England's Summer of Cricket 2022 as Joe Root Steps Down

First topic message reminder :

Must be assuming Southee can't be as ineffective again.

Would be a shame to see Morgan not make it to the upcoming T20 world cup, but as JDizzle says if that article is being written, surely the decision has already been made. He's really struggled with his body this season, barely been able to do back to back games for Middlesex in the blast.

Like Dummy says, hopefully they can keep him involved in and around the setup - obviously deserves great credit for what he led with the white ball team along with Bayliss, but also deserves to be remembered as one of England's best white ball batters - ahead of his time in the 2010-2015 period really.

Going to be a delayed start today as feared - currently hosing it down at Headingley apparently

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Going to be a delayed start today as feared - currently hosing it down at Headingley apparently

Forecast improves through the day - strong possibility of no play before lunch but should be OK for most of the afternoon and quite nice into the evening. Probably a good thing that England scored freely yesterday, as it should only need one session of play to score the 113 needed (or for the batting collapse), and so there isn't a time pressure.

Anyone know what the odds on an England win were when Foakes was out in the first innings?

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Going to be a delayed start today as feared - currently hosing it down at Headingley apparently

If it's just a rain front passing through hopefully it will clear up quickly. Surely they'll get the 10-12 overs England will need - in.

Think England got out to 15/1 when Foakes was out Dummy - or at least that's what my mate who works for a betting company says!

In other cricket news, England women begin their test against South Africa today - if you want a fix while the men are rained off.

Four debutants in the side, with a bit of a changing of the guard occurring. Glad to see Issy Wong and Lauren Bell selected, really exciting prospects!

I suppose it's not entirely over - 113 runs to get and England can collapse quickly. Three wickets away from dragging an unprepared Billings out, after that it's the tail (and I wouldn't expect J Overton to score 97 again!).

But New Zealand just looked beaten when they were in the field for most of yesterday. Maybe Williamson has given them a kick up the arse, but he looked the most miserable of all of them!

Weather should clear up by the afternoon, and only 30 overs (maximum) are needed to see this through to a result.

Couple of hours to wait for the start then ? At least it seems the women's Test is being shown here in the meantime...

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Think England got out to 15/1 when Foakes was out Dummy - or at least that's what my mate who works for a betting company says!

Odds would have been longer had it been any other ground I can imagine.

alfie wrote:Couple of hours to wait for the start then ?  At least it seems the women's Test is being shown here in the meantime...

Might be a few hours as more rain is set to hit Headingley in an hour's time.

alfie wrote:Couple of hours to wait for the start then ?  At least it seems the women's Test is being shown here in the meantime...

Lauren Bell absolutely hooping it in her first over - still got a way to go with consistency, but she really is a great hope for the women's side looking to replace Shrubsole and Brunt. Only 21 years old! Issy Wong only 20 herself too...looking forward to seeing her first change

Duty281 wrote:

alfie wrote:Couple of hours to wait for the start then ?  At least it seems the women's Test is being shown here in the meantime...

Might be a few hours as more rain is set to hit Headingley in an hour's time.

No early night for me then !

Cross makes Steyn pay for not covering her off stump... Good start for the new opening pair : seems strange not to see Brunt or Shrubsole with the new ball - they seem to have been playing forever .

alfie wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

alfie wrote:Couple of hours to wait for the start then ?  At least it seems the women's Test is being shown here in the meantime...

Might be a few hours as more rain is set to hit Headingley in an hour's time.

No early night for me then !  

Cross makes Steyn pay for not covering her off stump...  Good start for the new opening pair : seems strange not to see Brunt or Shrubsole with the new ball - they seem to have been playing forever .

Now announced a start at 12 (37 minutes time), we'll have to see if this rain misses.

https://www.accuweather.com/en/gb/headingley/ls6-3/minute-weather-forecast/2522150

I think England would have won at a canter in another hour if they'd played on last night, as NZ looked a broken team. The challenge today is whether NZ have regrouped and can actually make some inroads early on. From an England perspective, it would be great if both Pope and Root could reach 3 figures.

Interesting choice for MotM - LEach with a Michelle in each innings, Bairstow with the vital big ton in the first innings, Overton with the essential support and now Pope / Root having moved England most of the way towards victory.

