England's Summer of Cricket 2021

First topic message reminder :

Jacks, Crawley, Hain, Stokes, Salt (WK), Lawrence, Gregory, Overton, Saqib, Ball, Parkinson?

Will MacPherson suggests Hales won’t be picked, which is a bit odd given they hinted he would get a chance this summer.

You also have Vince, Duckett and keep an eye out for Harry Brook.

sirfredperry wrote:ESPN are reporting that Moeen is in the squad. I would like to see him play. It's not as if we're blessed with many options.

Moeen at seven, or even eight, is a dangerous proposition for opponents. He shouldn't bat higher. If Pope's fit I think he will come in for Lawrence. Both openers will remain for the time being, I think.

Crawley certainly deserves to be dropped on current form but when you think what he is capable of you have to reckon they'll stick with him for this Test at least.

The India puzzle is whether to play Ashwin. Usual rule is to do what the opposition least wants. I think England would be delighted if Ashwin was left out again.

Kohli, after the first test, hinted that they are going to have the first test 11 as the basic templet for this series. But I agree the Ashwin question is not that easy. Particularly if the weather holds. The HQ has at times, shown a tendency to be the flattest road of a pitch in the planet as the game goes on. You get lots of action in the first couple of days, thereafter it would become a track where there will be plenty of runs. India would need Ashwin in such a situation. You need to geet batters out not with a lot of help from the wicket. Ashwin's clearly better than Jadeja in that department, and I don't think someone like Shardul, with his medium pace in non-swinging or seaming conditions, would be able to do a better job than Ashwin. So, hope Kohli wouldn't get into a very non-flexible mode as such.

msp83 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Because he's not good enough, a better batsman than Sibley, Burns and Pope he is not.

Moeen Ali is not the best batter England have. He is not the greatest spinner to have ever played for them. But when you look at the fact, that Dominic Sibley, Oliver Pope and Zak Crawley combined do not have as many test runs as Moeen has, from nearly the same number of tests, you have to sit up and take note! Crawley averages less than Ali, Sibley averages just about a run-and-a-half more. Even Pope and Rory Burns, don't have a considerably better batting record than that of Ali's. Add Daniel Lawrence to the mix, the guy again averages less than Moeen. Even Jos Buttler and Jonny Bairstow don't have a clearly superior batting record in comparison to that of Moeen.
All this is besides the fact that England currently don't have a playable spinner other than Moeen in the country! The squad spinners are unselectable in an 11, though they may be slightly better bowlers on certain counts!
Moeen, like Sam Curran, has this irritating thing of beind a handful against India to add to all that.
And yet, England fans write Ali off as useless. If they could find 2 other batters other than the skipper who could average say in the late 30s consistently at the very least, and find a spinner who can actually be played in an 11 at home, this would have been understandable!

All of that based on tests that happened five years ago, aside from though.

msp83 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Because he's not good enough, a better batsman than Sibley, Burns and Pope he is not.

Moeen Ali is not the best batter England have. He is not the greatest spinner to have ever played for them. But when you look at the fact, that Dominic Sibley, Oliver Pope and Zak Crawley combined do not have as many test runs as Moeen has, from nearly the same number of tests, you have to sit up and take note! Crawley averages less than Ali, Sibley averages just about a run-and-a-half more. Even Pope and Rory Burns, don't have a considerably better batting record than that of Ali's. Add Daniel Lawrence to the mix, the guy again averages less than Moeen. Even Jos Buttler and Jonny Bairstow don't have a clearly superior batting record in comparison to that of Moeen.
All this is besides the fact that England currently don't have a playable spinner other than Moeen in the country! The squad spinners are unselectable in an 11, though they may be slightly better bowlers on certain counts!
Moeen, like Sam Curran, has this irritating thing of beind a handful against India to add to all that.
And yet, England fans write Ali off as useless. If they could find 2 other batters other than the skipper who could average say in the late 30s consistently at the very least, and find a spinner who can actually be played in an 11 at home, this would have been understandable!

