England's Winter of Cricket 2020/21

First topic message reminder :

First winter tour for England confirmed today: three T20s and three ODIs in South Africa from the 27th November-9th December.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/54537709

A possible limited-overs tour of Pakistan, which would be England's first trip to that country since 2005, as well as visits to Sri Lanka and India may also go ahead in early 2021.

Soul Requiem wrote:Russell is the best I've seen but do understand the perception of him being slightly messy, he was brilliant but not an aesthetic keeper like Foakes is. Healy who is up there overall also gave off the impression of being messy but made very few mistakes.

A team I played for was coached by David Byas for a short time and he had some great stories about Russell like most who played with or against him do.

During one game against Yorkshire Russell was struggling to concentrate with the bat so he scratched a small two square into the ground just off the wicket on the leg side at each end and would tap his bat in the square after every ball to reset. Yorkshire put a short leg in with his foot over Russell's little square to try to perturb him, so he just tapped the short legs foot with his bat after every ball instead for the next hour of play. 

A fantastic keeper without a doubt and one of crickets great characters.

I actually though Gilly was pretty much Healy's equal with the gloves. Both were excellent. The run of Marsh, Healy and Gilly as long term Australia keepers showed the great thing about keeping you allude to that effective keepers can still have different styles. Marsh was acrobatic, Healy had that finessed natural flowing style that I thought looked very aesthetic (though some disagree) and Gilly was extremely consistent and drilled from his hours training.

I sometimes think Gilly's glovework is forgotten given he revolutionised what was expected from a keeper with the bat. His teammates often observed that he didn't train that much with the bat because he was constantly working on his keeping, it certainly showed. I believe Gilly actually has more stumpings and catches than Healy despite playing 20-odd fewer Tests. A truly remarkable cricketer.

What I would say with regards to Healy and Glichrist is the big difference in footwork which sometimes goes under the radar. Healy like a Russell or Foakes rarely took spectacular catches because their footwork was so exemplary that they made the difficult look easy.

I touched upon it in the summer with the catch Buttler took against Pakistan, his footwork necessitated taking a Hollywood catch. Now Gilly is in his own right a top drawer keeper but his footwork sometimes faltered in a way Healy's never did.

Soul Requiem wrote:What I would say with regards to Healy and Glichrist is the big difference in footwork which sometimes goes under the radar. Healy like a Russell or Foakes rarely took spectacular catches because their footwork was so exemplary that they made the difficult look easy.

I touched upon it in the summer with the catch Buttler took against Pakistan, his footwork necessitated taking a Hollywood catch. Now Gilly is in his own right a top drawer keeper but his footwork sometimes faltered in a way Healy's never did.

That I'd agree with, particularly in the latter years of their respective careers. Gilly's keeping was excellent throughout but I do feel he peaked a few years before retirement. He was still one of the very best gloveman playing when he retired but not quite at the same level. Whereas Healy was pretty constant throughout.

The point about poor footwork sometimes necessitating a great grab for less natural keepers is in part something that sets Foakes apart from many other brilliant keepers in my opinion. Not only is his footwork so good that he makes hard catches look easy but he also takes screamers that most with worse footwork wouldn't get near. I hope he can prove a point in India.

Going to be at least one change for Sri Lanka on Friday...they've released Kusal Mendis (along with Karaunaratne, Bhankuka, Kumara and Pradeep) from their squad.

Also Will MacPherson reporting that Anderson WILL come in for Broad, and they are considering Stone/Woakes for Wood and Curran. Moeen not fit enough to play as expected

I was wondering if they might play Broad and Anderson but would be happier with the balance of rotating them.

Usually I verge towards minimal changes to winning side, with only changes necessary due to truly abject individual form (fairly rare) or different conditions (more frequent). For this second Test I'm verging on thinking that fully rotating the seamers is the best call though.

Wood playing consecutive Tests with the India series to come would be a risk in my opinion. Particularly when Jof won't have bowled in the middle for a couple of months so will need looking after too.

A second Test for Stone is a risk with an away series win available but one worth taking in the scheme of how much cricket there is to come.

I think Woakes offers better balance as a bowling all rounder batting at 7 as well.

The All-India Senior Selection Committee met on Tuesday to pick the squad for the first two Test matches to be played at Chennai against England.