Still looks a bit gloomy . Wonder if the start in 15 minutes will happen.

If - when - they do get out there , the batsmen may not find things quite as easy as last night. Ball is old but seeing won't be so good ; so Root and Pope will want to be switched on from the start.

MoTM will indeed be interesting . Of course if Boult takes six wickets to win it for NZ the choice will be easy

Rain hasn't missed so we're in for a longer delay. Weather set to brighten up in the afternoon, so light shouldn't be an issue.

alfie wrote:Still looks a bit gloomy . Wonder if the start in 15 minutes will happen.

If - when - they do get out there , the batsmen may not find things quite as easy as last night. Ball is old but seeing won't be so good ; so Root and Pope will want to be switched on from the start.

MoTM will indeed be interesting . Of course if Boult takes six wickets to win it for NZ the choice will be easy

I'd make a case for Mitchell or Blundell for their batting contributions.

SA women not doing too well. Four down now at Taunton for just 45 , all the England bowlers playing their part...Heather Knight will be pretty happy with her decision to insert them...

Can't believe what I just heard.

Did Daggers just say to Issy Wong's Mum that her daughter "always has a smile like a dog hanging out the back door of a car"?

No, it was Issy's Dad. Fair enough. Great description.

Rain really settling in. May not be a restart until 3 at the earliest.

Duty281 wrote:Rain really settling in. May not be a restart until 3 at the earliest.

This is going to be a complete wash out , isn't it ? Good old British (northern) weather. At least they let the crowd in for free

alfie wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Rain really settling in. May not be a restart until 3 at the earliest.

This is going to be a complete wash out , isn't it ?   Good old British (northern) weather.  At least they let the crowd in for free

Well they're going to restart in 25 minutes time, but there's more rain on the way. Radar looks clear after 3, so there should be a result.

They're coming out. Wonder if they'll dodge the imminent rain? And will the world test champions show a champion spirit, which has been lacking in this series?

Southee cleans up Pope's stumps with a beautiful delivery. Just the start they needed.

*points to the tweet*

https://twitter.com/tickerscricket/status/1165572856585097216

And that just sums up NZ's issues with defending these fourth innings chases. Southee gets a good dismissal, then the bowler at the other end (Boult) serves up a load of rubbish thus relinquishing any immediate pressure the wicket may have brought.

Duty281 wrote:Southee cleans up Pope's stumps with a beautiful delivery. Just the start they needed.

Decent delivery, but there does seem to be a bit of a hole in Pope's defence to these in-ducking deliveries. Foot went on middle and off and the bat played a 4th -5th stump line and didn't 'close the gate' quite quickly enough.

Didn't realise it had restarted, check the score and its pretty much over!

It's going to be fascinating to see how long Bairstow can keep making runs batting in this manner. Playing like this will naturally see him get out in a seemingly foolish manner sooner or later but at the end of the day out is out whether you're trying to whack it out the ground and skying it or trying to defend one and nicking off.

My general feeling is that a batter with a sound technique playing in a more controlled manner will of course fare better in the long run in Test cricket. Whether a batting line-up full of players with more flawed techniques will fare better playing like this in the long run will genuinely be really interesting and fun to find out if England stick with these tactics.

Realistically I don't think this group of England batters will suddenly become World Test Champions by batting like this. It could actually see it making a small improvement in the overall results in the short to medium term whilst we have such a flawed batting order though.

It's unavoidable that the loss of Taylor and Watling, Williamson struggling with his elbow, CdG and Jamieson respectively getting injured mid-Test and covid has contributed to this not being the same quality of NZ side at the one that deservedly won the inaugural WTC though.

New Zealand will be pleased to see the back of Bairstow and Root, the pair of them have treated the bowlers with contempt the past couple of weeks.

Glad I ignored Duty's "more rain on the way" and stayed tuned...

Not mucking about , are they ? Losing Pope early might have caused some nerves in the "old" days ; but they've just rattled along at 7-8 per over and assured a finish well ahead of the weather...

Only pity is Bairstow has been so dominant he's left Root with not enough spare runs to get his hundred

Don't think Joe will mind.

Hundred stand in what , 13 overs...

NZ attack is pretty well knackered by now ; but this is still remarkable batting from these two Yorkies.

