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

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Stone has just been sold to the MI Cape Town franchise in the new SA T20 league - I like it.

It's pretty clear that certain IPL franchises are going to start using their teams in other leagues as nurseries for potential IPL players. A big fillip for Stone's white ball potential there.

king_carlos wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Stone has just been sold to the MI Cape Town franchise in the new SA T20 league - I like it.

It's pretty clear that certain IPL franchises are going to start using their teams in other leagues as nurseries for potential IPL players. A big fillip for Stone's white ball potential there.

As long as it isn't just another opportunity for him to pick up an injury before he can get a decent run with England ...

king_carlos wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Stone has just been sold to the MI Cape Town franchise in the new SA T20 league - I like it.

It's pretty clear that certain IPL franchises are going to start using their teams in other leagues as nurseries for potential IPL players. A big fillip for Stone's white ball potential there.

Yep definitely - Mumbai one of the more "switched on" IPL franchises I think when it comes to player selection too. Good opportunity for Stone.

I see your point re: injury Alfie and England - but on the flip side of that, if he can go make himself a good amount of money on the franchise circuit, or even secure a rich IPL deal like Tymal Mills did a few years back...got to be worth it considering his injury history too. He won't have earned the money to secure his long term post cricket future from doing the domestic circuit to date

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Stone has just been sold to the MI Cape Town franchise in the new SA T20 league - I like it.

It's pretty clear that certain IPL franchises are going to start using their teams in other leagues as nurseries for potential IPL players. A big fillip for Stone's white ball potential there.

Yep definitely - Mumbai one of the more "switched on" IPL franchises I think when it comes to player selection too. Good opportunity for Stone.

I see your point re: injury Alfie and England - but on the flip side of that, if he can go make himself a good amount of money on the franchise circuit, or even secure a rich IPL deal like Tymal Mills did a few years back...got to be worth it considering his injury history too. He won't have earned the money to secure his long term post cricket future from doing the domestic circuit to date

Nor from England deals either due to the injuries.

There is a slight annoyance for me there when people (in no way mean yourself here Olly) talk about T20 money or IPL deals as if it's dirty money but usually overlook that England Test players get vast amounts of money now. It's something that kept coming to mind when Stokes gave up ODIs. There were lots of "we know why he's chose T20 over ODI" nudge, nudge wink, wink type comments. I couldn't help thinking that being good at Tests as an Englishmen likely earns you far more than all but the likes of ABdV, Gayle and Malinga in their prime do from T20 cricket.

Salt, Hales, Malan, Duckett, Brook, Moeen, Curran S, Willey, Wood, Rashid, Gleeson

England win the toss and bowl first

I presume the dew could be a big factor in this series, so likely a good toss to win.

But when you bowl the rubbish Willey and Curran have served up in the opening three, the toss doesn't matter!

The new guy Hales seems like a decent player, where's he been!

VTR wrote:The new guy Hales seems like a decent player, where's he been!

I dunno… 39 off 33 chasing 159 is pretty poor for me!

JDizzle wrote:

VTR wrote:The new guy Hales seems like a decent player, where's he been!

I dunno… 39 off 33 chasing 159 is pretty poor for me!

Couple of lovely boundaries from Hales since I typed this - but he does have an issue:

‘Alex Hales since the start of 2020 does have an issue - He dominates the powerplay 41.75/169, but in the middle overs he is 24.20/135.5’ as per @McLovinstatto on Twitter.

Comfortable for England in the end. Pakistan had a really good platform, set for 180+, but Rashid and Moeen did a fine job in the middle overs and the home side never recovered. 157 was never likely to be enough.

Though as I type Hales departs, so maybe there's a twist. It's been a solid effort from him first up and the powers that be will be delighted.

JDizzle wrote:

VTR wrote:The new guy Hales seems like a decent player, where's he been!

I dunno… 39 off 33 chasing 159 is pretty poor for me!

We're coming off the Jason Roy, out for 15 off 20 era, so anything looks good compared to that!

Composed knock from Brook - scored quickly as looked comfortable vs 90mph and above bowling, which is always a big question when you step up to international level.