The team is as follows: Virat Kohli (Captain), Rohit Sharma, Mayank Agarwal, Shubman Gill, Cheteshwar Pujara, Ajinkya Rahane (Vice-captain), KL Rahul, Hardik Pandya, Rishabh Pant (wicket-keeper), Wriddhiman Saha (wicket-keeper), R Ashwin, Kuldeep Yadav, Axar Patel, Washington Sundar, Ishant Sharma, Jasprit Bumrah, Md. Siraj, Shardul Thakur

The Committee also picked five net bowlers and five players as standbys.

Net Bowlers: Ankit Rajpoot, Avesh Khan, Sandeep Warrier, Krishnappa Gowtham, Saurabh Kumar

Standby players: K S Bharat, Abhimanyu Easwaran, Shahbaz Nadeem, Rahul Chahar, Priyank Panchal

Natrajan dropped from squad as well as as Net Bowler, as well as Prithvi Shaw & Saini gone.

Predictions for the 1st Test side KP?

1.Rohit
2.Gill
3.Pujara
4.Kohli
5.Rahane
6.Pant (wk)
7.Sundar/Thakur
8.Kuldeep
9.Ahswin
10.Siraj/Ishant
11.Bumrah

Something like that perhaps?

I'd presume they will want a second spinner with more experience than Sundar in home conditions. After his wonderful debut that might leave a difficult decision about whether a seam bowling all rounder is the better balance at 7?

Alternatively of course they could pack the side with batsman by picking Agarwal, who has an impressive early Test record, then trusting 4 bowlers to get the job done.

As an England fan I'm more a than a touch apprehensive. The gulf in class between the spin options for each side is huge and I could see that India batting lineup scoring an awful lot of runs in home conditions.

for the first test

1-Rohit
2-Gill
3-Pujara
4-Kohli
5- Rahane
6-Pant
7-Sundar
8-Shardul
9-Ashwin
10-Kuldeep
11-Bumrah

some chance that Siraj or Ishant may come in for Shardul..remaining 10 are locked in my view

KP_fan wrote:for the first test

1-Rohit
2-Gill
3-Pujara
4-Kohli
5- Rahane
6-Pant
7-Sundar
8-Shardul
9-Ashwin
10-Kuldeep
11-Bumrah

some chance that Siraj or Ishant may come in for Shardul..remaining 10 are locked in my view

Cheers KP.

Interesting that you feel Shardul might get in ahead of Siraj but it would add batting depth. Ashwin and Kuldeep are no mugs with the bat though. I hope Sundar does retain his place after his debut heroics.

Either way it's a very good top 6 in Indian conditions backed up by the excellent Ashwin, one of the best quicks in the world, the dangerous Kuldeep and some very talented young players on a high from winning in Oz. Tough tour for England I fear.

Just about the worst time to play India, really, as they'll be brimming with confidence after toppling Australia. They've also got an enviable balance of highly promising younger players and experience, with the likes of Gill/Washington/Pant at one end, and Kohli/Pujara/Ashwin/Bumrah at the other.

Can see a fair few 400+ scores ratcheted up by India in the upcoming series with a beautiful looking top-six that is three parts aggression and three parts classical test batting.

Duty281 wrote:Just about the worst time to play India, really, as they'll be brimming with confidence after toppling Australia. They've also got an enviable balance of highly promising younger players and experience, with the likes of Gill/Washington/Pant at one end, and Kohli/Pujara/Ashwin/Bumrah at the other.

Can see a fair few 400+ scores ratcheted up by India in the upcoming series with a beautiful looking top-six that is three parts aggression and three parts classical test batting.

Well I hope India do not become complacent. Eng has far more depth of resources and is coming well prepare
They juts need to get their combination right...the way to challenge India will be with pace

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/sri-lanka-vs-england-2nd-test-galle-england-mull-changes-to-pace-attack-with-olly-stone-in-contention-for-recall-1248540

Another article suggesting the seamer changes are coming, but wanted to note some quotes/stats in it from Dobell and comments from Silverwood, which I think show some of the good development that has happened in the last 12-18 months...

While it's clear sterner tests await for England, Silverwood did suggest it was no coincidence that his side had now won four overseas Tests in succession. In particular, it vindicates the gameplan he introduced when he was appointed coach ahead of the New Zealand tour at the end of 2019. At the heart of that is ensuring they score big totals in their first innings.

England have now posted first-innings scores of at least 400 in six of the 12 Tests they have played since Hamilton. To that can be added a second-innings of 391 for 8 declared in Cape Town and 369 against West Indies in the first innings at Old Trafford. Ahead of that Hamilton Test, England had not managed to score 400 in their 13 previous Tests.

