England's Summer of Cricket 2024

First topic message reminder :

Sri Lanka: 1 Dimuth Karunaratne, 2 Nishan Madushka, 3 Pathum Nissanka, 4 Angelo Mathews, 5 Dinesh Chandimal, 6 Dhananjaya de Silva (capt), 7 Kamindu Mendis, 8 Milan Rathnayake, 9 Prabath Jayasuriya, 10 Asitha Fernando, 11 Lahiru Kumara

Sri Lanka have confirmed their team. Unsurprisingly, V Fernando has been dropped after a lacklustre first game. He has been replaced by Kumara, not Rajitha. Kusal Mendis has also been replaced at 3, with Nissanka coming in to replace him. It will be Nissanka's first test in two years. His FC average is 60, but his test average is fractionally below 40.

Expected to be a very good batting wicket, and the weather is excellent for the first four days, but Monday has some rain around if we get that far. Sri Lanka have never won a test at Lord's, but they've managed to draw the last five.

Seeing Sri Lanka 200/2 you really have to wonder how England contrived to be dismissed for 156 on this pitch !

Nissanka has shown how to score fast without playing outlandish funky shots. Something Crawley does too , in truth ...they have really missed him. (Duckett plays some mad shots but it seems to suit him. ) Think I'd prefer most of the others to be more orthodox- while not stepping back from the very aggressive approach. Smith got it right yesterday at least.

Finishing before lunch , thankfully. Well done Sri Lanka as we await the final winning shot...

Job done for SL.

They punished a casual and complacent England in this one, and competed well in the previous two tests.

Pretty poor from England but in fairness to SL, they came back after day 1 and proved they still had the guts for the fight.

I suppose the usual bazball recriminations will proceed

Duty281 wrote:Job done for SL.

They punished a casual and complacent England in this one, and competed well in the previous two tests.

Parallels to the Windies tour here last summer with a well deserved win for the tourists in both cases.

GSC wrote:Pretty poor from England but in fairness to SL, they came back after day 1 and proved they still had the guts for the fight.

I suppose the usual bazball recriminations will proceed

I don't think the performance had much to do with Bazball, just a shameful level of complacency. You've got fans who have paid a lot of money to watch them play and they performed as if they didn't care. I can handle a team not being good enough but not caring is just not acceptable on any level.

Lanka upped their game & team selection, while Eng dropped their game, resulting in an easy win in the end.
Eng played proper, hard test cricket in T1, Lanka did not show up in T2
Here Eng took Lanka for granted, assumed themselves to be stronger, tried to show off the power/ dominance they thought they have.
Paid the price.

Lanka on the other hand batted well thru Nissanka...their 4 seamers was a good balance & SL achieved as CI shows below, not a mean feat
The highest successful fourth-innings chase by a subcontinental team in England

Summer ratings:

Duckett 6/10 - Pretty standard Duckett. He put up three brisk half centuries without kicking on to a big score, and largely failed outside of that. He averaged 36 in the summer and that won't get the job done v Australia.

Crawley 5.5/10 - Top scored in England's first innings of the summer with 76, then did nothing else, before getting injured.

Lawrence 2/10 - Got a few starts, but never kicked on. Played one of the worst 35s ever seen. Some sympathy for being played out of position, but he's not a test player.

Pope 7.5/10 - Typical Pope, with a feast or famine summer, making him difficult to rate. Put up two centuries and led the innings in both of those efforts, but also half his innings in the summer he scored 10 or fewer. Also added two half centuries. Failed to avert England's casualness as captain in the final test.

Root 9.25/10 - Truly the devil, with 666 runs this summer. Two centuries in the SL test at Lord's effectively won the game and the series, but he also added a second innings ton in Nottingham v the WI to take the game away from them. Oh, and don't forget the 62* that led England's successful chase in Manchester v SL, plus two other half centuries.

Brook 7/10 - A frustrating summer. So much talent, yet not enough application. His highest accolade of the summer was the century v WI in Nottingham which was part of the match winning partnership with Root. Outside of that, it was frustration. Brook got out six times, six, between 32 and 56. So many great platforms thrown away. He has the potential to be truly great, and reminds me a lot of Pietersen, but he needs to knuckle down and turn those thirty scores to centuries.