Yep was very impressed by Brook - extremely calm and seemed to handle the Pakistani pacers well, I think folk rightly have high hopes for him across formats. Hoping he can get a run in one of the XIs over the next 12 months to prove himself.

Decent enough knock by Hales, without being "wow" impressive. Think he will need to be a bit more aggressive if he's opening alongside Jos, but guess Salt is doing that here.

Nice to see Rashid have a good game - and a good debut by Luke Wood!

Only saw an abbreviated version on replay ; but looked like a fairly comfortable win for England (Moeen and Brook finishing rather cautiously at the death made it look closer than it was ). All the bats seemed to do quite well : Hales had a big slice of luck in the middle of his knock but has to be happy with his first hit on returning ; and Brook was very tidy.
Bowling looked a bit of a mix. Pakistan were motoring until Rashid intervened but made a bit of a mess of things once the openers were separated. Liked what I saw of Wood.

t20 results can change faster than the weather. But not a bad start for England for this tour.

Saw most of a re-run late last night - missed the first 10 overs of the Pk innings, where they had set themselves a really good platform. A couple of good overs (one from Willey went for 2) around 1overs 12-13 switched the pressure onto the Pakistan batsmen, with regular wickets meaning they got no momentum in the later overs. Should have been looking at a score in the region of 190-200 from their start, but ended well short.

Really a controlled run chase from England - never looked to do much more than keep up with the rate, and got over the line with plenty left. Brook quite impressive (interesting that he has a fair bit of experience in the PCL) and Hales good enough. Salt out in a typical T20 way caught off a very well hit pull shot that went flat tot he boundary and picked out the fielder, Malan and Duckett chipped in with 'good enough' innings in context, but Mo looked a bit out of touch with the bat. Rashid and Wood the pick of the bowlers

Some more news about the planned high-performance review and reforms to the first-class county game:

- Ball-tracking technology to judge the quality of wickets.
- A pilot trial of the Kookaburra ball with a view to it replacing the Dukes ball, if successful.
- A simplified point system. Three points for a win, a bonus point if a team scores between 325 and 399 in any innings of the game, and another bonus point if a team scores 400+ at any innings in a game.

It seems Strauss wants flat pitches to encourage spinners and genuinely fast bowlers to bowl more overs.

(The review will be published tomorrow)

Schedule for England's 2023 summer has been released:

Spoiler:

Looks very dry with just the Ashes of interest, and some pointless limited-overs games (four T20s v NZ, really?) and a pitiful lack of international cricket in August (thanks to the Hundred). Also been announced that the WTC final will be at the Oval next year, and Lord's in 2025. No interest in taking it abroad, it seems.

Duty281 wrote:Some more news about the planned high-performance review and reforms to the first-class county game:

- Ball-tracking technology to judge the quality of wickets.
- A pilot trial of the Kookaburra ball with a view to it replacing the Dukes ball, if successful.
- A simplified point system. Three points for a win, a bonus point if a team scores between 325 and 399 in any innings of the game, and another bonus point if a team scores 400+ at any innings in a game.

It seems Strauss wants flat pitches to encourage spinners and genuinely fast bowlers to bowl more overs.

(The review will be published tomorrow)

Largely seem like moves that make sense to me.

Three points for a win with a potential two batting BPs seem a pretty extreme move though?

The serious discussion around a change of ball I especially love. The newer Kookaburra's with the stronger seam that have done a bit more could be a good option there.

It does seem an extreme move on the BP situation. The quote from the Telegraph is:

"the high performance review will also recommend a simplified bonus point system in the Championship. This will see each team get three points for a win, with two potential bonus points on offer: one if they score between 325 and 399 in either innings of the match, and a second if they score over 400 in either innings of the match. "

Await for confirmation when it's published tomorrow, but it sounds like the abolition of bowling bonus points. Presumably it would be one point for a draw, so a team could get 3 points (same as a win in isolation) for drawing and scoring 400 at some point in the game. I wouldn't like that system as it would encourage dead wickets and not result cricket.

But we'll wait and see what it actually is when it's released tomorrow.

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

Stewart was asked about this at a Surrey members' meeting this morning. He tried to make light of it and joked that he had been linked with every England vacancy for the last few years. However, it was noticeable that he did not rule it out.