Why do you attribute past ability, which no longer exists, to the present day? Moeen averages 16 with the bat in his last 11 tests. That's the Moeen Ali that will be playing on Thursday - little better than a tail-ender. The Moeen Ali that scored five test centuries and provided some decent returns and great entertainment, he doesn't exist anymore in the test arena.

king_carlos wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Broad an injury doubt and going for scans on a calf injury picked up during training today.

Sounds like Wood might have played anyway. Wood adds pace and is arguably a better tailend batsman than Broad these days as well so not the end of the world for T2.

If Broad is unavailable for a significant portion of the series it's a massive blow as that will effect being able to rotate Anderson, especially with Woakes already injured.

Hopefully not a lengthy injury for Broad. England should definitely take the safety-first approach and rest him for this test.

Lord's, like many a place in England, is not the happiest hunting ground for Wood, though he did pick up a credible 3/81 in the recent NZ test over there.

msp83 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Because he's not good enough, a better batsman than Sibley, Burns and Pope he is not.

Moeen Ali is not the best batter England have. He is not the greatest spinner to have ever played for them. But when you look at the fact, that Dominic Sibley, Oliver Pope and Zak Crawley combined do not have as many test runs as Moeen has, from nearly the same number of tests, you have to sit up and take note! Crawley averages less than Ali, Sibley averages just about a run-and-a-half more. Even Pope and Rory Burns, don't have a considerably better batting record than that of Ali's. Add Daniel Lawrence to the mix, the guy again averages less than Moeen. Even Jos Buttler and Jonny Bairstow don't have a clearly superior batting record in comparison to that of Moeen.

Mo hasn't made Test runs since 2016 though, msp. It's not rational to list stats he built up years ago and just pretend that Mo still bats at that level. Not making runs in half a decade has got to be factored into the discussion. The last time Mo got a Test century he was playing in a side captained by Alastair Cook, with Jake Ball opening the bowling and Liam Dawson playing. The opposition included Amit Mishra, Karun Nair, Parthiv Patel and Murali Vijay. It was a long time ago.

If we were getting Mo the batsman of 2016 when he made 4 centuries and 5 fifties in a calendar year at an average of 47 then of course he'd be a shoe in. At full flow he's one of the best ball strikers in the game. Since getting worked out by seamers Mo has averaged around 16 though. That's over the course of 5 years. It's not a momentary blip.

If picked I obviously hope that Mo proves me wrong about his batting and finally scores his 6th Test century. I really like Mo as a cricketer and have been loving watching him bat in The Hundred. There's nothing in his record since 2016 to suggest he's likely to score runs at Test level though.

If India have any tactical nous they'll use Ishant to bowl short to him, Shami or Siraj to accurately hang the ball outside off stump and Bumrah to do a mix of both with his pace and accuracy. On top of that they just won't bowl spinners at him as Mo is very good at using his feet to attack spinners. It's an easy plan that has worked for 5 years on the trot without Mo finding a solution to the obvious weaknesses in his game at Test level.

king_carlos wrote:On expecting the pitch to assist seamers I think it's worth noting that this pitch will likely be very similar to the one for the WTC final. It won't be a 'spinners pitch' but I think it will be fairly flat and good for batting as far as English Test pitches in recent years have been. That combined with the good weather forecast will hopefully mean this Test goes into day 4 or 5, hence the spinners will naturally come into the game more.

The Dukes ball seems to be swinging more each summer at the minute though so seam and swing will still be king. Reverse swing has almost gone out the game in England now as the ball has swung conventionally until very late in the innings, plus the rise of the 'wobble seam' as a really potent weapon in English conditions.

If I was picking an Indian XI I'd have Jadeja and Ashwin in there barring an absolute green top though. They offer so much with their quality, experience and all round abilities. If India had a stronger seam bowling all rounder on tour to challenge the 8 spot then it might be different but with the squad India have I just think Ashwin is too good to leave out unless it's a proper snake pit such as the dire pitch seen for the England vs Ireland Test at Lords.

Bumrah and Ishant backed up by Siraj or Shami then the spin twins in Jadeja and Ashwin is a fantastic attack. Ashwin adds considerably to the batting depth compared to Thakur as well.