Stokes 7.5/10 - Three half centuries with the bat, and five wickets @ 34 with the ball, before injury struck. Entertained the crowds with the T20 knock in Birmingham to win the game. Captained England to a 3-0 win.

Smith 8.5/10 - Solid keeping, but more importantly showed his immediate worth over Foakes, in being able to briskly add runs with the tail. Put together three half centuries and a ton, with some of those scores being highly instrumental. Has a bright future, though tougher tests certainly lie in wait.

Woakes 9/10 - Now the attack leader. He was never quite devastating with the ball in any spell, getting four-for just once, but he was a consistent and reliable threat, only ending up wicketless in one of 12 innings this summer. His final figures were 24 wickets @ a little over 20. He also offered crucial control, which is much needed. Woakes' summer also started off well with the bat, before fading. 46 runs from six innings at seven indicates he isn't a seven! The big question is will he be able to play a role overseas, having historically struggled?

Atkinson 9/10 - The breakthrough man of the summer. Started his test career with the loudest bang, 12 wickets at Lord's, and maintained consistency until the final test of the summer, where he faded. He did manage another seven wickets at Lord's v Sri Lanka, too! The only slight blemish was an economy over four. Also contributed a surprising century, again at Lord's.

Wood 7.5/10 - Just three tests this summer, with one five-for as he blew away the West Indies tail. Injury has derailed his winter plans and his next possible test isn't until Zimbabwe next year.

Bashir 4.5/10 - A pretty mediocre summer. 15 wickets @ 36, with an economy just over 3.5. 5/41 in Nottingham v the WI was obviously the highlight. Offers little with the bat. Will still be backed for the winter, presumably, but if England favour two frontline spinners for Pakistan, then there's a chance for Bashir to be usurped.

Anderson 100/10 - England's greatest, champion of my heart, forced into retirement too early.

Stone 7/10 - Came in for the last two tests and impressed. With Wood's injury, Stone will likely have a leading role in the winter tests if he stays fit.

Potts 5/10 - Played two tests, didn't hugely impress, may have set himself back in the pecking order.

Hull unrated - Unrated as he only played one test. I suppose from a physical attributes point of view, I can see what Key is getting at by selecting him, and a left armer will also create extra footmarks for Bashir to target. However, Hull didn't look test level, and his pace was in the 79-82mph bracket, which really isn't it. Might still have a test future, but I think he needs more county cricket and more Lions games before he gets to that point.

Duty281 wrote:Hull unrated - Unrated as he only played one test. I suppose from a physical attributes point of view, I can see what Key is getting at by selecting him, and a left armer will also create extra footmarks for Bashir to target. However, Hull didn't look test level, and his pace was in the 79-82mph bracket, which really isn't it. Might still have a test future, but I think he needs more county cricket and more Lions games before he gets to that point.

He needs to go to an Academy where Bowling & Bio-mechanics coaches can work on remodeling /optimizing his action.
In India someone like this would be sent to MRF Pace Foundation and / or NCA at BCCI's expense.
Is there an equivalent program in England?

Seem fair to me. Do wonder about Bashir, quite unusual for a front line spinner to be a true number 11, he's not exactly Murali! I get the long term investment etc, and he hasn't done too badly, but Leach still seems far superior, and Hartley can hold a bat. Feels like Australia and India would take a lot of runs off him, if that's what they're planning towards

Duty281 wrote:Hull unrated - Unrated as he only played one test. I suppose from a physical attributes point of view, I can see what Key is getting at by selecting him, and a left armer will also create extra footmarks for Bashir to target. However, Hull didn't look test level, and his pace was in the 79-82mph bracket, which really isn't it. Might still have a test future, but I think he needs more county cricket and more Lions games before he gets to that point.

Seen him bowl in person once. Tall, left-handed, that's about it. One of those run-ups that peaks half way in and then eases in to the crease. Was surprised to find out people are so high on him, but maybe he figures it out and proves them right.

Don't want to pile on too much re Hull (acknowledging I am prejudiced because I really didn't like his selection) ; but I also saw some stats re point of release among England pace bowlers : can't recall the exact detail but despite his 6'7" height , Hull's PoR was well down the list behind several other recent bowlers (not all as tall) : which somewhat invalidates one of the main reasons given for picking him.

