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

First topic message reminder :

Duty281 wrote:What do we think of the future of ODI cricket as a whole, because its demise is once again being discussed?

Wasim Akram thinks ODI cricket should be put out of its misery; Mark Ramprakash says that Stokes' ODI retirement could be the beginning of the end for ODI cricket; but Ravi Shastri says there should be fewer T20Is.

My view is that ODI cricket should stay, and it's T20i cricket that should be abolished. T20 should remain franchise/domestic only. No need for a T20 World Cup when the IPL and such exists. If T20i cricket does stay, I think there should be no three format players, only two formats maximum. I'd be very disappointed if 50-over cricket died on an international basis.  

No format will die as long as they are generating revenues.
And much as I used to call them Meaningless-Masala-ODIs, these games as well as meaningless T20Is generate more revenue then tests.
Instead of 5 to 7 ODIs per series earlier...now limited over series comprise of 3+3.
Test Matches, "The Premium Form" of the game per purists ( including me) is still the commercially subsidized format of the game.
Now the defeats in ODIs/T20Is don't hurt as much, nor are wins remembered for long, only World Cups stay in memory.
But the international games generate high viewership rating & expensive advertisements (atleast on Indian TV)

As I wrote on the Ind-WI thread, the Indians have stopped complaining about too much cricket.
BCCI has found peace by putting out as many as 2 and a half to 3 squads now...call them Senior (or premium) and A and B squads for international games.
Ensuring prime stars get plenty of rest / rotation......and the pool of contracted players gets bigger and everyone gets full contracted fee, playing lesser games
Recently we have seen 2 Indian series running concurrently and twice VVSL has been India's national coach for a series when Dravid was with another Indian squad at the same time in another series.

If a marquee player Stokes was under BCCI management.....BCCI would have NEVER let him retire, would have done a sweet deal with him guaranteeing his workload across formats and asking him to appear for a very limited number of ODIs and T20Is and also letting him skip B grade test series.

No format will die since even these meaningless ODI&T20Is are indeed generating revenues, that are essential to subsidize tests and pump into FC, junior and women cricket development

Soul Requiem wrote:I hadn't realised quite how good a start to his test career that Robinson has had; 51 wickets in 11 matches at under 20. Strike rate and economy are also very very good.

I haven't fact checked it but I'm sure I heard someone on the tv say he had beaten Glenn McGrath to 50 test wickets.

Lets hope he stays injury free as he will be an absolute handful over the next few years.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:I hadn't realised quite how good a start to his test career that Robinson has had; 51 wickets in 11 matches at under 20. Strike rate and economy are also very very good.

I haven't fact checked it but I'm sure I heard someone on the tv say he had beaten Glenn McGrath to 50 test wickets.

Lets hope he stays injury free as he will be an absolute handful over the next few years.

McGrath took his 50th test wicket in his 15th match I think, his first handful of matches were quite ordinary.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:I hadn't realised quite how good a start to his test career that Robinson has had; 51 wickets in 11 matches at under 20. Strike rate and economy are also very very good.

I haven't fact checked it but I'm sure I heard someone on the tv say he had beaten Glenn McGrath to 50 test wickets.

Lets hope he stays injury free as he will be an absolute handful over the next few years.

I think we’ll see more records like that over the next few years, of guys who have started in this era of seam bowling dominance.

You’ve got Jamieson who has 72 @ 19.4 and even Jansen has 37 @ 18.16. Probably other guys I am forgetting too! I think Robinson is a sensational bowler, but I do wonder if batting conditions remain this tough then starts to careers like his will become more common.

All a bit academic now...but Rabada hasn't had much luck this innings . Twice he's had Lees dropped now.
For Lees , it kind of confirms his obvious weakness. Will this innings (which might reach fifty if he continues to be lucky ) keep him in the side ?

Think Crawley has done enough to be safe for now given how much they have already invested in him. He has looked very good in this innings.

JDizzle wrote:

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:I hadn't realised quite how good a start to his test career that Robinson has had; 51 wickets in 11 matches at under 20. Strike rate and economy are also very very good.

I haven't fact checked it but I'm sure I heard someone on the tv say he had beaten Glenn McGrath to 50 test wickets.

Lets hope he stays injury free as he will be an absolute handful over the next few years.

I think we’ll see more records like that over the next few years, of guys who have started in this era of seam bowling dominance.