KC, how has the HQ track been playing in domestic cricket this year? I remember there have been a number of big 3rd or 4th innings in there in the last decade or so. India got destroyed thre the last time as overhead conditions completely changed things around, but as the weather is reported to stay nice, I would bring Ashwin back. I would have stuck with him in the first test though I found the Shardul call fair enough. Shardul, like Ashwin, hasn't done anything wrong to be dropped, but Ashwin's quality, and the possibility of the pitch flattening out later on, they should bring him back. Won't lose anything in terms of batting, Ashwin's overall record is better than Thakur, though they have gone opposit directions in recent with their batting performances. Prior to the Australia series, Ashwin's batting had clearly gone down so much so that he looked more like a number 9 rather than the potential number 6 in any conditions that he seemed to be evolving into 5 years ago. Shardul on the other hand, has improved into a capable number 8 from a dashing number 9 in domestic cricket in recent times, and the same has been reflected in his limited international performances across formats.
If the weather is likely to stay good and the pitch is not an absolute green top, then Ashwin back in for me, in place of Thakur.
And if he's back to full fitness, Ishant to return, for Siraj.

The Moeen still being a good batsman argument is a lot like when Gary Ballance kept coming back into the team, based on what he'd done a couple of years before, expect the gap is even longer. Like Moeen he either lost it/was found out at some stage. Even Jonny Bairstow falls into a similar bracket now and was last a good Test batsmen around the same time as Moeen.

I will join those hoping Moeen does well, as I do really like him as a player, but I really am not expecting much

The fact that Ali has been pretty average with the bat in the last few years is quite obvious. England never gave him a consistent run in a batting position though, and there are clear technical issues too.
But the far more important thing is, that Sibley, Pope, Crawley and Lawrence, all perhaps other than Lawrence having played a fairly reasonable number of test matches, are scheduled to score big test runs consistently only some time in some future! And they all have the technique of Boycott and Gavaskar, and the flare of Richards! So, even if you can't even select a spinner in your playing 11 as of to date, even when you have someone who has scored nearly 3000 test runs and taken nearly 200 test wicket at a better strike rate than even some of their best ever, he shouldn't be picked!
I didn't rate Moeen a great deal when he came in to international cricket. But he has always meant trouble for India, even when seemed rather out of sorts in his test career, he still ended up taking 8 wickets, bowled the ball of the year to Virat Kohli that knocked him over, and smashed around with the bat to top score in an innings. Didn't change the match direction one bit, but that's not really his fault

msp83 wrote:The fact that Ali has been pretty average with the bat in the last few years is quite obvious. England never gave him a consistent run in a batting position though, and there are clear technical issues too.
But the far more important thing is, that Sibley, Pope, Crawley and Lawrence, all perhaps other than Lawrence having played a fairly reasonable number of test matches, are scheduled to score big test runs consistently only some time in some future! And they all have the technique of Boycott and Gavaskar, and the flare of Richards! So, even if you can't even select a spinner in your playing 11 as of to date, even when you have someone who has scored nearly 3000 test runs and taken nearly 200 test wicket at a better strike rate than even some of their best ever, he shouldn't be picked!
I didn't rate Moeen a great deal when he came in to international cricket. But he has always meant trouble for India, even when seemed rather out of sorts in his test career, he still ended up taking 8 wickets, bowled the ball of the year to Virat Kohli that knocked him over, and smashed around with the bat to top score in an innings. Didn't change the match direction one bit, but that's not really his fault

Former India batter VVS Laxman suggests India should go for Ashwin for Shardul. But as KPF indicated, Kohli doesn't seem inclined for the same.

The flip side of believing Moeen is now a poor test batsman isn't to annoint anyone else as a cross between Boycott and Richards. It's perfectly possible to believe they are all not that good

I actually come down slightly on the side of Moeen playing. It gives some balance to the team on paper, you never know, in the short term it could just about work. All of this though is because the cupboard really is bare at the moment and we have to hope a couple of Hameed, Crawley, Pope and Lawrence somehow come good otherwise the future is very grim

VTR wrote:The flip side of believing Moeen is now a poor test batsman isn't to annoint anyone else as a cross between Boycott and Richards. It's perfectly possible to believe they are all not that good

When people suggest that Moeen coming in to replace Dan Lawrence or any one of those 20 something-early 30 something averaging batters is going to massively impact England's batting, and suggesting Moeen is nowhere good enough to bat number 7 for England and that they need one of those 20 somethings in there in stead, how does that come across? Also considering they couldn't play a spinner in any of the home tests this season on pitches that weren't anything like a green top?

