3rd Test England v West Indies

by Adam D Sun 03 Jun 2012, 9:44 am

First topic message reminder :

Just got the press release for the squad so thought I would start a thread for it.

England name 12-man squad for third Investec Test match against West Indies

The England selectors today named a 12-man squad for the third Investec Test match against West Indies commencing Thursday June 7 at Edgbaston.

Pace bowler James Anderson is the only omission from the squad selected for both previous Investec Test matches against West Indies. Anderson received treatment during the course of the second Test for a minor quad problem and it has been decided that missing the final Test in the series will give the 29 year old an opportunity to overcome several minor injuries.
England won the second Test in the three match series by nine wickets at Trent Bridge to secure a series win having won the first Test at Lord’s by five wickets. Preparations for the final Investec Test in the series will begin in Edgbaston on Tuesday.

National selector, Geoff Miller, said: “We have been made to work hard for our two victories so far and are delighted to have secured the series, however we know that we will need to continue to play some good cricket if we want a third win against the West Indies this week.

“James Anderson will miss this Investec Test as we look to manage his workload ahead of a busy period of cricket this summer and beyond, a decision which is in the best interests of the team and James himself.”

England squad – 3rd Investec Test

Andrew Strauss (Middlesex) (Captain)
Jonny Bairstow (Yorkshire)
Ian Bell (Warwickshire)
Tim Bresnan (Yorkshire)
Stuart Broad (Nottinghamshire)
Alastair Cook (Essex)
Steven Finn (Middlesex)
Graham Onions (Durham)
Kevin Pietersen (Surrey)
Matt Prior (Sussex)
Graeme Swann (Nottinghamshire)
Jonathan Trott (Warwickshire)

by Mad for Chelsea Sat 09 Jun 2012, 1:58 pm

England do get a second wicket, Onions trapping Barath after Finn had him dropped at third slip by Bell again (not sure Bell is a slip fielder, Bresnan?). Not sure what Holding is going on about "not too sure that was a good decision" as hawkeye has it hitting the outside of leg Headscratch

by GSC Sat 09 Jun 2012, 1:58 pm

England probably need another 3 or 4 this session

by Mad for Chelsea Sat 09 Jun 2012, 2:02 pm

Michael Holding is annoying me now, going on about "benefit of the doubt". He may want WI to do well, but it's not on criticising the umpire for making a perfectly good decision...

by Mad for Chelsea Sat 09 Jun 2012, 2:27 pm

there's England's third wicket. Bravo just chipping one straight back at Finn, who you have to say has deserved that, he's been superb in this post-lunch spell, going past the outside-edge time and time again. WI 99/3 and just in a spot of bother.

by alfie Sat 09 Jun 2012, 2:40 pm

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Michael Holding is annoying me now, going on about "benefit of the doubt". He may want WI to do well, but it's not on criticising the umpire for making a perfectly good decision...

Especially as Barath had earlier survived , for exactly that reason , after an England review had found an Onions delivery just clipping the top of the stumps...

How many doubts do you want to benefit from ?

by alfie Sat 09 Jun 2012, 3:19 pm

Oh well bowled Bresnan !

Even Ian Bell couldn't drop that Very Happy

Fudadin had looked OK up to then.

Need a bunch of wickets still to bring the game to life...

by TRUSSMAN66 Sat 09 Jun 2012, 4:57 pm

If Holding is upsetting you....What about Nasser Hussain!!

Whether it's a half-volley..full toss..every wicket is part of a plan..

so leave it out!!!

by Mad for Chelsea Sat 09 Jun 2012, 5:56 pm

it's not so much the fact that he was being biased, but I dislike hearing commentators criticising the umpires, especially after he's made a perfectly good decision.

by Mad for Chelsea Sat 09 Jun 2012, 6:00 pm

ANOTHER catch goes down. England's catching today has been shocking...

by gboycottnut Sat 09 Jun 2012, 9:26 pm

Mad for Chelsea wrote:ANOTHER catch goes down. England's catching today has been shocking...

