England's Winter of Cricket 2023/24

First topic message reminder :

After the disappointment of the World Cup, can England be the first away team in 11 years to win a test series in India?

Three ODIs v West Indies (3rd December-9th December)
Five T20s v West Indies (12th December-21st December)
Five Tests v India (25th January-11th March)

Not a great start for Wood...bit leg side.

And Jaiswal off to a flyer with two beautifully timed sixes off Hartley ...welcome to Test Cricket

Welcome to test cricket Tom Hartley

The review shouts didn't retire with Broad I see

Bit of a poor review there from England to say the least. Don't want to be wasting those on a spinner's pitch.

Hartley as opening bowler not proving such a good idea...

Can understand why they tried him : batted well , get him into the game etc. But unfortunately it has just gifted Jaiswal a rocket start.

Time for Leach.

By the first look of Hartley ...doesn't have a pivot,  doesn't rip ...puts it there less than 80kph....doesn't have the teasing loop that slower speed SLAs have like one Manav Sutar who played for Ind A recently.

Won't fit in a Hyderbad club side Hartley
..but let's give him benefit of having 2 to 3 spells and 15 odd overs , before passing a final verdict on him

alfie wrote:Bit of a poor review there from England to say the least. Don't want to be wasting those on a spinner's pitch.

Very poor. As Olly and I have maintained for a while, Foakes is (very) good with the gloves but is all at sea when it comes to reviews. Add to that, he can't bat with tail for toffee and so, even for this Surrey man, his place in the side should be far from guaranteed.

GSC wrote:Welcome to test cricket Tom Hartley

Are we sure its not Simon Kerrigan?

I get Stokes needs to keep Hartley's confidence up. But he's being hammered at the moment

Disappointing start from all the England bowlers here I'm afraid. Even Leach has served up a couple of pies.

Better improve or KP_fan will annoy Duty by suggesting Stokes should give Moeen a call

guildfordbat wrote:

alfie wrote:Bit of a poor review there from England to say the least. Don't want to be wasting those on a spinner's pitch.

Very poor. As Olly and I have maintained for a while, Foakes is (very) good with the gloves but is all at sea when it comes to reviews. Add to that, he can't bat with tail for toffee and so, even for this Surrey man, his place in the side should be far from guaranteed.

In fairness to Foakes , it wasn't all his fault this time ...couple of close fielders were also (unjustifiably) enthusiastic then. But he really doesn't have a good record with reviews.

Probably not happy to get out cheaply today too. Notable he and Pope were the two bats who tried to just defend and it didn't pay off : but I can't blame Foakes too much as he probably saw his role as trying to hang in with Stokes after the collapse. This pitch is one on which scoring intent is important...

Fifty already for Jaiswal

Must think this is an easy game.

Burned another review

What are they doing ?

alfie wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

alfie wrote:Bit of a poor review there from England to say the least. Don't want to be wasting those on a spinner's pitch.

Very poor. As Olly and I have maintained for a while, Foakes is (very) good with the gloves but is all at sea when it comes to reviews. Add to that, he can't bat with tail for toffee and so, even for this Surrey man, his place in the side should be far from guaranteed.

In fairness to Foakes , it wasn't all his fault this time ...couple of close fielders were also (unjustifiably) enthusiastic then. But he really doesn't have a good record with reviews.

Probably not happy to get out cheaply today too. Notable he and Pope were the two bats who tried to just defend and it didn't pay off : but I can't blame Foakes too much as he probably saw his role as trying to hang in with Stokes after the collapse. This pitch is one on which scoring intent is important...

Yeah but as keeper Foakes should be standing up to the others and bossing the reviews. He lacks the strength of character to do that.

And another review wasted now. Seemed desperate in real time.

But at least Jack has one.

Ah at last ... Leach draws the error and Rohit departs...

After rather a handy opening stand ! Needed that , one might say

Safe to say England rather needed that. Lot of pressure on Leach coming off a lost summer to injury as the only senior spinner. Especially if the other options are going round the park

Last review burned already

Honestly I thought that one was out - can hardly believe it was shown as missing altogether !

But that's why you don't waste them on wild hopes...

