England's Summer of Cricket 2021

First topic message reminder :

Siraj will have a couple of deliveries at Anderson. The lead is already a nice 25.

alfie wrote:
Who is the PoTM ?  That Siraj is a bit of a pain in the arse but he bowled his team to this win : does that trump the century makers ?

I think it will have to be Siraj. But plenty of good performances

guildfordbat wrote:Totally deserved win for India.
Totally deserved loss for England.

More later.

Well summed up. Hope your "more" includes a magic formula to change things around or this is going to be an English summer to rival 1999.

alfie wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Totally deserved win for India.
Totally deserved loss for England.

More later.

Well summed up. Hope your "more" includes a magic formula to change things around or this is going to be an English summer to rival 1999.

guildford mentioning the forthcoming twins in our family has revealed his true identity to me.

Probably the most qualified of us all to discuss cricket on here

AlciG wrote:

alfie wrote:
Who is the PoTM ?  That Siraj is a bit of a pain in the arse but he bowled his team to this win : does that trump the century makers ?

I think it will have to be Siraj. But plenty of good performances

PoTM? Tricky call that. After some thought, Siraj gets my vote - hard to argue with 2 fourfers.

I did give some thought though to awarding it to Kohli. Not so as to wind msp up but as the captain and representative of an excellent team performance, aided by an excellent call (ie the same as mine ) on the declaration.

eirebilly wrote:

alfie wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Totally deserved win for India.
Totally deserved loss for England.

More later.

Well summed up. Hope your "more" includes a magic formula to change things around or this is going to be an English summer to rival 1999.

guildford mentioning the forthcoming twins in our family has revealed his true identity to me.

Probably the most qualified of us all to discuss cricket on here

Sorry, Billy, but not at all. You mentioned the forthcoming twins in a post the other day. Meant to congratulate you then but forgot until now.

But they always give the awards to the batsmen... Great hundred from Rahul so fair enough I guess.

guildfordbat wrote:

eirebilly wrote:

alfie wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Totally deserved win for India.
Totally deserved loss for England.

More later.

Well summed up. Hope your "more" includes a magic formula to change things around or this is going to be an English summer to rival 1999.

guildford mentioning the forthcoming twins in our family has revealed his true identity to me.

Probably the most qualified of us all to discuss cricket on here

Sorry, Billy, but not at all. You mentioned the forthcoming twins in a post the other day. Meant to congratulate you then but forgot until now.

Oh thanks then . Sorry, i thought ye were someone else.

alfie wrote:The more I look at the scorecard the worse it is : bowled out in 52 overs ?  

India bowled really well but that is an awful performance from England. The dreadful session with the ball this morning seems to have just knocked the stuffing out of them.

Who is the PoTM ?  That Siraj is a bit of a pain in the arse but he bowled his team to this win : does that trump the century makers ?

No alfie, they don't usually give it to bowlers. Its KL who is the player of the match. Would have been a travesty to give it to Root after what he did in the morning despite an absolutely brilliant innings yet again. Siraj is a bit too much of theatrics for my liking, but what a performance from the lad. Playing his first game at the HQ, Slope and all, in his first tour of England, he bowls his side to a win.

And yes , eirebilly , I also saw your post re twins the other day so congrats and best wishes from me too...

Thanks lads.

Until the next test, wish ye all well

msp83 wrote:

alfie wrote:The more I look at the scorecard the worse it is : bowled out in 52 overs ?  

India bowled really well but that is an awful performance from England. The dreadful session with the ball this morning seems to have just knocked the stuffing out of them.

Who is the PoTM ?  That Siraj is a bit of a pain in the arse but he bowled his team to this win : does that trump the century makers ?

No alfie, they don't usually give it to bowlers. Its KL who is the player of the match. Would have been a travesty to give it to Root after what he did in the morning despite an absolutely brilliant innings yet again. Siraj is a bit too much of theatrics for my liking, but what a performance from the lad. Playing his first game at the HQ, Slope and all, in his first tour of England, he bowls his side to a win.

Yeah he was great : he quite impressed me in Australia to be honest. Really gives it everything whenever he bowls. Do wish he would tone down the performance art but an excellent - and match-winning - effort. He gets the "alfie" award anyway for this game

We can criticise the morning performance but England had to bat 2 sessions. The top order didn't even survive one bar Root. England's batting is just far too fragile to be competitive

GSC wrote:We can criticise the morning performance but England had to bat 2 sessions. The top order didn't even survive one bar Root. England's batting is just far too fragile to be competitive

Sadly true. And the main reason I am banging the drums of doom...because I honestly can't see how they can improve it. Maybe see if Sir Chef could be talked into a comeback ?

I do think though that the massive game changing morning session basically blew them apart mentally. Soon as a wicket or two went down it was like watching a pre-ordained walk off a cliff...