Ben Stokes enjoying the view from the pavilion : he doesn't even seem to be dressed for batting ! Maybe Leach is padded up

And finished with a bang !

How easy was that ! Not much doubt about MoTM ...

Way too easy for England, again.

3-0 is an outstanding result for England. I thought they'd struggle to win a test before the series started. Without trying to sound churlish, I think the result has been more down to how bad New Zealand have been, than how good England have been.

New Zealand have been completely terrible on this tour, completely removed from the smooth unit that came over last year. The three fourth innings chases have shown some of the worst test bowling I've seen, lacking control and accuracy. Their team selections have been bizarre - leaving out Wagner for Henry and leaving out Patel for Bracewell. They've also been unfortunate in that they've suffered with injuries which affected them at a crucial time in tests one and two...but not bowling Patel in the first test was just as culpable for them losing that test. And the batting, with the notable exception of Mitchell and Blundell, has failed. Also, in each of the three third innings, NZ staged a mini-collapse at some point, which saw their position move from 'insurmountable' to 'strong'. Covid, as well, affected them. Terrible stuff all round.

Now for England. I don't think this overly attacking approach will work in the long-term for the test team, and I worry that this result will entrench it as a good idea. 'Remember when England beat New Zealand 3-0' will be the cry as England hack and slash their way to 98ao in Pakistan. I imagine Buttler will come back at some point as he suits this new approach. Having failed to make him the new Gilchrist, they'll try and make him the new Hayden or Sehwag.

England's slip-catching has again been woeful. I thought the praise directed at McCullum for supposedly remedying this after the first test was completely bizarre, he wouldn't have had a chance to implement solutions after such a short time, and so England have reverted to type in tests two and three. It has to be the end for Crawley, hopefully Compton comes in, but Lees has probably bought himself more time (he seems to trying a more aggressive approach to fit in).

The main positive for England has been the discovery of Potts, who adds to the cluster of seam-bowling talent England have in their possession. Leach may have turned a corner, also, and Pope hasn't looked overawed at 3, which is good. Root as strong as ever, playing a key role in two of the chases, as has Bairstow who has entered the best part of his test career.

India next. England should be confident for this one, not just because of this winning run, but because India have had very limited preparation and England controlled three of the tests last summer (only for Root's inept captaincy to cost England two tests).

So Jonny Bairstow was always the GOAT right?

New Zealand have the feel to me of the England side that toured Australia at the end of 2013. They'd just won the home Ashes 3-0 and were favourites. On that tour time caught up very quickly with a number of that side and it was the end of one of the best teams England had ever had. The selections became more and more desperate as well.

Seems to me NZ, having conquered the mountain to become world champions are going to have to look to rebuild. Stalwarts such as Williamson, Nicholls, Southee and Wagner have all been pretty terrible here. Their two all rounders are huge guys, and its not a massive surprise bowling high number of test match intensity overs results in injury. I think they'll still be a good competitive side as they always seem to be, just a few notches below what was probably their best ever team

How on earth have they not given Bairstow man of the match

Afraid that does sound just a little churlish , Duty. Maybe NZ looked bad because England didn't let them play any better ? You can always choose to rubbish the losing team or praise the winners , when an overwhelming result occurs : usually it is a bit of both.

Agreed NZ had bad luck with injuries- compounded by some poor selection choices. But also note England were down to about their tenth choice pace bowler by the end of the series... And that sort of worked out OK .

Of course no guarantees this new approach will allow England to sweep all before them ; but I for one don't expect them to take it to ridiculous extremes as they move forward. Even yesterday Pope and Root were "busy" rather than super aggressive after the early two wickets ; and if they scored rapidly they generally did so without taking many risks. I reckon they will temper their methods to suit the circumstances - though I'm sure the intent to press as hard as is practical will remain their mantra. Won't always work but I can't see why it won't be better than the insipid stuff they had slipped into over that string of defeats.

Still got India and SA to come soon so we will get a better idea of where they stand. But I do think a bit of optimism isn't exactly out of place after the last three games...

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:How on earth have they not given Bairstow man of the match

Yeah I must say I thought he'd be the man ! Must like to share these awards around as he got the previous one...and Jack Leach certainly did play a big part with his ten wickets ...but still : two innings like that...