As for the stuff about a left arm bowler making rough for Bashir : spare me ! What would it do for Nathan Lyon

Anyway , don't want to bury him but Lions for now and maybe some time working with Jimmy around the lead up to Tests rather than trying to shoehorn him into the main XI ?

The Hull selection was just plain stupid, test cricket is not the place to learn. Beyond being a tall left armer there didn't seem to be a lot to work with. Action and run up needs a complete remodelling, it would have been better if he'd failed to take any wickets in a way.

Mixture of extremes really. When Jimmy was (forced) to retire they replaced him with Mark Wood and still had a pretty old seam attack. Then Hull plays the last test of the summer being plucked out of almost nowhere.

In truth I don't mind his selection that much as the 4th seamer in an already won series. But maybe it did add to an air of somewhat else than full commitment to this game from the England camp. But that falls upon the coach and the leadership team to address. Brook in particular I think has a bit of a habit of dim dismissals after getting himself set for a big score now.

Soul Requiem wrote:The Hull selection was just plain stupid, test cricket is not the place to learn. Beyond being a tall left armer there didn't seem to be a lot to work with. Action and run up needs a complete remodelling, it would have been better if he'd failed to take any wickets in a way.

Not sure I agree with this - Anderson did an awful lot of his learning, by playing, as did Broad and others.
Think what I was a disappointed with was his pace. Just being tall isn't an attribute, as we have seen with likes of Boyd Rankin in yesteryear trips to Australia! Definitely needs to go away and get more out of his action.

Thought we had got past the daft/mindless batting performances after the Lords debacle in the Ashes last year - but it crept in horrendously in that first innings in particular. Obviously sometimes they'll get bowled out cheaply, and will be the odd daft shot/dismissal...goes with the territory, but I don't think any of them could really say they were "got out" bar maybe Root, and took some absolutely awful options with shot types too. GSC has mentioned Brook, and maybe it is harsh to hold him to a higher standard because of his obvious talent, but feels like he needs to get an awful awful lot greedier. This summer he's really been a player of great shots, rather than great runs.

Big winter ahead for both the batting and bowling units. Bowlers with the first overseas test for a lot of them, and see who really can develop as options for Aus, and then batting wise this unit needs to start putting up those 500+ scores. You would think the pitches in Pakistan/New Zealand will give them the opportunity, particularly if the toss goes their way.

I see the Pakistan squad is announced...time for a new England's winter of cricket thread?!

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:The Hull selection was just plain stupid, test cricket is not the place to learn. Beyond being a tall left armer there didn't seem to be a lot to work with. Action and run up needs a complete remodelling, it would have been better if he'd failed to take any wickets in a way.

Not sure I agree with this - Anderson did an awful lot of his learning, by playing, as did Broad and others.
Think what I was a disappointed with was his pace. Just being tall isn't an attribute, as we have seen with likes of Boyd Rankin in yesteryear trips to Australia! Definitely needs to go away and get more out of his action.

Thought we had got past the daft/mindless batting performances after the Lords debacle in the Ashes last year - but it crept in horrendously in that first innings in particular. Obviously sometimes they'll get bowled out cheaply, and will be the odd daft shot/dismissal...goes with the territory, but I don't think any of them could really say they were "got out" bar maybe Root, and took some absolutely awful options with shot types too. GSC has mentioned Brook, and maybe it is harsh to hold him to a higher standard because of his obvious talent, but feels like he needs to get an awful awful lot greedier. This summer he's really been a player of great shots, rather than great runs.

Big winter ahead for both the batting and bowling units. Bowlers with the first overseas test for a lot of them, and see who really can develop as options for Aus, and then batting wise this unit needs to start putting up those 500+ scores. You would think the pitches in Pakistan/New Zealand will give them the opportunity,  particularly if the toss goes their way.

Anderson had shown a lot of promise in his first season at Lancashire before being called up to the ODI. He was raw but he'd shown a lot of promise already and wasn't a punt pick like Hull. The same goes for Broad, the situations were nothing like the current one.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:The Hull selection was just plain stupid, test cricket is not the place to learn. Beyond being a tall left armer there didn't seem to be a lot to work with. Action and run up needs a complete remodelling, it would have been better if he'd failed to take any wickets in a way.