Big problem is there seem no options for England. Two or three batsmen banging down the door in the county championship? Not been on for weeks. Prepare a pitch that will nibble around to help the bowlers? That would probably expose the batting even more

Even in the 90s we could at least bring back Hick or Ramprakash on weight of first class runs to fail again

msp83 wrote:

alfie wrote:The more I look at the scorecard the worse it is : bowled out in 52 overs ?  

India bowled really well but that is an awful performance from England. The dreadful session with the ball this morning seems to have just knocked the stuffing out of them.

Who is the PoTM ?  That Siraj is a bit of a pain in the arse but he bowled his team to this win : does that trump the century makers ?

No alfie, they don't usually give it to bowlers. Its KL who is the player of the match. Would have been a travesty to give it to Root after what he did in the morning despite an absolutely brilliant innings yet again. Siraj is a bit too much of theatrics for my liking, but what a performance from the lad. Playing his first game at the HQ, Slope and all, in his first tour of England, he bowls his side to a win.

Something that irks me is that they no longer ever seem to give it to someone from the losing side. Back in the day - I'm thinking of one day domestic finals and ODIs in England in the '70s and '80s - it was far from unknown for a member of the losing team to walk away with the MotM award (as it then was).

I'm not saying it should have happened here. As I posted earlier, my vote went to Siraj. Furthermore, I can understand it going to Rahul (first innings century in difficult batting conditions setting India on their way). However, if England had ended up winning by 3 or 4 wickets today, that would have in no way lessened Rahul's day one contribution but fair to say he wouldn't have scooped the award.

Yeah as you say it's not like there's guys breaking down the door to be in the team. Think Hameed deserves a longer go at the top of the order at the expense of Sibley I guess. Gonna take a least a few years to sort this mess out, but first understand how to develop world class test batsmen. Because it's a real drought right now

VTR wrote:Big problem is there seem no options for England. Two or three batsmen banging down the door in the county championship? Not been on for weeks. Prepare a pitch that will nibble around to help the bowlers? That would probably expose the batting even more

Even in the 90s we could at least bring back Hick or Ramprakash on weight of first class runs to fail again

Olly got a century at the weekend. Most of England's top order don't know what that is. Get Olly in.

alfie wrote:

GSC wrote:We can criticise the morning performance but England had to bat 2 sessions. The top order didn't even survive one bar Root. England's batting is just far too fragile to be competitive

Sadly true. And the main reason I am banging the drums of doom...because I honestly can't see how they can improve it. Maybe see if Sir Chef could be talked into a comeback ?

I do think though that the massive game changing morning session basically blew them apart mentally. Soon as a wicket or two went down it was like watching a pre-ordained walk off a cliff...

Yes, once you get trapped in a negative mindset, it's difficult to escape from. And goodness knows how negative England must have been feeling while employing 4/5/6 (I lost count) fielders on the boundary v Bumrah.

In the larger scheme of things, that Bumrah over to Anderson, turns out to be a turning point. England got so annoyed, that their focus ended up being ruffling Bumrah with short-balls, come what may. They ended up producing one of the must rubbish bowling sessions for them in recent times. I just couldn't figure out as to how easily did the singles kept coming for Jas and Shami. The 2 guys did a splendid job, but it just was utterly inexplicable from Root and England, and Root's right, he as skipper, will have to take responsibility...

Let's try to put everything into perspective.
1. This is a very weak England team, with possibly the poorest and least-experienced batting line-up that I can remember.
2. India are the second-best Test side.
3. For all their problems England played three days of good cricket in this match.
4 England got themselves in a winning position after India were around 270 for two before Kohli was out on the first evening.
5. England will be stronger for the next three Tests in that Sibley (an extraordinary selection in the first place) will be dropped, as will Curran and, hopefully, Pope will be back.
6. Thanks to ECB's money-first strategy England were ill-prepared for this match.
7. Some are comparing this with 1999. It should be remembered that the period 2000-15 was a comparatively golden one for England.

On a side note, do you realize who sits just above Mohammed Siraj and Ishant Sharma in the Runs for the series table?
Yes, Jasprit Bumrah, Mohammed Shami, Pant, Jadeja and every other batter, have scored more than our best. Virat's won the test, and the day and the arguments on the selections. Can we get some significant runs now in addition, Skipper?

If Sibley is dropped, who do they get in? Hameed to open, and then who bats 3? If its Pope in for Sibley, how would the batting order be? Bairstow at 3? He has just about looked like the only other England batter who can get a few runs on th board at 5. Would they want to mess him about for a yet unproven Pope who has been as inconsistent as the rest of them? Will the captain, in the form of his life with the bat, promote himself to 3 where his overall record isn't as good as it is at 4? Will they recall Crawley a game after he got dropped on the back of no FC performance? Is there any other young batter who is making a half-decent case for selection? Or now that he's back, will they think its time to mess around with Moeen again and bat him 3?

