SLC Development XI v England XI

Final tour match for England started today in Colombo. The England team was:

AJ Strauss*, MJ Prior†, IR Bell, RS Bopara, TT Bresnan, SCJ Broad, KP Pietersen, IJL Trott, ST Finn, GP Swann, SR Patel

Good to see Broad playing. The Development XI are currently 217/3, Broad with 2 wickets and Patel 1.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sri-lanka-v-england-2012/engine/current/match/536301.html

Chamara Silva giving the selectors a timely nudge with what sounds like a very good century.

England toiling in the heat. Patel simply not good enough to play Tests in terms of his bowling, I'm afraid, so I fully expect Bopara to play at six.

England missing Jimmy Anderson, that is for sure.

England definitely missing Anderson in this one you feel, but the important thing for them is Broad got a few overs and a couple of wickets under his belt, suggesting he'll be fit for the test series. Now hopefully the batsmen will use what seems to be a nice pitch to score some runs.

370 odd for 5 then at the close. England have taken a royal pasting today! A harsh learning curve for some.

Let us just hope that the pitches for the Tests at least have a bit of turn in them, though, as this just makes for a boring spectacle.

Fists of Fury wrote:Chamara Silva giving the selectors a timely nudge with what sounds like a very good century.

England toiling in the heat. Patel simply not good enough to play Tests in terms of his bowling, I'm afraid, so I fully expect Bopara to play at six.

England missing Jimmy Anderson, that is for sure.

So do I, although I would prefer Prior at 6 and Bresnan at 7 but it won't happen sadly.

SL will be licking their lips at facing spinners whom can't cut it in SL conditions

Speaking of cutting it, why don't you cut the bullshine, presumably you failed to notice that the pitch didn't offer an ounce of anything to anyone?

Fists of Fury wrote:Speaking of cutting it, why don't you cut the bullshine, presumably you failed to notice that the pitch didn't offer an ounce of anything to anyone?

Great bowlers make things happen. The supposed 'best spinner in the World' was shown to lack the ability to get through a second rate SL batting line up.

Demon Racer wrote:

Fists of Fury wrote:Speaking of cutting it, why don't you cut the bullshine, presumably you failed to notice that the pitch didn't offer an ounce of anything to anyone?

Great bowlers make things happen. The supposed 'best spinner in the World' was shown to lack the ability to get through a second rate SL batting line up.

Bloody hell, didn't know Ajmal was playing!

Demon Racer wrote:SL will be licking their lips at facing spinners whom can't cut it in SL conditions

demon monty was rested thus wasnt playing agianst this batting line up...

Demon, this is an excellent board, so can I suggest you stop coming onto every post about England and trying to wind people up? It's getting tiresome...

On an earlier thread I queried the purpose - or, put another way, had a bit of a whinge - about Tredwell being included in the England squad. It's not that I'm particularly anti-Tredwell, simply that I couldn't see the point.

Several respected posters gave the view that the selection had much to do with the importance of spin in the two match series and that his role was as understudy to Swann, especially if Swann for some reason had to drop out on the eve of a Test. That was all reasonable and understandable.

However, we will shortly start the first Test with Tredwell having played in neither of the warm up games. If Swann does have to drop out, it now seems unlikely that Tredwell will replace him and pretty unfair on him if he does. As I said before, more is not always better and can be a distraction.

SLC declared on 431/6 and England have raced to 169/0 in 37 overs. Just how flat is this wicket?

looks like a great cricket pitch this one - heavy sarcasm. England 217/2 in reply, both batsmen dismissed "retired out" on reaching their centuries (Strauss and Trott). Oh well hopefully Bell can get some runs under his belt, I think that's all England can really hope for from this one...

Thanks to the curator for allowing our struggling batsmen to find some form!

feel a bit sorry for the development XI's bowlers though, not too fussed about England's, they had a good work-out in the heat which is probably what they needed after having it a bit too easy in the first game. KP not hanging around...

