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).

Think as England are playing Rashid and Ali, they would in fact need 4 seamers if Anderson isn't to be bowled into the ground.
And as an aside, I just couldn't see the point of people going after Ben Stokes yesterday, consistently talking about the need to drop him. Earlier also, I said this, he's a better all condition bowler than most in the 3rd/4th seamer category that England have got. He does go for a few runs, but he takes wickets, and in the last 3-4 tests, he has been pretty solid with the ball. Bowling a lot more economically and taking wickts as well. And at the moment, he's a much better bet than Ian Bell in the side. Bell has been average to godawful for the best part of 4 years, the 2013 Ashes in England being the only exception. If someone like a James Taylor is to come in, then it has to be in place of Bell, and not Stokes who gives them the option of that 4th seamer and thereby let them play the 2 spinners.......

LondonTiger wrote:What changes do people EXPECT England to make to their lineup for T2?


(Note not what you think they should do).

For me only player who may drop out, based mainly on his inability to string together back to back tests, would be Mark Wood.

England selectors normally resist the urge to make many, if any changes, after just one match of a series. Especially when we've got off to a winning start - ok, we didn't but it probably rather seems like it.

I agree that if one player were to go by the wayside now, it's most likely to be Wood. On grounds of effectiveness and even more fitness. That would probably open the door to Plunkett whom I would still expect to be ahead of new boy Jordan in the pecking order. The left field choice - which I might consider further subject to the wicket - would be to bring in Patel as a third and (hopefully) holding spinner, particularly thinking of the first innings. However, England selectors aren't well known for left field decisions!

I can't realistically see Taylor or Hales playing in the second Test. With no games between Tests, there's nothing much they can do to force their way into the side other than wait until one of the current incumbents has to be dropped - not a decision I expect to be made at this early stage.

guildfordbat wrote:
I agree that if one player were to go by the wayside now, it's most likely to be Wood. On grounds of effectiveness and even more fitness. That would probably open the door to Plunkett whom I would still expect to be ahead of new boy Jordan in the pecking order. The left field choice - which I might consider further subject to the wicket - would be to bring in Patel as a third and (hopefully) holding spinner, particularly thinking of the first innings. However, England selectors aren't well known for left field decisions!

I agree. (but someone will need to help Cook set a decent defensive field).

msp83 wrote:Think as England are playing Rashid and Ali, they would in fact need 4 seamers if Anderson isn't to be bowled into the ground.
And as an aside, I just couldn't see the point of people going after Ben Stokes yesterday, consistently talking about the need to drop him. Earlier also, I said this, he's a better all condition bowler than most in the 3rd/4th seamer category that England have got. He does go for a few runs, but he takes wickets, and in the last 3-4 tests, he has been pretty solid with the ball. Bowling a lot more economically and taking wickts as well. And at the moment, he's a much better bet than Ian Bell in the side. Bell has been average to godawful for the best part of 4 years, the 2013 Ashes in England being the only exception. If someone like a James Taylor is to come in, then it has to be in place of Bell, and not Stokes who gives them the option of that 4th seamer and thereby let them play the 2 spinners.......

I agree on the Stokes front. For that last test certainly he was absoluetly the right person, and made it possible for Anderson and Broad to bowl effectively when Ali and rashid were leaking runs. Pakistan conversly were forced to use Babar and Malik for a ludicrous number of innefective overs and even then Rahat Ali was dropping his pace to stay alive.
I was a big Stokes critic early in the summer, but he has really started to turn things around. If you look at recent games hes arguably been Englands most effective wicket taking bowler. He has also become a decent enough batsman. Hes unlikley to ever average much above 40, but good enough at the minute for 6 ... plus he can actually catch unlike half the team. Hes a good all round cricketer whos finally delivering on promise.
Would we need a 4th seamer on raging turners? Well thats a different question.

The issue players for me are Wood, who hasnt really delivered wickets despite taking the strike roll in the attack and Bairstow who isnt one of the 4 best batsmen available to England. With an all rounder opening theres only really 4 specialist batsmen slots available, is Taylor not a better option? Its not like Bairstow has been scoring the runs to demand his inclussion. Bell too..you make the argument about...He has been scoring more runs than Bairstow has. Wood ...hes only in for Finn in the first place, maybe a lack of credible alternatives...Plunkett wouldnt be a big change..perhaps a pity again theres not a left armer to give some more variety. Stokes has bene delivering more with the ball than Wood has and is much more deserving of retaining a place.