As for India, think the questions will be on the fast bowlers. Jasprit, Shami and Siraj have played both the tests. Will they bring Shardul back as he's likely to be fit and available for selection? Ravichandran Ashwin may have to wait a bit longer to get back into the mix I feel, as Kohli's templet has produced the result...
Will Umesh Yadav get a look in? He doesn't bowl that well overseas, though has a fine home record...

I thought Eng needed Root to bat thru with an unbeaten 60 or 70 to see them thru...without that they had no chance...of even overhauling 180 odd.
But the sheer physicality, brutality of Kohli.s assault was breathtaking.....make no mistakes, the raw aggression that 11 on field displayed was all fueled from Kohli

The Theatrics & brawl that started at the end of day 3...pumped Kohli and thru him his boys 2 or 3 or 4 notches up.
Eng made the mistake of trying to do the same.....that's not Root's personality.

In the  end Ind attacked, dominated, subjugated, pummeled, annihilated, bullied and bulldozed Eng.....and had enuf time to take 10 wickets, after dropping Butler's sitter and getting Moeen of a no ball and could have picked 2 or 3 more wickets if they needed to in the remaining time they had.

I keep saying for my generation that started watching cricket as a kid in mid 80s....and having seen mediocrity, and apologetic for granted losses overseas...the resilience, never say die and brute aggression of the team keeps surprising & thrilling us.

A spinner of quality of Jadeja hasn't taken a wicket and bunnies of No. 11 standards elevated themselves to score 100 runs between Ishant, Bumrah & Shami.....and old war horses Pujara & Rahane scored with back to the wall.
In adversity, instead of crumbling, every one rose to high and unexpected levels......and now Ind has a well oiled machine with all eleven parts running in tandem

The series is heading only one way....if I were Eng I would bring batters who could play fearless cricket...more of Bairstow and Butler mode...Sibley, Burns, Crawley mode ain't taking them anywhere

msp83 wrote:If Sibley is dropped, who do they get in? Hameed to open, and then who bats 3? If its Pope in for Sibley, how would the batting order be? Bairstow at 3? He has just about looked like the only other England batter who can get a few runs on th board at 5. Would they want to mess him about for a yet unproven Pope who has been as inconsistent as the rest of them? Will the captain, in the form of his life with the bat, promote himself to 3 where his overall record isn't as good as it is at 4? Will they recall Crawley a game after he got dropped on the back of no FC performance? Is there any other young batter who is making a half-decent case for selection? Or now that he's back, will they think its time to mess around with Moeen again and bat him 3?

Crawley surely won't be back. There's no one banging on the door really. James Bracey played the NZ Tests after doing well in first class cricket and was absolutely shocking. He wasn't playing in his usual batting position but still, he was way out of his depth. I'd struggle to think of a name to be honest. Malan to get some experience in? The Dentury to return? We will have to see, could well be Pope back and Bairstow pushed up the 3. Not convincing at all

I'm not sure about dropping Sibley, principally because Bairstow at 3 sounds a worse option. Bairstow's doing alright at 5, keep him there. And keep Sibley to open.

Woakes in for Curran, Pope in for Moeen. Mahmood, presumably, in for Wood if Wood is injured. Trust in Root if you need spin.

Duty281 wrote:I'm not sure about dropping Sibley, principally because Bairstow at 3 sounds a worse option. Bairstow's doing alright at 5, keep him there. And keep Sibley to open.

Woakes in for Curran, Pope in for Moeen. Mahmood, presumably, in for Wood if Wood is injured. Trust in Root if you need spin.

Pope in for Moeen. Now that would be a very interesting call indeed. Didn't do worse than any of the specialist bats barring Root, bowled quite alright... Provides balance to the attack.
With Broad out, Anderson if he plays, into his 3rd consecutive test, Wood injured and unsure for the next game, No Stokes, no Woakes, Curran struggling. Dropping Moeen for yet another of those 20 Somethings is the best way to go about for sure!

VTR wrote:

msp83 wrote:If Sibley is dropped, who do they get in? Hameed to open, and then who bats 3? If its Pope in for Sibley, how would the batting order be? Bairstow at 3? He has just about looked like the only other England batter who can get a few runs on th board at 5. Would they want to mess him about for a yet unproven Pope who has been as inconsistent as the rest of them? Will the captain, in the form of his life with the bat, promote himself to 3 where his overall record isn't as good as it is at 4? Will they recall Crawley a game after he got dropped on the back of no FC performance? Is there any other young batter who is making a half-decent case for selection? Or now that he's back, will they think its time to mess around with Moeen again and bat him 3?