Not sure I agree with this - Anderson did an awful lot of his learning, by playing, as did Broad and others.
Think what I was a disappointed with was his pace. Just being tall isn't an attribute, as we have seen with likes of Boyd Rankin in yesteryear trips to Australia! Definitely needs to go away and get more out of his action.

Broad in particular took a very long time to get his Test bowling average down to a decent number. He was scoring useful runs that helped keep him in the team for a while whilst his bowling was unreliable. 8 of his Test fifties and the only century came in those first 40-odd Tests when his bowling was extremely up and down. It wasn't until he got the wobble ball and pushed his lengths up, as all Test seamers did around a similar time, that his bowling average plummeted to the great numbers we'll remember. It took a massive investment letting him play lots of Tests to learn things he wouldn't in the CC.

I don't think Hull's action needs a complete remodelling. It's not like he's bowling off the wrong foot! He just decelerated into the crease, particularly as the Test wore on. His delivery stride, gather and release look really good to me. He needs more momentum coming into that delivery stride. Which is a likely a mixture of fitness work and tweaking his runup. That's far from a complete remodelling.

He was getting good swing when the conditions suited and his earlier spells when he was coming into the crease with more energy showed the bounce that he can get. I think there's a ton to work with there.

Ideally we'd have a CC better setup to produce bowlers for Tests. As things stand, the CC is brilliant for developing opening bowlers in very specific conditions, but not much else. Surrey might be the only county with the resources to really target having change bowlers. Hants sort of use James Fuller in that type of role I guess. It's mostly bowling attacks of 3 or 4 opening seamers, then pitches curated to help them.

India's system of really beefing up their A tour program under Dravid worked excellently for them. Players who showed talent in Ranji were largely brought under Dravid's tutelage very early, then the A team and their coaching programs were used to tailor them towards Tests, rather than domestic F-C cricket. Due to how congested the CC summer is, it's difficult to do that with the Lions over the summer though, which leaves the winter, which is also congested with franchise cricket.

It'd probably be better for players such as Hull if they could play 3 or 4 high quality Lions games over the summer in conditions tailored to be more suited to Tests. A couple of decks that are dry and will turn, a couple that are flatter and ideally have some bounce. That'd be a much more controlled setup to develop talents such as Hull. Likely a batter such as Pope too in all reality. His F-C record is heavily propped up by runs scored at the Oval, he can't play spin at all. Taking those talents away from the counties would go down about as well as a bowl of vomit though. Whilst changing the overall system is bordering on impossible when the counties will vote against change.

And back to the summer, because England have named their starting XI for the first of three T20s v Australia, starting tomorrow.

England: 1 Phil Salt (capt & wk), 2 Will Jacks, 3 Jordan Cox, 4 Liam Livingstone, 5 Jacob Bethell, 6 Sam Curran, 7 Jamie Overton, 8 Jofra Archer, 9 Adil Rashid, 10 Saqib Mahmood, 11 Reece Topley.

Debuts for Cox and Bethell. J Overton is playing as a specialist bat, because he's unfit to bowl. This is also his T20i debut, after missing the T20 World Cup through injury. Mahmood plays his first international in 18 months. But also plenty of familiar names.

That looks a really lightweight top 4 to me. Cox debuting, Jacks has been hit and miss at this level, Livi has flattered to deceive.

I'd have maybe brought Duckett into the T20 squad and rested him for the ODI's once Buttler was injured. Given Root has been rested from the ODIs, I'd have even been tempted to ask if Root would play. I still think he could've been a fantastic T20 player. His best in the format was better than what I saw from Williamson or Steve Smith, who have had very good T20 careers themselves. Or simply bring Root into the ODI squad, use Duckett and/or Brook in the T20is, then rest them in the ODI series accordingly.

The ODI batting with the Test players in will look far better. Even with Crawley injured too. It does feel we are going to have a lot more all format batters soon.

1.Salt 2.Jacks 3.Duckett 4.Brook 5.Smith 6.Buttler

If Buttler doesn't make it back, that top 5 for the ODIs still looks way stronger than the XI picked for the first T20 here.

From 5 down, it feels they are looking at things that need improving. They need hitters in the lower middle order. Bethell and Overton have talent there. They need improved PP bowling - Saqib was brilliant at times in the Hundred. I'm hoping that Curran comes in at 5 ahead of Bethell. Both to prioritise using Bethell as a lower middle order hitter, and to give Surran a chance higher up, where I think his batting is much better suited.