You’ve got Jamieson who has 72 @ 19.4 and even Jansen has 37 @ 18.16. Probably other guys I am forgetting too! I think Robinson is a sensational bowler, but I do wonder if batting conditions remain this tough then starts to careers like his will become more common.

Yep, totally agree. Tough time to be top order batters at the moment.

There are 42 bowlers above Robinson in terms of matches with a pretty even spread through the decades. Since the turn of the century Philander is way out front, doing it in SEVEN matches.

Soul Requiem wrote:There are 42 bowlers above Robinson in terms of matches with a pretty even spread through the decades. Since the turn of the century Philander is way out front, doing it in SEVEN matches.

Seven! Jesus.

Ah...justice done as Rabada gets Lees via a shrewd review. I'm still not at all convinced about Lees after that innings .

Don't think England will be too nervous about getting 22 more runs though

Lees has benefitted from loads of dropped catches but still hasn't done much. Would rather any of Burns, Hameed or Sibley, think they all did better with the chances they got

Actually I'll add the troll comment that Jack Leach was a better Test opener as well

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:There are 42 bowlers above Robinson in terms of matches with a pretty even spread through the decades. Since the turn of the century Philander is way out front, doing it in SEVEN matches.

Seven! Jesus.

The first innings of that seventh match. His average at that point was less than 11.

Soul Requiem wrote:

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:There are 42 bowlers above Robinson in terms of matches with a pretty even spread through the decades. Since the turn of the century Philander is way out front, doing it in SEVEN matches.

Seven! Jesus.

The first innings of that seventh match. His average at that point was less than 11.

I remember him bursting on the scene but didn't realise his numbers were that off the chart. That is incredible.

Nearly there...

Who's the PoTM ? Probably be Robinson - and fair enough , that first day effort was excellent : but I think Pope also has a decent case as he's made about twice as many runs as everyone else on an apparently very tricky surface...that innings of his looks better the longer the game has gone.

Five to win now as Pope fortunately isn't damaged by that knock...

Nine wicket win

Pretty comprehensive . Crawley will be happy with 69 no , and a nice shot to finish the summer.
2-1 series win.

Think we can celebrate that

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:There are 42 bowlers above Robinson in terms of matches with a pretty even spread through the decades. Since the turn of the century Philander is way out front, doing it in SEVEN matches.

Seven! Jesus.

The first innings of that seventh match. His average at that point was less than 11.

I remember him bursting on the scene but didn't realise his numbers were that off the chart. That is incredible.

Axar Patel currently stood on 39 after 6 games. Would be a challenge to match him, but not impossible if he gets a dust bowl vs this SA side!

And that's it.

I thought that was a dispiritingly low-quality test series, with frequent amateur batting from both sides. It's been a strange summer overall. England have amassed a record of 6-1, yet I don't think they've made any real steps forward, but the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune have favoured them at various points. I'm usually impressed by visiting South African teams, but this one was a very poor imitation.

Crawley got 69* against an opposition that had given up, and I honestly think that's the worst thing to see, because Crawley's place is now secure despite his dismalness when batting actually matters. We'll see how England go against Pakistan in the winter in markedly different conditions.

The T20 cycle begins in 8 days time with the seven-game series against Pakistan, followed by the three games v Australia, then the World Cup itself, so test cricket takes a back seat for a while.

alfie wrote:Nine wicket win

Pretty comprehensive .  Crawley will be happy with 69 no , and a nice shot to finish the summer.
2-1 series win.

Think we can celebrate that

Yes, a fine way to finish the summer for England. Congratulations Alfie and all on this board.    

Now we can get down to the more serious stuff like the European Cricket Championship. Austria made 107/7 in their 10 overs and Spain is off to a decent start. A nasty collision in the field there with some Austrian fielders putting a relatively easy catch down. Spain now only need 86 runs off 49 balls. They should cruise it in...

Duty281 wrote:And that's it.

I thought that was a dispiritingly low-quality test series, with frequent amateur batting from both sides. It's been a strange summer overall. England have amassed a record of 6-1, yet I don't think they've made any real steps forward, but the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune have favoured them at various points. I'm usually impressed by visiting South African teams, but this one was a very poor imitation.

Crawley got 69* against an opposition that had given up, and I honestly think that's the worst thing to see, because Crawley's place is now secure despite his dismalness when batting actually matters. We'll see how England go against Pakistan in the winter in markedly different conditions.

I just want to give you a cuddle and cheer you up sometimes, Dooty!

