England team for the 2nd test

First topic message reminder :

With the news of Finn being ruled out of the second test, who should England pick?

My team would be
Cook
Compton
Trott
kp
Morgan
Prior
Bresnan
Broad
swann
Anderson
Panesar

Doesn't Patel average close to 40 in first class cricket with the bat? , yes, cricinfo say 39.1. He also averages 31 with the bat in ODIs.
Eoin Morgan's first class average is 34.5 and he averages 30 after playing 16 test matches.
I know stats can only tell you so much, but Patel is not as hopeless as he's made out to be and Morgan by no means is a superhuman first class or test player.

msp83 wrote:Doesn't Patel average close to 40 in first class cricket with the bat? , yes, cricinfo say 39.1. He also averages 31 with the bat in ODIs.
Eoin Morgan's first class average is 34.5 and he averages 30 after playing 16 test matches.
I know stats can only tell you so much, but Patel is not as hopeless as he's made out to be and Morgan by no means is a superhuman first class or test player.

Patel with his raise the bat and walk across to come dead in front of the stumps is a walking wicket against international quality bowling when there are close-in fielders.

with that type of flawed technique is a prime LBW candidate.......now we can split the hair and say that those balls were going marginally down......but he was comrehensively beaten...not once but twice in 2 innings and given...survived a number of shouts..that coupled with his technique builds the doubt in umpires, and they rare more prompt in giving such batsmen out ....and was a matter of time he was gone if he survived one of those appeals.

if he does survive LBW...he will fall to a catch in slips or caught at foward short-leg with that kinda walk-across-stumps-and-play-with-a-inclined /cross-bat technique ( or should i say the complete lack of technique)

Morgan too is not the most technically perfect batsman playing the game. Patel has nevertheless scored ODI runs with the same technique, I know you did mention close in fielders KPF, but at the end of the day playing with hard hands against the turning ball without being quite sure about the kind of spin available, as was the case with Morgan won't help much either. Morgan has been quite good against spin in ODI cricket, but hasn't done anything remarkable against spin in tests. Bringing him in for Patel, who has recent form, ODI runs against spin in the sub-continent and a handy 2nd string to his game, may not make a sea of difference. Fair enough, give Patel one more go, and if he failes with the bat, then bring Morgan in or Bell or anyone else.

Patel's ODI runs haven't exactly been huge though. A couple of fairly recent good efforts, and a lot which frankly aren't good enough for somebody who is a frontline batsman for his county, and gets in ahead of the likes of Briggs, Borthwick and Rafiq primarily because of his batting.

But then shelsey, he hasn't had too many opportunities to play a big innings. But I remember he showing good temprament to see England through some pressure situations in a few T-20I games as well as a few ODIs. The temprament is the importnat thing here. Again, I am not trying to suggest he's England's next best thing with the bat or even that he's far better than Morgan in overall analysis. But he's not a lost case and considering his recent form and all the extras coming with the package, he should be given a fair chance. Morgan had got it , so has Bopara.

msp83 wrote: Again, I am not trying to suggest he's England's next best thing with the bat or even that he's far better than Morgan in overall analysis. But he's not a lost case and considering his recent form and all the extras coming with the package, he should be given a fair chance. Morgan had got it , so has Bopara.

there is a subjective judgement of talent based on visual observation.....where atleast Morgan looks exciting with X-factors based on what he does in T20s and ODIs...a bit like Raina....and that visual observation of exceptional talent is used to justify getting him inot tests.

patel looks.......mediocre and flawed .....to put it mildly....when he bats
and pedestrian....when he bowls

So India are to prepare massive turning pitches are they? That's nice.

Swann and Panesar > Ashwin and Ojha

Now England just need to get through the mental barrier batting and we'll be fine.

msp83 wrote:But then shelsey, he hasn't had too many opportunities to play a big innings. But I remember he showing good temprament to see England through some pressure situations in a few T-20I games as well as a few ODIs. The temprament is the importnat thing here. Again, I am not trying to suggest he's England's next best thing with the bat or even that he's far better than Morgan in overall analysis. But he's not a lost case and considering his recent form and all the extras coming with the package, he should be given a fair chance. Morgan had got it , so has Bopara.

I agree with you that chances have been somewhat lacking from number seven.