GSC wrote:Safe to say England rather needed that. Lot of pressure on Leach coming off a lost summer to injury as the only senior spinner. Especially if the other options are going round the park

Stokes to Leach: ''Jack, you ok at having 45 from this end tomorrow?''.

alfie wrote:Last review burned already

Honestly I thought that one was out - can hardly believe it was shown as missing altogether !

But that's why you don't waste them on wild hopes...

I was stunned that wasn't at worst umpires call - thought it was plumb!

Hartley has bowled okay to the righthanders but been awful against Jaiswal. If I was Stokes i'd take him off and get him back in what Jaiswal's gone, considering the next LHB is Jadeja at 7.

James100 wrote:Hartley has bowled okay to the righthanders but been awful against Jaiswal. If I was Stokes i'd take him off and get him back in what Jaiswal's gone, considering the next LHB is Jadeja at 7.

Think I'd have had him off after three - with a word of "OK , don't sweat - we will bring you back soon but I want to try something else right now" . But Stokes obviously wanted to show a lot of confidence in him : who knows ? If this doesn't kill him he might learn a lot from it...

Have to say I am impressed with Jaiswal : has feasted on some pies ; but has played very well and got India off to a splendid start

Rehan Ahmed
Lacks balance in his action...runs in clumsily, like a medium pacer with head dropping at delivery and arm coming from the side .
Will neither get flight nor a lot of spin with this low arm action.

You would take his spin if he was a batter like Manus of Head...doesn't look like a front line spinner.
And I think I guessed why Eng played 4 spinners...even they didn't know what to expect and hoping one or two of them will click.

My original view was......Eng should play to their strength....2 seamers as a minimum.....3 to my liking.
It's not just about having spinner....they must be above a certain quality threshold...and neither Rehan nor Hartley come anywhere close to keeping Anderson out

[quote="alfie"]

James100 wrote:
Have to say I am impressed with Jaiswal : has feasted on some pies ; but has played very well and got India off to a splendid start

Jaiswal has the skill level of Pant......only needs some polish and maturity

Not sure England made a glaring selection issue with 3 spinners, can't really make the case another seamer changes this. Just Leach has been ok and Hartley/Renan have been pretty ineffective. Being outgunned by a very good team in home conditions unfortunately

118/1 then. Magnificent session for India thanks to Jaiswal - who seems to be batting on a different pitch to everyone else.

England arguably over attacked - but really their bowling just wasn't nearly good enough. The risk with inexperienced bowlers I guess ; but they'll be very disappointed with that display.

Need to regroup overnight or India could take this away from them very quickly tomorrow. Have to limit the damage so that they don't start their second innings too far adrift. If they can set up a fourth innings challenge then the game would still be open as I doubt batting will get easier on this pitch : but much more of this and India won't need a second innings ...

GSC wrote:Not sure England made a glaring selection issue with 3 spinners, can't really make the case another seamer changes this. Just Leach has been ok and Hartley/Renan have been pretty ineffective. Being outgunned by a very good team in home conditions unfortunately

True - not the balance of the side that's the issue, simply the quality of the players we have available - OK, you could argue that Dawson should have been picked if we have a side with 3 spinners, but would his bowling be any more dangerous? I think he's sort of a modern day Ashley Giles - can hold down an end without bowling much loose stuff, and bat a bit around 7 or 8 in the order. Not exactly a big improvement over what we have available.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

alfie wrote:Last review burned already

Honestly I thought that one was out - can hardly believe it was shown as missing altogether !

But that's why you don't waste them on wild hopes...

I was stunned that wasn't at worst umpires call - thought it was plumb!

I thought that was out. Maybe umpire's call on leg stump. I honestly didn't have going over in my thoughts. A tough one to lose a review to.

The previous 2 burnt reviews, especially the second, were poor though.

I felt the pitch settled early in the India innings, presumably after having the light roller on it. That has often felt the case on these more recent Indian pitches. The heavy roller seems to break the top soil up. So the batting side opt for the heavy roller between innings and during breaks. That seems to settle the pitch briefly, then it starts to go.

I just thought England bowled pretty poorly in that period whilst there wasn't much there. Hartley really struggled to find a length. In retrospect, Root may have been a better call to the leftie, with the new ball. Just angle his darts in whilst it's quieter.