So what do people think of Pope at three?

He's had an ok summer but in recent England terms it's probably a very good one; 456 @ 38 with one century and three other 50's. I still have reservations about him coming in so early, he's frenetic until he reaches about 20 odd when he settles down and starts to show his class. There's potential for him to be a long term option.

A good start from Pope, but not a great one. He has been England's highest run-scorer in this South African series, and was the only Englishman who appeared to know what to do with the bat at Lord's and in the first innings of this test. He also got the century on the Nottingham pancake v NZ and made a solid contribution in the Leeds chase. His SR this summer has, perhaps unsurprisingly, seen an increase, and he's managed to get his test average back in the 30s. Conversion of 50s to 100s remains an issue. An average of 38 for the summer isn't earth-shattering, but England will gratefully take it and will be pleased if Pope can maintain it.

It'll be interesting to see what England do with him in Pakistan. Part of the reason he was given a promotion to 3 was to hide him from the spinners, but there will be no hiding in the subcontinent, and it'll be interesting to see how he copes in that environment.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

Duty281 wrote:And that's it.

I thought that was a dispiritingly low-quality test series, with frequent amateur batting from both sides. It's been a strange summer overall. England have amassed a record of 6-1, yet I don't think they've made any real steps forward, but the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune have favoured them at various points. I'm usually impressed by visiting South African teams, but this one was a very poor imitation.

Crawley got 69* against an opposition that had given up, and I honestly think that's the worst thing to see, because Crawley's place is now secure despite his dismalness when batting actually matters. We'll see how England go against Pakistan in the winter in markedly different conditions.

I just want to give you a cuddle and cheer you up sometimes, Dooty!

I may be somewhat down, but I don't enjoy seeing tests where the conclusion is over inside two full days of play, as happened in this series twice. There were only two completed innings, out of nine, where a side managed to score more than 180. It's a poor advert for test cricket, and I was very disappointed by a limp South Africa team that came here on a run of good results.

I agree with that line of thinking. South Africa series used to be hard fought, and often epics. This series felt like it was on fast forward with three poor matches. I'll take England being on the right side of that, but it wasn't a good series

If one wishes to find something to complain about , I guess you can say short and eventually one-sided matches lack in some areas...but at the same time if you like watching devastating bowling spells then these games have been a nice change from bat-dominated matches - like the ones earlier in the summer when it seemed no lead was ever enough...

Really we've had a bit of everything this year - except ten run or two wicket victories (or bore draws ). And very few days which didn't feature either rapid change of momentum and/or spectacularly fast scoring. If the eventual results were all fairly conclusive , I think almost every game had people expecting the complete opposite result after one , two or three days before it all turned around - so the lack of a close finish didn't equate to any level of boredom.

I reckon we've been treated to some pretty good entertainment all round.

Soul Requiem wrote:So what do people think of Pope at three?

He's had an ok summer but in recent England terms it's probably a very good one; 456 @ 38 with one century and three other 50's. I still have reservations about him coming in so early, he's frenetic until he reaches about 20 odd when he settles down and starts to show his class. There's potential for him to be a long term option.

A pretty promising summer, which I'm not entirely sure has been reflected in his average for the summer...if that makes any sense.
I think we'd all take him averaging 38 coming in at 3 for the rest of his career though - I do think he looks better there, and I also think he bats well with Root as and when they get the opportunity. He would surely, as has been the case with many others, benefit if we could find some openers with some shred of consistency...

Duty I see you have mentioned about spin in Pakistan re: Pope - but I do think it is important to note that I think conditions historically, and definitely since the return of test cricket to the country in 2019, have shown that Pakistan isn't actually the same hotbed for spinners as say when you rock up at Galle or Mirpur. and you have spin on from over 8 on day one.
Pitches out there tend to be pretty flat, and favour more of their pace/left arm variety...of course spin comes into it later in the game - but providing they don't suddenly alter there plans, I would suspect you see similar wickets to the Aus series out there last year, which was generally high scoring, things happening towards the end of the game stuff

Soul Requiem wrote:So what do people think of Pope at three?

He's had an ok summer but in recent England terms it's probably a very good one; 456 @ 38 with one century and three other 50's. I still have reservations about him coming in so early, he's frenetic until he reaches about 20 odd when he settles down and starts to show his class. There's potential for him to be a long term option.

TMS made the point that he tended to be getting runs that mattered - was top scorer in the innings 3 times, so while his numbers aren't sensational, they've been decent especially when viewed in the context of difficult batting conditions.