Crawley surely won't be back. There's no one banging on the door really. James Bracey played the NZ Tests after doing well in first class cricket and was absolutely shocking. He wasn't playing in his usual batting position but still, he was way out of his depth. I'd struggle to think of a name to be honest. Malan to get some experience in? The Dentury to return? We will have to see, could well be Pope back and Bairstow pushed up the 3. Not convincing at all

Looking back at it, probably England was too quick to move on from Joe Denly. Made it to double figures more often than not, and played out a reasonable number of balls to ease things a touch for Root and Stokes...
And had he been in, people would have found another reason to not play Moeen, Denly the English Shane Warne!

msp83 wrote:As for India, think the questions will be on the fast bowlers. Jasprit, Shami and Siraj have played both the tests. Will they bring Shardul back as he's likely to be fit and available for selection? Ravichandran  Ashwin may have to wait a bit longer to get back into the mix I feel, as Kohli's templet has produced the result...
Will Umesh Yadav get a look in? He doesn't bowl that well overseas, though has a fine home record...

India will sure play with same 4 seamers.......BUT I won't be surprised if one of them breakdowns
and then shardul will be back........we have Yadav who will surely get a chance
and Ashwin too might play but that would be in case Inf are down to only 3 fit seamers

Ind had Avesh Khan for whom they did not get a replacement.....I read they have Arzan Nagwaswalla in the squad also a Left arm pacer that I have never heard of before......fast medium , Parsi from Gujarat

There has been some real nadirs in English cricket in the past few years but this feels like a proper bottoming out moment. Up there with the 58 all out debacle in Auckland or the 51 all out in Kingston - but I suppose most similar to the surrender in Adelaide 15 years ago.

The huge concern, as raised by others, is the stand out batsmen in domestic red ball cricket in recent years - Sibley, Burns, Bairstow (averages 50 in domestic red ball games) and Pope, are all either playing or have been and yet the batting has still been abject.

I do still think there is a chance to draw the series, as with Anderson and Robinson plus Woakes hopefully to come back England still have an outstanding attach in these conditions. The trouble is I can't see India not winning at least one more Test with England's frailties with the bat. And even restricting them to one seems a long shot!

Sibley has to go unfortunately. Test bowlers are too good when you only have one scoring shot. They will just tie you down. I wouldn't have picked Hameed in the first place and he just looked out of his depth, but not sure what you do with him now you have picked him.

The trouble is they've now tried picking guys on County stats (Burns, Sibley, Pope) and picking guys on hunches (Roy, Crawley, Lawrence) and neither have produced any sure fire successes!

Alex Davies? Vasconcelas (not sure if Eng Q)? Harry Brook? Bracey in a more natural position?

God knows.

KP_fan wrote:

msp83 wrote:As for India, think the questions will be on the fast bowlers. Jasprit, Shami and Siraj have played both the tests. Will they bring Shardul back as he's likely to be fit and available for selection? Ravichandran  Ashwin may have to wait a bit longer to get back into the mix I feel, as Kohli's templet has produced the result...
Will Umesh Yadav get a look in? He doesn't bowl that well overseas, though has a fine home record...

India will sure play with same 4 seamers.......BUT I won't be surprised if one of them breakdowns
and then shardul will be back........we have Yadav who will surely get a chance
and Ashwin too might play but that would be in case Inf are down to only 3 fit seamers

Ind had Avesh Khan for whom they did not get a replacement.....I read they have Arzan Nagwaswalla in the squad also a Left arm pacer that I have never heard of before......fast medium , Parsi from Gujarat

Nagwaswalla has an impressive FC record. Got into the IPL this season... Offers the left-arm option. Not officially part of the test squad I think, but if he's there, who knows, an opportunity like T Natarajan's might present itself.
There is a bit of a gap before the next test, Jasprit and co can recharge themselves and hopefully be ready to go full on...
Think Ashwin will only play if there is a really turning/flat track. We know our Virat don't we? What is he if not stubborn!?

Don't think the team would have conttemplated dropping Pujara or Rahane at this point. But their backs-to-the-wall effort that helped India regain some of the lost ground, should quieten the chatter around... Rahane seems to have made some slight technical adjustments too. And think they should just let Pujara do his thing. And sure, runs from the skipper's bat, will help the 2 veterans out quite a bit... And Rohit. He has been contemplative of his test batting, and that's what has allowed him to finally make the step up that he should probably have made years ago. Now there are big runs to be scored, if he brings a bit more of common sense into his game. Hopefully, he wouldn't leave it late like he did earlier.

As for England selection for the next Test. Er, Harry Kane's not doing anything else at the moment. He's guaranteed to do no worse with the bat than Curran at Lord's.

Have England ever featured so many Test ducks, and a few golden ones at that, as they have in recent Tests?

