England in the UAE

First topic message reminder :

Fixtures

Mon Oct 5 - Tue Oct 6
England XI v Pakistan A
Sharjah Cricket Stadium

Thu Oct 8 - Fri Oct 9
England XI v Pakistan A
Sharjah Cricket Stadium

Tue Oct 13 - Sat Oct 17
1st Test - England v Pakistan
Sheikh Zayed Stadium, Abu Dhabi

Thu Oct 22 - Mon Oct 26
2nd Test - England v Pakistan
Dubai International Cricket Stadium

Sun Nov 1 - Thu Nov 5
3rd Test - England v Pakistan
Sharjah Cricket Stadium

Sun Nov 8 (50 ovs)
England XI v TBC
Sheikh Zayed Stadium, Abu Dhabi

Wed Nov 11
1st ODI - England v Pakistan
Sheikh Zayed Stadium, Abu Dhabi

Fri Nov 13
2nd ODI - England v Pakistan
Sheikh Zayed Stadium, Abu Dhabi

Tue Nov 17
3rd ODI - England v Pakistan
Sharjah Cricket Stadium

Fri Nov 20 (
4th ODI - England v Pakistan
Dubai International Cricket Stadium

Mon Nov 23
England XI v United Arab Emirates
Sheikh Zayed Stadium, Abu Dhabi

Thu Nov 26
1st T20I - England v Pakistan
Dubai International Cricket Stadium

Fri Nov 27
2nd T20I - England v Pakistan
Dubai International Cricket Stadium

Mon Nov 30
3rd T20I - England v Pakistan
Sharjah Cricket Stadium



Squads

Test squad:
Alastair Cook (Essex, capt), Moeen Ali (Worcestershire), James Anderson (Lancashire), Zafar Ansari (Surrey), Jonny Bairstow (Yorkshire, wk), Ian Bell (Warwickshire), Stuart Broad (Nottinghamshire), Jos Buttler (Lancashire, wk), Steven Finn (Middlesex), Alex Hales (Nottinghamshire), Liam Plunkett (Yorkshire), Adil Rashid (Yorkshire), Joe Root (Yorkshire), Ben Stokes (Durham), James Taylor (Nottinghamshire), Mark Wood (Durham).


ODI squad:
Eoin Morgan (Middlesex, capt), Moeen Ali (Worcestershire), Jonny Bairstow (Yorkshire, wk), Sam Billings (Kent, wk), Jos Buttler (Lancashire, wk), Steven Finn (Middlesex), Alex Hales (Nottinghamshire), Adil Rashid (Yorkshire), Joe Root (Yorkshire), Jason Roy (Surrey), James Taylor (Nottinghamshire), Reece Topley (Hampshire), David Willey (Yorkshire), Chris Woakes (Warwickshire), Mark Wood (Durham).


Twenty20 squad:
Eoin Morgan (Middlesex, capt), Moeen Ali (Worcestershire), Sam Billings (Kent, wk), Jos Buttler (Lancashire, wk), Alex Hales (Nottinghamshire), Chris Jordan (Sussex), Stephen Parry (Lancashire), Adil Rashid (Yorkshire), Joe Root (Yorkshire), Jason Roy (Surrey), Reece Topley (Hampshire), James Vince (Hampshire), David Willey (Yorkshire), Chris Woakes (Warwickshire), Mark Wood (Durham).

I think Rashid will get a longer rope as I believe McGain was 35 when he debuted, or maybe even a bit older than that?

But its a fair point, as you could argue Kerrigan had a debut no worse than Rashid and it would not be a huge surprise if he became a one Test wonder

I think you have to give him at least this series, where at some point he should encounter somewhat more favourable conditions. Worth noting that Zulfiqar/Malik haven't taken a wicket either, so obviously this can't be a great pitch to bowl spin on.

VTR wrote:I think all this worst debut bowling stuff was a bit harsh. It wasn't good by any stretch, but McGain's debut/final Test was certainly a whole lot worse.