I am moderately impressed with Pope over these seven games. Hasn't torn down trees , exactly ; but an average of 38 is middling to good by recent English standards ; one big hundred , albeit on a flat sort of pitch , and a couple of very valuable half centuries in much more challenging conditions which were at least as significant for the team...not a bad return for his first run at number three - especially when you consider he was coming back from a disastrous tour of Australia that might well have ruined him permanently . He's shown a lot of character in that alone.
One might quibble that so far he's not managed to put two scores together ; but worth remembering that he was usually in very early due to the struggles of the opening pair , and faced some rather decent opposition attacks. Can't expect runs every time in those circumstances. He will probably have easier series for batting in the future if he continues to develop.

The Pakistan tour might present some problems but as Olly says the pitches there weren't really spin crazy when Australia visited. We will have to wait and see whether the same applies this time : I do have a hunch they'll be a bit more spin friendly in December - partly because the ultra-flat surfaces early this year produced a good deal of rather forgettable cricket ; and also because the home team may fancy its chances against an England side often shaky against spin and lacking much in that department of their own.

The SA batting team was poor, I suppose but I don't think there was that big a gap between the two teams. Heading into lunch yesterday, SA were essentially 40/1 before England put together a genuinely inspired spell of bowling to break the game open. Some of that was of course inexperienced on SA's side, but most of it was the objective truth that the a ball which England had tried to get replaced literally doubled in it's movement. Not quite as dramatic, but its a bit like Broad breaking the 2009 Ashes open.

Sadly though, we've gotten on the franchise T20 diet for the foreseeable future, meaning this probably will stay our best chance to win a series in England for at least a generation.

For England though, the only question is their top 2. Lees was the worst opener in a series where every opener sucked, so you'd think he'll be dropped. While Crawley will hope that beating up on a defeated attack in the last inning will be enough to mask the fact that he was averaging 17 heading into the final innings. They've got Pakistan after this, and those pitches offer a golden opportunity to get some credit in the bank.

https://www.somersetcountycc.co.uk/news/club-news/sccc-board-statement/

Somerset throwing some shade at the ECB and the Hundred:

"The current domestic playing programme, which resulted in only four one-day matches being played in Taunton over 43 days in the height of summer this year, with 17 Somerset players unavailable, is unacceptable to the Club, its Members and the South West’s cricketing public."

It seems Somerset are against Strauss' reforms for now as they stress the need for a greater consultation period.

Will MacPherson reporting that Alec Stewart is the “front runner” for the national selector role

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Will MacPherson reporting that Alec Stewart is the “front runner” for the national selector role

Jack Leach will be quaking in his boots

James100 wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Will MacPherson reporting that Alec Stewart is the “front runner” for the national selector role

Jack Leach will be quaking in his boots

Why would that be? Has he threatened to bring Zafar Ansari out of retirement as a replacement?!

VTR wrote:

James100 wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Will MacPherson reporting that Alec Stewart is the “front runner” for the national selector role

Jack Leach will be quaking in his boots

Why would that be? Has he threatened to bring Zafar Ansari out of retirement as a replacement?!

Hasn't picked a spinner in the Championship all season at Surrey despite having Moriarty and Virdi warming the benches.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Will MacPherson reporting that Alec Stewart is the “front runner” for the national selector role

Maybe they could try hiring someone who wasn’t a top level cricketer for one of these roles at some point? Might be worth a go.

Thanks, that's a shame for Virdi especially, who seemed to be someone England had an eye on but has fallen away completely and I think I read somewhere might even consider retiring

JDizzle wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Will MacPherson reporting that Alec Stewart is the “front runner” for the national selector role

Maybe they could try hiring someone who wasn’t a top level cricketer for one of these roles at some point? Might be worth a go.

I would say at least with Stewart he’s clearly got a very good knowledge of the county circuit having done his role at Surrey for so long now…with decent effect too. Think that is fairly important with McCullum being coach, this time around

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

JDizzle wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Will MacPherson reporting that Alec Stewart is the “front runner” for the national selector role

Maybe they could try hiring someone who wasn’t a top level cricketer for one of these roles at some point? Might be worth a go.

I would say at least with Stewart he’s clearly got a very good knowledge of the county circuit having done his role at Surrey for so long now…with decent effect too. Think that is fairly important with McCullum being coach, this time around

It’s not even really a shot at Stewart. He seems a well respected bloke. He might well be the best man for the job - I just struggle to believe the best man for all these jobs happen to be ex top level players! They limit the pool of talent they can pick from massively.