Definitely heading in the right direction I'd say

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/sri-lanka-vs-england-2nd-test-galle-england-mull-changes-to-pace-attack-with-olly-stone-in-contention-for-recall-1248540

Another article suggesting the seamer changes are coming, but wanted to note some quotes/stats in it from Dobell and comments from Silverwood, which I think show some of the good development that has happened in the last 12-18 months...

While it's clear sterner tests await for England, Silverwood did suggest it was no coincidence that his side had now won four overseas Tests in succession. In particular, it vindicates the gameplan he introduced when he was appointed coach ahead of the New Zealand tour at the end of 2019. At the heart of that is ensuring they score big totals in their first innings.

England have now posted first-innings scores of at least 400 in six of the 12 Tests they have played since Hamilton. To that can be added a second-innings of 391 for 8 declared in Cape Town and 369 against West Indies in the first innings at Old Trafford. Ahead of that Hamilton Test, England had not managed to score 400 in their 13 previous Tests.

Definitely heading in the right direction I'd say

Agree Olly. The changes to tactics whilst batting in particular have paid dividends and seen improvements.

The next 4 series after Sri Lanka will be tough and may see some poor results along the way from an England perspective but I do believe we have improved as a side under Silverwood.

My worry for India is the openers setting a foundation. Sibley struggles against the turning ball. Crawley played poorly in the first Test in Sri Lanka. Burns, whilst stronger against spin than Sibley in my opinion, isn't the best player of spin himself and he's left handed. Ashwin's record in India and against left handers is outstanding.

I expect that Lawrence or Bairstow will bat 3 in India with one of Sibley or Burns partnering Crawley. The middle order should be good players of spin. Bairstow, Root, Stokes, Pope, Lawrence, Buttler and Foakes all play spin well. The openers in subcontinental conditions are a concern though.

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Just about the worst time to play India, really, as they'll be brimming with confidence after toppling Australia. They've also got an enviable balance of highly promising younger players and experience, with the likes of Gill/Washington/Pant at one end, and Kohli/Pujara/Ashwin/Bumrah at the other.

Can see a fair few 400+ scores ratcheted up by India in the upcoming series with a beautiful looking top-six that is three parts aggression and three parts classical test batting.

Well I hope India do not become complacent. Eng has far more depth of resources and is coming well prepare
They juts need to get their combination right...the way to challenge India will be with pace

I think that's the main worry for India - complacency and/or overconfidence. They shouldn't be too troubled by England's spinners so, like you say, England's pace bowlers will likely need to provide the main challenge.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Going to be at least one change for Sri Lanka on Friday...they've released Kusal Mendis (along with Karaunaratne, Bhankuka, Kumara and Pradeep) from their squad.

Also Will MacPherson reporting that Anderson WILL come in for Broad, and they are considering Stone/Woakes for Wood and Curran. Moeen not fit enough to play as expected

Losing Karunaratne again is a blow for Sri Lanka. Mendis currently a walking wicket so a fair change there. 

Cricinfo seem to think it'll be all change for England's seamers, with Anderson/Stone/Woakes all coming in for Broad/Wood/Curran, while the spinners will stay the same. Will be a big test for Stone who has suffered repeated injury in the last few years, but certainly looks as though he has the raw potential to provide competition to Wood and Archer if he can remain fit.

And while cricinfo seem to think three seam changes, Ali Martin of the Guardian is expecting only Broad for Anderson, with Curran/Wood playing here and then getting their rest for the first test in India when Stokes/Archer return.

Basically nobody knows!

I'd be keeping Broad in the side in place of Anderson, neither are going to win the match and one can add useful late order runs.

Sri Lanka are expected to bring in Lakmal for Hasaranga (bad news for England that, Hasaranga is dog), and then Oshana Fernando to replace Kusal Mendis at 3. SL going with three seam, two spinners...might be a bit more in the pitch for the seamers this time?

Hearing - via Surrey connections - that Anderson for Broad is the only England change for the second Test.

guildfordbat wrote:Hearing - via Surrey connections - that Anderson for Broad is the only England change for the second Test.

Like Soul suggests, that is the one change I wouldn’t have made! For the reasons he lays out.

Did read, via Ali Martin of the Grauniad, SCurran and Wood are likely to miss out on the squad for the first two Tests in India so they will get their rest then I guess. But it won’t be rest if Wood injures himself this Test! Was kind of intrigued to see a more hit the deck quick in Stone have a go on these wickets than a skiddier bowler like Wood. Might get more out of it.