I actually think Sam Curran has the performances and potential to consistently bat number 7 for England. Think his batting is stronger than his bowling.
Was also very impressed by young Hasib Hameed when he came to India at the start of his test career. Will they give him another go in this test?
Also, what is the deal with Woakes? Is he out for the entire series? And any clear indications about Stokes making himself available in the 2nd half of the series?

I guess the difference is age, Moeen is 34 I think, so if you had to pick someone to average around 30, the younger person could be learning and eventually improve to be credible Test batsmen.

Like I say though, Moeen just about plays for me. He's the third choice all rounder though, circumstances have forced the selection

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/eng-vs-ind-1st-test-england-and-india-docked-two-wtc-points-apiece-for-slow-over-rate-1272885

England and India docked two points (50%) in the World Test Championship and handed fines for their slow over rate - a surprise to me because I forgot all about the World Test Championship and didn't realise this series was the beginning of another cycle. On the face of it it doesn't seem to be a great punishment, but Cricinfo do correctly point out that Australia would have made the recent WTC final, at the expense of New Zealand, had it not been for their four-point fine for a slow over rate in a test v India.

Saqib called up to the Test squad. Probably indicates Broad is definitely out - but that does still leave them with Anderson, Robinson, Curran, Wood, Overton and now Mahmood! Hardly short of choice. Guess it confirms it is Mo at 7 and four seamers though otherwise they wouldn’t need even more cover.

JDizzle wrote:Saqib called up to the Test squad. Probably indicates Broad is definitely out - but that does still leave them with Anderson, Robinson, Curran, Wood, Overton and now Mahmood! Hardly short of choice. Guess it confirms it is Mo at 7 and four seamers though otherwise they wouldn’t need even more cover.

I'm sure the Oval Invincibles are delighted to lose their star bowler for their two crucial group stage games so he can carry drinks for a week....

VTR wrote:I guess the difference is age, Moeen is 34 I think, so if you had to pick someone to average around 30, the younger person could be learning and eventually improve to be credible Test batsmen.

Like I say though, Moeen just about plays for me. He's the third choice all rounder though, circumstances have forced the selection

England have riches of all-rounders, it is just unfortunate that both Stokes and Woakes are unavailable/injured at the same time. Had even Woakes was available, they could have played him at 7, and given Leach an opportunity. But when they both were/are unavailable, it is a simple choice to bring Moeen in considering they wouldn't play Curran at 7 and consider Leach good enough to come in. They should have played Woakes or Ali in the New Zealand tests, they should have started with Ali for the first test itself. Else, give Sam a good solid run at 7 and give Leach a decent go with 3 other quicks among Anderson, Broad, Wood, Robinson and Stone. And Archer of course, if and when he returns to test cricket. What is silly, is to keep mediocre bats in and imbalance the side without really gaining anything.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

JDizzle wrote:Saqib called up to the Test squad. Probably indicates Broad is definitely out - but that does still leave them with Anderson, Robinson, Curran, Wood, Overton and now Mahmood! Hardly short of choice. Guess it confirms it is Mo at 7 and four seamers though otherwise they wouldn’t need even more cover.

I'm sure the Oval Invincibles are delighted to lose their star bowler for their two crucial group stage games so he can carry drinks for a week....

I'm no fan of the hundred but the schedule makes no sense whatsoever, how many star players have been withdrawn because of this test series?

JDizzle wrote:Saqib called up to the Test squad. Probably indicates Broad is definitely out - but that does still leave them with Anderson, Robinson, Curran, Wood, Overton and now Mahmood! Hardly short of choice. Guess it confirms it is Mo at 7 and four seamers though otherwise they wouldn’t need even more cover.

May be a more worrying indication that Broad is out for more than one test, perhaps the whole series. If he were just missing this one I'd doubt they'd have called up further cover.

Would like to see Mahmood get given a test this series, especially if there's a view to taking him to Australia.

Bess has also left the squad and gone back to Yorkshire.