I think England see him as a second innings and mop up the tail bowler. So we will have to see how he goes if/when faced with those scenarios on a pitch that isn't a graveyard

That is part of my issue with England selecting any leg spinner, unless he is near to really outstanding. I'm unconvinced that we can afford to choose a bowler who is going to largely be a costly passenger during the all important part of the opposition's first innings.

McGain had less than 100 FC wickets and 30 FC games. Rashid has 4 times those figures.

Whereas Scott "any legspinner" Borthwick had a good debut and has never been seen again.

This is clealry a spinners garveyard ... theres 7 guys had a go and not one wicket so far. So lets not get overly carried away on Rashids figures. The groundswell for him was because he had been taking a lot of wickets, and frankly its not so much a case of any leg spinner as any spinner at all ... thats how Ali got the job. Rocking up here with only Tredwell wouldve copped a lot more (deserved) flack thats for sure.

The Pakistani spinners have turned the ball far less so far than the English did. The only reason they are in the game is because neither Bell nor Cook are overly proficient at pushing the ball into gaps. This means that the Pakistanis can just keep wheeling in on a length.

I reckon Ali and Rashid would get wickets bowling at our batsmen

Gotta say though great fighting knock form Cook, joining Kallis on 8 tons in Asia and notching a ton now in every "country" he has played in (WI not really a country).

Could make it to 10,000 test runs by the end of the year.

Ryan Kerrigan didn't last long either

LondonTiger wrote:Gotta say though great fighting knock form Cook, joining Kallis on 8 tons in Asia and notching a ton now in every "country" he has played in (WI not really a country).

Could make it to 10,000 test runs by the end of the year.

He could make it by the end of this innings if they didnt have a 5 day limit.


Conditions and the bowling have helped England but hats off to them for keeping their heads together and pushing through the scoreboard pressure. Bells not looked comfortable at all but hes still in and managed to start scoring some runs at least. When was the last time England were nearly 200-1 in a test? Its not happened often an even given how flat this is I dont think anyone really hoped for a better fight back than this has been till this point

Kerrigan and Borthwick though both made their debuts in final, "dead-rubber" tests. Plenty of examples of one-cap wonders from those (Boyd Rankin played in the same test as Borthwick did he not?).

In Borthwick's case, he then went back to Durham and barely bowled until the next test came around. At the time he was somewhat in the frame (this was when England decided to go with Ali) but ultimately they went with the more dependable Ali. Unfortunately Borthwick just doesn't bowl enough week-in, week-out, to be a real option.

Kerrigan was different. He just bowled terribly in his only test, far far worse than Rashid here IMO. Seemed to be over-awed by the whole occasion and ended up just trying to roll the ball in, which he couldn't do. I don't think England should completely give up on him, as he seems to be consistent at County level, but... He also doesn't add much in the field or with the bat.

Cook has certainly led from the front today. Great powers of concentration - and , perhaps surprisingly , more scoring options than either of his partners so far.

Still a lot of work to do. Pitch still seems benign , though that may change over the next day or so. The longer these two bat the better.

Bell really could do with a big innings.

Last two overs have seen 3 rank long hops and one poor full toss. England left two, defended one and pushed the full toss straight to a fielder.

Pakistan would have gotten at least 10 runs from those balls. Different mindset at the crease I guess.

C'mon lads wear them down.

Gooseberry wrote:To be fair KP wouldve been a better 4th spinner than Stokes.

On the KP subject ... I heard yesterday that hes now begging for a coaching role (which he previously slagged Strauss off for offering him)  but said half the team arent on speaking terms with him. You have to be concerned about the guys mental health sometimes.

Right, you can blame Goose for lighting my touch paper.