Must have been a fine line in picking Root over YJB for the series award too. But they probably open the fancy booze in the team after party

alfie wrote:Afraid that does sound just a little churlish , Duty. Maybe NZ looked bad because England didn't let them play any better ? You can always choose to rubbish the losing team or praise the winners , when an overwhelming result occurs : usually it is a bit of both.

Agreed NZ had bad luck with injuries- compounded by some poor selection choices. But also note England were down to about their tenth choice pace bowler by the end of the series... And that sort of worked out OK .

Of course no guarantees this new approach will allow England to sweep all before them ; but I for one don't expect them to take it to ridiculous extremes as they move forward. Even yesterday Pope and Root were "busy" rather than super aggressive after the early two wickets ; and if they scored rapidly they generally did so without taking many risks. I reckon they will temper their methods to suit the circumstances - though I'm sure the intent to press as hard as is practical will remain their mantra. Won't always work but I can't see why it won't be better than the insipid stuff they had slipped into over that string of defeats.

Still got India and SA to come soon so we will get a better idea of where they stand. But I do think a bit of optimism isn't exactly out of place after the last three games...

Not sure about that. NZ's bowling in the fourth innings was generally atrocious, which allowed England to score freely, rather than England attacking first and knocking NZ off their lines.

Today showed a good example. Southee bowled a good first over, knocking over Pope, then next over Boult at the other end serves up three short, wide deliveries and his over goes for 17, pressure completely vanishes. I enjoyed Bairstow's blistering innings at Nottingham, but how many short leg-side balls did he get?!

I probably just expected better from NZ and through the test series they competed well and were usually ahead after three innings of each test, but in the fourth innings they would fall away. Combined series score for England of 874/13 in the fourth innings from 183 overs tells you everything.

England were down to their tenth choice pace bowler or so, yes, but they didn't suffer any key injuries during the match and leaving them a bowler light in-game, as NZ did through CdG and Jamieson.

alfie wrote:Afraid that does sound just a little churlish , Duty. Maybe NZ looked bad because England didn't let them play any better ? You can always choose to rubbish the losing team or praise the winners , when an overwhelming result occurs : usually it is a bit of both.

Agreed NZ had bad luck with injuries- compounded by some poor selection choices. But also note England were down to about their tenth choice pace bowler by the end of the series... And that sort of worked out OK .

Of course no guarantees this new approach will allow England to sweep all before them ; but I for one don't expect them to take it to ridiculous extremes as they move forward. Even yesterday Pope and Root were "busy" rather than super aggressive after the early two wickets ; and if they scored rapidly they generally did so without taking many risks. I reckon they will temper their methods to suit the circumstances - though I'm sure the intent to press as hard as is practical will remain their mantra. Won't always work but I can't see why it won't be better than the insipid stuff they had slipped into over that string of defeats.

Still got India and SA to come soon so we will get a better idea of where they stand. But I do think a bit of optimism isn't exactly out of place after the last three games...

You could claim that if NZ played so badly, that the new approach looked more gung-ho as a result. If they decided to attack anything that was a half bad delivery, they were presented with so many that they scored at 5,6,7 an over.

Against a better attack, they might be presented with less opportunity and therefore not appear as gung-ho.

Guess what I'm saying is that you have to look at both sides approaches in tandem and how well/poorly/aggressively/passively one side plays reflects on the other team too.

Afro wrote:

alfie wrote:Afraid that does sound just a little churlish , Duty. Maybe NZ looked bad because England didn't let them play any better ? You can always choose to rubbish the losing team or praise the winners , when an overwhelming result occurs : usually it is a bit of both.

Agreed NZ had bad luck with injuries- compounded by some poor selection choices. But also note England were down to about their tenth choice pace bowler by the end of the series... And that sort of worked out OK .

Of course no guarantees this new approach will allow England to sweep all before them ; but I for one don't expect them to take it to ridiculous extremes as they move forward. Even yesterday Pope and Root were "busy" rather than super aggressive after the early two wickets ; and if they scored rapidly they generally did so without taking many risks. I reckon they will temper their methods to suit the circumstances - though I'm sure the intent to press as hard as is practical will remain their mantra. Won't always work but I can't see why it won't be better than the insipid stuff they had slipped into over that string of defeats.