The selection choices for me are :
Would England get continued value from a 4 seamer attack or can they afford to add depth to the batting if it looks like a results spinning wicket?
If they think 3 seamers is fine do you replace Wood with a batsman or Patel?
If they stick to 4 seamers is there any value from swapping Wood for Plunkett?
regardless of that is Bairstow one of the best 4 batsmen in the squad, or would Taylor/Hales have a beter chance of delivering runs in the middle order?


Ali opening is another "thing" but one that will get swept under the carpet for now.

Chances are England wont change anything. I personally would get Taylor in either for Bairstow or for Wood.

Patel Im less convinced by, holding spinners didnt do Pakistan much good...its took them the best part of 2 days to bore England into chucking wickets away. he would offer a bit more batting depth than Wood but it would be a pretty negative pick in my opinion. Certainly if he came in for Stokes. For Wood I could cope with.

Taylor for Bairstow and Plunkett for Wood.

Jetty wrote:Taylor for Bairstow and Plunkett for Wood.

Taylor for Wood.

Stella wrote:

Jetty wrote:Taylor for Bairstow and Plunkett for Wood.

Taylor for Wood.

Yes, you are right, we have too many bowlers. With Yasir Shah coming back we will need extra batting.

Plunkett should be nowhere near the team.

If Wood is replaced - and it will only be due to fitness worries - it has to be another bowler. Do we really want to face Rashid and Ali bowling more than 60 overs in the first innings?

LondonTiger wrote:Disagree with an extra day Simon.

Would however like to see them start earlier the following day when all overs not completed. Despite all the overs from spinners, not one day saw the full complement bowled - even with the extra 30 minutes.

In the end, allowing 6 overs for change of innings, we were short by 17 overs short of the full allotment.

Only just caught up with this. I think we're making essentially the same underlying point - daft to 'finish' a 5-day game as a draw when the standard minimum overs hadn't nearly been bowled - but yours is probably the more realistic proposal. My only qualm about an earlier start the next day would be that it wouldn't take long for teams to slow down their overs at the end of a day in order to bowl the remainder first thing the following day in potentially more helpful conditions, eg with early morning dew (ok, maybe not a big issue in the UAE, but in England, for example?). Perhaps the best solution would be to carry on playing under lights until the requisite minimum number of overs had been bowled that day? But would that be fair on guiltless batsmen to have to play the red ball under lights? Aaagh! I give up - there's a problem here but I don't have the answer!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/34573193

This seems crazy. He might not play, but if he does there is a scenario where he could contribute to a Pakistan victory then be banned from bowling a few days later.

Lets be honest, the 3-0 defeat last time had a lot to do with batsmen failing to master facing a bowler who was later deemed to be chucking it

SimonofSurrey wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:Disagree with an extra day Simon.

Would however like to see them start earlier the following day when all overs not completed. Despite all the overs from spinners, not one day saw the full complement bowled - even with the extra 30 minutes.

In the end, allowing 6 overs for change of innings, we were short by 17 overs short of the full allotment.

Only just caught up with this. I think we're making essentially the same underlying point - daft to 'finish' a 5-day game as a draw when the standard minimum overs hadn't nearly been bowled - but yours is probably the more realistic proposal. My only qualm about an earlier start the next day would be that it wouldn't take long for teams to slow down their overs at the end of a day in order to bowl the remainder first thing the following day in potentially more helpful conditions, eg with early morning dew (ok, maybe not a big issue in the UAE, but in England, for example?). Perhaps the best solution would be to carry on playing under lights until the requisite minimum number of overs had been bowled that day? But would that be fair on guiltless batsmen to have to play the red ball under lights? Aaagh! I give up - there's a problem here but I don't have the answer!!  

A solution could be to give the team batting the choice as to whether they would prefer to face the "extra" overs at the end of the day with the use of floodlights if necessary or start the next day's play earlier.

Alternatively the umpires could just "make" the players bowl the required number of overs within the time given, it seems to me that often the umpires only think about time wasting issues towards the end of day, when in reality a lot of time is wasted throughout the day.

The fining system for slow over-rates doesn't seem to make any difference. I would propose a 10 run penalty for every over not bowled by the close of the day to be added to the batting team's total, but with strong umpire control to ensure the batting team isn't responsible for the slow over-rate.