Stewart should be OK . Not sure they even need the post filled though - Key seems to have been managing quite well working with McCullum and Stokes so far

But of course it isn't always just a case of picking a squad of 14 for a home summer and subbing others in for the odd injury ... I guess with various tours and future planning it makes sense to spread the decision making load a little.

Whoever is picking the team will have to sort out plans for Pakistan first. I see Moeen and Rashid have apparently expressed a lack of desire for the series so if England are taking spin back-up for Leach that is (along with the opening pair) a key decision that needs to be taken.

I looked back at some comments Stewart made in March ; and find it encouraging that he spoke of the need to reward strong performances in the County game - and to recognize that the step up in class means it is also necessary to give a player a reasonable number of games to effect that step up , rather than be discarded too hastily. This seems to align well with the present management plan so might make his appointment the perfect fit ?

If the Pakistan pitches are flat rather than turners again then I'd ere towards 3 seamers and Stokes with Leach backing them up anyway I think.

Still definitely need 3 spinners on tour though as if a Bunsen suddenly appears you will want to play 2 spinners so need that back up for safety. Parkinson will presumably be one. Whilst I'm a fan I do fear he bowls a bit slow to trouble the best batters consistently. The 3rd is a your guess is a good as mine scenario I think?

Openers wise I'd probably go back to Burns who I still think for his flaws is a better player than Lees or Crawley. Then I'd pair him with Jennings who will suit flatter wickets or turning ones. I see Crawley being persevered with but that's what I'd do.

1.Burns
2.Jennings
3.Pope
4.Root
5.YJB
6.Stokes (c)
7.Foakes (wk)
8.Robinson
9.Wood?
10.Leach
11.Anderson/Broad

If Wood doesn't make it that attack looks very different overseas though as presumably next in line will be Potts, COverton, JOverton, etc which feels like a one pace England attack away from England situation. Stone is still crocked, as is Carse even.

From what I understand Jof is a way off sadly as he's one of the best raw talents I've seen with the ball in such a long time. Cummins and Rabada level talent. The ability to bowl 96mph bouncers but also pull it back to mid-80s and take an Ashes five-fer with sublimely skilful seam bowling is extremely rare. I genuinely love watching him bowl in all formats. He glues me to the couch watching every ball. If the injuries prevent him playing a significant number of Tests I'll feel strangely bereft in away.

king_carlos wrote:
From what I understand Jof is a way off sadly as he's one of the best raw talents I've seen with the ball in such a long time. Cummins and Rabada level talent. The ability to bowl 96mph bouncers but also pull it back to mid-80s and take an Ashes five-fer with sublimely skilful seam bowling is extremely rare. I genuinely love watching him bowl in all formats. He glues me to the couch watching every ball. If the injuries prevent him playing a significant number of Tests I'll feel strangely bereft in away.

If only the England management could see that, they may have stopped trying to use him as a battering ram every match. His 90+ spells were exciting but he didn't tend to take wickets, line and length, line and length did the trick, yes it needed saying twice. The worse thing to happen to his career was hitting Smith.

JDizzle wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Will MacPherson reporting that Alec Stewart is the “front runner” for the national selector role

Maybe they could try hiring someone who wasn’t a top level cricketer for one of these roles at some point? Might be worth a go.

So replicate what they've done with the Test openers?

VTR wrote:

JDizzle wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Will MacPherson reporting that Alec Stewart is the “front runner” for the national selector role

Maybe they could try hiring someone who wasn’t a top level cricketer for one of these roles at some point? Might be worth a go.

So replicate what they've done with the Test openers?

It’s tough to argue that a combination of Key, McCullum and Stewart would have averaged less opening the batting this summer than Crawley and Lees!

A lot of plates spinning on this Pakistan tour

Buttler/Woakes/Wood seem unlikely to play until the later leg of the tour due to fitness
Salt likely to keep wicket
Mott talking about balancing prepping for World Cup, and giving those who aren't in the squad for the WC, but are here, a good look.

I couldn't begin to predict an XI for the first game this week - I just hope to see Olly Stone, and somehow force his way into the WC squad at a late stage...