Still got India and SA to come soon so we will get a better idea of where they stand. But I do think a bit of optimism isn't exactly out of place after the last three games...

You could claim that if NZ played so badly, that the new approach looked more gung-ho as a result. If they decided to attack anything that was a half bad delivery, they were presented with so many that they scored at 5,6,7 an over.

Against a better attack, they might be presented with less opportunity and therefore not appear as gung-ho.

Guess what I'm saying is that you have to look at both sides approaches in tandem and how well/poorly/aggressively/passively one side plays reflects on the other team too.

I feel that’s extremely valid. We’ll be able to make an even better and more thorough evaluation of England’s effectiveness at the end of the summer when we can look at it against more Test nations than just New Zealand. I’ll therefore hold off anything too pronounced until then. In the meantime, I’ll happily celebrate tonight a 3-0 series win, something which doesn’t come around too often.

Tbf though to Duty and if I were a Kiwi, I would be having a lot to say tonight about my team and not too much of it would be positive.

Stokes said a player's method "will be on the selectors' minds" when picking future squads.

"These last three games should have sent a message to anyone who wants to play Test cricket for England in the next two or three years at least," he said.

"It is the manner in which you play, whether that be bat or ball. It wasn't going to be about stats; it is the manner in which you play.

"We want to build on this. It's not just about us at the moment but the future as well."

Oh dear. This isn't going to end well. Not everyone will serve up buffet bowling like New Zealand.

Duty281 wrote:Stokes said a player's method "will be on the selectors' minds" when picking future squads.

"These last three games should have sent a message to anyone who wants to play Test cricket for England in the next two or three years at least," he said.

"It is the manner in which you play, whether that be bat or ball. It wasn't going to be about stats; it is the manner in which you play.

"We want to build on this. It's not just about us at the moment but the future as well."

Oh dear. This isn't going to end well. Not everyone will serve up buffet bowling like New Zealand.

I’ll wait to see how this plays out on the field before reaching judgement.

However, I do have some appreciation for Duty’s view. Whilst a team needs to try to create and dictate the situation, it also needs to show understanding of the situation and circumstances which might be applying and play accordingly.

If we are 2/2 on the first morning of a Test, my top priority will still be to be only 2 down when we go in for lunch regardless of the runs scored by then. I like to think that Stokes wouldn’t fundamentally disagree with that even though his words tend to suggest otherwise. Anyway, it’s the performances I’ll get wrapped up about.

Can we just enjoy what was a very good series win without making excuses for the opposition; England were better and entertained, that's all that really matters.

Agree, if we lose to India its nothing to be ashamed of, I'd say them and Australia are the real top two at the moment. A few months ago we couldn't dispatch the Windies, who are not really a good side. With the resources available England should never be below around 3rd or 4th in the world, but had embarrassingly slipped to around 8th or 9th.

Soul Requiem wrote:Can we just enjoy what was a very good series win without making excuses for the opposition; England were better and entertained, that's all that really matters.

Was going to say, we'd won 1 of our last 18 (I believe) test matches coming into the series - as VTR says coming off one of the most disheartening series I've seen England play in WI earlier this year...where quite frankly I think most of us were thoroughly unengaged (the most dangerous place for a sports team to reach is one where fans have apathy!). To turn that round to a 3-0 home series win, no matter who or what the opposition were, is worth celebrating.

I'm sure this "positive" approach will lead to the odd 80 all out down the line (heck maybe even next week) - but lets not pretend that hasn't happened when playing "more traditionally" either, we've just come off a winter where we crapped ourselves at the very sight of bloody Scott Boland and made him look like a prime Glenn McGrath!

Did enjoy the McCullum interview with Sky post series - worth a watch I think, I can see how him and Morgan got on so well in their time at the IPL - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CAyvWC2j4c

Also think he deserves some initial credit for installing some belief and already a little bit of aura back into the side - again, not saying they'll bounce back from conceding 500+ to win, or being 55/6 to win, or chasing 250+ in the 4th dig to win everytime, but evidently over the last 18 or so months with basically the same players, they often folded badly when things begun to go against them - to start getting some belief back into the side in a three week span is a good sign going forward.