That is what happens when the main taliesman James Anderson doesn't play and hence his catching ability is missing in the slip cordon.

by GSC Sat 09 Jun 2012, 9:53 pm

Some batting practice for England tomorrow in all likelihood. Bairstow could use the time.

by msp83 Sun 10 Jun 2012, 9:45 am

How's the weather shaping up for today?

by msp83 Sun 10 Jun 2012, 9:48 am

On Holding, I thought he was making a perfectly sensible point. What he was trying to say that the DRS has its fair share of inconsistencies. The Barath decion that was given out would have stayed notout had the original call was notout. Likewise had the earlier call that wasn't given, had the original call been out, he would have been out. Both times the ball was clipping the stump only just.
So either all such calls be notout, or all such ones should be out. Otherwise, there would be serious inconsistent standards.

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Sun 10 Jun 2012, 11:26 am

Strauss why only 2 slips and a gully for the number 11 batsmen Headscratch

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Sun 10 Jun 2012, 11:31 am

Why is Swann not on against the tailender? Just because it's the start of a day don't mean the seamers have to bowl

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Sun 10 Jun 2012, 11:37 am

Now another drop, very hard chance however. Just sloppy all round from England this morning

by trebellbobaggins Sun 10 Jun 2012, 12:58 pm

Afternoon all.

Hasn't this shattered the myth the Eng have bowling depth.

Utter humiliation for our horribly limited attack today.

all a waste of time though unless the eng sloggers do the windies a favour and mess up their batting yet again.

by LivinginItaly Sun 10 Jun 2012, 1:09 pm

It will be interesting to see how the west indies bowlers peform on this pitch. Looks pretty flat to me, and Tino Best according to G Boycott.

by alfie Sun 10 Jun 2012, 1:21 pm

Have to agree with trebs that England without Anderson and Broad look a bit ordinary. And not just the bowling , the fielding has been downright sloppy.

Of course the other factor is the first two days washout ...just took all the intensity out of the game. But the decision to rest the two main bowlers was wrong on all counts , in my view. It reeked of arrogance , taking an opponent lightly - and sent the wrong signals to the players: ie , this match doesn't really matter.

It won't cause a defeat , unless they bat very poorly , but I think it can be said already to have come back to bite them... and hopefully will be the end of "rotation".

Fortunately there is a long break before the SA Tests , and they will have time to regroup.

...and Tino out for 95 ! A great pity , he deserved a century...

by trebellbobaggins Sun 10 Jun 2012, 1:25 pm

yeah that was a crazy peformance. Bet he never does it again.

Yeah i think it's the arrogance that annoys me alfie. I don't think we've been good enough of late to deserve it and SA are ready to show it i fear.

by alfie Sun 10 Jun 2012, 1:36 pm

Well perhaps getting smashed around by Tino Best is just what was needed to bring 'em back to earth ?

Might prove to be the reality check that helps them get it right against SA.

Be interesting to see how they bat now...

by DouglasJardinesbox Sun 10 Jun 2012, 1:52 pm

The selectors should be dropped for the next test series.

Their timid and arrogant decision to rest their two best bowlers backfired badly. Now we'll go into the SA series in a far from confident position.

by trebellbobaggins Sun 10 Jun 2012, 3:02 pm

I agree with the above.

With Engs fragile batting they have unsurprisingly started poorly.

Windies massive favourites for this one now.

I hope the English get over themselves and start to show some respect in future. This Windies team is better than their team. Safas will have fun showing them up i fear.

by ChequeredJersey Sun 10 Jun 2012, 3:28 pm

This shows that Broad and Anderson are too important to drop both

by trebellbobaggins Sun 10 Jun 2012, 3:37 pm

yup and our batting is poor as i've bemoaned increasingly for the last 18 months.

by alfie Sun 10 Jun 2012, 3:42 pm

Actually I am not that worried about the SA series. It is a long way away still , and any sloppiness shown in this match is unlikely too be repeated then.