I'd have been tempted to look at Mousley as a death bowling option. That might be conditions based though.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:The Hull selection was just plain stupid, test cricket is not the place to learn. Beyond being a tall left armer there didn't seem to be a lot to work with. Action and run up needs a complete remodelling, it would have been better if he'd failed to take any wickets in a way.

Not sure I agree with this - Anderson did an awful lot of his learning, by playing, as did Broad and others.
Think what I was a disappointed with was his pace. Just being tall isn't an attribute, as we have seen with likes of Boyd Rankin in yesteryear trips to Australia! Definitely needs to go away and get more out of his action.

Thought we had got past the daft/mindless batting performances after the Lords debacle in the Ashes last year - but it crept in horrendously in that first innings in particular. Obviously sometimes they'll get bowled out cheaply, and will be the odd daft shot/dismissal...goes with the territory, but I don't think any of them could really say they were "got out" bar maybe Root, and took some absolutely awful options with shot types too. GSC has mentioned Brook, and maybe it is harsh to hold him to a higher standard because of his obvious talent, but feels like he needs to get an awful awful lot greedier. This summer he's really been a player of great shots, rather than great runs.

Big winter ahead for both the batting and bowling units. Bowlers with the first overseas test for a lot of them, and see who really can develop as options for Aus, and then batting wise this unit needs to start putting up those 500+ scores. You would think the pitches in Pakistan/New Zealand will give them the opportunity,  particularly if the toss goes their way.

Hey Olly - very much with you and GSC there about Brook. I feel he would benefit from taking on board one of my favourite football quotations, ''Great goal scorers don't score great goals.''

Duty 281
Love your score for Anderson

Well, we spoke about Rocky Flintoff, how about Archie Vaughan?

He's currently got figures of 6/68 v Surrey as Somerset try to force a win. He's 18 and this is just his second FC game.

Duty281 wrote:Well, we spoke about Rocky Flintoff, how about Archie Vaughan?

He's currently got figures of 6/68 v Surrey as Somerset try to force a win. He's 18 and this is just his second FC game.

His bowling appeared on my twitter feed
For one whose primary role is batting his off spin looked very decent, flight, loop dip and then spin.
He's 17 and I have seen many in early teens lose their loop as they gain height

England winning the toss and bowling first.

Australia 1 Travis Head, 2 Matt Short, 3 Mitchell Marsh (capt), 4 Josh Inglis, 5 Marcus Stoinis, 6 Tim David, 7 Cameron Green, 8 Sean Abbott, 9 Xavier Bartlett, 10 Adam Zampa, 11 Josh Hazlewood

Aussies probably look a little stronger. I think England have eight different bowling options, would be nine if J Overton could bowl!

71/0 after five. Curran just got taken for 30.

Um, er, yeah.

Seems like a real bits and pieces team. Where it looks like there's loads of bowling options and batting down to 9, but the reality is two decent bowlers and the tail starting at 5

England actually managed a good fightback with the ball. 86/0 for Australia, looking at 240, became 179ao. I think three different England bowlers were on hattricks at one point, including LL who got two wickets in two balls...both from successful reviews! Someone show Pope...

Unfortunately, and as expected really, the batting was nowhere near good enough to take on a score of 179. England are sliding to defeat.

It was a bit of a fizzer in the end. Odd sort of atmosphere given the test season has only just ended. England seemed sort of caught on the hop... not really having the benefit of some warm up matches like Australia had with the Scots.

The bits and pieces England team showed a few glimpses with the ball and did very well in the field towards the end of the Aus innings. They reeled things back pretty well after that explosive start from Head and Short.

However, the Aussies kept their cool and performed to script against this England batting line up. Not a huge total for England to chase but think conditions were better for bowling under the lights. They all chipped in when it counted. Some super catches too in the outfield.

There'll probably be some changes to both sides for Cardiff. I'd like to see Fraser McG, Hardie and Connolly get a game and Meredith in for Bartlett. I hear the 3rd match looks in doubt for Manchester due to adverse weather... looked a little chilly tonight with the crowd all rugged up.

Hey PJ - agree with your post and the general tone of the other comments about the make up of the side, especially the lack of batting strength.

And, yeah, a friend went to the game and he's just said how cold it was.