More a case of being lacking in quality spin options rather than fundamentally wrong tactics or team selection to me. Bumrah and Siraj bowled 12.3 overs on D1. That's only going to get more pronounced as the game goes on. I don't think the number of spinners is the issue, simply their prowess.

Root now the leading run scorer in India vs England Tests I've just seen. He's got a notably better average than Sachin, Sunny and Cook below him too. So it's not just a modern players having more matches to accumulate type of record. Most tons as well.

Caught the action in parts. Rohit perhaps bowled at least 1 over too many from Siraj in the morning, but then the spinners got into the act, Jadeja got the ball to turn from the first ball and Ashwin and Axar joined in. Jadeja, while picking up 3, was unusually leaky with runs, a rampaging Stokes not helping... Axar on the other hand, bowled much better than he did during the Australia series where he was quite poor. Ashwin did the needful in these conditions and should have had Stokes too, only for the specialist wicketkeeper to drop 1...

I suspect that had either Hartley or Rehan been an experienced campaigner , they might well have gone with Leach and that one , along with two seamers and Root. But with both being so raw presumably they they've gone in hoping at least one of them would fire...

Not working so far. But in truth there isn't a lot there for the pace men so questionable whether it would have made a huge difference.

As for Dawson : there was a case for him for this tour. But they've clearly looked to the future and can you really blame them ? They got a lot of criticism for dragging Moeen back in the Ashes so can't win either way

It's one session. A tough one. Let's give them a little more slack and see if they can improve...

Watched England up to 60-3 and then the last 2 wickets. Stokes played a fine hand, and from the highlights and cricinfo, seems Bairstow too looked much better against spin than he managed right through the previous tour. Root, the little I watched, and seemingly the rest of the innings, played a rather Un-Root-like way. He's not like Pope and others, maximize before they get you batter. He's one of the best in the world and should play like that. Both Duckett and Crawley seem to have learned a bit since their previous India experience. Not so much for Oliver Pope. He can at best be a flat track bully, just doesn't have tough runs in him. Doesn't have the game for spinning conditions, plays away from the body with hard hands just like he did today. Just don't get what the hype is all about...

alfie wrote:As for Dawson : there was a case for him for this tour. But they've clearly looked to the future and can you really blame them ? They got a lot of criticism for dragging Moeen back in the Ashes so can't win either way

I've wanted Dawson utilised more in white ball stuff for a while, but, struggle to see him as much of a Test bowler. His previous efforts in Tests hardly inspired confidence. A loopier finger spinner who doesn't put big revs on the ball hardly profiles as likely to succeed in these conditions. His career stats are basically the same average, SR and RPO as Dom Bess. He had a brilliant summer in the CC of course. So did Brett Hutton and Ben Raine though. I struggle to see Dawson as making more impact.

As for India, fine innings from young Jaiswal. But I felt he was in too much of a hurry to start with before settling down to a better tempo, still aggressive but secure... Rohit missed out after yet another start. With no Virat Kohli in, and playing without any one of Kohli, Cheteshwar Pujara and Ajinkya Rahane for the first time in more than 12 years, Rohit should take greater responsibility in general. Shubman Gull, it was felt was lacking a first gear in his test innings. Today he seemed determined to rectify that perception, got stuck on first for a while, but did his initial job nevertheless, of seeing it through to stumps.
India in a strong position, should take it nice and easy and try and bat England out of the game.

As for the makeup of the England side, I belived Anderson should have been in for Hartley. Nothing I saw today convinced me otherwise. Stokes was silly and stubborn to let him get smashed around that long! Can be a handful on spitting pitches with his frame perhaps, but doesn't seem to have the range and class for test cricket. Anderson has a bit of a psychological edge over the Indian batters. Could have kept it quiet at least. And with the left-hander going strong, Root should have least a couple of overs today...

msp83 wrote:As for the makeup of the England side, I belived Anderson should have been in for Hartley. Nothing I saw today convinced me otherwise. Stokes was silly and stubborn to let him get smashed around that long! Can be a handful on spitting pitches with his frame perhaps, but doesn't seem to have the range and class for test cricket. Anderson has a bit of a psychological edge over the Indian batters. Could have kept it quiet at least. And with the left-hander going strong, Root should have least a couple of overs today...