JDizzle wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Hearing - via Surrey connections - that Anderson for Broad is the only England change for the second Test.

Like Soul suggests, that is the one change I wouldn’t have made! For the reasons he lays out.

Did read, via Ali Martin of the Grauniad, SCurran and Wood are likely to miss out on the squad for the first two Tests in India so they will get their rest then I guess. But it won’t be rest if Wood injures himself this Test! Was kind of intrigued to see a more hit the deck quick in Stone have a go on these wickets than a skiddier bowler like Wood. Might get more out of it.

Hmm, it does seem pretty counter intuitive to make a song and dance about rotation and managing players workloads...to then play your most injury prone fast bowler, crucial in all three formats, in back to back tests (within a week) in Sri Lanka, when there is a replacement in the squad (and you are doing it with your older seamers).

I don't think they quite know what to do with the bowlers at the moment which has been exasperated by Moeen being unavailable. Playing Wood again on a pitch he can get nothing out of doesn't make a lot of sense but the powers that be don't seem to have much faith in Stone which begs the question why he's there at all. It's a shame there isn't a Collingwood type player available, someone to bowl a few overs here and there to take some of the load of the pace men, ideally you want Broad, Wood and a batting all rounder.

In one of Broad’s many excellent interviews over the summer, he made the point about rotation that most injuries occur a few days after putting your body in the ‘red zone’. So an injury prone seamer playing again after bowling 27 overs in Sri Lankan heat seems unideal - but with the amount of tracking data they have access too you would hope they wouldn’t be able to screw it up.

guildfordbat wrote:Hearing - via Surrey connections - that Anderson for Broad is the only England change for the second Test.

Confirmed I see as they also announce the squad for the first test in India , resting both Wood and Curran , and Bairstow.

Archer , Stokes and Burns included , but not Pope. Buttler to go home after first match which seems strange - why bother including him at all ?

Bowler rotation seems a little odd ? But I suppose they have to settle this stuff early. It does seem Stone is really more "reserve" than alternative.

Wood playing again puts even more importance on the toss in my opinion. If England can bat first, put runs on the board then Wood gets another day with his feet up and will get the better bowling conditions in the second innings. If they lose the toss and bowl first then Wood could be goosed by the second innings if they go through a lot of overs.

Personally I'd have rotated Curran for Woakes, partially on the solidity of Woakes batting, but I understand why Root wants the left-arm angle. Sam has a very handy knack of picking up key wickets and breaking partnership. Both openers in the second innings of the first Test for instance. Variation can be useful when the bowl is doing nothing.

alfie wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Hearing - via Surrey connections - that Anderson for Broad is the only England change for the second Test.

Confirmed I see as they also announce the squad for the first test in India , resting both Wood and Curran , and Bairstow.

Archer , Stokes and Burns included , but not Pope. Buttler to go home after first match which seems strange - why bother including him at all ?

Bowler rotation seems a little odd ? But I suppose they have to settle this stuff early. It does seem Stone is really more "reserve" than alternative.

A shame about Pope but presumably he isn't fully fit again yet. Important to note that it's the second time he's badly injured that shoulder in a short career so they will be very careful. A fantastic opportunity for Lawrence.

I think Buttler is there for the 1st Test for continuity starting the series. With Burns and Sibley not being the strongest against spin there's probably an argument to play Buttler at 6 for that Test as a batsman, then Lawrence up to 3 and Foakes at 7 whilst keeping. I can't see it though.

A bit surprised that Bairstow is being rested after batting well in the 1st Test in Sri Lanka. He plays spin a lot better than Burns, Sibley and Crawley who will presumably make up the top 3 in India going on that squad. I've long rated Rory Burns but I could see Ashwin giving him a torrid time. Left-hand bat and not the best player of spin is like a dinner bell for Ashwin in home conditions.

Resting Wood and Curran makes sense in my opinion. I can see both being important to the white ball side going into the T20 World Cup which will be their other big consideration this year. Buttler and Bairstow also rested during the India tour, whilst Stokes and Archer rested for Sri Lanka. It seems that the key players across the formats are getting a break.

Wood playing two tests in a row is odd. Bairstow being rested for the first two tests in India is rather strange.

In a way though it's important to test Wood out in back to back tests, he'll be so important in Australia that his endurance needs testing.