While we debate England's likely combinations and injury impact, there is some bad news for India as well. Umesh Yadav, the most successful fast bowler in the last match is a doubtful starter for the next game, and Ashok Dinda is called up as cover. Yadav has some back trouble.

msp83 wrote:While we debate England's likely combinations and injury impact, there is some bad news for India as well. Umesh Yadav, the most successful fast bowler in the last match is a doubtful starter for the next game, and Ashok Dinda is called up as cover. Yadav has some back trouble.

ishant will play
dinda will get old carrying dfrinks and providing cover

Ishant too had some fitness concerns for the last match didn't he?
Fair enough, Dinda's early season form has kind of deserted him during the last couple of Ranji matches. Not that Ishant did anything great in the only Ranji match he played this season on a rather lively track. But if Ishant could find his best form then that would be a different proposition altogether. Now since he's no longer an automatic pick and needs a good performance to strengthen his case for further consideration, Ishant might be able to take his game to a new level. Also since that much delaied surgery is done, he should be feeling a lot better with his fitness.
Nevertheless, Yadav is a big loss, no doubt whatsoever on that.

Perhaps they should have given an opportunity to Pankaj Singh at least to have some squad time He has really earned the right to be considered, through some real consistent performances at the domestic level.

Pankaj should be playing against England A side that will be here soon.

Ishant was at his best against Australia and Eng at home in 2009 series when him and Zaheer were getting the ball to reverse in the 7th over with the new ball.

Ishant's gotta picth it up if he plays

Ishant's decline started when he started cutting down on his pace like what Munaf Patel and even Irfan Pathan did.
That's one reason I really like Umesh, he just want to bowl as fast as he could and unlike Varun Aaron the other Fast bowler India have, Umesh has more than just bowling it fast and the more he plays with Zaheer the better he's going to become. He wasn't reversing it as much as he did in the last match last year, but there is the improvement. Shame he's under an injury cloud. comfortably Outbowling the likes of James Anderson is no symple feat.

Ishant did surgery, missed IPL, missed CL...played a lot of FC cricket....duleep, irani, challanger, Ranji..tried bowling fast and long spells on Patta picthes.

He has done the hard yards...let's see if he has come out tempered and shining.

I think he will give a good account of himself...if he has to play T2

If Patel was amongst England's best 6 batsmen before the first test (and the reasoning given everywhere was that he was, because he played spin better than Morgan and Bairstow) then he is amongst their best 5 batsmen now Bell has gone home. I don't see how 2 innings (when everybody but Cook and Prior were hopeless anyway) can change that.

I've often said that players seem to improve remarkably whilst they're out of the side. Now Morgan has suddenly become wonderful again (note, I don't believe he's a bad player, but he's not a better player now than he was at the start of the tour), Onions is all of a sudden the answer to everything (although he was outbowled by Bresnan and Broad in the warm-ups, and indeed in the tests against the West Indies) and Panesar is the spin bowler who is suddenly going to rip through this Indian line-up.

Guildford's obviously tongue in cheek reference to Bopara is along those lines. Actually it's not as silly as some have made out: before the summer Ravi was the incumbent for the no 6 slot. He lost his place because of injury and well-publicised mental problems, and never really recovered, but his records suggest he wouldn't be significantly worse than Morgan or indeed Patel.

Not suggesting there aren't problems, but when you replace a player you have to ask yourself is what you're replacing him with actually any better?

Really, it doesn't matter who you put in this England side come Thursday that much. Unless Trott, Pietersen and whoever's batting 5/6 bat significantly better than they did last time, England have little to no chance.

Mike I agree with what you are saying about players improving whilst they are out of the side. However, I don't think Patel was one of the top six batsmen, I think he has always been included because of his bowling hence why he comes into the mix in the sub continent.

LivinginItaly wrote:Mike I agree with what you are saying about players improving whilst they are out of the side. However, I don't think Patel was one of the top six batsmen, I think he has always been included because of his bowling hence why he comes into the mix in the sub continent.

Fair enough. But there are many who were saying before the test that Patel was a better subcontinental batsman than either Bairstow or Morgan (e.g Shanky and CF - not sure if they've changed their mind since though, haven't read this thread too closely).

Just saying that if (like msp also) you thought before the first test that Patel was selected for his batting with his bowling a bonus, then I don't see how the first test has changed your views.