I see that India and England have been docked two points for slow over rates in the first Test.

This does nothing to help the short-changed spectators who invariably get fewer than 90 overs even if an extra half-hour is added on.

Things could be speeded up if they dispensed with drinks breaks which are now totally unnecessary as the 12th man and other squad guys rush out with drinks every five minutes anyway.

Another way round the problem is to have tea only after a set number of overs have been completed. This would mean you would not have to have an over-long final session and you could also get through more overs before the light fails.

Contrast this with The Hundred. Sides bowling too slowly have to bring an extra fielder into the ring. But ALL THE OVERS/BALLS ARE GOING TO BE BOWLED ANYWAY. There's no short-changing of fans. Barmy.

Soul Requiem wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

JDizzle wrote:Saqib called up to the Test squad. Probably indicates Broad is definitely out - but that does still leave them with Anderson, Robinson, Curran, Wood, Overton and now Mahmood! Hardly short of choice. Guess it confirms it is Mo at 7 and four seamers though otherwise they wouldn’t need even more cover.

I'm sure the Oval Invincibles are delighted to lose their star bowler for their two crucial group stage games so he can carry drinks for a week....

I'm no fan of the hundred but the schedule makes no sense whatsoever, how many star players have been withdrawn because of this test series?

It's rather ridiculous isn't it - not saying that players playing The Hundred shouldn't be allowed to be called up (!), but as JDizzle noted for Moeen earlier (and really the same applied for Bairstow and now Mahmood), you've got this new tournament you're trying to sell, which you're actively harming by selecting guys who are the homegrown stars of the Hundred and white ball cricket, but bubble/fringe test players (for which there are probably equivalents in the squad, or county scene you could call up instead). Especially as for once, England had a fairly big gap between test matches this year!

I think we have differing views on the tournament itself, and I generally think it's been a good product...but certainly this is an area the ECB need to look at for future editions (alongside other improvements).

Saqib Mahmood has had an impressive start to his limited overs career. His First Class record is decent without quite being outstanding, from whatever little I have followed of him in limited overs, he has good pace, though not quite express, and seems to have more about him in his skill set. How do English fans view him, look like first choice material in the near future?

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

It's rather ridiculous isn't it - not saying that players playing The Hundred shouldn't be allowed to be called up (!), but as JDizzle noted for Moeen earlier (and really the same applied for Bairstow and now Mahmood), you've got this new tournament you're trying to sell, which you're actively harming by selecting guys who are the homegrown stars of the Hundred and white ball cricket, but bubble/fringe test players (for which there are probably equivalents in the squad, or county scene you could call up instead). Especially as for once, England had a fairly big gap between test matches this year!

I think we have differing views on the tournament itself, and I generally think it's been a good product...but certainly this is an area the ECB need to look at for future editions (alongside other improvements).

The Bairstow call up was the one that got me. You have one of it not the best white ball batsman in the world and if you're into that stuff he provides entertainment every time he bats while on the flip side he's an ok test player who doesn't offer much more than the alternatives. Mahmood is someone who will be around the test side for years to come but it does him no good to carry drinks for a few weeks. My views on Mo are well known, either pick a batsman or pick a spinner, leave him to do his thing in the hundred where he is quite brilliant.

It’s the ECB trying to have it’s cake and eat it. If the Hundred has to be over the summer holidays, which makes sense given who it is targeted at, then you are limited when you can host it. But are they going to give up the cash cow of playing as many Tests as they do? No bloody chance. So we end up where we are, and it’s exacerbated by Covid and the whole bubble situation too.

MSP - yes, Saqib has potential to become an excellent Test cricketer. He’s not absolute express, but if he can maintain the high 80s speed consistently throughout a Test that is quick enough. He has had injuries though which is a concern as his action is a high effort one which puts strain on the body. He’s an intriguing prospect outside England as he can reverse the ball, even in England, and we’ve seen him do that in white ball cricket particularly the PSL. Which would add another option to England’s selection.

msp83 wrote:

VTR wrote:I guess the difference is age, Moeen is 34 I think, so if you had to pick someone to average around 30, the younger person could be learning and eventually improve to be credible Test batsmen.

