England v India 4th Test, Old Trafford

First topic message reminder :

With the Anderson/Jadeja spat in the rear view mirror, we can all move on.

England name an unchanged squad, I'd be surprised if Plunkett didn't play, whether its at the expense of Jordan or Broad is the biggest question. Imagine they'll have planned on resting Broad at some stage.

The myth of Ian Bell being a 'world class player of spin' continues...

He's only shown the ability to play non turning slow bowling. 

His record is the subcontinent(minus Bangladesh) is pitiful.

Very impressive this by bell. Playing one day stuff out there without a care in the world... Keep it up bell

there's a lot to like about Ballance, there really is. Has a very simple, uncomplicated game, with a nice range of shots, and great awareness of where the field is (you rarely ever see him pick out a fielder with an attacking shot).

India's seamers looking a little weary, Pankaj's levels of fitness just aren't good enough (something Mike picked up on here in the previous test).

Bell averages something like 78 at OT doesn't he? seems he's on his way to better that. And Ballance looking as solid as ever.

Yep . Touch wood.

there hasn't been a rookie test batter start like this for England in my lifetime

Ballance has slotted in seamlessly for England. His Test average is, currently, around the 66 mark.

Looks like England have rode out the opening storm.

These two will hopefully see out the night and bat most of tomorrow, *waits for the collapse*   

Gary Ballance has feasted on weak attacks of SL and India and now he's England's saviour...

One Test vs Australia in Sydney and he was a total bunny...

He is the new bradman Gerry. Face it.

interesting that on day 1 of the previous Test England were happy to just play for stumps, no sign of such caution today. Rightly so IMO, India's bowlers look tired, and not all that up for the fight.

100 up, and at a jolly decent rate, too. That makes it all the more worthwhile, given the constant threat of rain that looms over this Test.

mystiroakey wrote:He is the new bradman Gerry. Face it.

You wish...

He'll be exposed in the Caribbean

Gary ballance is Zimbabwean, my grandfather's Zimbabwean, we're practically family.

#ZimboPower

My cousin  is half. South African, does that make us family raf?

I had a South African friend at school...  

It works better with Zimbabwe because there are like 50 people left now.

No way . Leg side

Maybe not

Ah Balance will be disappointed but, given the match situation, it is hardly a hammer blow to England's aspirations.

This lad Aaron looks a good bowler, reminds me of Surrey's Stuart Meaker. Has got some serious wheels. 

As for Gary Bradman...yeah he's average at best.

Given England batting of recent years i'd call this pretty even. Eng could easily be out for not much more than India.

If they can get 150 more they'd be in a decent ish position.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:interesting that on day 1 of the previous Test England were happy to just play for stumps, no sign of such caution today. Rightly so IMO, India's bowlers look tired, and not all that up for the fight.

Actually thought Ballance went a little into his shell at the end there and cost himself a wicket just playing defensively

Like that Jordan has gone in as nightwatchman (although hate the night watchman idea in a situation like this). If he bats for an hour tomorrow he'll score quickly

Match situation wise I've got no problem with Dhoni batting first, if India would've played well they would've got near 250/300 a good first innings score ala at Lords. As it was England were superb and India not great.

They're on there last legs really, if England can get 300 its a heck of a ask for India to come back

Jordan is a seriously good fielder. If he comes good as an all rounder , he could be ideal for us.

England bat deep and have plenty of attacking minded players to take the game away from India. After the mini-wobble, 36/2, was averted, England took full command once again.

Anything less than a 150 lead will be disappointing for England, and the only realistic chance that India have is that the conditions save them.

Yep England's target will be 350 but not slowly due to weather.

But 300 has to be achieved. If we are less than 100 ahead and India get 300 , we have issues. This game isn't over although it is England's to lose

I think England will finish up in the region of 380-420, which will be more than enough to ensure a triumph.

Actually don't think a spot of rain will affect England too much, might actually help them as it'll keep a bit of nibble in the surface, and prevent it from becoming a dry spinner (like Old Trafford can do)

Interesting days cricket. At 8/4, batting first looks stupid, but I thought it was a valid decision. Cricket fans sometimes get into this "it's only a good idea if it worked" mentality, but I don't think India were beaten more than is standard on a bouncy pitch with swing about. The difference is that this morning, Indians nicked off, whereas generally, most are just play and misses, and one of them fights through to a massive knock. England obviously in control, but there's probably enough time for India to still be able to fight back, too much to fight for a draw... If I'm captain, I'd go for the counter punch, and try blast England out tomorrow morning.

This test is England's to win as it stands. They will perhaps build a lead of about 100 after the first innings and that will prove too much for India with Anderson and Broad to face again. Even if England have 100 to chase down in the final innings the batsmen now appear far more confident and there won't be any jitters.

Think on form, we're talking about a series between the fifth and sixth best (maybe six and seventh) teams in the world, but it's produced enthralling cricket. Five test series are quite justified if the two teams are close enough in quality.

England probably has this one in the bag.

Are you serious , who are these 5 better teams?

I do believe in the world rankings India are third and England fourth.

I would make England 3rd best in the world, presently. Even then, it isn't terribly clear-cut.

One thing is clear-cut however: England have hit their nadir, losing 5-0 to Australia which was coupled with off the field strife, and losing to Sri Lanka at home, but are gradually starting to rise again.

The only way now for Cook is upwards, and into those broad, sunlit uplands.