Yeah, the whole thing is in a mess at the moment. The good news is England have given themselves 11 games to figure out their starting XI for the World Cup (7 in Pakistan, 3 v Aus in Aus, and 1 more v Pakistan in Aus) which will hopefully be enough. Hopefully they'll know what it is by the time they leave Pakistan. Although a concern could be that the team may fall apart if something terrible happens, such as losing 6-1 or 7-0 in Pakistan, or Hales' inclusion causing issues.

It's a really odd squad for Pakistan. Even in a direct build up to the World T20 it's such a depleted squad.

Looking at the make up with so many bowlers and relatively few batters I have a feeling we may see a bowler heavy approach to test out a fair few seamers. Testing both their fitness and form I would imagine in many cases.

I'd guess we will see Mo batting at 6 or higher. I wouldn't be surprised to see Surran floating up the order as well when matchups suit.

From 7 down the order likely consisting of two out of Surran, Woakes and Willey at 7 and 8. Then Dilly or Dawson at 9.

The bowling attack needs some things to click though. Wood or Stone being fit and on form is vital for Oz. Woakes or Surran going well in the PP likely very important too. Topley maintaining his recent form as well. It's an attack with lots of question marks due to all the injuries.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:A lot of plates spinning on this Pakistan tour

Buttler/Woakes/Wood seem unlikely to play until the later leg of the tour due to fitness
Salt likely to keep wicket
Mott talking about balancing prepping for World Cup, and giving those who aren't in the squad for the WC, but are here, a good look.

I couldn't begin to predict an XI for the first game this week - I just hope to see Olly Stone, and somehow force his way into the WC squad at a late stage...

Careful what you wish for , Olly : given the WC squad plus three reserves (two of those being pace bowlers) has been picked - for Stone to get in now would require rather a lot of pace bowlers to break down over the next couple of weeks ! Do we really need any more injuries ?

alfie wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:A lot of plates spinning on this Pakistan tour

Buttler/Woakes/Wood seem unlikely to play until the later leg of the tour due to fitness
Salt likely to keep wicket
Mott talking about balancing prepping for World Cup, and giving those who aren't in the squad for the WC, but are here, a good look.

I couldn't begin to predict an XI for the first game this week - I just hope to see Olly Stone, and somehow force his way into the WC squad at a late stage...

Careful what you wish for , Olly : given the WC squad plus three reserves (two of those being pace bowlers) has been picked - for Stone to get in now would require rather a lot of pace bowlers to break down over the next couple of weeks ! Do we really need any more injuries ?

Woakes picking up a niggle and Stone coming in for him and opening the bowling wouldn't be the "worst" thing to ever happen imo....

England: (possible) 1 Alex Hales, 2 Phil Salt (wk), 3 Dawid Malan, 4 Ben Duckett/Will Jacks, 5 Harry Brook, 6 Moeen Ali (capt), 7 Sam Curran, 8 David Willey, 9 Adil Rashid, 10 Luke Wood/Olly Stone, 11 Richard Gleeson.

Cricinfo reckoning that for the probable team tomorrow. Buttler, Woakes and Mark Wood won't be available until at least game five of the series, so it gives a chance for Salt and Hales to duel directly for the secondary opening berth.

Hales and Salt both tend to attack from early on. That is the role England need filled to complement Buttler. Having both of them together means it could start spectacularly well or diabolically though! Perhaps some a good chances for Malan to get the long innings he likes at least.

Malan should suit the conditions for the World T20. I've never been as convinced as some by Malan and I tend towards the view that Malan holding the no 1 spot in T20i rankings more sums up how silly bilateral T20i's have become than anything else. With Morgan and Roy gone he now holds an absolutely vital place in this side though. Favouring pace on the bat should help him in Australia. The bigger grounds make it naturally harder to hit sixes but do give players with good placement, something Malan is excellent at, value for their shots as it's harder to cover a huge outfield.

I still think that with more T20 exposure Root could perform that anchor role even better but that's a different debate!

Dilly showing he can still find his best following the shoulder problems is huge for England too. At his peak he is so consistent in the middle overs whilst also offering the potential for an over in the PP or death. If he can find his best it will ease some of the worries around the bowling attack.

Going to be interesting to see how Jacks/Duckett/Brook get on in this series - batting out of position to what they play domestically/franchise wise most likely due to the Hales call up, so not ideal ways to make their bows/early stages of their career but alas.

Think I read Topley has a niggle too? Hence why not in discussion for the XI tomorrow?

Stone has just been sold to the MI Cape Town franchise in the new SA T20 league - I like it.