Like I say though, Moeen just about plays for me. He's the third choice all rounder though, circumstances have forced the selection

England have riches of all-rounders, it is just unfortunate that both Stokes and Woakes are unavailable/injured at the same time. Had even Woakes was available, they could have played him at 7, and given Leach an opportunity. But when they both were/are unavailable, it is a simple choice to bring Moeen in considering they wouldn't play Curran at 7 and consider Leach good enough to come in. They should have played Woakes or Ali in the New Zealand tests, they should have started with Ali for the first test itself. Else, give Sam a good solid run at 7 and give Leach a decent go with 3 other quicks among Anderson, Broad, Wood, Robinson and Stone. And Archer of course, if and when he returns to test cricket. What is silly, is to keep mediocre bats in and imbalance the side without really gaining anything.

That's more or less what I also think....Eng's bowling allrounders deliver no less and often more than their host of dibbly , dobbly batters

Eng should pack the side with Stokes, Woakes, Curran Moeen...always if available  and keep rotating 2 more bowler...and even among the pure bowlers likes of Wood,  Robinson, Archer and Stone have shown the ability to bat.

6 bowlers, 1 WK and 4 batsmen of  Which Root is the constant & remaining 3 rotating conveyor belt of those struggling with 20s average trying to break into 30s...until they find some good enuf to average 35+ consistently

PS* discount and add about 4 to 7 runs for those predominately playing in seam friendly English conditions to judge their averages

Jimmy now struggling for tomorrow with a thigh strain…

The Mahmood call up is just for this match , as cover , no ?  I'd expect Wood to play but in case he breaks an ankle at nets they have a pace option.

Talk seems to be Moeen will play so it is just a question of whether it is him followed by three pace men or a five bowler attack : in the latter case I presume Curran is one of them and I think I would then bat him at seven and keep Moeen for eight as I'm not expecting him to do great things with the bat. However he isn't really being picked for his batting . I tend to agree with thoughts above from one or two posters that in English conditions  it is less important for the spinner to exert "control" (as Leach would likely do rather better) than be able to take a vital breakthrough wicket or two - something Moeen does have a fair record in doing.

Look I am neither a Moeen fan ( like our Indian correspondents - both of whom I do believe , by the way , are totally sincere and not wishing to push his case because they reckon he'll be a sitting duck for the Indian seamers !) ; nor one who thinks he's overrated /washed up/a daft choice... I think it is fair to say he wouldn't be in the conversation if Stokes and Woakes were available right now : but they ain't. He isn't an unreasonable option , and is probably as good a chance as Leach to have some influence on the match. If they pick him , fine ; and I hope he does a job , even if I probably won't be adding him to my fantasy team.

Think getting the batting right remains the main issue.

JDizzle wrote:Jimmy now struggling for tomorrow with a thigh strain…

That would be a bigger blow than Stokes
Anderson is world class but especially devastating vs India

Let's see how many runs those all rounders make batting in the top four, big difference scoring runs at 7-9 than there is 1-5.

JDizzle wrote:Jimmy now struggling for tomorrow with a thigh strain…

Yeah, looks like he won't be playing as he missed training today, and England will always take the safety-first approach with Anderson (rightly so).

Meaning England's bowling attack will be Curran, Wood, Robinson and Mahmood or Overton (hopefully Mahmood), with Moeen and Root the spin options.

JDizzle wrote:Jimmy now struggling for tomorrow with a thigh strain…

Ouch !   Just saw this.  Really hope he is OK .  Can just about cop Broad missing (a rotation option in any case) but going in without either of them  would be a bit scary . Though I am reading "tight quad" rather than "thigh strain" so will wait and see how serious this actually is.

But you can certainly see why Mahmood has been called up to bolster the reserves...

So that would be Anderson, Broad, Woakes, Archer, Stone and Stokes all missing...(alongside Foakes too).

The seam bowling depth is getting a proper test already, usually this level of reserve playing is only reserved for the Sydney test in an Ashes away trip

If Overton did play over Jimmy, England would go from potentially having a huge tail a few days ago to a line up where numbers 9 and 10 have FC hundreds.

Robinson and Overton have been the two stand out seamers in the last few seasons of the CC. Would be interesting to see them take the new ball together.