SA/Aus out ahead, Sri Lanka better than both teams and I'd back the Kiwis to beat both atm. So I'd have England/India as fifth/sixth

As for India a few thoughts:

Aaron looks handy, bit scattergun but pace and bowls properly good balls in there.

Kohli has looked clueless all tour so far, no idea what to do against the moving ball

And how on earth Jadeja has three first class triple hundreds to his name, is one of life's great mysteries.

Nz better , you are actually joking right?

Ok England may have only just got back to a bit of form. But tell me how many kiwis would get in the England team?

If we want to be harsh but fair. All the teams are equally as bad bar South Africa and aus(pak,sl,ind,eng,nz)

However a few decent result means nothing to the fragile Aussies. I wouldn't back against England beating them 5-0 next time.. They are very fragile. If the big boys in England come good like cook,bell,jimmy and broad, add ballance Ali and root and tbh , England are better.

People have short memories.

England hammered Australia in England.
Australia hammered England in Australia.

If the chronology of the two were swapped, we would all look at it differently.

Well for a start unless I'm mistaken Sri Lanka just came over here and beat us. 

New Zealand have a very good side. Guys like Kane Williamson, Brendan McCullum, Trent Boult, Tim Southee, Jimmy Neesham, Corey Anderson and Ross Taylor I'd say are all as good if not better in some cases than there English counterparts.

Duty281 wrote:People have short memories.

England hammered Australia in England.
Australia hammered England in Australia.

If the chronology of the two were swapped, we would all look at it differently.

Not entirely sure what your point is here duty, yes if they were swapped we would, but this isn't some strange parallel universe.

As I said on form all are of very similar quality. Impossible to split as the rankings also suggest.

But out of them all England have the most class test players that you would want on your team

Think people need to just hold back on England being back just yet. Doing better and encouraging signs, but there's a long old way to go in this match and series.

Olly wrote:

Duty281 wrote:People have short memories.

England hammered Australia in England.
Australia hammered England in Australia.

If the chronology of the two were swapped, we would all look at it differently.

Not entirely sure what your point is here duty, yes if they were swapped we would, but this isn't some strange parallel universe.

My point is that there is not too much difference in quality between Australia and England, presently.

If I had to put together a combined England/New Zealand team this would be it

Cook
Williamson
Taylor
Bell
Ballance
Needham
McCullum 
Southee
Broad
Boult
Anderson

So I'd have one more NZ player. If we weren't accepting McCullum as WK I'd remove Ballance, have McCullum as batsman/skipper and Watling as wicket keeper

New Zealand are doing well, won their last three test series. However two of them have been against a very average West Indies side.

Duty281 wrote:

Olly wrote:

Duty281 wrote:People have short memories.

England hammered Australia in England.
Australia hammered England in Australia.

If the chronology of the two were swapped, we would all look at it differently.

Not entirely sure what your point is here duty, yes if they were swapped we would, but this isn't some strange parallel universe.

My point is that there is not too much difference in quality between Australia and England, presently.

Your point is pretty wrong.

A lot has changed since that series last summer. We've got worse, by quite a bit and are only now showing signs of recovering, whereas the Aussies have got significantly better.

Olly wrote:Think people need to just hold back on England being back just yet. Doing better and encouraging signs, but there's a long old way to go in this match and series.

England's quality has never been in doubt, for me. They fell apart off the field in the winter leading to a colossal cricketing disaster. The negative mental effects that stemmed from that led to England scrambling and stuttering for the first part of the summer, but now they are starting to find their feet once more, and playing to their level.

Olly wrote:If I had to put together a combined England/New Zealand team this would be it

Cook
Williamson
Taylor
Bell
Ballance
Needham
McCullum 
Southee
Broad
Boult
Anderson

So I'd have one more NZ player. If we weren't accepting McCullum as WK I'd remove Ballance, have McCullum as batsman/skipper and Watling as wicket keeper

Taylor over ballance - and then ballance over root.. No.

Ballance at 3 root at 5 and bell at 4.

--well.....a bad day....and from here if it slips down further, a big inning defeat is in the offing.

---However by picking 3 wickets, Ind has ensured Eng do not run away there is a small window open.....they need a ripping inspired spell of bowling tomorrow to bowl Eng out.... within another hundred runs.


--I unfortunately got so caught in work that I could not see first hand Indian bowling....so I dunno how penetrative they looked ?
If Pankaj cannot pick wickets here on this pitch....his career will end...and duly so.

--a lead of 70 odd can be managed  through a sound second inning with bat by India....they have to win the first session tomm...their chances in the test rest on first session.

--applause for Dhoni.....mind over matter.....fighting knock...

---one more time I come back to Woakes......if he cannot pick wickets on a pitch like this?....where else will he take wickets

Olly wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Olly wrote:

Duty281 wrote:People have short memories.

England hammered Australia in England.
Australia hammered England in Australia.

If the chronology of the two were swapped, we would all look at it differently.

Not entirely sure what your point is here duty, yes if they were swapped we would, but this isn't some strange parallel universe.

My point is that there is not too much difference in quality between Australia and England, presently.

Your point is pretty wrong.

A lot has changed since that series last summer. We've got worse, by quite a bit and are only now showing signs of recovering, whereas the Aussies have got significantly better.

The transition for England has been pretty difficult, granted, but England are completely through the worst now. The patient is in good health, and making a gallant recovery.

I wouldn't expect miracles whenever it is that England visit South Africa, but I do expect the Three Lions to win this series, beat the West Indies away and the Kiwis at home, before reclaiming the Ashes next summer.