giving them experience of playing in that part of the world.

Sensible decision really

king_carlos wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:The end of Philanders career, ends with a remarkable average a shade over 22 with the ball, a very good bowler on his day but can't help but feel that average is somewhat misleading.

I'd argue that his figures sum his bowling up very well when you take them all in context. Economy of 2.63 an over, strike rate of 50.8, 15 five-fers and 2 ten-fers.

Outstanding average (actually lower than Steyn) and economy rate (0.5 runs per over lower than Steyn) but a strike rate lagging behind most bowlers with that good average.

Rabada already has 4 ten-fers compared to Philanders 2 for instance. 10-fers are a rare but sure indication of match winning performances from seamers. On par in my mind with a batsman scoring a double ton or two centuries in a match.

Philander is a brilliant bowler who tended to nip in with 2-3 wickets an innings that floated under the radar. He was also very economical throughout his career, even when the pitch wasn't seaming for him. He did however produce fewer devastating spells and outright match changing performances than many peers with a similarly outstanding average.

Problem is that there are no fixed limits to the number of runs scored but there are only 10 wickets in each innings, so its not an easy comparison to make, and may even just be an indication that your team has one decent bowler and a bunch of poor-average ones.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Confirmed that Sibley, Crawley and Bess will all take part in the red ball games during the Lions tour of Australia in early February, giving them experience of playing in that part of the world.

Sensible decision really

Absolutely. I just hope they arent burnt put by the time Sri Lanka rocks around and utterly jaded by the time the county season starts.

I did wonder how the overlap worked with those games...I'd not seen a schedule of what's when but if the red ball is out of the way before the trip to srinlanka starts that's perfect.

I would agree that Philander's average is very misleading. SA, perhaps aware of his fitness record, completely wrapped him up in cotton wool.

He would rarely put in the hard yards when the team was struggling but would step in and get key wickets on helpful tracks or knock over the tail.

Often he missed matches or was rarely used if the going was tough. Perhaps this was the only way they were going to get anything out of him.

My comments are, admittedly, somewhat mean-spirited. He was often a match-winner and to get 224 Test wickets you have to be pretty good. But that Test average was ALWAYS something that annoyed me, for some reason. Perhaps it was the sight of Anderson or Broad having to bowl 20-25 overs a day while England toiled that got me going as far as Vernon was concerned.

lostinwales wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:The end of Philanders career, ends with a remarkable average a shade over 22 with the ball, a very good bowler on his day but can't help but feel that average is somewhat misleading.

I'd argue that his figures sum his bowling up very well when you take them all in context. Economy of 2.63 an over, strike rate of 50.8, 15 five-fers and 2 ten-fers.

Outstanding average (actually lower than Steyn) and economy rate (0.5 runs per over lower than Steyn) but a strike rate lagging behind most bowlers with that good average.

Rabada already has 4 ten-fers compared to Philanders 2 for instance. 10-fers are a rare but sure indication of match winning performances from seamers. On par in my mind with a batsman scoring a double ton or two centuries in a match.

Philander is a brilliant bowler who tended to nip in with 2-3 wickets an innings that floated under the radar. He was also very economical throughout his career, even when the pitch wasn't seaming for him. He did however produce fewer devastating spells and outright match changing performances than many peers with a similarly outstanding average.

Problem is that there are no fixed limits to the number of runs scored but there are only 10 wickets in each innings, so its not an easy comparison to make, and may even just be an indication that your team has one decent bowler and a bunch of poor-average ones.

I accept the 'no fixed limits' point, lost. I'd argue that actually makes five and ten wicket hauls even more impressive compared to batting feats though. Michael Clarke has 28 test centuries to Glenn McGrath's 29 five wicket hauls for instance. Whilst Pup was a brilliant test batsman I wouldn't hold him near the same echelons as McGrath who would probably make my all time test XI.

On the later 'one decent bowler' point you don't average 22 whether it's with a strike rate of 42 or 51 unless you're a very fine bowler!

https://www.icc-cricket.com/rankings/mens/team-rankings/test

England jump up to joint 3rd with NZ in the test rankings.

king_carlos wrote:https://www.icc-cricket.com/rankings/mens/team-rankings/test

England jump up to joint 3rd with NZ in the test rankings.

Paper Rock Scissors " but New Zealand keep beating us" system calls BS on this.

Not sure if the last SA tour (2016?) has decayed off yet but the rest of that year was pretty rubbish so if they can win in Sri lanka again and have a good summer they will see their ranking soar a bit.

But if anyone thinks they would stand a chance going to india or Australia new week then they are wrong. The good thing is they are on an upward trajectory that's hopefully more than just a case of lucking out against an awful SA side wrecked by injury.
Finally feels like theres genuine competition for spots rather than people hanging on because the other options are worse ( ok Denly ...)