The three best performances I've seen from Pietersen when playing for Surrey:
1. 355 not out v Leics at the Oval this year including a last wicket partnership of 139 with 'Clive' Dunn who scored 5.
2. 234 not out at Guildford in 2012 as he took the Lancs attack and especially Kerrigan apart before the Australians had thought of the idea.
3. A key bowling performance when Surrey beat Notts at the Oval in September 2012 to escape relegation. Analysis of 10-3-24-2 with the wickets of rock like opener Edwards and at number 4 Australian Voges. Skipper Batty had to literally grapple the ball out of his hand.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Kerrigan and Borthwick though both made their debuts in final, "dead-rubber" tests. Plenty of examples of one-cap wonders from those (Boyd Rankin played in the same test as Borthwick did he not?).

In Borthwick's case, he then went back to Durham and barely bowled until the next test came around. At the time he was somewhat in the frame (this was when England decided to go with Ali) but ultimately they went with the more dependable Ali. Unfortunately Borthwick just doesn't bowl enough week-in, week-out, to be a real option.

Kerrigan was different. He just bowled terribly in his only test, far far worse than Rashid here IMO. Seemed to be over-awed by the whole occasion and ended up just trying to roll the ball in, which he couldn't do. I don't think England should completely give up on him, as he seems to be consistent at County level, but... He also doesn't add much in the field or with the bat.

If Borthwick keeps making runs high in the order at Durham he may yet come under consideration for his batting. In which case his bowling would be a useful extra. But you'd think his chances would be considerably enhanced if he did a serious amount of bowling.
May have to change counties to do so though.

I think to a degree it's also that England are waiting for the second new ball LT. Cook has generally been pretty good as scoring off bad balls in his knock so far. Pakistan were fairly lenient on Stokes's over of rather filthy off-spin right before tea yesterday...

LondonTiger wrote:Last two overs have seen 3 rank long hops and one poor full toss. England left two, defended one and pushed the full toss straight to a fielder.

Pakistan would have gotten at least 10 runs from those balls. Different mindset at the crease I guess.

C'mon lads wear them down.

TBF they only scored 5 off Stokes' off spin.

But yets it is a different mindset and has to be. Realistically England can only lose or draw the game, Pakistan were batting to win it. They did lose a cluster of wickets late on as a result, England simply cannot afford that. England were also pushed into taking risks ( like Stokes spinning) to try and prise wickets out at any cost once Pakistan had got a stable base to their innings. Pakistan are still in a psoition where they can play the patience line and length game ( with the odd bust of Wahab to liven things up) and let the England batsmen get themselves out. If this goes on for another session though then they might have to start trying plan B a bit and offer more socring opportunities.
Bell and Moeen have been more tied down than they perhaps should have been , but hardly surprising given the context of their innings both on a personal and game level. Theres scertainly no reasonable criticism of Cooks scoring rate. All of them have been sticking to the task, which is preserving their wickets and showing some application.

guildfordbat wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:To be fair KP wouldve been a better 4th spinner than Stokes.

On the KP subject ... I heard yesterday that hes now begging for a coaching role (which he previously slagged Strauss off for offering him)  but said half the team arent on speaking terms with him. You have to be concerned about the guys mental health sometimes.

Right, you can blame Goose for lighting my touch paper.

The three best performances I've seen from Pietersen when playing for Surrey:
1. 355 not out v Leics at the Oval this year including a last wicket partnership of 139 with 'Clive' Dunn who scored 5.
2. 234 not out at Guildford in 2012 as he took the Lancs attack and especially Kerrigan apart before the Australians had thought of the idea.
3. A key bowling performance when Surrey beat Notts at the Oval in September 2012 to escape relegation. Analysis of 10-3-24-2 with the wickets of rock like opener Edwards and at number 4 Australian Voges. Skipper Batty had to literally grapple the ball out of his hand.

And lets not forget his glorious 2, 0, 14, 1 , 32, 18 last time England came out here. Ian Bell "End" has topped that high score already.

The debate on here is far more interesting than the actual cricket - some good discussion around the spin bowling!

VTR wrote:The debate on here is far more interesting than the actual cricket - some good discussion around the spin bowling!

but as with most internet debates - much of it is driven by our prejudices. We all have them, sometimes we even acknowledge them, but even if they have been formed based on experience it does tend to create lively but pointless debates.

remember when lots of people wanted Cook dropped?