Bell gone, oh dear

Bresnan in at n°5 above Bopara, Patel and Prior? mildly odd move that , could it be that England are genuinely thinking of going into the tests with Prior at 6?

Apparently not MfC. KP now out for 26 which is a shame.

Good chance for Bopara and Patel to battle it out.

One thing about warm-up matches though: why doesn't the touring side automatically win the toss? The match is after all organised for their benefit. When France play warm-ups, we win the toss (that is, we agree with the side we're playing what we'll do; if they don't like it we won't play them again, but so far not a single side has had any problems with us going "guys, ok if we bat first today?"). I just don't understand why this isn't standard practice.

not hugely fussed about KP, he's had a decent knock now in both warm-up games and it would be nice to see what Patel and Bopara can do. I swear it had Bresnan in at n°5 on cricinfo a minute ago

Yeah happy with a 20-something for KP, he has felt the ball in the middle of the bat and that often counts most. It is when people get out after facing about 3 balls that it's a worry.

Patel and Bopara crawling along. Not convinced either of them are good enough, still.

Drop them both and get Steven Croft in there

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Bell gone, oh dear

Bresnan in at n°5 above Bopara, Patel and Prior? mildly odd move that , could it be that England are genuinely thinking of going into the tests with Prior at 6?

Id say this match says they should consider it for flat pitches.

They miss Panessars attacking left arm to compliment Swan, Patel is nothing more than a fill in bowler. The heat is sapping on our quicks, to get the best form them they need short spells and lots of rest, apparently Prior kept wicket with no pads because of the humidity.

Im now 90% sure they will go with two spinners. I was expecting 4 bowlers, but seeing Bopara and Patel fail to make a case for inclussion and the trouble they had taking wickets on the flat pitch Im seeing 5 as a serious possibility again.

I'm not a fan on 5 bowlers in general. My thoughts on it are that if you are in the field long enough for the fifth bowler to bowl a decent amount of overs then they opposition have a huge score and the fifth bowler playing has not worked! I'd go with Anderson, Broad (if fit, if not Finn), Swann and Panesar. That attack should be more than enough to take 20 wickets regularly, as long as the pitches offer something... Not like this road.

No Im not a fan either, and England havent been a fan. But these two games and comments made suggest that or a flat track on this tour England may go that way.
I agree in a low scoring game its pretty pointless, but the last thing they will want is a score of 400 turning into 600+ because their strike bowlers are crackered and the attack lacks variety.
The other thing to consider ....England dont have 5 batsmen demanding a place, let alone 6

True, the decision is made a lot easier by the fact that Bresnan probably would score the amount of runs that Bopara or Patel would. Half of me hopes that, as a big Taylor fan, Bopara will fail inevitably and maybe then England will finally discard him at test level.

I think if they were considering a 4 bowler attack of 3 seamers and 1 spinner, then maybe 5 would be the way to go but as they are probably going to go with Swann and Panesar I think the seamers will get enough of a break with the spiners to bowling to allow them to go in with only 4. I hope it's 4, but Flower knows his stuff so I will bow to his superior judgement if he decides to go with 5!

England need 359 to win off of 64 overs after another fast declaration. KP and Bell are opening.

31/0 after 4 overs A nice gentle start by England.

Lovely half century from KP before being bowled by the leg-spinner. Ravi has made a half century of his own.

Bell wrongly given out down the leg side by all accounts - when you're out of luck, you're out of luck.

Ah I saw Bell have failed again, bad for him. At least it perhaps wasnt his fault this tiume, his form has to be a worry though.

Good to see Bopara make some runs. I think the question between Panessar and Patel has been emphaticaly answered between these two games. Bopara being sent out so high in the order suggests they are looking to play him, so maybe we will see a 4 man attack with two proper spinners for the tests.