When would be the last time neither Broad or Anderson played for England in a Test Match in England? Or in general?

JDizzle wrote:If Overton did play over Jimmy, England would go from potentially having a huge tail a few days ago to a line up where numbers 9 and 10 have FC hundreds.

Robinson and Overton have been the two stand out seamers in the last few seasons of the CC. Would be interesting to see them take the new ball together.

Mark Wood would be one of the better number 11's in world cricket too. I do wonder if that seam foursome negates the need for Mo?

Anyway it seems India have had their selection problem settled for them with Thakur ruled out with injury. So Ashwin is presumably an automatic pick , I would imagine.

Soul Requiem wrote:

JDizzle wrote:If Overton did play over Jimmy, England would go from potentially having a huge tail a few days ago to a line up where numbers 9 and 10 have FC hundreds.

Robinson and Overton have been the two stand out seamers in the last few seasons of the CC. Would be interesting to see them take the new ball together.

Mark Wood would be one of the better number 11's in world cricket too. I do wonder if that seam foursome negates the need for Mo?

Yeah, if my 8, 9, 10 was Curran, Robinson, Overton then that looks a good lower order. And if it was a green seamer I would be tempted to muddle though with Root as the spinner. My main worry would swing to taking 20 wickets rather than the batting depth!

alfie wrote:

JDizzle wrote:Jimmy now struggling for tomorrow with a thigh strain…

Ouch !   Just saw this.  Really hope he is OK .  Can just about cop Broad missing (a rotation option in any case) but going in without either of them  would be a bit scary . Though I am reading "tight quad" rather than "thigh strain" so will wait and see how serious this actually is.

But you can certainly see why Mahmood has been called up to bolster the reserves...

Tight Quad is hamstring and that's a few weeks
I hope he is back for T3 latest....he is a star we don't want to miss in action

Soul Requiem wrote:

JDizzle wrote:If Overton did play over Jimmy, England would go from potentially having a huge tail a few days ago to a line up where numbers 9 and 10 have FC hundreds.

Robinson and Overton have been the two stand out seamers in the last few seasons of the CC. Would be interesting to see them take the new ball together.

Mark Wood would be one of the better number 11's in world cricket too. I do wonder if that seam foursome negates the need for Mo?

Not getting too excited over the batting of Wood and Overton ! It remains a tail in any case I think : after all that "huge tail" had Broad (one Test Century ! Yeah a while ago , I know) at ten and Jimmy with a top score of 80 odd - against India - at eleven. If you are hoping for serious runs from the last pair you are clutching at straws...

JDizzle wrote:When would be the last time neither Broad or Anderson played for England in a Test Match in England? Or in general?

https://twitter.com/_hypocaust/status/1425398115922755584

Twitter to the rescue! I do hope they tour Bangladesh sometime soon for tests...that was a fun two games in 2016!

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

JDizzle wrote:When would be the last time neither Broad or Anderson played for England in a Test Match in England? Or in general?

https://twitter.com/_hypocaust/status/1425398115922755584

Twitter to the rescue! I do hope they tour Bangladesh sometime soon for tests...that was a fun two games in 2016!

Good catch! 2012 being the infamous Tino Best Test I would assume… Bodes well.

alfie wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

JDizzle wrote:If Overton did play over Jimmy, England would go from potentially having a huge tail a few days ago to a line up where numbers 9 and 10 have FC hundreds.

Robinson and Overton have been the two stand out seamers in the last few seasons of the CC. Would be interesting to see them take the new ball together.

Mark Wood would be one of the better number 11's in world cricket too. I do wonder if that seam foursome negates the need for Mo?

Not getting too excited over the batting of Wood and Overton ! It remains a tail in any case I think : after all that "huge tail" had Broad (one Test Century ! Yeah a while ago , I know) at ten and Jimmy with a top score of 80 odd - against India  - at eleven. If you are hoping for serious runs from the last pair you are clutching at straws...

Overton would be closer to Curran than Jimmy/Broad in terms of batting. He has a FC hundred and has had some useful knocks at International level (in NZ in the collapse and vs Aus at OT where he batted for a long time) so has some pedigree at playing international bowling - unlike someone like Archer who has runs at FC level but has looked clueless at international level. Certainly a factor when it comes to balancing the side, if not a huge bonus for England.