The cricket may not have been the most exciting, but I've found it quite interesting to watch, and have been very pleased with England's batting so far. Last summer we really struggled when faced with big totals, so it's good to see us responding well to one (so far) here.

Was busy helping select teams for the weekend so I missed most of the second session. How did Bell play after lunch ? Because I was rather concerned before the break that his ultra-passive approach to the spinner was going to land him in trouble sooner or later...presume he found a way to break the shackles eventually...

Have England been a bit too cautious , do we think ? Or is this about right : stay in , keep Pakistan in the field for as long as possible , look to take advantage through tomorrow when their bowlers are really tired ? I'm inclined to think this is the correct approach , given the type of players who have batted so far ; as long as they don't allow themselves to become totally bogged down - like Bell before lunch.
In an ideal world , the likes of Stokes and Buttler get a chance to bat against some very tired opponents.

Mustn't get ahead of ourselves. Still need 99 more to avoid the follow on.

guildfordbat wrote:

Olly wrote:England's spin problem is simply we don't have swann/panesar anymore.

Ali is a developing off spinner
Rashid is playing his first test and still developing leg spin.

And these are our two best current options against some of the better spin players around

This was pretty much always the most likely outcome on day 1/2.

Looking pretty bleak now - those bell drops look crucial

Hi Olly and all - I don't agree with the first highlighted sentence. To quote Alec Stewart to me on a previous occasion, ''It's a game of opinions, sir.''

If the second highlighted sentence is correct - and I believe that one is, and have long been consistent with that view - shouldn't we have tried something different?

I accept we don't have this type of player in the UAE and, in any case, the selectors turned their backs on such players some time ago but I would look to a holding spinner to provide support to Ali and the seamers. I've long been a supporter of Tredwell. If his form was not considered good enough, even Batty might have been a short term winter option. As posted yesterday, I don't consider Ali and Rashid to be an effective combo. I have considerable doubts about Rashid which are well documented and go back much further than yesterday.

Saw The Verdict on the Sky (UK) cricket channel last night with Charles Colville and Bob Willis. The latter was scathing in his comments:
''The spinners were a bit of an embarrassment. Poor old Adil Rashid was not much of an advance on Simon Kerrigan ... .. Too many gift balls from him ... He's got to learn to bowl much quicker in these conditions ... Moeen Ali was more economical but didn't look threatening at all.''

Admittedly, Sky never want a middle of the road comment when an aggressive soundbite (incidentally, lacking any solution) will do. Nonetheless, I couldn't disagree with Willis.

Btw, I do totally agree with Olly in another of his posts that every passing England Test shows how incredibly good and valuable Swann was. A case can definitely be made for him being England's greatest spinner.

Finally, a word for the England seamers who have performed admirably and lacked only luck and a second slip.

I posted the above yesterday morning, particularly following Bob Willis' comments about the England spinners on day one.

Just to quickly follow up now on what Willis had to say about their performance on day two. ''Completely unsatisfactory'' was his judgement on Rashid and Ali although he conceded that ''the cupboard is bare''. He did refer to Ansari but pointed out he was currently injured and in any case still had some learning to do. Willis did also quickly mention Tredwell and Batty as possible alternatives but seemed less than taken, rather dismissively calling them ''old stagers''.

I had a dig at Willis the day before for slating Rashid and Ali without coming up with anything else so I was at least slightly pleased he (albeit very briefly) considered things beyond those two even if it was only to appear to suggest they're the best we currently have available.

Adopting some Gooseberry type thinking, it does seem rather cunning of Rashid to have achieved the worst ever bowling figures in a Test innings on debut. Rather than being encircled by savage criticism of him lacking threat and economy, we now appear to risk being engulfed by a tsunami of sympathy for him.

Bell was a bit more pro-active alfie, used the sweep to pretty good effect, but still fairly cautious overall and not at his fluent best by any means.