KP with a brisk fifty, he hasn't played a long knock yet on tour but in all three innings he's got going, so it suggests the form is there. Poor Bell! when things go against you... I noticed in Australia last Ashes that in some of the warm-up matches local umpires seemed very happy to trigger the touring batsmen in the warm-ups. Doing their bit for the cause?

Good to see Bopara get some runs, and I think this answers any lingering question we may have had about the team for the first test. Bopara at 6, two spinners, the only question is Broad's fitness.

Bopara gone for 66, Prior having just reached a brisk 50, wonder if England will keep going for the target or shut up shop now and just take the opportunity for batting practise.

News coming through that Ravi has a side strain and cannot bowl in the Tests. I'd still play him, though. Not sure his bowling would have been at all effective.

Well thats put the cat amongst the pigeons. If Bresnan had looked vaguely threatening Id be rining the 5 bowlers bandwagon bell.

well that changes things a bit. However I don't think Patel would be a genuine bowling option in tests (he'd still be fill-in) so he's not the answer IMO. It thus becomes a straight choice between Bopara and Bresnan really. Given that England have hardly struggled to bowl sides out in recent times (in any conditions) I'd say stick with the same policy, especially as Bopara is in decent form with the bat at the moment.

5 bowlers may be an option if the pitch looks incredibly flat (like this one)

I'd stick with Ravi. Bresnan looked about as threatening as a pair of safety scissors with the blades taped together.

then again, it was pretty hard to look threatening on this pitch but yeah, I agree, stick with the six batsmen for now. Prior gone for a very rapid 84 (60 balls). Patel going reasonably well, England need 94 off 16 overs.

How many wickets down now?

4 down, need 89 off 14.4 overs biltong. Strauss and Trott haven't batted in this innings as they scored centuries in the first dig (I suspect Broad and Swann will get sent in ahead of them too).

Thansk Mad, it looks pretty regulation then for England?

Bresnan gone. As I predicted, Broad is in, 84 needed from 83 balls, could be quite a tense finish actually.

BOSH! Swann slaps 31 off 12 balls, England cruise home by four wickets with more than three overs to spare, nice

Well that livened up what was meandering toward a rather insipid draw prior to the sporting declarations.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:well that changes things a bit. However I don't think Patel would be a genuine bowling option in tests (he'd still be fill-in) so he's not the answer IMO. It thus becomes a straight choice between Bopara and Bresnan really. Given that England have hardly struggled to bowl sides out in recent times (in any conditions) I'd say stick with the same policy, especially as Bopara is in decent form with the bat at the moment.

5 bowlers may be an option if the pitch looks incredibly flat (like this one)

A normally unfit Patel or a temporarily unfit Bopara?

Most here seem to side with Bopara. I suspect Flower will as well. However, whilst I wouldn't die in ditch over it, on balance I'd probably go for Patel.

I accept, as Mad states, that 'Bopara is in decent form with the bat at the moment'. However, so is Patel. His quickfire 70 today refers.

I also find it difficult to overlook that Bopora has form for mucking up in Tests. Going in with an injury is hardly going to help. It apparently also means he can't bowl. Patel is clearly no Swann or Monty with the ball but might be useful as a fifth and extra bowler.

Good chase, 360/6 in 60.4 overs. Very good to see Strauss, Trott, KP, Bopara, Patel and Prior amongst the runs. Even if it was a very flat deck it will give them confidence which is vitally important. This is my team for the first test:

1) Strauss (C)
2) Cook
3) Trott
4) KP
5) Bell
6) Prior (WK)
7) Bresnan
8) Broad
9) Swann
10) Anderson
11) Panesar

Mike Selig wrote:
One thing about warm-up matches though: why doesn't the touring side automatically win the toss? The match is after all organised for their benefit. When France play warm-ups, we win the toss (that is, we agree with the side we're playing what we'll do; if they don't like it we won't play them again, but so far not a single side has had any problems with us going "guys, ok if we bat first today?"). I just don't understand why this isn't standard practice.