Potts 9/68 in the County Championship!

It's tough balancing rest with fielding strong sides these days. India literally have two teams playing simultaneously at times. It does feel like the ODI batting has been favoured too heavily over the T20i side here though.

Even if Buttler doesn't make it back, the likely top 7s are below:

T20 - 1.Salt 2.Jacks 3.Cox 4.Livi 5.Bethell 6.Surran 7.Overton
ODI - 1.Salt 2.Jacks 3.Duckett 4.Brook 5.Smith 6.Cox 7.Bethell/Carse

That ODI batting looks pretty strong even with Buttler and Crawley injured, along with Root rested. Whereas the T20 batting is threadbare. Especially when two of the top 4 have flattered to deceive at this level.

As said when that XI for the first T20i was announced, I really feel they could've shifted at least one, if not two, of Duckett, Brook or Smith into the T20 squad. Then brought Root into the ODI squad as cover for them so they don't play all the ODIs.

Even if they are dead set against Root playing the ODIs, then look at Sam Hain again as a middle order anchor? I'm honestly not convinced he has the top end power to step up with how ODIs are increasingly played, but his list-A record is fantastic, it'd still present a better balance than they have here.

If the strongest XIs end up with more multi format players, then this will be a growing issue though. It really feels that's where they are heading with the batting especially.

Test - 1.Crawley 2.Duckett 3.Pope 4.Root 5.Brook 6.Stokes 7.Smith
ODI - 1.Salt 2.Crawley 3.Root 4.Duckett 5.Brook 6.Buttler
T20 - 1.Buttler 2.Salt 3.Brook 4.Duckett 5.Smith 6.Bethell

I could very feasibly see our best batting line-ups shaping up something like that soon. I think Smith is likely to be the next in line for the ODIs as well. Basically heir to Buttler as keeper and cover for the middle order in the meantime. Managing the work loads of Duckett, Crawley, Brook and Smith could get much tougher going forward.

England bowling first again. Archer makes way for Carse.

England leveled the series. Carse impressing with the ball on his return, but LL took MOTM with 2/16 and 87*. It felt Livingstone's presence in the team was drifting somewhat, so his strong showing in these two games has been much needed. Bethell also hit 44 from 24 to put down an early marker.

That's a hell of an overdue innings from Livi the batter. His batting had defined 'flattering to deceive' for so long. That ridiculous summer where he hit a ball out of Headingley had been keeping him around for a while! The non finishing finisher came good.

Seeing Carse do well feels like a massive boost for both white ball sides. Be it T20 or ODI. They've missed someone in that middle overs role since Plunkett departed. It leads to them having to bowl Dilly there or needing to bring back someone like Jof in the middle overs as a strike option. Both of which limits flexibility elsewhere. It would help the white ball setup no end to have a go to middle overs seamer again. That Carse can bat more than a bit is useful too of course.

And Bethell could be something special. That ability to strike from ball one is something that England have largely missed for a while. Mo did it briefly in his prime but declined from that. It's why I like them looking at Bethell and JOverton, even if it does contribute to the side looking odd with lots of other batters missing. Both those guys could feasibly offer things the lower middle order have been missing, whilst adding bowling options too when fully fit.

I'm hoping that Mousley gets his chance in the 3rd match. The best place there might be for Overton though. Still Hull to get a potential debut too. That might be a straight swap for Topley given that he's in the ODI squad, whereas Mahmood isn't.

Butler out of the ODIs as well. Livi added to the squad. Brook to skipper. That must be with a view to the future as Duckett for instance would be a more experienced skipper and Brook hasn't done much in ODIs yet. Though I fully expect him to be excellent in the format.

1.Salt 2.Jacks 3.Duckett 4.Brook 5.Smith 6.Livi/Cox 7.Bethell 8.Carse 9.Jof 10.Rashid 11.Topley

That seems like the likely sort of XI. Stone, Potts and Turner also in the squad as seamers.

Hull has been withdrawn with a thigh injury but it's not expected to be severe enough to threaten his place on the Pakistan tour.

Meanwhile at Old Trafford, the third T20i is currently delayed due to rain.

Not looking good for Buttler, unfortunately. Vote of confidence in Brook, but I hope he doesn't get burnt out playing all three formats.

I would have given Salt the captaincy for these games, he did okay in the t20's