I think England's approach is the correct one: to stand any chance of winning the game they need to get a first innings lead you'd think. Realistically of course, England are playing for a draw here, so the objective today was always going to be to bat through and lose as few wickets as possible, something they're doing admirably.

Gooseberry wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:To be fair KP wouldve been a better 4th spinner than Stokes.

On the KP subject ... I heard yesterday that hes now begging for a coaching role (which he previously slagged Strauss off for offering him)  but said half the team arent on speaking terms with him. You have to be concerned about the guys mental health sometimes.

Right, you can blame Goose for lighting my touch paper.

The three best performances I've seen from Pietersen when playing for Surrey:
1. 355 not out v Leics at the Oval this year including a last wicket partnership of 139 with 'Clive' Dunn who scored 5.
2. 234 not out at Guildford in 2012 as he took the Lancs attack and especially Kerrigan apart before the Australians had thought of the idea.
3. A key bowling performance when Surrey beat Notts at the Oval in September 2012 to escape relegation. Analysis of 10-3-24-2 with the wickets of rock like opener Edwards and at number 4 Australian Voges. Skipper Batty had to literally grapple the ball out of his hand.

And lets not forget his glorious 2, 0, 14, 1 , 32, 18 last time  England came out here. Ian Bell "End" has topped that high score already.

Not recognised as not for Surrey. You are going off topic.

Did you actually watch any of the cricket GB? If so I can only assume you missed the balls that turned past the bat, or the edge that dropped short of slip from the shoulder of the bat, or the sliced shot that landed between two fielders or the googlies that were just jabbed into the pads.

While Rashid did not bowl well, to claim he offered no threat is in my opinion crazy.

Well done Ian Bell. Battling 50.


Only 200 morer needed to make up for the drops

That's a good fighting 50 from Bell - I have to give credit as I was wondering earlier if this could be it for him (I couldn't see him getting many with his pre-lunch attempts)

He does need to go on now though, make a telling contribution rather than a "just enough" performance which is all he has seemed to deliver recently

LondonTiger wrote:Did you actually watch any of the cricket GB? If so I can only assume you missed the balls that turned past the bat, or the edge that dropped short of slip from the shoulder of the bat, or the sliced shot that landed between two fielders or the googlies that were just jabbed into the pads.

While Rashid did not bowl well, to claim he offered no threat is in my opinion crazy.

I tend to agree with this a bit, albeit that LT makes it sound like Rashid was fizzing balls past the outside edge regularly, which he really wasn't. He did however create a few moments which could have brought about wickets with a bit more luck. In particular Malik I think lofted one high but landed just wide of mid-off at one point, and there were a few edges that landed short/wide of slip.

Not regularly - probably only about 5 times in 30 overs - but was some threat.

LondonTiger wrote:Did you actually watch any of the cricket GB? If so I can only assume you missed the balls that turned past the bat, or the edge that dropped short of slip from the shoulder of the bat, or the sliced shot that landed between two fielders or the googlies that were just jabbed into the pads.

While Rashid did not bowl well, to claim he offered no threat is in my opinion crazy.

Tiger - I thought that would reel you in and highlight the prejudices you were admirably confessing to in an earlier post.

Ok, I'll withdraw ''no threat'' but would still maintain there was insufficient threat from Rashid.

I'm not Willis' greatest fan by any means but don't think his assessments have been too wide of the mark. Perhaps he hasn't been watching any of the cricket either? What do you say to his views?

alfie wrote:Was busy helping select teams for the weekend so I missed most of the second session.  How did Bell play after lunch ?  Because I was rather concerned before the break that his ultra-passive approach to the spinner was going to land him in trouble sooner or later...presume he found a way to break the shackles eventually...

Have England been a bit too cautious , do we think ?  Or is this about right : stay in , keep Pakistan in the field for as long as possible , look to take advantage through tomorrow when their bowlers are really tired ? I'm inclined to think this is the correct approach , given the type of players who have batted so far ; as long as they don't allow themselves to become totally bogged down - like Bell before lunch.
In an ideal world , the likes of Stokes and Buttler get a chance to bat against some very tired opponents.