Well played India. They were excellent on day 5 and England were diabolical. I said before the series that I think this India team have come a long way since their last visit to England despite being a similar group of players in terms of personnel. They are a very tough unit now and Kohli has driven that aggression and competitiveness into their play.

1.Burns
2.Hameed
3.Pope
4.Root (c)
5.Bairstow
6.Buttler (wk)
7.Woakes
8.Mo
9.Robinson
10.Wood
11.Anderson

I think I'd probably go with that for T3. I don't like it particularly but this England side has so many flaws that I'm never going to like it much!

msp83 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:I'm not sure about dropping Sibley, principally because Bairstow at 3 sounds a worse option. Bairstow's doing alright at 5, keep him there. And keep Sibley to open.

Woakes in for Curran, Pope in for Moeen. Mahmood, presumably, in for Wood if Wood is injured. Trust in Root if you need spin.

Pope in for Moeen. Now that would be a very interesting call indeed. Didn't do worse than any of the specialist bats barring Root, bowled quite alright... Provides balance to the attack.
With Broad out, Anderson if he plays, into his 3rd consecutive test, Wood injured and unsure for the next game, No Stokes, no Woakes, Curran struggling. Dropping Moeen for yet another of those 20 Somethings is the best way to go about for sure!

Pope has a far higher ceiling with the bat than Moeen. Pope has the potential to score test hundreds, Moeen does not (anymore).

Duty281 wrote:

msp83 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:I'm not sure about dropping Sibley, principally because Bairstow at 3 sounds a worse option. Bairstow's doing alright at 5, keep him there. And keep Sibley to open.

Woakes in for Curran, Pope in for Moeen. Mahmood, presumably, in for Wood if Wood is injured. Trust in Root if you need spin.

Pope in for Moeen. Now that would be a very interesting call indeed. Didn't do worse than any of the specialist bats barring Root, bowled quite alright... Provides balance to the attack.
With Broad out, Anderson if he plays, into his 3rd consecutive test, Wood injured and unsure for the next game, No Stokes, no Woakes, Curran struggling. Dropping Moeen for yet another of those 20 Somethings is the best way to go about for sure!

Pope has a far higher ceiling with the bat than Moeen. Pope has the potential to score test hundreds, Moeen does not (anymore).

if you are talking about Ollie Pope who came to India......that Pope ain't  got the potential to average even 32 over a period of time
His feet don't move when needed.....and Move wrong way if at all , when they move
I would be happy to be wrong and happy if the young man succeeds

Of the young ones from Eng.....Dan Lawrence is the one with potential IMHO

Lot of doom and gloom around at the moment but England fans just have to grin and bear it.

We have to acknowledge that we've not got a great team at the moment and we're playing a very good side when we're shorn of Stokes, Woakes and Archer.

Some of our guys have played little or no red-ball cricket for many weeks. We looked a lot stronger with Bairstow and Moeen in the side (and there are those who want to drop Moeen!).

I was really, really hoping that Hameed would not be recalled yet. They'll have to give him at least one more Test.

We have a poor, weakened side and then we play five Tests against India having had little red-ball preparation. Things will get better soon. Oh, hold on - we've got Australia away.

Interesting to read so many different comments on various platforms - from random fans like ourselves to proper experts ( Dexter , Vaughan etc) as to which of the young England hopefuls have proper potential : I have seen strong suggestions both yea and nay for Pope , Crawley , Lawrence ... even Hameed.

Obviously all hypothetical at present.

Problem is right now the team is trying to compete with strong opponents and the priority must surely be to put out the line-up most likely to give them a chance to do so , rather than nurture future hopes (unless one wishes to resign the team to inevitable defeat while waiting for someone to make a breakthrough)

To be honest I've seen signs from all these fellows that give some cause for optimism : but also flaws that account for their collective failure to average much more 30 per head at best. If the rest of the batting line-up were something Strauss Trescothick Vaughan Pietersen then I suspect any one of these could be "carried" for a while as the missing piece , much as Ian Bell was early in his career...but it ain't. Which makes for a seemingly insoluble problem.

A pair of openers , each with their own individual merits - but clearly neither quite good enough to be there other than by default : are Burns and Sibley really any better than Stoneman or Hales ? (I think they are , at least in terms of output : but they both fail far too often to be considered fixtures) You could try Hameed for Sibley now but I am uncertain whether this will really work better : and if he fails completely what then ? Back to Dom for the Ashes tour ? (If it happens)

Three is the biggest problem as it has been since Trott faded out. Right now ,  if indeed Hameed moves up to open , you are faced with probably three (not altogether satisfactory) options :
1/ Move Root up from four . Want to risk the only stable part of the team like that ? Not sure I do.
2/ Bring in Pope : he is better at playing pace than spin so theoretically not the worst
choice. But he's going to be under a lot of personal pressure as it is coming back after injury time out and a few poor innings : that wouldn't be easy for him at all.
3/ Ask poor old Bairstow to take another bullet for the team and slot in to the cursed spot. Would be hugely unfair to the fellow who has already been messed about even more than Moeen - and I'm not sure it would work either.