Personally, as my post suggested I think it's much of a muchness. I think Morgan could make a big score, but I realise stats don't back this up, and he may be just as likely to fail. I think Bairstow has obvious technical issues against spin (and raised this a long time before the T20 WC) but is mentally tough and learns quickly - he could still score runs. Will either certainly make significantly more runs than Patel? I'm not certain, and to be honest I don't see how it will make that much difference unless others put their hands up as well. I also think that having made the call to go with Patel (based partly on the warm-ups where he was excellent) to make him a scapegoat for what was really a collective failure would be harsh. Although not necessarily wrong.

This may seem like fence-sitting, but my point is really that it's foolhardy to think that by putting in Morgan/Bairstow for Patel you're going to solve England's problems.

Don't completely downplay handy 2nd strings that players have got. Michael Clarke had very nearly bowled Australia to victory at Mumbai 8 years ago. They did have some very capable spinners playing that match as bowlers along with a few handy seamers!. Anyone saw Bangladesh's Abul Hasan demolishing West Indies today, batting at 10? He is picked as a bowler in the side.

Mike Selig wrote:

LivinginItaly wrote:Mike I agree with what you are saying about players improving whilst they are out of the side. However, I don't think Patel was one of the top six batsmen, I think he has always been included because of his bowling hence why he comes into the mix in the sub continent.

Fair enough. But there are many who were saying before the test that Patel was a better subcontinental batsman than either Bairstow or Morgan (e.g Shanky and CF - not sure if they've changed their mind since though, haven't read this thread too closely).

Just saying that if (like msp also) you thought before the first test that Patel was selected for his batting with his bowling a bonus, then I don't see how the first test has changed your views.

Personally, as my post suggested I think it's much of a muchness. I think Morgan could make a big score, but I realise stats don't back this up, and he may be just as likely to fail. I think Bairstow has obvious technical issues against spin (and raised this a long time before the T20 WC) but is mentally tough and learns quickly - he could still score runs. Will either certainly make significantly more runs than Patel? I'm not certain, and to be honest I don't see how it will make that much difference unless others put their hands up as well. I also think that having made the call to go with Patel (based partly on the warm-ups where he was excellent) to make him a scapegoat for what was really a collective failure would be harsh. Although not necessarily wrong.

This may seem like fence-sitting, but my point is really that it's foolhardy to think that by putting in Morgan/Bairstow for Patel you're going to solve England's problems.

I was kind of looking at the selection process starting from the bowlers. With the view that if panesar plays with swann then Patel's bowling is unnecessary and therefore it really does become a straight fight for the number six position based exclusively on batting. A competition that Bairstow appeared to be winning after the summer series.

Once again, I don't disagree at all. The thing is, Bairstow has gone from being hopeless (can't play the short ball) to the solutions to all England's problems, back to hopeless (can't play spin, based on T20 performances) again. In quite a few people's eyes. I never thought he was hopeless to start with, but I did querry his technique against spin quite early on, and wasn't surprised by his problems in the T20.

For what it's worth, I think Patel has the better technique to score runs in India, but I'm fairly sure Bairstow will score more runs over the course of his career because he learns quicker and is stronger mentally than Patel, whilst his technique against seam is more than adequate. The question is then whether you go purely "horses for courses" and pick Patel in the subcontinent (and if he performs admirably can you then drop him for home tests?), or decide that continuity is more important and pick Bairstow, even if you suspect Patel could make more runs. I can't answer that question, because I'm not close enough to the England team.

ON the bowlers, it seems almost certain that Panesar will play with Swann. However I still think Patel can bowl a few useful overs - even with Swann and Patel Pietersen bowled a bit after all.

I still maintain it is harsh to drop Patel after that last game - he didn't do more wrong than many other England players. But then Morgan was dropped after the UAE despite the fact that Bell and Pietersen had just as poor series. The feeling could be Patel has less credit than the others (which is right) and there could be a genuine belief that Bairstow's qualities will make England better.

However, the main point is still that if England wish to compete, they have to bat better as a team. Regardless of who they eventually pick.

Very true observations regarding how quickly we change our opinions of players, bairstow being a case in point.