As for going forward, McCullum/Stokes have clearly stated players will get one game too many, so it looks like Crawley will play against India. Billings is in the squad, so must be some doubt over Foakes's covid situation...and hopefully Anderson will be fit to take his place in the bowling lineup.

India, with some quality spin bowling, will definitely be more of a challenge for some of England's batsmen - Pope has looked all at sea against them and Bairstow hasn't always been the best starter against spin, even if he can be very destructive once set.

Be interesting to see if the aggressive approach remains as uninhibited, or if we rein things in a bit to try to make a better score - of course if it's Pope and Root that are in, the score oard tends to tick over quite fluently even with relatively low risk shot making, so it's more about whether YJB and Stokes try to bat or just try to hit their way through the Indian attack.

Of course, opener remains an issue, even if Lees has had a few moments where he's looked the part. Crawley does not look to be the answer at the top of the order. The question is do we go backwards to (say) Burns or try someone new (Compton)?

Provided Foakes isn't actually ill with COVID, he's got time to get back hasn't he? Otherwise, do we play Bairstow as a keeper and bring in Brook, or pick a new keeper (which I'm sure based on the dressing room attitude would be Buttler)?

As for England's bowling, I can see India trying to take Leach down. Presumably Jimmy A will be back in the team; the most likely to drop out I guess is Overton, whose major contribution to the last match was with the bat. Not convinced by a tail of Potts, Leach, Broad and Anderson, but it is probably the pick of the available bowlers. Other option, which I don't like and would be incredibly harsh given his MotM award in the last game, would be to stand Leach down (on the grounds he's much less likely to be effective against India than he was against NZ) and keep Overton in the side.

Soul Requiem wrote:Can we just enjoy what was a very good series win without making excuses for the opposition; England were better and entertained, that's all that really matters.

Spot on. You can pull any part of the NZ performance apart if that's your narrative.

I said this ages ago on here - England fans, in the majority anyway, will get behind their teams if they can see a process in place. Same in any team and any business. People will accept failure if they can see there is a strategy and a process. Exactly what happened with the white ball team post 2015. That team was just about as low as the test team has been recently. Morgan and Bayliss took over, had a clear and concise strategy in place. They were accepting of the fact that the journey wouldn't be a straight line and that they would get rolled for 120 in 30 overs but they stuck to their principles and ended up WC winners and world number 1 in both formats.

Clearly a more nuanced approach is needed in test cricket but the fundamental principle is the same. Have a clear and concise strategy, fill the team and support staff with people who buy into that vision and go from there. Accept the failures along the way and build a culture that looks at them as learning events rather than failure. In every business I've ever worked in, that has been the foundation of them all. Good and bad. Sometimes it just won't work and maybe the BazBall revolution will fail, but I would rather they try something new and fail than carry on repeating the mistakes of the past and still fail. The end result is the same.

Lets get behind them, back the vision and see where they end up. It will be a lot of fun on the way and that is a massive step change from the last few years at least.

Some excellent posts above. Guess how you want to react to this series overall is going to depend on your own natural tendencies to optimism or the reverse... I am in the former camp generally but accept some caution is always reasonable. In fact one of the things I have always , when captaining teams , tried to instil in my players is to never get too up ; or too down over a short passage of play : the game can always change quickly - the old "add two wickets" thing... What matters over time is how you handle the big moments.

Winning 3-0 over a NZ team which is still pretty handy even if probably in decline - or at least in "reset" mode after some retirements , should be cause for joy. Doesn't in itself mean England's problems are all solved ; but I really think the change in attitude and resultant confidence among the playing group is not about to fizzle out in a hurry.

India - even if a little short of preparation - are likely to present a different , and probably tougher , challenge. They will have a more varied attack , with much better spin options ; and are unlikely to have many issues with bowler fatigue in this single match situation - so the England bats may need to dial back the aggression at times. Just how England manage the tricky balance between positivity and reckless over-aggression is something I am really keen to observe in this match. May be wrong ; but I can't help but think Stokes is talking up the "fix bayonets , charge !" narrative just a little for the press and the public interest ; and in reality England have an eye to playing the game with serious intent ; but not without attention to the situation on the day. We will see...but I'd imagine whatever happens it is likely to be fun to watch.