Duty281 wrote:Schedule for England's 2023 summer has been released:

Spoiler:

Looks very dry with just the Ashes of interest, and some pointless limited-overs games (four T20s v NZ, really?) and a pitiful lack of international cricket in August (thanks to the Hundred). Also been announced that the WTC final will be at the Oval next year, and Lord's in 2025. No interest in taking it abroad, it seems.

That blasted Hundred really has taken over The Entire Universe , hasn't it ? No International cricket in the blessed good weather in August - and in fact only unimportant limited over stuff after July , Ashes done and dusted in 46 days ... suppose it allows everyone to just tune out and let the football take over...

Bah .

Re: the no international cricket in August, MacPherson reported a few weeks back it is more to do with Sky not wanting to have the Ashes clash with the start of the Premier League season on their channels than the Hundred.

Suspect it might be a thing moving forward for series against India/Australia

I'd be very surprised if they didn't arrange a two test series in August against New Zealand or West Indies.

Given England's scheduled tours of the Windies between now and 2027 only involve ODI and T20i's I'd be pretty surprised if the WICB felt too inclined to offer a Test tour just to help the ECBs coffers.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Re: the no international cricket in August, MacPherson reported a few weeks back it is more to do with Sky not wanting to have the Ashes clash with the start of the Premier League season on their channels than the Hundred.

Suspect it might be a thing moving forward for series against India/Australia

I think that's nonsense, to be perfectly honest (not that he said it, but what he said).

Sky have had England home games since 2006, have done four home Ashes series in that time and numerous other big test series, and they haven't once concerned themselves with the battle between the PL and cricket fans.

It's just down to the ECB prioritising the Hundred and not wanting it to clash with tests, because they want the likes of Bairstow/Root/Stokes competing in their failed competition in a desperate effort to make the Hundred viable. I do believe there's no international cricket in August (apart from in the very last days) for England in the next couple of years because of this reason.

The high-performance review has been released:

https://resources.ecb.co.uk/ecb/document/2022/09/22/60de6c08-1cb1-4ff7-a749-7a21cb4b4eb5/Men-s-High-Performance-Review-Report.pdf

There's many things in it which have been previously discussed, but I'll comment on a few things:

1) The point system in County Championship will be overhauled. The proposed structure is:

0 points for a loss; 1 point for a draw; 3 points for a win; 4 points for a win and scoring 325-399 in any innings; 5 points for a win and scoring 400+ in any innings.

No bonus points unless a team wins. No bowling bonus points whatsoever. This structure is envisaged as a trial for one season to see what effect it has on pitches. I could easily see this points system as having the reverse effect. The review wants team to prepare better batting wickets, but with the value of a win being 3 times greater than a draw (rather than twice as great as now) you could see counties prioritise result pitches, rather than risk games petering out into a 600-plays 550 stalemate where both teams only get a point for their efforts.

2) The season structure will be mostly as previously discussed, including these four-day festival games in August. The review talks about it in terms of options such as:

An annual London Cup , played in a round robin format
An annual Roses ‘Test’ series
A tri-series and final between Western counties

This for me is where the review becomes confused, because it makes a big thing of talking about reducing the amount of cricket played, but with these four-day festival games a player could play as many as 14 four-day games in a year (10 in the regular season; 1 more with the play-off; 3 more in the festival). It also seems to indicate that they wanted the CC to continue through August, and perhaps have more than 10 games, but couldn't do so due to the clash between the Hundred and the CC which the counties wouldn't countenance.

There will be only one play-off game in the divisions, so no semi-finals. The One Day Cup will be in April and no other month. They considered the County Championship in August, and more than 10 games in a CC season, but it clashes with the Hundred on both counts. They use some tortured and twisted logic to justify the Hundred's place.

The first division of the CC will be six teams and ten games a year. Then the second division is split into two conferences, six teams and ten games a year in each.

3) There will also be an annual red ball series between the North and the South in 'overseas conditions' in pre-season. Selection will be based on data. The aim is to give FC players overseas experience, which I applaud, but doesn't this add to the workload which apparently needs to be reduced so drastically?

4) More Lions games and a restoration of the U17 England pathway to identify high-potential players earlier.