My objection is to the way this match has been devalued , with a not unpredictable effect being that the England team has , in Mr Vaughan's words , just not been at the races.

And the fact that it was far from essential. I could just about cop Anderson being rested , if indeed he had a couple of minor injuries ; but when Broad was also left out , with some vague muttering about him being a bit off colour , it rather suggested the real agenda had little to do with resting players for their own good and more to do with experimentation...

If you are serious about watching bowlers' workloads , it would make more sense to change the attack for the second of two back-to-back matches than for one match , isolated between a longish break and a stream of ODIs.

In short , I don't think Andy Flower and the selectors told the whole truth , and the whole business has not been good for the team's concentration.

But they wil hopefully learn from it , and move on. As I should.

79/3

by trebellbobaggins Sun 10 Jun 2012, 3:51 pm

yup and Onions was good but isn't up to it now. not yet anyway.

Finn for Broad or Jimmy maybe but not both.

by alfie Sun 10 Jun 2012, 4:00 pm

Thought Onions bowled pretty well actually. And I have no problem with him as a reserve , especially in England , for when the inevitable real injuries strike.

In fact getting him to demonstrate - not least to himself - that he still has it after a prolonged spell out with injury is perhaps the best thing that has come out of this match.

Hundred up Smile

by Duty281 Sun 10 Jun 2012, 4:09 pm

In all honesty, I think England can't be bothered and the lack of intensity is showing. We'll step it up for the ODI series which starts on Saturday. In fact we're playing 14 ODIs this summer, 3 against WI, 5 against Australia, 1 against Scotland (in the middle of the rest period between Test 2 and Test 3 against the Saffers!) and 5 against South Africa.

by DouglasJardinesbox Sun 10 Jun 2012, 4:40 pm

"we have to be careful we don't devalue one-day cricket" says Ashley Giles. So we just devalue Test Cricket then.

STAGGERING.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Sun 10 Jun 2012, 4:55 pm

KPs form seems entirely driven by how much of a flounce hes had.

by trebellbobaggins Sun 10 Jun 2012, 6:21 pm

Can't see many bothering with tomorrows play. No time left in this one even if the weather is good. What a shame.

by trebellbobaggins Sun 10 Jun 2012, 6:36 pm

oh great, KP goes and gets a well arrogant celebration from the windies bowler.

eng deep in trouble now.

Pnly Windies can win it so expect a dead ground tomorrow but weather will probably win. we still have two innings to go here.

by gboycottnut Sun 10 Jun 2012, 7:27 pm

trebellbobaggins wrote:Can't see many bothering with tomorrows play. No time left in this one even if the weather is good. What a shame.

England can still lose if West Indies declare early with a 150-200 lead and England then get bowled out for under 100 in the target run chase.

by DouglasJardinesbox Sun 10 Jun 2012, 8:11 pm

Looks like it s time to dispense with the Bairstow Project. And then they should make a low budget movie about it. Black & white, grainy, in the forest.....

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Sun 10 Jun 2012, 8:26 pm

Wow i missed the end of play, assumed they werent coming back out.

when exactly did Samuels become so good? This must be his best tour ever by a distance...hes averaging just under 100 with the bat and 30 with the ball!

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Sun 10 Jun 2012, 8:29 pm

Jeez reading some of the comments above, come on guys this is a BS match and everyone knows it. Sure Finn/Onions arent quite the magic bullet some imagined they would be ( hi bairstow/morgan) but lets not right them off as useless.

Anyone noticed Trott avergaes pretty much the same over his last 24 innings as Morgan did over his career of that length? Can we all have a go and question his place in the side please.

by **Fists of Fury** Sun 10 Jun 2012, 8:54 pm

Great days play, though sloppy from England in the field.

Brilliant entertainment from Best, and given that this is a dead rubber, surefire draw I, along with many others no doubt, would have loved to have seen his celebration had he gone on to three figures. Tino holding the pose after each boundary, great stuff.