Anderson, Broad, Archer, Woakes and Stokes all unavailable. Ouch. Basically the entire first choice bowling lineup.

Robinson will have a lot of responsibility on his shoulders leading the attack.

Losing Anderson and Broad also effects the Mo selection in a way. A said above a key reason I don't mind Mo as a bowling option at home is the seamers (predominantly Anderson and Broad) keep things very tight. Therefore we don't need a spinner to 'hold up an end' by drying the run rate. A spinner who might go for runs but will usually pick up wickets doing it can be more useful as Mo can produce that bit of magic with the ball to break partnerships.

JDizzle wrote:

alfie wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

JDizzle wrote:If Overton did play over Jimmy, England would go from potentially having a huge tail a few days ago to a line up where numbers 9 and 10 have FC hundreds.

Robinson and Overton have been the two stand out seamers in the last few seasons of the CC. Would be interesting to see them take the new ball together.

Mark Wood would be one of the better number 11's in world cricket too. I do wonder if that seam foursome negates the need for Mo?

Not getting too excited over the batting of Wood and Overton ! It remains a tail in any case I think : after all that "huge tail" had Broad (one Test Century ! Yeah a while ago , I know) at ten and Jimmy with a top score of 80 odd - against India  - at eleven. If you are hoping for serious runs from the last pair you are clutching at straws...

Overton would be closer to Curran than Jimmy/Broad in terms of batting. He has a FC hundred and has had some useful knocks at International level (in NZ in the collapse and vs Aus at OT where he batted for a long time) so has some pedigree at playing international bowling - unlike someone like Archer who has runs at FC level but has looked clueless at international level. Certainly a factor when it comes to balancing the side, if not a huge bonus for England.

Oh I agree he's a better bat : just not sure whatever he might make at ten will make up for his shortcomings as a bowler at Test level ! I think I'd sooner Wood and Mahmood over him rather than trying to scrape up a few more from the last two wickets. Though I do admit he's apparently been in good form with the ball this season.

Just need Root to fall down down stairs now or similar and we really can see what a scratch side can do!

Root is one of the few players this year who hasn't had a Some-Mothers-Do-Ave-Em type calamity, so I certainly wouldn't rule it out! Maybe the coin at the toss tomorrow will strike him and cause concussion?

Ha, it's really has been ridiculous. Dave Beasant and the jar of Salad Cream level ridiculous

alfie wrote:

JDizzle wrote:

alfie wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

JDizzle wrote:If Overton did play over Jimmy, England would go from potentially having a huge tail a few days ago to a line up where numbers 9 and 10 have FC hundreds.

Robinson and Overton have been the two stand out seamers in the last few seasons of the CC. Would be interesting to see them take the new ball together.

Mark Wood would be one of the better number 11's in world cricket too. I do wonder if that seam foursome negates the need for Mo?

Not getting too excited over the batting of Wood and Overton ! It remains a tail in any case I think : after all that "huge tail" had Broad (one Test Century ! Yeah a while ago , I know) at ten and Jimmy with a top score of 80 odd - against India  - at eleven. If you are hoping for serious runs from the last pair you are clutching at straws...

Overton would be closer to Curran than Jimmy/Broad in terms of batting. He has a FC hundred and has had some useful knocks at International level (in NZ in the collapse and vs Aus at OT where he batted for a long time) so has some pedigree at playing international bowling - unlike someone like Archer who has runs at FC level but has looked clueless at international level. Certainly a factor when it comes to balancing the side, if not a huge bonus for England.

Oh I agree he's a better bat : just not sure whatever he might make at ten will make up for his shortcomings as a bowler at Test level ! I think I'd sooner Wood and Mahmood over him rather than trying to scrape up a few more from the last two wickets. Though I do admit he's apparently been in good form with the ball this season.

Yes there have been many reports from reputable sources that Overton is a much improved bowler from what we have seen in his fleeting appearances in 2018/19, I do think if he was in the original squad over Mahmood he should be given the nod (I would then rotate Wood/Mahmood throughout the rest of the series, especially as it sounds like Broad's injury from initial reports is going to be more than a game...)