Anderson has Wood over Indians and gets their respect.
Remember last time in one spell of prodigious reverse swing achieved only at 130kph in Chennai he blew up Indian middle order and Eng won that test.
And he had Ind on the mat in Mumbai until Pant did a brilliant counterattack to take the game away from Eng....
Anderson may not have legs for 5 tests...but is Eng's best bet as even on such a pitch new ball wobbles and old one reverses.

The point you made on Jaiswal being too aggressive......well he just played the right level due against this cannon, fodder club level bowling.
Rohit too was going in the same vein until his bad shot selection and Gill has given more respect than this "attack" deserved.
Don't be surprised if tomm we might see the entire line-up down to Axar / Bharat at  9 feast themselves on this help-yourself-unlimited buffet and pile up 500.
And yes....given what we saw, Ali remains by far the best spinner for Eng even today.

Just caught up.

Great toss for England to win, and a curious innings. The expected aggression against the seamers from Crawley and Duckett, but then England were a lot more circumspect against the spinners than I expected. It was an intelligent approach, unusual in Bazball terms (we all remember England throwing away the second test in the Ashes through idiocy), and probably aided England in getting to what looked like a decent 246, rather than hack and slashing their way to something below 200. Then Stokes tried a late attack with the tail which paid off. Even with that late attack, the run rate was below 4.

India's bowling attack was really good. Perhaps they bowled the seamers a little too long initially - what England usually do over here! - but after that it was fine. Ashwin's first spell was excellent, Jadeja bowled consistently, and I really liked Axar and what he delivered. And Bumrah popped back in with a couple of key wickets.

Then the India innings. Oh dear.

Pretty clear England got their selection balance wrong and overestimated the turn in the pitch. Sometimes over here you'll see a team advocate for five seamers. But the counter argument is usually - if four seamers don't do the job, why will five seamers? Similar here, only with spinners. If three spinners won't do it, why pick a fourth? Hartley, as many of us feared, looked well below test standard, although he did show some improvement late on, albeit on a receptive surface. He was overbowled, unfortunately. I understand getting him on early to vanquish any nerves, but keeping him on after the assault...oh dear.

The pitch was receptive for turn, like a day three pitch I suppose, but it certainly wasn't the spinning lottery pitch that demands only one seamer to be picked.

Leach was pretty good, didn't see enough of Rehan, although we should expect Rehan to be expensive. Oh for Liam Dawson, the most underappreciated England cricketer.  Wood was also the wrong quick to pick. His radar looks like it carried over from the World Cup.

Use of two of the three reviews was utterly moronic and could cost England dear. This is an area where England have been utterly terrible in recent years, and it seems to go under the radar. The attacking approach on the field seems to overflow into a cavalier approach with the reviews. Only one of the three burnt made any sense. To lose all reviews in 14/15 overs is shocking.

Have to also add that Pope needs to be dropped. He can't play spin. At all. Many of us had fears about this pre-series and it was shown why in that torturous 11 ball innings. Teams in test cricket generally know how to pick or not pick bowlers in certain conditions, but it doesn't seem to have caught on to batting yet. Pope needs to steer well clear of the subcontinent in tests. It's an easy choice to pick Jennings at 3, he has two test centuries in the subcontinent and recently scored 154 against India A, but it's highly unlikely to happen because he doesn't fit into the ironic rigidity of Bazball selection (same as Dawson and to an extent Foakes, who is grudgingly admitted).

Looks like the test is over from here, unless England can provoke a quick collapse tomorrow. The Lions are staring down a 341 run deficit as they kick off the third innings in that game. Hopefully it won't be as bad for England tomorrow, though I'm fearing the worst.

Very negative there, England are in a great position, Stokes has played a match winning innings and Harters is a great bloke (so it doesn't matter if his bowling is worse than Chris Schofield's). That's per Ben Duckett, who's not someone sat behind a keyboard, he's actually part of the game!

In Duckett's defence, he can't really say, "Yeah, 250ish isn't great after winning a good toss, but, we're dogsh*t against spin, so we'll take it. Also, it looks like our best spinner on a good day is worse than all 3 of theirs on an average day and our next best spinner can't land it on a bus stop let alone a dime".