Starting the next days play early is off the table due to ground and TV issues. Its probably the best solution for the game, but one that doesnt easily marry up with the commercial side.

Lets face it there was a big chunk of this game where England were more than happy to take their time, and it was them that set the precedent for truely appalling over rates on the first morning.

I do feel its wrong that they come off for light when its the batting side that would be disadvantaged but want to stay on, but its the players who voted against having that choice.

Get the ball colurs sorted, increase penalties for slow over rates, introduce penalties for batting teams deliberately slowing the game, get wickets that give a decent balance between bat and ball so that most games finish around 360 overs.

Is starting the game early off the table though? There are times when the start of play is brought forward to make up for time lost due to bad weather. What is the difference in this case? I would think that tv would cause more of an issue with play being extended at the end of the day due to scheduling issues, but I could be wrong.

Bilal Asif added to the Pakistan squad as doubts stilkl over Yasir Shah's fitness.

Asif currently under investigation for a suspect action - results of which are declared during the second test. So technically he coudl get banned from bowling mid game perhaps.

LondonTiger wrote:Bilal Asif added to the Pakistan squad as doubts stilkl over Yasir Shah's fitness.

Asif currently under investigation for a suspect action - results of which are declared during the second test. So technically he coudl get banned from bowling mid game perhaps.

What a crummy week for Test Cricket. Aleem Dar forced out of umpiring India/S Africa by right wing Hindu extremists (never thought I'd have to type that phrase on these boards), while the timing of a decision on Asif - during the Second Test - is crass in the extreme: at best unfortunate, more probably an avoidable c*ck-up that suits no-one.

Maybe it's all big mix up. The PCB asked the ICC if they could play a chucker in the next Test. The ICC responded "As If!"

And here we are, what a mess

The ICC are in charge - what else do we expect at this point?

If Yasir is fit, then Asif won't be needed. But again, the PCB are messing up, as they almost always do.......
Yasir and a spinning track, with Rashid on the other side. That's what I am hoping for.......

Stokes has been suffering from a stomach virus and may not be passed fit to play.

Also a reasonably interesting read covering how Andrew Gale (yorkshire's captain) uses Rashid:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/34586992

Missing stokes would really complicate selection.

LondonTiger wrote:Stokes has been suffering from a stomach virus and may not be passed fit to play.

Also a reasonably interesting read covering how Andrew Gale (yorkshire's captain) uses Rashid:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/34586992

Tiger - thanks for the link. Understand where Gale is coming from although do feel Rashid is a more natural fit with Yorks' current attack than England's. As we've discussed on the county threads, particularly thinking of the valuable role played for Yorks by the miserly and under appreciated Patterson which probably helps Rashid's attacking approach.

I hope that's not seen as an ungracious response to Rashid's Test fivefer - it's much more meant to reflect how well balanced Yorks' bowling line up is. England might be putting out the best bowlers they can but I'm still not convinced as to its balance - maybe just something we have to live with for now.

Not sure how useful the Gale advice is at present.  Sure , Rashid is likely to be more effective in the second innings , and using him to attack the tail makes sense... but when you're touring UAE in very hot weather you need your spinners to do a fair bit of bowling in the first innings too...Bit different from cc matches in the north of England !
If he had been kept until Pakistan were six or seven down he probably wouldn't have bowled at all

Not to dismiss it all : could be England can look to use Moeen more in the early stages and give Rashid brief spells , as suggested. But as guildford points out , Cook's hands are tied to some extent by the bowling resources he possesses. The old question of balance (and I'm not certain Patel , if he should be a forced change for Stokes , will do a lot to address this ) ; and , again to agree with guildford , you just have to do the best you can with what you've got.

In any case it was good to see the young man taking those second innings wickets , which will surely lift his confidence for this match , and may therefore help even in the first innings.  I'd particularly like to see how he - and England generally - would fare bowling if Cook were to win a toss and the batsmen put , say , 450+ on the board...

A wicket for Moeen and Stokes so far this morning - Pakistan being reeled in after a fast start

Two very welcome wickets ! England players' spirits might have fallen a bit when Cook called incorrectly this morning... Warm again , I understand ? But after the double break , they'll be thinking one more wicket will ensure an excellent first session.

Terrific reaction catch from Bairstow And good to see Stokes apparently fit and firing despite his being a bit off-colour overnight.

Can I refer you good people to the dedicated match thread I have set up?