Getting everyone fit and having a bit more experience and tinkering with the new caps theres a chance of fielding a competitive side. Leach and Bess in India ...as good as Swann and Panessar? Wood and Archer in Aus?
Might be wishful thinking but if the moons align they might enable to compete in those places.

Probably still draw a series against the west indies mind.

The only chance England have in Australia is having Wood and Archer bowling at full pace. India is a more winnable series for me, their batting line up is vulnerable even at home.

king_carlos wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:The end of Philanders career, ends with a remarkable average a shade over 22 with the ball, a very good bowler on his day but can't help but feel that average is somewhat misleading.

I'd argue that his figures sum his bowling up very well when you take them all in context. Economy of 2.63 an over, strike rate of 50.8, 15 five-fers and 2 ten-fers.

Outstanding average (actually lower than Steyn) and economy rate (0.5 runs per over lower than Steyn) but a strike rate lagging behind most bowlers with that good average.

Rabada already has 4 ten-fers compared to Philanders 2 for instance. 10-fers are a rare but sure indication of match winning performances from seamers. On par in my mind with a batsman scoring a double ton or two centuries in a match.

Philander is a brilliant bowler who tended to nip in with 2-3 wickets an innings that floated under the radar. He was also very economical throughout his career, even when the pitch wasn't seaming for him. He did however produce fewer devastating spells and outright match changing performances than many peers with a similarly outstanding average.

Problem is that there are no fixed limits to the number of runs scored but there are only 10 wickets in each innings, so its not an easy comparison to make, and may even just be an indication that your team has one decent bowler and a bunch of poor-average ones.

I accept the 'no fixed limits' point, lost. I'd argue that actually makes five and ten wicket hauls even more impressive compared to batting feats though. Michael Clarke has 28 test centuries to Glenn McGrath's 29 five wicket hauls for instance. Whilst Pup was a brilliant test batsman I wouldn't hold him near the same echelons as McGrath who would probably make my all time test XI.

On the later 'one decent bowler' point you don't average 22 whether it's with a strike rate of 42 or 51 unless you're a very fine bowler!

I merely meant to point out that you could have 2 decent bowlers at the same time who always get 4 wickets per innings each. They might never get 5 or 10 wicket hauls despite being better than bowlers who do. I know real life isn't like that- you always tend to find form and environment suiting one bowler at one ground and a different one at another, but still you get the point.

lostinwales wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:The end of Philanders career, ends with a remarkable average a shade over 22 with the ball, a very good bowler on his day but can't help but feel that average is somewhat misleading.

I'd argue that his figures sum his bowling up very well when you take them all in context. Economy of 2.63 an over, strike rate of 50.8, 15 five-fers and 2 ten-fers.

Outstanding average (actually lower than Steyn) and economy rate (0.5 runs per over lower than Steyn) but a strike rate lagging behind most bowlers with that good average.

Rabada already has 4 ten-fers compared to Philanders 2 for instance. 10-fers are a rare but sure indication of match winning performances from seamers. On par in my mind with a batsman scoring a double ton or two centuries in a match.

Philander is a brilliant bowler who tended to nip in with 2-3 wickets an innings that floated under the radar. He was also very economical throughout his career, even when the pitch wasn't seaming for him. He did however produce fewer devastating spells and outright match changing performances than many peers with a similarly outstanding average.

Problem is that there are no fixed limits to the number of runs scored but there are only 10 wickets in each innings, so its not an easy comparison to make, and may even just be an indication that your team has one decent bowler and a bunch of poor-average ones.

I accept the 'no fixed limits' point, lost. I'd argue that actually makes five and ten wicket hauls even more impressive compared to batting feats though. Michael Clarke has 28 test centuries to Glenn McGrath's 29 five wicket hauls for instance. Whilst Pup was a brilliant test batsman I wouldn't hold him near the same echelons as McGrath who would probably make my all time test XI.

On the later 'one decent bowler' point you don't average 22 whether it's with a strike rate of 42 or 51 unless you're a very fine bowler!

I merely meant to point out that you could have 2 decent bowlers at the same time who always get 4 wickets per innings each. They might never get 5 or 10 wicket hauls despite being better than bowlers who do. I know real life isn't like that- you always tend to find form and environment suiting one bowler at one ground and a different one at another, but still you get the point.

Hi LiW - Joel Garner probably best illustrates your point. A great bowler as proven by his 259 Test wickets from 58 matches at an average of 21 (fractionally below that, in fact). However, often bowling alongside three other greats (Roberts, Holding and Marshall) he never achieved a Test tenfer.

Philanders overall stats are near identical to those of Steyn.
But his home ones are unparalleled as far as I can see, absolutely ridiculous. Overseas they are just human. 
Steyn managed to average 24 in Asia, despite trashing his figures in his last tour playing injured. To me that really shows the difference, Steyn was in most peoples eyes the best bowler of that generation. Philander the second best South African of his generation (a very strong one), whether that qualifies him as a giant of the game depends on where you set the bar. 