(Am ruling out reinstalling Crawley immediately or doing something totally crazy like bumping Moeen right up the order !)

Paradoxically : if they could settle a number three then the rest of the order looks reasonable on recent form - Root Bairstow Buttler Woakes Moeen wouldn't be an awful 4-8. And if Stokes ever comes back , even better... But that gaping hole at three doesn't seem to be any closer to getting covered.

Bring back Vince ? Or Denly ? Or Malan ? Answers on a postcard please ...

sirfredperry wrote:Let's try to put everything into perspective.
1. This is a very weak England team, with possibly the poorest and least-experienced batting line-up that I can remember.
2. India are the second-best Test side.
3. For all their problems England played three days of good cricket in this match.
4 England got themselves in a winning position after India were around 270 for two before Kohli was out on the first evening.
5. England will be stronger for the next three Tests in that Sibley (an extraordinary selection in the first place) will be dropped, as will Curran and, hopefully, Pope will be back.
6. Thanks to ECB's money-first strategy England were ill-prepared for this match.
7. Some are comparing this with 1999. It should be remembered that the period 2000-15 was a comparatively golden one for England.

Sir Fred and all - do you see that strategy changing? Do you see our preparation getting better if it doesn't?

I fear the answer is ''No'' to both questions and that's why my perspective is not as positive as Sir Fred's.

To be clear, I'm not a Hundred hater (I'm even going on Friday to see what it's like) but am disillusioned with the scheduling of domestic cricket and England's crammed international calendar.

Moeen did nothing of note. His batting returns were nothing to write home about, and he was frankly fortunate to make as many as he did in the first innings. His bowling, on a helpful surface, was OK, but again it was nothing special. England need to put a proper batsman in ahead of Moeen because runs are the issue. Pope has the potential to score big runs, Moeen does not.

Comparisons to 1999 are, quite frankly, absurd. In 1999 a dismal England side lost to a dismal NZ side at home by 2-1. An equivalence to that in 2021 would be England losing to Bangladesh/Zimbabwe/Ireland/Afghanistan...not India who are one of the top four nations in the world. Of course, England will still win this series, like in 2014 when they came back, or when India came back earlier in the year. Twice now in this series England have been in winning positions in tests and failed to convert, albeit the first test was decided by the weather.

Root needs to resign as captain straight away. It won't happen. But yesterday was the worst session of captaincy I've ever seen from an England captain and it effectively lost England the game. It isn't entirely Root's fault. Nonsense plans to tailenders from England predate his place in the team. But having so many men on the boundary to Bumrah is embarrassing. Consistently not bowling at the stumps to such tail-enders is ridiculous.

England's batting is horribly brittle, but dispensing with Sibley would be misguided. He played three solid innings in this series so far, and having someone who can see off the new ball is vital, no matter how limited he is scoring-wise. Hameed is a big concern already. I was looking forward to his return, but he seemed plagued with nerves and indecision. I'm not sure he was ready for a return - hopefully he'll settle for the third test. He should be told he'll get a place through the series no matter what - maybe it'll relax him? Bairstow and Buttler, I've been pleased with the improvements they've made. The former is threatening a big score, Headingley for the next test is a great platform to achieve it. Would also stay well clear of Malan.

And for all the talk of England's brittle batting...India's is, too. We haven't yet seen the 150-odd ao innings from India in this series, but we will and on more than one occasion, too.

My team for the next test would be:

Burns; Sibley; Hameed; Root; Bairstow; Pope (if unfit, I'm unfussed as to Moeen v Lawrence, I don't think Lawrence has much of a future); Buttler; Woakes; Robinson; Wood (Mahmood if Wood isn't fit); Anderson (Overton if Anderson isn't fit).

Overall, are England a weak team? No, even without Stokes, predominantly because of the strength of the seam bowling, especially Anderson. The big worry, and I've voiced this before, is when Anderson and Broad retire England will begin a proper slide down the rankings, unless the current problems are rectified before that happens...which is unlikely.

Agree with guildford the calendar has a lot to answer for . (The weaknesses are there anyway , but exacerbated by the crazy messing about with the first class game)

Suppose the money question is a real one though however much we might look down our noses at it being given priority ? If The Hundred makes serious money to prop up the rest of the system then maybe it has a place (hopefully brings new fans in too though we will wait and see if that translates)

However there surely has to be a compromise ? Seems to me vital the CC should be allowed to run pretty much throughout the summer : even if this means teams are sometimes well short of full strength it would be better than having lots of people , suited or not , whacking white balls around at the height of the season and first class cricket shoved to either end as almost an afterthought. One of the county short form competitions probably has to suffer but what is the alternative ?