Mustn't get ahead of ourselves. Still need 99 more to avoid the follow on.

Hi Alfie - belated response but I think we've done it about right. Even more so as the clock has ticked on. Glad though for England and Bell that lunch came when it did and not fifteen minutes later. He seemed in a right pickle before the break but has settled better and grown more confident as this session has gone on. Cook meanwhile playing splendidly - may we all learn from it.

Excellent application and concentration shown by Cook and Bell today.

Slightly worried that England aren't batting quick enough to force the win, but hey-ho.

I guess my response to Willis would be that Zulfiqar hasn't (to my mind) offered any more threat than Rashid (possibly less). He has offered more control of course, which is useful (though only if you have threat from the other end, which Pakistan haven't really). Overall I'm really loathe to make too much of a judgement on Rashid based on one match which, to all evidence, has been played on a wicket which really doesn't suit bowlers...

There's something wonderfully soothing about watching Cook bat in this form. A bit like Trott at his best (thinking of his Melbourne knock from 2010 which I was lucky enough to watch live), there's just a wonderful tempo to his innings, so that although he doesn't look like doing anything extravagant he's just ticking along and scoring lots of runs at a decent rate.

guildfordbat wrote:I'm not Willis' greatest fan by any means but don't think his assessments have been too wide of the mark. Perhaps he hasn't been watching any of the cricket either? What do you say to his views?

Well Willis is one of the few former Surrey players I have met (along with Mark Butcher) that I have any time for. Probably why they sacked him as a player



(Yes my prejudices again - formed by experience of some quite vicious bullying in the 70s)

Getting back to Rashid : he certainly turned a few balls ; and yes I recall one mishit at least that fell safely...and to be fair no one expected him to be a menace on this track on the first two days.
My concern is more that he was not only expensive (not a single maiden over is an odd stat) but seemed to concede runs largely without any risk to the batsmen I'd expect them to attack him at times ; but would have hoped they'd have had to get a bit more adventurous to do so : as it was he was basically "milked". And rather too quickly.
Still ; early days. Let us see how he goes next up.

oooh Cook dropped, by Asad Shafiq I think, at deep-backward square leg. Shafiq made decent ground, but really should have hung on to that. Zulfiqar rightfully livid. Moments later, Cook brings up his 150

Picking Batty or Tredwell wouldve been as retrograde a step as picking err Patel.

Going for a holding spinner just for the sake of having a holding spinner regardless as to wether they are test match standard or not (neither of those currently are, and even in their prime both were always controversial squad inclussions) ...is that any different to going for an attacking spinner regardless.

No doubt we would be sitting here bemoaning the historic lack of wickets from spinners on the fact theyd ignored the leggie. Its not just Rashid thats struggled on this pitch, the Pakistani spinners havent been unable to take wickets either. Nor could Ali who managed to confound the Indians not so long ago. Sure another regulation off spinner may have been more economical, but equally they may have been even less risky to smash out of the park.

Give England some credit for turning up with some variety for once. And some attacking intent, we've spent enough time blaming their previous losses on defensiveness. And last time they came here it was not picking the more attacking spinner.

Had they managed to win the toss what would we say then come 4th innings? Im glad we have Gareth Batty to run through them?

There were some people arguing that England shouldve picked 3 spinners for the game. We have a test record for most overs of spin without a wicket in this game.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:I guess my response to Willis would be that Zulfiqar hasn't (to my mind) offered any more threat than Rashid (possibly less). He has offered more control of course, which is useful (though only if you have threat from the other end, which Pakistan haven't really). Overall I'm really loathe to make too much of a judgement on Rashid based on one match which, to all evidence, has been played on a wicket which really doesn't suit bowlers...