Soul Requiem wrote:In a way though it's important to test Wood out in back to back tests, he'll be so important in Australia that his endurance needs testing.

Very true to be fair.

The other side of that coin though is can England get by in Australia with just 2 quicks if they want to go down that route with their tactics? To me if they want to fight fire with fire using pace rather than the 2010/11 tactics of drying things up more with Bresnan and Anderson then targeting reverse swing then they will need a third quick to rotate. Hence Stone getting chances at some point would be important.

They could try to rotate Archer and Wood in the pace bowler role with Stokes bowling aggressive spells supported by two more controlling bowlers. In which case 2 quicks might work well.

Wood won't play 5 Tests in Australia though so if he and Archer are the only quicks at some point they will just have 1 pace bowler in the XI.

Ollie Robinson is still the unknown quantity for me. I think he's a really good bowler and when I've watched him bowl he hits the pitch hard which can be effective in Australia. I reckon Robinson is the best bowler challenging the very established group of Anderson, Broad, Archer, Wood, Curran and Woakes.

All the selection decisions seem to be made with one eye on Australia which isn't the right way of going about things, winning in India is just as important but feels like an afterthought.

If you've got two quicks in the side you can potentially use Archer as a more a controlling bowler, he'll in theory have more threat in Australia than Anderson or Broad whilst being capable of short bursts of speed if required. As long as they don't try using him as a short ball battering ram which he's just not suited to do. Stone should hopefully get a couple of tests before Australia especially in the summer.

Archer is definitely better when allowed to bowl his natural fuller lengths. He's an excellent seam bowler who can bowl very quick rather than an out and out pace bowler. Obviously capable of bowling rapidly though.

I think the India tour poses a much bigger challenge than Australia who have big holes in their side. After losing a home Ashes series for the first time since 2005 there seems a massive focus on that tour.

There is a danger of losing momentum though. The India tour is a massive challenge, New Zealand will be strong in English conditions and this India side aren't one to be bullied away from home anymore. A lot of cricket before next winter.

Pope is going to India with them, so I’d imagine if he’s passed as fully fit then he’ll play. But, really is important he is absolutely 100% able to field and dive about, if that shoulder goes again it’s approaching career defining/altering territory at this point

The selections at the moment have as much or more to do with managing the white ball players as they do the Ashes. There's two world cups coming up which are clearly taking priority over these test series. If they were picking with an eye to the Ashes then Stone would be getting a run out on the assumption they will want a stable of three quicks but theres a fair chance he will get that opportunity in more friendly conditions at home if he's actually deemed good enough to deserve it. Also dont think it was any more pointless to bring Stone than a fifth choice spinner, at least he had some chance of playing if there was a withdrawl.

No doubt there is a lot of thought to the Ashes series which is a big deal to the players and one of the yardsticks coaches seem to get measured on but the world cups are very much a thing too. But I don't see that the current rotation is specifically tailored to that, nor is picking a quick on Asian pitches, they tend to have much better records than the mid to low 80s county seamers.

(Pedants note, England didn't lose the Ashes at home, they drew the series and Australia retained the Ashes)

The India tour was always going to be a massive challenge regardless of what England were doing with rotation and focus. With that on top, well it does give players a chance to shine I guess. The wider squad will have to deliver. As will the spin pair, at least they wont be short of bowling on spinners pitches going in to it. Unkind people (Me) would suggest that Mo getting injured probably did England a favour in this tour, but if they are hell bent on playing him in India it would've been handy for him to get some cricket under his belt. It certainly

The bit that concerns me the most is what they are doing at 3, pretty much seem to be banking on Sibley finding form and Burns deserving to walk back into the side if Bairstows being rotated out.

Just been looking back at the 2006 tour where they went with a very inexperienced top 4* and backed up Panesar with the mighty Blackwell and Udal. They managed to pull of a deserved draw in that one so its really only the last tour that they've struggled out there which might offer some vague optimism. Stokes to do his "new Flintoff" thing, Anderson to still be Anderson and it might not be that bad. *(OK so the top 4 included Strauss, Cook, Bell, KP). Everyone wrote off India in Aus (hi) and having a second string side turned out to be a good thing for them.

I know I have a reputation for being dramatically over confident in England but its pretty clear on balance they are going to win in India

king_carlos wrote:Archer is definitely better when allowed to bowl his natural fuller lengths. He's an excellent seam bowler who can bowl very quick rather than an out and out pace bowler. Obviously capable of bowling rapidly though.