England didn't get off to the best start with the bat but Pietersen and Bell were imperious in partnership. Is there a better pair to watch in tandem in world cricket than those two? I highly doubt it, their styles are very complimentary of one another and it was a pleasure to watch.

Narine had a chastening welcome to Test cricket, mercilessly put to the sword by Pietersen at times. He will have his day, but the grand master of destroying bowling attacks was at his best today, and that proved rather unfortunate for young Sunil.

As for the light issue, how ridiculous. I won't even bother talking in depth about that...lights were on, let them play, people have paid good money to be there.

All in all a day I thoroughly enjoyed watching given that no result is possible.

by Stella Sun 10 Jun 2012, 9:32 pm

Peter
Trott still averages over 50. No sane person will be discussing his place just yet.

by Mike Selig Sun 10 Jun 2012, 9:40 pm

Fists of Fury wrote:
As for the light issue, how ridiculous. I won't even bother talking in depth about that...lights were on, let them play,

I agree but...

Fists of Fury wrote:people have paid good money to be there.

this doesn't have anything to do with it.

The rules state I believe something along the lines that play should be stopped if the light makes it dangerous or unreasonable (the latter is oft forgotten by commentators): it was clearly neither in this case, so they should have carried on. But decisions about sporting matters shouldn't be made on business (paying public) matters.

England do have a real dilemna with Bairstow though...

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Sun 10 Jun 2012, 9:55 pm

Mind the windows Tino Very Happy

by gboycottnut Sun 10 Jun 2012, 11:10 pm

DouglasJardinesbox wrote:Looks like it s time to dispense with the Bairstow Project. And then they should make a low budget movie about it. Black & white, grainy, in the forest.....

The question then is who takes his place? Another batsman? or perhaps move Prior to 6 and bring in another bowler (Finn or Onions) with Bresnan at 7, Broad at 8,Swann at 9 and Anderson at 10.

by liverbnz Mon 11 Jun 2012, 12:33 am

I'd imagine they'll go back to Bopara now.

Too early for Bairstow unfortunately. The Saffers would rip him to shreds.

by JDizzle Mon 11 Jun 2012, 12:38 am

I'm more excited about the ODI squad being announced tomorrow than the final day of this Test Match! Come on Jimmy! Very Happy

Cook, Kies, Trott, Ravi, Taylor, Bairstow/Buttler, Samit, Bres, Broad, Swann, Finn. (That's what I think the side will be, not what I'd like it to be). With Bairstow/Buttler, Anderson, Davies, Borthwick also in the squad.

by alfie Mon 11 Jun 2012, 4:15 am

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Jeez reading some of the comments above, come on guys this is a BS match and everyone knows it. Sure Finn/Onions arent quite the magic bullet some imagined they would be ( hi bairstow/morgan) but lets not right them off as useless.

Anyone noticed Trott avergaes pretty much the same over his last 24 innings as Morgan did over his career of that length? Can we all have a go and question his place in the side please.

I don't think anyone was writing off Finn or Onions as useless , PSW. But picking them both and leaving out the two best bowlers does seem to have contributed to a general loss of intensity around the team, as could be seen from the fielding ... Of course the wash out of the first two days didn't help !
I for one have no problem in using either of them in the attack. But only when the first choice bowlers are genuinely unavailable for whatever reason.

by alfie Mon 11 Jun 2012, 4:49 am

The light issue is always going to be tricky. Many different systems have been tried , and none are perfect.
I am old fashioned enough to prefer the ancient method whereby the batsmen initiated the matter with an appeal to the standing umpires against the state of the light. The umpires then made a decision to either play on or go straight off, and the batsmen had to wear it. It was then up to the umpires to decide if the light deteriorated later , in which case they could choose to offer the batsmen the option of departing. At least this avoided the silly situation in which two batsmen were happily carving up the bowlers - as in this case - only to be taken off the field whether they liked it or not.
Of course people will argue that Bell and Pietersen would have gone off anyway , due to the state of the match , if offered the light ; and maybe they would. But I rather doubt they would have chosen to launch an appeal to the umpires of their own volition , given they ease with which they were handling the bowling.