4 England bowlers averaged better than 22 and 5 with an SR 50 or better. Wood averaged 13. This wasnt even one the lowest scoring series of recent decades. Good seam bowlers get good figures in SA. Philander bowled most of his test overs on very helpful pitches.

Gooseberry wrote:Philanders overall stats are near identical to those of Steyn.
But his home ones are unparalleled as far as I can see, absolutely ridiculous. Overseas they are just human. 
Steyn managed to average 24 in Asia, despite trashing his figures in his last tour playing injured. To me that really shows the difference, Steyn was in most peoples eyes the best bowler of that generation. Philander the second best South African of his generation (a very strong one), whether that qualifies him as a giant of the game depends on where you set the bar. 

4 England bowlers averaged better than 22 and 5 with an SR 50 or better. Wood averaged 13. This wasnt even one the lowest scoring series of recent decades. Good seam bowlers get good figures in SA. Philander bowled most of his test overs on very helpful pitches.

I think it depends on what grounds.  

Wanderers 3 Tests each
Broad 13 wickets at 18.07
Anderson 4 wickets at 86.50

Newlands 3 Tests each
Anderson 16 wickets at 18.81
Broad 6 wickets at 50.33

You can prove anything with facts.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/jan/28/faf-du-plessis-escapes-sanction-over-on-field-collision-with-jos-buttler-england-cricket

Bairstow at 3 again for the Sri Lanka tour? What is this silliness?

The same old story of trying to force square pegs into round holes it would seem.

In the short term Bairstow shouldn't have his technical issues against pace shown up by the Sri Lanka seamers. Similar to Jennings possibly being recalled I guess. Whilst I'm not a fan of Jonny being recalled without a chance to work on his game I do prefer it to Pope being shoved up the order.

Potential batting line-up in Sri Lanka:

1.Sibley
2.Jennings
3.Bairstow
4.Root
5.Stokes
6.Pope
7.Foakes (wk)

Then in the summer:

1.Sibley
2.Burns
3.Crawley
4.Root
5.Stokes
6.Pope
7.Foakes/Buttler/Bairstow (wk)

I really hope that Foakes seizes his chance with both hands if he gets it in Sri Lanka. I love watching really high class wicket keepers in action.

Luck plays such a big part in sport. A fairly weak, inexperienced England side have come up against the poorest SA side for years.

Consequently, we now have two new batsmen - Sibley and Pope - with Test hundreds, Bess with a five-for, Crawley getting some good time in the middle and Wood on fire.



If England are going to drop Buttler I'd bring back Bairstow and bat him at seven. (sorry about that, Surrey fans).

Given the opposition they face over the next three series, England have a chance to chalk up some good results.

Is Bayliss back as a consultant? Theres lots of wrong answers to Englands top 3 and that sounds like one of them. It would also mean they are banking on Mo and Rash being fit/ available and remembering what a red ball looks like.
Over loyalty from Root to Bairstow? Or has the desire tonhavebsomeone who can get at the bowling up top clouded judgement?
Indications from press conferences are that buttler will keep (the gloves). So we have two rubbish keepers who are out of form with the bat and no place for 6 bowlers unless they drop Pope.

England 2 Sri Lanka 0

Agree with the above sentiment regarding England cashing in on SA being at a nadir, but they had their fair slice of bad luck early in the tour and it's a sign of good things that the young players came in and performed when the weary experienced heads were about to drop.
I'd also say England were unlucky to play Australia at the height of their cheating and then as soon as theyd got their best players back. Some element of swings and roundabouts in all this.

Luck can also be connected to when you play as much as who you play. If Hick, for example, had come to the fore in, say, 2005 rather than 1991, we could have been talking about one of the great Test careers.

Bell, on the other hand, would have been dropped, possibly never to return, if he'd started his Test-playing in 91 rather than 05.

Dare say there are other examples. I suppose, though, that if you're really good you make your own luck.

Bairstow keeping in Sri Lanka is a horrible idea.

Soul Requiem wrote:Bairstow keeping in Sri Lanka is a horrible idea.

Worse than Buttler? It seems he is due to play as a batsman and Buttler is being "backed"

Gooseberry wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Bairstow keeping in Sri Lanka is a horrible idea.

Worse than Buttler? It seems he is due to play as a batsman and Buttler is being "backed"

The insistence on backing both Buttler and Bairstow is baffling.

Gooseberry wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Bairstow keeping in Sri Lanka is a horrible idea.

Worse than Buttler? It seems he is due to play as a batsman and Buttler is being "backed"

The insistence on backing both Buttler and Bairstow is baffling.