Mike Selig wrote:If Patel was amongst England's best 6 batsmen before the first test (and the reasoning given everywhere was that he was, because he played spin better than Morgan and Bairstow) then he is amongst their best 5 batsmen now Bell has gone home. I don't see how 2 innings (when everybody but Cook and Prior were hopeless anyway) can change that.

He wasnt though and never has been. he was selected for the tour and for that game because Flower didnt think two wicket taking spinner were required, but did expect England to have top bowl for long periods.
Noone seriously thinks Patel is amongst the top 5 or 6 or 10 English batsmen do they? I mean really?
What he has in theory offered is a way to balance the side without playing 5 proper bowlers.

If Panessar plays his all round ability goes out of the question and he has to be judged as a better bat, and player with the strength of character to thrive in test match intensity, than the players who were selected for the tour purely on their batting.

Yes Patel doenst deserve to be dropped purely on one game, the question is does he deserve to be selected ahead of specialist batsmen? Does he offer in terms of fielding, mental strength and professionalism than those guys?

Course Morgan was supposed to be the spin playing specialist but thats a thing isnt it

Has Monty Panesar become Bishen Singh Bedi over night?

Panesar averages 33 in Tests and that rises to nearly 60 in Tests in India.

Therefore showing Panesar doesn't have the class to trouble Indian batsmen.

England should stick with pace bowling, like South Africa do when in India.

Pick Meaker and Onions they'll give the Indian batsmen the hurry up.

Bairstow should anyways get a chance in the next game as Bell's unavailable.

This England side will be fighting to avoid the dubious historical record of " most defeated England side in a single year" in Mumbai

There are reports that Stuart Broad is a bit under the weather. Broad has missed the last training session before the match. He's not ruled out yet, but if he's not fully fit, it would be a risk playing him, as he's already not in the best of form and his pace down. If England are going in with only 2 seamer, the risk element become that much more.
Meanwhile the Indian captain Mahendra Singh Dhoni indicated that fast bowler Umesh Yadav still remain a fitness concern and India are very unlikely to risk him.

msp83 wrote:There are reports that Stuart Broad is a bit under the weather. Broad has missed the last training session before the match. He's not ruled out yet, but if he's not fully fit, it would be a risk playing him, as he's already not in the best of form and his pace down. If England are going in with only 2 seamer, the risk element become that much more.
Meanwhile the Indian captain Mahendra Singh Dhoni indicated that fast bowler Umesh Yadav still remain a fitness concern and India are very unlikely to risk him.

Don't you know MSP....ganguly and BCCI invented it.....when a senior player was to be "dropped" on form like Kumble, Sehwag, Srinath types...they were euphemistically declared "sick"......or "injured"....as a mark of respect for their seniority....and declared "recovered" when convenient.

Looks like Vice Captain Broad is likely to go out with an injury/ sickness of convenience in this game

Well if broad is not fit, then I definitely think we will only play four bowlers, and this increases the chances of bresnan playing imo to reduce the length of the tail. See them playing Anderson, bresnan, swann, panesar. With only four bowlers think they will also play patel at six for a few overs of spin if necessary. Meaning now I would pick

cook
compton
trott
kp
Morgan
Patel
Prior
Bresnan
Swann
Anderson
Panesar

I hope the england team have a clear selection idea and strategy, because I seem to pick a different team every five minutes. Chicken and headless spring to mind, I just need to start running around in circles now

KP_fan wrote:

msp83 wrote:There are reports that Stuart Broad is a bit under the weather. Broad has missed the last training session before the match. He's not ruled out yet, but if he's not fully fit, it would be a risk playing him, as he's already not in the best of form and his pace down. If England are going in with only 2 seamer, the risk element become that much more.
Meanwhile the Indian captain Mahendra Singh Dhoni indicated that fast bowler Umesh Yadav still remain a fitness concern and India are very unlikely to risk him.

Don't you know MSP....ganguly and BCCI invented it.....when a senior player was to be "dropped" on form like Kumble, Sehwag, Srinath types...they were euphemistically declared "sick"......or "injured"....as a mark of respect for their seniority....and declared "recovered" when convenient.

Looks like Vice Captain Broad is likely to go out with an injury/ sickness of convenience in this game

Oh, I do remember Dada Sourav missing a match at Nagpur? against Australia just before the toss with a back that went all wrong all of a sudden!!.