I agree with Duty about Pope. He just looks all at sea against spin. It's an interesting example of analysis actually looking at Pope's development in that regard. When analyst/journalist Jarrod Kimber looked at his F-C stats early two things stood out. The huge bias to scores at the Oval, which is well known, and his SR against spin, which isn't. His average against spin in the CC is actually very good. His strike rate was very low though and his percentage of runs scored in boundaries was high. Which is indicative of someone who couldn't rotate the strike to save his life, on English pitches, against CC spinners. Kimber's argument was that he'd be eaten alive by Test spinners in conducive conditions if he couldn't get off strike. The England camp and several pundits argued that looking at SR in that regard was meaningless as his average was good. Generally, I think the importance of batting SR in red ball cricket is overegged. To actually move the dial you need to be in that Gilchrist or Sehwag bracket. I find that a really interesting example of how looking at SR in a deeper context can be very illustrative though.

I've been banging the, "pick batters that suit conditions as well as bowlers who suit conditions", drum for years though!

As for KPF's point about India going in for a 4th spinner, I don't generally agree with that approach on any pitch. If its a spitting underprepared pitch, then 3 spinners should be enough really. Then you add on to the batting. In that context, call for Washington over Siraj can make sense, he's better than both Axar and Ashwin with the bat, can very much bat 7, and KS Bharat would have been a fine number 10!

Duty281 wrote:Looks like the test is over from here, unless England can provoke a quick collapse tomorrow. The Lions are staring down a 341 run deficit as they kick off the third innings in that game. Hopefully it won't be as bad for England tomorrow, though I'm fearing the worst.

Eng should   take heart and LEARN from that A game......bucket load of wickets in both tests and the unofficial 2 day game have been taken by Eng's  seamers
Pott-6 and Carse-3 again today.
Any controlled seam bowling in the 130+kph channel will trouble Indian batters.....and contrary to perceptions.....there is movement with  new ball for 15 overs and then reverse after 30 odd overs....even on these flattish pitches
(look no further than records of Ishan sharma, Bhuvi, Umesh, Shami, Zaheer in India...it's quite decent)
"Controlled" is the operative word here....in the corridor...stick to a 5th/6th stump line and in and out field and there is much more chance of frustrating and forcing Jaiswal, Gill, Iyer types to nick one...and that's far more then what this spin attack can do.

Lions need to bat out 5 sessions to earn a draw like Ind-A did last game.....the pitch is seemingly flat....but in Saurabh and Washington are two of best spinners not playing for India and 3 seamers are quite competent too

king_carlos wrote:It's interesting how fit the England players look. Now, looks can be deceiving of course. It isn't a beauty contest. From the photos and clips of training I've seen, there are multiple players who look in as good shape as I've seen though. Even someone like Jimmy, who's long been in brilliant condition, looks notably leaner than recent years. Stokes is looking by a distance the best he has for while, he's apparently down 10kg to help with his knees. Even Robinson, who's conditioning I've been very frustrated with, looks a bit thinner.

None of that means that I think England will win. I just find it interesting coming off the back of the Ashes and CWC though. In both of those England frankly didn't look up to it physically at times. The Ashes saw a few bowlers fall away drastically throughout innings. Whilst the CWC saw some very average fielding and lacklustre running between the wickets from a white ball unit who were leading the way there in the previous CWC cycle. Whilst they may not admit it publicly, that does feel like there's been a collective view and response from the players that maybe their preparation hasn't been up to scratch at times in the last year.

Interesting note on this. I've now heard on George Dobell's YT stuff and the Wisden pod now that apparently Foakes was due to play before Brook was ruled out. Murmurs are that Bairstow was told he needed to concentrate on getting fitter again. The choice was then between Pope and Bairstow, rather than YJB and Foakes. If the usually well informed journalists are to be trusted. With Pope rumoured to have been likely to get the nod.

Whilst the outward showing of Bazball is, "Never look back, never apologise", it does feel like behind the scenes they do make adjustments. I certainly felt that was the case with the batting after that farcical collapse at Lords. It did seem that they became more selective and intelligent after that. It also seems to have been the case with their physical preparation for this series. Rumours are that they'd made the U-turn on the keeper spot before Brook went home too. I think that's really good to see. Even if I still think they're likely to get hammered in this series.