Hmmm, not sure about that. Suppose it depends upon what's understood from when the match is arranged.

Whilst the match is (principally) for the tourists' benefit, my view is that it's still meant to be competitive and testing. That includes having to adapt to circumstances - including the loss of the toss - which might go against you.

A logical extension of the above approach would be for Strauss to say to the other skipper, ''We want KP to get a bit of practice in against your slow left armer. So if he gives a chance early on, please make sure your guys don't take it!'.

guildfordbat wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:well that changes things a bit. However I don't think Patel would be a genuine bowling option in tests (he'd still be fill-in) so he's not the answer IMO. It thus becomes a straight choice between Bopara and Bresnan really. Given that England have hardly struggled to bowl sides out in recent times (in any conditions) I'd say stick with the same policy, especially as Bopara is in decent form with the bat at the moment.

5 bowlers may be an option if the pitch looks incredibly flat (like this one)

A normally unfit Patel or a temporarily unfit Bopara?

Most here seem to side with Bopara. I suspect Flower will as well. However, whilst I wouldn't die in ditch over it, on balance I'd probably go for Patel.

I accept, as Mad states, that 'Bopara is in decent form with the bat at the moment'. However, so is Patel. His quickfire 70 today refers.

I also find it difficult to overlook that Bopora has form for mucking up in Tests. Going in with an injury is hardly going to help. It apparently also means he can't bowl. Patel is clearly no Swann or Monty with the ball but might be useful as a fifth and extra bowler.

England will only play Patel if they arent playing Panessar. I would stake the shiney 10p i found on the floor today that they will play Panessar. With Bopara unable to bowl I think that means 5 bowlers.
I find it hugely unlikely theyd go into a test with 2 spinners, 2 seamers and 1 Patel . Far more likely 2 spinners two seamers and a bowling bopara, or 2 spinners 3 seamers.

England have been making a big hoo haa about the heat and humidity on this tour, and need to rest bowlers. With the top 4 finding form the worries about the batting depth are eased a bit.


The leftfield option then is do they drop bell for bopara or Patel as a fifth batsman. Unlikely for the first test but i love speculation.

guildfordbat wrote:

Mike Selig wrote:
One thing about warm-up matches though: why doesn't the touring side automatically win the toss? The match is after all organised for their benefit. When France play warm-ups, we win the toss (that is, we agree with the side we're playing what we'll do; if they don't like it we won't play them again, but so far not a single side has had any problems with us going "guys, ok if we bat first today?"). I just don't understand why this isn't standard practice.

Hmmm, not sure about that. Suppose it depends upon what's understood from when the match is arranged.

Whilst the match is (principally) for the tourists' benefit, my view is that it's still meant to be competitive and testing. That includes having to adapt to circumstances - including the loss of the toss - which might go against you.

A logical extension of the above approach would be for Strauss to say to the other skipper, ''We want KP to get a bit of practice in against your slow left armer. So if he gives a chance early on, please make sure your guys don't take it!'.

I think you are being a bit disingenuous. There is a big difference between being allowed to win a toss and being allowed to win. I don't think the match loses any of its competitive edge by handing the toss to the tourists, but it does ensure they get the preparation they want. Nothing to stop England saying "we'd like to bowl first on this flat pitch, to give our bowlers a work-out" (indeed, I have turned up at a green-top and gone "right guys, we may need to bat on one of these at some point, so let's start now where there's a bit less pressure" then to the other side "skip, you don't mind if we bat first do you?".

Hi Mike - In your examples immediately above, the tourists' skipper wants the worst of the starting conditions for his own team so they can benefit in the long run from the experience. That seems fair enough. However, it's almost certainly what would result anyway if the captains tossed a coin in the normal way.

My concern really relates to the tourists' skipper being automatically able if he so wishes to impose the worst of the starting conditions on the local home team. That for me dilutes the competitive edge and probably too much.