If you're English and require some optimism then look no further than this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/4831604.stm

Yeah they also used to say that was the reason why 14 year old girls dropped out of school for 6 months ...doesnt mean that broads pregnant though

Duty281 wrote:If you're English and require some optimism then look no further than this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/4831604.stm

that was the era when India was sc.rewed by Chappelization.
its' impossible to fall so low again....

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:If you're English and require some optimism then look no further than this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/4831604.stm

that was the era when India was sc.rewed by Chappelization.
its' impossible to fall so low again....

Also when England were also at their weakest for quite a while.

Duty281 wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:If you're English and require some optimism then look no further than this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/4831604.stm

that was the era when India was sc.rewed by Chappelization.
its' impossible to fall so low again....

Also when England were also at their weakest for quite a while.

OK then...just like I have in the past I say again.....
let the results prove one way or the other....

let Swann show us that he can do even a Tredwell and Broad a Flintoff

I think batting wise Bairstow will come in for Bell and Patel will probably keep his place, which is right imo, he was unlucky and it's not like Morgan is guaranteed to do any better and Patel did get runs in the warm ups.

As for the bowling it will be a 4 man attack and almost certainly Panesar will play, I think he'll do a good job, he was decent in SL and had a good season for Sussex, certainly if the pitch helps him out he'll stand more chance of wickets than Patel. As for the seamers, Broad was terrible in the first game anyway so if he's not 100% then don't bother risking him imo. Personally, with Finn out as well I would like to see Meaker given a chance as he is much quicker and bowled better (apparently) than Onions in the warm up. I would also like England to use their pace men in short quick bursts rather than having them bowl long spells and tire themselves out.

KP_fan wrote:

msp83 wrote:Bit of good news.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/bcci-goes-with-dhoni-orders-rank-turners-for-remaining-tests-t20s/1033935/
Well done, Mahendra Singh Dhoni. Will provide everyone a more meaningful challenge, the batsman can play their shots and the excellent ones can survive and score well. The seamers should enjoy the bounce. The spinners can have a bawl , and they very much deserve it.

I predict a 3rd or early 4th day finish in Mumbai......and sub 200 totals for England in each inning.
Eng should realize that they got te better of the bowling conditions in Motera where the ball spun and bounced more on the first 3 days
.[/i]

Well you may have got one bit right, the last bit I'm not so sure about.

[quote="Duty281"]

KP_fan wrote:

msp83 wrote:Bit of good news.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/bcci-goes-with-dhoni-orders-rank-turners-for-remaining-tests-t20s/1033935/
Well done, Mahendra Singh Dhoni. Will provide everyone a more meaningful challenge, the batsman can play their shots and the excellent ones can survive and score well. The seamers should enjoy the bounce. The spinners can have a bawl , and they very much deserve it.

I predict a 3rd or early 4th day finish in Mumbai......and sub 200 totals for England in each inning.
Eng should realize that they got te better of the bowling conditions in Motera where the ball spun and bounced more on the first 3 days
.[/i]

Well you may have got one bit right, the last bit I'm not so sure about. [/quote

Headline Story:

An obligated nation stands grateful to "The mercenary"

Nah the headlines will be:

"The Full Monty"

[quote="KP_fan"]

Duty281 wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

msp83 wrote:Bit of good news.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/bcci-goes-with-dhoni-orders-rank-turners-for-remaining-tests-t20s/1033935/
Well done, Mahendra Singh Dhoni. Will provide everyone a more meaningful challenge, the batsman can play their shots and the excellent ones can survive and score well. The seamers should enjoy the bounce. The spinners can have a bawl , and they very much deserve it.

I predict a 3rd or early 4th day finish in Mumbai......and sub 200 totals for England in each inning.
Eng should realize that they got te better of the bowling conditions in Motera where the ball spun and bounced more on the first 3 days
.[/i]

Well you may have got one bit right, the last bit I'm not so sure about. [/quote

Headline Story:

An obligated nation stands grateful to "The mercenary"

The ECB's hardline stance appears to have won him over. Time will tell I guess. Headlines?

"England batter India again"
"England make it 5 out of 6 against India"
"India just weren't in England's class"
"Captain Cook Conquers in Mumbai"
"India Cooked"
"Kevin the King"
"The Monty Panesar Show"