Will leave the answers to those of you on the ground ; but I would note in passing that many in Australia are not too happy with the scheduling of everything here either. Just don't have quite so many clubs and different competitions to cater for so there is a little more scope to balance finances and preparation for the Internationals.

To address a few points made in some good discussion so far:

On 1999, the Test side might be the worst since then, but certainly not as bad about that. The other thing with 1999 was England were also abysmal in ODIs, these days they are the best in the world. I remember a lot saying on here saying poor Test results would be the price to pay for a WC win, and a lot would rather the WC win and have a poorer Test team, as winning that was special, whereas the next test series vs India or Aus is nowadays usually just a few months away!

Which brings me onto scheduling. The endless Tests will get less appealing at some point. People aren't stupid to keep being sold constant Ashes series and Tests against India. I hope people start voting with their feet as the ticket prices are high now. I am already bored of playing those 2 teams to be honest, beating them won't feel special as have seen it many times now. Sadly I think the end game here is going to be the decline of the standard of Test cricket. So it will be entertaining but you will see loads of batting collapses and poor play as limited overs is given more and more precedence

The real elephant in the room is James Anderson. His bowling in the first innings is still top notch and more than deserving of his place in the side, the issue however is how ineffectual he looks in the second innings and it's been that way for a while now. There have now been eight occasions since the start of 2020 where he's failed to take a wicket in the second innings, i'd suggest that is very much age and load dependent. It's an impossible problem to solve too.

I see nothing is dampening your confidence in an England comeback , Duty

Admirable and I hope you are right about their potential for resilience : but I think you are seriously off the planet in comparing this Indian team with the 2014 outfit. This lot are far more focused and better prepared to handle whatever England throw at them - as we saw in this match. I'd like to believe this "a 150 all out - more than once -  is just around the corner " stuff but the evidence so far is otherwise.

I don't really disagree with you re the batting. Personally would keep the openers for want of alternatives (for now) and whether it is Hameed or someone else at three might not make much difference either way. Would be extremely wary of a four man attack though so would prefer to retain Moeen (even though I would also like an extra batsman : unfortunately you can't have both !) . As always , have to look at the pitch - though they usually misjudge it anyway

I know msp will be along anyway to dispute your rather dismissive summary of Moeen's contribution ; but if I may get in first : I agree his batting was nothing to get excited about. He battled it out pretty well in the first innings considering a lack of red ball practice  ; but I was a little disappointed he was unable to take charge after tea , when he had settled pretty well and the bowlers were looking a bit short of ideas. Might have been under orders ? But it seemed to me there was a window there to take the game away from India and he ended up hanging around to no good effect. Second innings he tried to block it out ; but like all of them couldn't do it long enough. So nothing special - but perhaps some hope he might improve with a game under his belt ? Might be one place lower too , if Woakes plays.
His bowling gets overpraised at times (and probably over-criticized on his bad days , to be fair!) He was OK but I don't think India are quaking in their boots. If it spins I think Leach would be better. But with the batting issues I don't think Leach is a serious option anyway... So Moeen remains in my team.

Replacing Root as captain sounds like a football style kneejerk call though. He is what he is : a leader by example but no Brearley. Silverwood calls a lot of the tactical shots anyway. And no one else stands out as a ready replacement . When Stokes is back maybe he can take on the mantle for good or ill but right now lets not shuffle the deckchairs.

Soul Requiem wrote:The real elephant in the room is James Anderson. His bowling in the first innings is still top notch and more than deserving of his place in the side, the issue however is how ineffectual he looks in the second innings and it's been that way for a while now. There have now been eight occasions since the start of 2020 where he's failed to take a wicket in the second innings, i'd suggest that is very much age and load dependent. It's an impossible problem to solve too.

You do have a point there , about age and load issues , Soul. I wouldn't go so far as to call him "ineffectual" in second innings as he always provides control at worst...but he definitely needs more wicket taking threat from the other end second time around - especially when he bowls a lot of first innings overs.

The problem isn't actually insoluble. It revolves around having the rest of the attack adequate to work with him. They nearly got this right with Wood firing well on Sunday ... if they hadn't gone silly Monday morning we might all be celebrating a successful win chasing about 185 thanks to a great team bowling performance.

Elephant Jim is the least of our problems

I'm not suggesting dropping Jimmy at all but it's something that rarely if ever gets mentioned, it stood out that he bowled two overs yesterday morning before the changes began. He does get misused on occasion, Sunday evening when India were under the cosh he was kept on two overs too many just because Kohli was at the crease, doesn't send a great message to the other bowlers.