5) Kookaburra ball will be used in the CC. Apparently England's home advantage with the ball is not as big as other nations (could have fooled me on that one!), and England struggle with the ball more overseas, so let's dispense with the Dukes ball. Seems fair enough.

6) Counties will get greater funding for developing England players.

These are just proposals at this stage. Some need the approval of the ECB, some need the approval of the counties, so none of these things are a given. It's also important to note that no changes to the domestic structure will come in until 2024, so next season will be business as usual. There should be a final decision on what's changing, and what isn't, by the end of November of this year.

Strauss: "I firmly believe that if the game comes together, we will be able to achieve remarkable success on the field and create heroes in the process. If we want that to happen, in the face of a rapidly changing landscape, we need to act together now."
Kent: “We will not allow our Club to be rendered irrelevant.”

OK...

Harry Brook has just got it. Looks at home playing international cricket.

Tremendous knock from Duckett too. He maybe lacks the raw power to be a T20 gun outside of the sub continent - I don’t expect him to feature in the WT20 in Aus - but England need a left handed for their ODI middle order with Stokes/Morgan retired, and Duckett’s ability vs spin could mark him out as the man for that role.

Fair to say that drop of Moeen cost quite a bit!

200 to chase for the home side.

Looks like England will be thrashed. Willey, Curran and L Wood are not international quality T20 bowlers. Maybe a bit early to judge Wood.

The World Cup will be a monumental struggle if Woakes and M Wood aren't fit to play. First mark against Hales, also, as he dropped a fairly simple one.

Luke Wood I think is a very good bowler but I worry his death bowling wont stand up against the best hitters. Standout death bowlers at the very top either have a more notable stock ball to stop scoring (i.e. Bumrah or Malinga's yorkers) or better variety (i.e. Mills at his peak didn't have the accuracy of Bumrah's yorker or say Dirk Nannes bouncer but could mix very quick yorkers and bouncers with his slower ball).

Willey still has that same issue of being a new ball specialist. It's very difficult to see where his other overs come from. Then even at the top, whilst good, he doesn't offer anywhere near the threat of Afridi, Starc or Bhuvi at their best for instance.

Surran I think can be a fantastic T20 player between his bowling and lower order hitting but isn't a bowler to rely on for 4 overs every game. If the conditions suit he can be dangerous up top or a good change up but you have to have other bowlers you can rely on. Stokes isn't really an all-rounder in T20 cricket if you actually look at how much he bowls even before considering he has never really mastered controlling the white ball. Mo is looking more and more a batter who bowls again. If you can rely on those three for 8 overs then I think Surran can be worth a bit of a gamble for the flexibility and potential PP overs in Jof's absence. I'm not sure you can rely on them for 8 overs every game though.

10 wicket win. Century for Babar. Ouch.

It just looks to me as though England's PP bowling offers little in terms of threat with the three seamers we saw tonight, and that England are essentially reliant on Rashid and a bit of Moeen in the middle-overs to pull it back. Then the death overs become a problem again if Rashid and Moeen haven't taken quite a few wickets. The lack of variety at the moment doesn't help either!

Duty281 wrote:First mark against Hales, also, as he dropped a fairly simple one.

When England won that CWC in 2019 it was genuinely one of the best fielding units I've ever seen.

The more recent white ball sides are a fair way off that sort of standout level it must be said.

Having Stokes and YJB (hopefully...!) return for the World T20 will naturally help that though. Both are exceptional fielders. YJB in particular I sometimes think is underrated as a fielder due to be being a bit of a  specialist as a boundary rider in white ball cricket which traditionally was where you hid duffers. Between Bairstow being so fast and having a very accurate arm I often think he must save a lot of runs on the boundary by covering so much ground.

I really wish cricket used spatial tracking cameras as many other sports now do so we could actually measure things such as that. The tech has existed for years now to have data such as that there in black and white yet cricket still relies on the eye test for the vast majority of fielding and keeping judgement. An unnecessarily amateur part of the game still.

Think this thrashing shows nothing more than how random T20 can be. That's why I wouldn't make any predictions for the World Cup, I would say most of them have seen unexpected winners

1. Play Olly Stone
2. Look at point 1 and enact it

Looks like the reduction in County Championship games won't be happening, with 2/3rds of Counties needing to vote for it:

Spoiler:

The reduction in T20 blast games has also gone down badly. The relationship between the counties and the ECB appears to be at a new low. There will be a winter of discontent with little prospect of a glorious summer made by Andrew Strauss.