I think the India tour poses a much bigger challenge than Australia who have big holes in their side. After losing a home Ashes series for the first time since 2005 there seems a massive focus on that tour.

There is a danger of losing momentum though. The India tour is a massive challenge, New Zealand will be strong in English conditions and this India side aren't one to be bullied away from home anymore. A lot of cricket before next winter.

We didn't lose the series in 2019 but yes a draw was the same in a sense.

Sri Lanka win the toss and will bat first. Obviously an excellent toss for them to win. It's said that, because conditions have been drier in Galle for the last few days, the wicket will take sharper turn than in the first test. 

Hopefully Root's saving up his coin toss wins for India...

Ramesh Mendis (debut), Lakmal and Fernando in for Sri Lanka, Kusal Mendis, Hasaranga and Shanaka out. England's change is already known - Anderson in for Broad.

Early DRS referral for England - Curran finding some swing and hitting Perera's pads, looked good in real time, but it was 'umpire's call'. 

No matter though as Perera's out shortly after in the manner of a filthy T20 slogger. Another poor dismissal from him.

And two in the over for Anderson as Fernando, in for Mendis at 3, edges on to his stumps for a duck. 7/2 and Sri Lanka in early difficulty.

Decent start for Jimmy

king_carlos wrote:Archer is definitely better when allowed to bowl his natural fuller lengths. He's an excellent seam bowler who can bowl very quick rather than an out and out pace bowler. Obviously capable of bowling rapidly though.

I think the India tour poses a much bigger challenge than Australia who have big holes in their side. After losing a home Ashes series for the first time since 2005 there seems a massive focus on that tour.

There is a danger of losing momentum though. The India tour is a massive challenge, New Zealand will be strong in English conditions and this India side aren't one to be bullied away from home anymore. A lot of cricket before next winter.

You can’t be giving us a home Ashes loss for a draw, Carlos! Especially considering that was one of the worst England sides we’ve seen in tests for a while...it’s all the better even a strong Aussie outfit couldn’t dispatch it

In fact at the moment, I believe England have an away series win over every team more recently than they have a series win, in England

Hour gone. Typical slow sub-continent pitch with little life in it. Curran found some early swing but that's abated by now. Plenty of runs here for Sri Lanka if they apply themselves.

Yes. Not much there for any type of bowler at present. Good toss to win.

The two spinners will be tested today , I suspect.

Time for a bit of Sam Curran before lunch...Not surprised. Leach being scored off rather too easily at the moment. From a dreadful start , Sri Lanka have turned it round and are looking at a decent first session score....three per over .

Lunch. 76/2 . Thirimanne seems to have become a new man after that hundred last week...been pretty solid today.

England are going to have to work for their wickets today.

Outfield has some pace in it, unlike the first test, so the batsmen are getting a higher value for shots that beat the close fielders. England were trying to get the ball changed after 22 overs which is a sure indicator it's not doing anything for the fielding side.

Thirimanne and Mathews have been completely untroubled; they just need to keep milking the runs, remain patient, and grind England down in the field.

From an England perspective I'm highly concerned about Leach and Bess' inability to keep control, particularly with India just round the corner and these two being the leading spinners. 12 overs between them in that session and just the solitary maiden.

When did Thirimanne become a competent cricketer? The guy averaged 22 at the start of the series!

Strangely looking like Englands best bowling line up in Asia might be Anderson and Broad, which shows how far they havent come with improving the overseas bowling.

Gooseberry wrote:When did Thirimanne become a competent cricketer? The guy averaged 22 at the start of the series!

Strangely looking like Englands best bowling line up in Asia might be Anderson and Broad, which shows how far they havent come with improving the overseas bowling.

Kiss of death well done me!

Anderson really is a legend

Classic Jimmy. Continues his excellent record v Thirimanne.

Just the lift England needed after lunch.

Close to another, he's absolutely unplayable today. 3/6 off 6 overs against top order bats on day one is ridiculous.

Imagine how good Clouderson would be if he could bowl in these conditions

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Imagine how good Clouderson would be if he could bowl in these conditions

Well it is humid in Sri Lanka

Needs to work on his fielding if hes going to make it as a test cricketer though

Spinners can wait , it seems.

Jimmy on fire and now we shall see if Sam's Golden Arm can produce anything. Lack of maidens from the spin twins is a bit of a concern ; but worry about that later : one more wicket now would be huge on this...