There's something wonderfully soothing about watching Cook bat in this form. A bit like Trott at his best (thinking of his Melbourne knock from 2010 which I was lucky enough to watch live), there's just a wonderful tempo to his innings, so that although he doesn't look like doing anything extravagant he's just ticking along and scoring lots of runs at a decent rate.

MfC - as usual, that's pretty fair enough about Rashid. I said in a post on this thread to Olly last night that I appreciate the argument for him staying in for the series, particularly in view of the time and hopes already invested in him. Fair enough also if he proves my doubts wrong which go back long before this Test and, incidentally, were largely shared by Mike [please tell him he's much missed here].

''Soothing'' is spot on about Cook. Almost a ridiculous thing to say about a batsman but he makes me think of a top class umpire or wicket keeper - the better they quietly go about their job, the less they get noticed. I won't say anything about the drop a few minutes ago - after all, Tiger would not expect me to be watching!

Gooseberry wrote:Picking Batty or Tredwell wouldve been as retrograde a step as picking err Patel.
...

Who rightly or wrongly will be more in the frame for the second Test.

guildfordbat wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:Picking Batty or Tredwell wouldve been as retrograde a step as picking err Patel.
...

Who rightly or wrongly will be more in the frame for the second Test.

Can Stokes not bowl left arm?

cheers GB, I also have reservations about Rashid, but then again, I have reservations against most English spinners (with the caveat that I don't really watch much CC so am painfully ignorant on Batty's progress since he last played for England). I just feel that it's unfair to judge him too critically based on this match, given how it's transpired so far (and who knows, he could still spin England to victory on day 5).

I'll pass on your greetings to Mike, who's busy with teaching at the moment, so won't be able to watch much/any of this series I would have thought.

Bell gone. Bit of a loose shot, reaching for a wide one from Riaz and slicing it to backward point. Still a very important innings for England, and one that showed plenty of character. Wood in as the nightwatchman, and lucky not to be out a few balls later as he flashes at a wide one and edges through/over the slips.

Wake up everyone, there's been a wicket!

looking at that Wood edge again, Misbah should probably have caught it (or at least made some sort of attempt), not great from the Pakistani skipper...

and one does bring two. Wood's reprieve is short-lived as he chops on to one from Wahab in his next over. A poor shot that. England need to be very careful here, in danger of undoing all the good work they did for the vast part of this day...

Can't see the sense of sending Wood in there. Has he even batted on this tour so far?

Cheers in turn, MfC. I too have reservations about England's spinners. Willis is pretty much right about ''the cupboard being bare''. I don't view Tredwell or Batty as any great saviours but do regard both as good, hardened county professionals who know their game and have a sufficient level of nous. That wouldn't normally be good enough in my book and nor should it. However, as a short term option at least, I believe it's the best option currently available or, as Mike sometimes posted, ''the least worst''.

I would add that any judgements I'm making about Rashid may be wrong but they are not hurried. They have their basis from well before yesterday.

Please do pass on my greetings to Mike, thanks.

VTR wrote:Can't see the sense of sending Wood in there. Has he even batted on this tour so far?

Do not think so. however as every single international team would have done the same thing - not much point being over critical of the coaches.

Wood himself would have looked at the pitch and hoped to do a Dizzy.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:looking at that Wood edge again, Misbah should probably have caught it (or at least made some sort of attempt), not great from the Pakistani skipper...

Didn't matter much ...Wood gone , chopped on. Not very night watchman like innings. I'm not against the night watchman tactic , normally ; but I'm not sure it was the right move this evening. Flat pitch , tired bowlers ; I reckon Root would have just as soon had a few overs batting tonight and start fresh in the morning...but I suppose he was happy to accept the substitution. Presume he had some say in it ?

England will be - rightly - disappointed to lose wickets like this in the shadows of the close. Still has been a good day ; hopefully the key pair , Cook and Root , can get things back on track.

Never normally a fan of nightwatchmen. If he doesn't fall in the final few minutes, he normally goes early the next morning to give the bowlers an extra lift. Particularly would question if it was needed on this track and in these conditions.