Duty281 wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Re: the no international cricket in August, MacPherson reported a few weeks back it is more to do with Sky not wanting to have the Ashes clash with the start of the Premier League season on their channels than the Hundred.

Suspect it might be a thing moving forward for series against India/Australia

I think that's nonsense, to be perfectly honest (not that he said it, but what he said).

Sky have had England home games since 2006, have done four home Ashes series in that time and numerous other big test series, and they haven't once concerned themselves with the battle between the PL and cricket fans.

It's just down to the ECB prioritising the Hundred and not wanting it to clash with tests, because they want the likes of Bairstow/Root/Stokes competing in their failed competition in a desperate effort to make the Hundred viable. I do believe there's no international cricket in August (apart from in the very last days) for England in the next couple of years because of this reason.

I have also seen it reported that the Ashes scheduling is partly due to Australia wanting it done earlier to assist their proposed white ball commitments against SA.

But I still think The Hundred is the main problem here.

Just looking at those proposed future fixtures for August : I really have to ask what possible purpose having "festival games " (alias "friendlies" , no ?) going on ... I mean ; who would care ? If you're going to clear everything out for the wretched Hundred , might as well be honest about it...

As to the t20 (saw most of the England innings - thought they had plenty. Having seen the scoreboard am not inclined to seek highlights of Pakistan's stroll to victory ! )

But does appear to show up England's limitations with ball in hand - particularly when Rashid doesn't come off. Fortunately , he usually does (less so Moeen who seems very inconsistent with the ball these days) Willey can be very good with the new ball ; but if he doesn't strike early he's a bit of a liability later on : only room for one of him or Curran , I think.

Not in a panic. Let us see who is fit and healthy when the WC starts. Though I am not too confident of England's chances there , to be honest. Think this white ball side is at present just a shadow of the Morgan-led outfit from three years back.

Agree, the Morgan era side had an experienced 11, I think the current white ball side has question marks around 3 or 4 in the lineup. As mentioned by others the injuries to the bowlers do not help, but that's now been going on for years and we may have to accept certain lineups will only ever exist on paper. Peak Jason Roy is a big loss as well

They have to go with the batter heavy strategy > extra bowler come the real thing imo. Will continue to say, the benefit of having that extra bowler is very slim when they're all not that good!

alfie wrote:
Just looking at those proposed future fixtures for August : I really have to ask what possible purpose having "festival games " (alias "friendlies" ,  no ?) going on ...   I mean ; who would care ?  If you're going to clear everything out for the wretched Hundred , might as well be honest about it...

I believe the plan was to play the CC in August during the Hundred, a good move IMO, but the Counties voted against it, sadly.

They didn't vote against holding CC games at the same time as the Hundred, but they would have voted against it, and understandably so because some counties would have been disadvantaged more than others owing to the loss of players to the Hundred.

The calendar will be in a mess until the Hundred is abolished, that's the reality of the situation.

A couple of forum members here will be quite excited because Will Jacks is making his debut in the third game (which is today!), with Hales left on the sidelines.

I don't wish to stir a pot, but Moeen said yesterday that Jacks would have to wait his turn, so I hope Hales hasn't fallen foul of everyone already!

Topley in for Willey as well. And Mark Wood is playing, in for Luke Wood. Goodness.

Pakistan bowling first.

Will Jacks szn!

It's a good job for Dawid the World Cup isn't in the subcontinent

That was the worst of Malan. The typical slow start endured all the way, but got out before he kicked on.

Had no idea they were playing again today! Must try harder to follow this wonderful 7 match series

I like a seven game T20 series, but there's an argument that they're not long enough. Hopefully we'll see an 11 and 13 match series going forward.

Harry Brook looks a proper player

England end up 221-3 off 20 overs, partnership of 139* (72) between Duckett and Brook. Duckett 70* (42), and Brook an utterly sensational 81* (35), Jacks earlier with a decent 40 (22) in the powerplay.

Over to you now bowlers!