Root now has an average of exactly 50 with 22 centuries and 50 50's, puts into context the woes of everyone else when i'd consider him to have underachieved overall.

Meanwhile at Durham, Pope is in early at number 3. Up against the experienced and ever wily Rushworth in overcast conditions. Should be a good test of Pope's England credentials having failed in his two recent RL 50 knocks.

guildfordbat wrote:Meanwhile at Durham, Pope is in early at number 3. Up against the experienced and ever wily Rushworth in overcast conditions. Should be a good test of Pope's England credentials having failed in his two recent RL 50 knocks.

And Pope's middle stump has just been knocked out of the ground by Rushworth. He goes for a duck. Not looking good for Pope or England (or Surrey but I'll leave that for the domestic thread).

alfie wrote:I see nothing is dampening your confidence in an England comeback , Duty

Admirable and I hope you are right about their potential for resilience : but I think you are seriously off the planet in comparing this Indian team with the 2014 outfit. This lot are far more focused and better prepared to handle whatever England throw at them - as we saw in this match. I'd like to believe this "a 150 all out - more than once -  is just around the corner " stuff but the evidence so far is otherwise.

I don't really disagree with you re the batting. Personally would keep the openers for want of alternatives (for now) and whether it is Hameed or someone else at three might not make much difference either way. Would be extremely wary of a four man attack though so would prefer to retain Moeen (even though I would also like an extra batsman : unfortunately you can't have both !) . As always , have to look at the pitch - though they usually misjudge it anyway

I know msp will be along anyway to dispute your rather dismissive summary of Moeen's contribution ; but if I may get in first : I agree his batting was nothing to get excited about. He battled it out pretty well in the first innings considering a lack of red ball practice  ; but I was a little disappointed he was unable to take charge after tea , when he had settled pretty well and the bowlers were looking a bit short of ideas. Might have been under orders ? But it seemed to me there was a window there to take the game away from India and he ended up hanging around to no good effect. Second innings he tried to block it out ; but like all of them couldn't do it long enough. So nothing special - but perhaps some hope he might improve with a game under his belt ? Might be one place lower too , if Woakes plays.
His bowling gets overpraised at times (and probably over-criticized on his bad days , to be fair!) He was OK but I don't think India are quaking in their boots. If it spins I think Leach would be better. But with the batting issues I don't think Leach is a serious option anyway... So Moeen remains in my team.

Replacing Root as captain sounds like a football style kneejerk call though. He is what he is : a leader by example but no Brearley. Silverwood calls a lot of the tactical shots anyway. And no one else stands out as a ready replacement . When Stokes is back maybe he can take on the mantle for good or ill but right now lets not shuffle the deckchairs.

Didn't know alfie, that Duty was expecting Moeen to be the next offspinning Shane Warne on return with a touch of Murali! Since England have plenty of those ready, they should surely send Moeen packing!
Every decent test team, would have a frontline spinner playing in the lineup, even if they don't necessarily qualify to be one of the top 4 or 5 bowlers. New Zealand played Ajaz Patel in their last test against England didn't they? The templet of not going in with a frontline spinner, is not the sensible norm, it has to be absolutely exceptional. Particularly since England wouldn't really fancy real green tops and would rather prefer to play on flat tracks as their batting is as it is. Can they play Leach in a 4 man attack? Can they play Bess who couldn't land it 4 months ago? Is there another one ready to go? If the answer to all these is no, there is no reason really, not to play Moeen, who clearly established, that he's as good or bad as the rest of their batting lineup barring Root, and he more than held his own with the ball.
This thing of Root emerging as their regular frontline spinner, it is not really sustainable. Sachin Tendulkar could spin the ball more than Anil Kumble, he had as many variations as Shane Warne had. He has won many an ODI, and a few test matches with the ball in his career. And yet, there was a reason he remained a batter who could bowl throughout his career, though around the end of the 90s and early 2000s, he had become the regular 5th bowling option, particularly under Ganguly's captaincy. One of the reasons that he had a run of injuries in the mid-2000s, was this increased bowling load, and since then to the end of his career, they had significantly cut down on his bowling load. And Tendulkar was a far superior parttime bowler to Joe Root.

guildfordbat wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Meanwhile at Durham, Pope is in early at number 3. Up against the experienced and ever wily Rushworth in overcast conditions. Should be a good test of Pope's England credentials having failed in his two recent RL 50 knocks.

And Pope's middle stump has just been knocked out of the ground by Rushworth. He goes for a duck. Not looking good for Pope or England (or Surrey but I'll leave that for the domestic thread).

Guildford, I remember at the start of Pope's England career, there was a lot of fuss about Pope being batted out of position, and as to how unfair it all was . Do you see him as England's long-term number 3? Having seen him in action in India earlier this year, I have strong doubts about a consistent test future for him, he has serious issues playing spin...