I know the problem the authorities have with allowing batsmen any input is the fear of tactical decision making , though it seems to me to be a small price to pay if it results in more cricket being played. After all , except in extreme circumstances only the batting team is likely to be disadvantaged by playing in poor light , so why should they not have some choice in the matter ? I do recall a couple of cases where fielding teams have been complaining about the light while the batsmen were happy to play on : England's famous victory in the gloom in Pakistan in 2001 , and a match in England (2002 ?) where India elected to bat on late one evening and continued to put the hapless bowlers to the sword...under current rules both these cases would have seen play halted , to the detriment of the the team which had the courage to push for a win ...

And the other big factor is of course the advent of the light meter. Sure it gives a measure of consistency , but at the cost of removing any flexibility in decision making from the umpires. I suppose this is in line with the DRS philosophy of trying to make every decision "perfect" , in a technical sense...

Personally , I would prefer trusting the judgement of experienced and competent umpires , and wouldn't grizzle too much if my own team occasionally suffered as a consequence. But you could argue the other way too ... Comes back to my initial point : no system is going to make everyone happy all the time.

by DouglasJardinesbox Mon 11 Jun 2012, 8:11 am

Mike Selig wrote:
Fists of Fury wrote:
As for the light issue, how ridiculous. I won't even bother talking in depth about that...lights were on, let them play,

I agree but...

Fists of Fury wrote:people have paid good money to be there.

this doesn't have anything to do with it.

The rules state I believe something along the lines that play should be stopped if the light makes it dangerous or unreasonable (the latter is oft forgotten by commentators): it was clearly neither in this case, so they should have carried on. But decisions about sporting matters shouldn't be made on business (paying public) matters.

Disagree Mike. If these stupid rules drive away the fans, there will be no game to govern. I understand your point, but for the state of the game, and the result, as much play as possible is required. I may not have thge answer, but stopping play when there is clearly no reason is just plain daft.
England do have a real dilemna with Bairstow though...

by DouglasJardinesbox Mon 11 Jun 2012, 8:16 am

gboycottnut wrote:
DouglasJardinesbox wrote:Looks like it s time to dispense with the Bairstow Project. And then they should make a low budget movie about it. Black & white, grainy, in the forest.....

The question then is who takes his place? Another batsman? or perhaps move Prior to 6 and bring in another bowler (Finn or Onions) with Bresnan at 7, Broad at 8,Swann at 9 and Anderson at 10.

Horses for courses I'd say. Finn or Onions (depending on the pitches) for the SA series. Maybe a 6th batter for NZ / India (or Monty). Then we can worry about the Ashes depending who has done what over these 4 series....

I do believe Bairstow has blown his chance of the big time....Bopara will be in for the first Saffer test, baring further injury. Not a decision I personally support.

by Stella Mon 11 Jun 2012, 8:21 am

Bopara will come back but Bairstow will be back at some point in the near future, I'm sure of that.

by **Fists of Fury** Mon 11 Jun 2012, 9:15 am

Mike Selig wrote:
Fists of Fury wrote:
As for the light issue, how ridiculous. I won't even bother talking in depth about that...lights were on, let them play,

I agree but...

Fists of Fury wrote:people have paid good money to be there.

this doesn't have anything to do with it.

The rules state I believe something along the lines that play should be stopped if the light makes it dangerous or unreasonable (the latter is oft forgotten by commentators): it was clearly neither in this case, so they should have carried on. But decisions about sporting matters shouldn't be made on business (paying public) matters.

England do have a real dilemna with Bairstow though...

Mike, that is the point though, it wasn't even bordering on dangerous. Play should continue until someone almost or actually gets hurt, until then it clearly isn't dangerous. Considering that KP was scoring at a T20 rate there obviously weren't any issues seeing the ball.

This nonsense is what leaves grounds empty and damages the game in a big, big way. Those umpires should be hauled over the coals for such a pathetically inept showing in the instance of the light. Incompetent buffoons.

by Sponsored content