Between Bairstow and Pope, I'd pick Bairstow. I see a flat road somewhere down the series, and see Pope getting runs only then. Can't bat to save his life in spinning conditions. Bairstow had an awful tour of India last time when he played, but he has better chances of succeeding in these conditions than Pope ever has. Considering Bairstow's fitness issues, Foakes surely is a better choice with the gloves. But then, it comes down to that number 3 batting position. Who'd have batted 3 if Bairstow was picked a head of Pope, with Foakes keeping? Moeen Ali is happily retired? What could Stokes have done then? promoted himself up the order? Considering he's the 2nd best batter of the side and is probably the current best in batting with the lower order, it wouldn't have been the smartest calls.
So if the road pitch wouldn't have arrived by the 2nd test, England would have to have made some real tough calls.

I'd pick YJB over Pope in these conditions and put Stokes up to 3. It sounds like McCullum and Stokes were leaning towards Pope though.

I've said it before, but, if Stokes can't bowl I struggle to see how England have a specialist batter at 6 longer term. In home conditions, most conditions in fact, they regularly look better when they get an extra bowling option in. Even at the expense of shortening the batting line up. I expect that will happen again. At which point you're inevitably looking at your keeper batting 6. I just struggle to see them balancing the side with a specialist batter as low as 6.

Out of Bairstow, Pope and Stokes, I think the skipper is the best suited to the number 3 spot.

This is why tours with one team that are clearly better hurt. I inevitably end up debating the minutiae and pointless hypotheticals about the future because debating the cricket is hard when you've got Ashwin/Jadeja/Axar vs Jack Leach/A tall bloke/loopy wrist spin in conditions where Warne struggled. So instead I end up dragging myself into wondering whether Jamie Smith or James Rew might end up batting 6 and keeping wicket in the future to balance the England team. Stupid sport. We have 5 Tests of this. I'm going to watch every single one regardless of whether I enjoy it or not. Ridiculous. I chose a couple of sports in childhood and allow the fortunes of a team or two in each to dictate my mental health for large chunks of the year.

Having been out this afternoon and watching mostly the Brisbane action lately I'm not able to assess the England bowling too minutely...but whenever I did have a look it seemed to be Rehan bowling a full toss ...

I note that Hartley seems to have tightened up a lot today and even got himself a wicket...probably relieved that Root removed Jaiswal before he could get at him again

Root does seem to have been under bowled : got the wicket , had Rahul dropped behind before he scored , and nearly had Gill caught shortly afterwards. Two wickets taken for 104 runs in 27 overs is an improvement on yesterday ; but that Jaiswal innings has given India a huge advantage here and Rahul and Iyer have carried that on well...have to fear the potential for a crushing lead developing as you'd have to wonder how England are going to take seven more wickets in the absence of a truly top class spinner.

Imagine it will get plenty of comment anyway ; but I think it is just as well England had Foakes keeping - because if it had been Bairstow dropping Rahul on nought the Internet would have gone into meltdown

Will nerve myself to watch the next session (despite KP being on Comms) and hope they can fight back and limit the damage before this gets too one sided...

As I say , I haven't watched it all. But it does seem a little odd to examine the bowling figures: Root and Leach together 17 overs 2/58 ... Hartley and Ahmed 27 overs 1/134.

Hope this doesn't indicate something is amiss with Leach ?

Ahmed resumes after the break... With a a maiden . And Jimmy is on the field as a sub fielder !

Ah good ...Leach on at the other end.

Aha ! Rehan gets his man...Iyer tries to go big and only finds Hartley...a safe pair of hands on the leg boundary

223/4. Nice restart...and a confidence boost for the young spinner.

Another very brief spell for Leach ...off after two overs. Root back - probably because the left handed Jadeja is at the crease.

England really need to get him early - and somehow get rid of Rahul who is looking very good , now on 66.

Oh the agony... Root immediately strikes Rahul in front but given not out...and No Reviews Left . As it happens Hawkeyes says umpires call on height , but still...

A. The umpires are reluctant to give lbw
B. Root is England's most dangerous bowler here.

Rahul celebrates his escape by smiting a half tracker from Ahmed miles back and India take the lead...

Morning / evening Alfie and anyone else following - just joined today's play about 10 minutes ago.

See that the spinners have 1 each now. Thought Root was unlucky with his lbw shout last over but then followed by some pies from Rehan to give India the lead.

Any quick thoughts on the half day's play before I catch up with all comments overnight, thanks.