The Build to England’s Summer of Cricket

First topic message reminder :

It’s a little early for separate World Cup and Ashes threads, but with the Windies giving England less wins than they might have liked, what confidence had been gained from Sri Lanka has been drained.

If anything, it feels like there were less questions in summer than there are now, with the top three even less secure, Curran’s away showings looking unconvincing so far and some questions around  places for Bairstow, Foakes and pace of Wood or similar. 

There’s also a World Cup coming, a home World Cup, something England have been building towards for quite some time. They’re a very good team, maybe better than any England World Cup team, but there’s a few issues.

It’s also worth noting opponents, although I can’t see anyone getting more discussion than the Aussies. They’ve recovered from defeat to win a home series against a very weak Sri Lanka. Their tails are up, and they could welcome back their two bets batsmen. Could, as morals might well make that a little difficult. They don’t have many here, though, so it will depend just how much of a tit Warner is in the meantime.

Hales and his team may (do) have a point regarding the ECB handling the situation shambolically, but when you have two failed drug tests and the Bristol debacle on your resume, it probably isn’t a good time to be publicly pointing the finger at others.

On Archer, I thought Liew missed the major point of how Archer is coming into the best team in the world on the eve of the World Cup, with no international caps. That is always going to cause more consternation than Boyd Rankin playing when 4-0 down in the Ashes or in some random T20s. I don’t really remember what the reaction was when KP was picked in 05 for the Ashes? His ODI success giving similar confidence as Archer’s T20 success. They should still obviously pick him, it’s a no brainer for me. Unlike Hales, he has done nothing to warrant questions on his character.

LondonTiger wrote:13-man squad to face Ireland (ODI) and Pakistan (IT20): 
Eoin Morgan, Jofra Archer, Tom Curran, Joe Denly, Ben Duckett, Ben Foakes, Chris Jordan, Dawid Malan, Liam Plunkett, Adil Rashid, Joe Root, James Vince, David Willey.

1.Duckett
2.Vince
3.Root
4.Morgan (c)
5.Malan
6.Denly
7.Foakes (wk)
8.Archer
9.Rashid
10/11.Plunkett/Jordan/Willey/Curran

Seems that mix is likely against Ireland.

Archer will surely play and I think Denly will be trialed in the second spinner role that he seems to be first reserve for.

My bets would be Willey (left arm variation) and Tom Curran (death bowling and wicket taker) for the last two seamer spots.

I don’t think the Hales stuff would have any more a reaction were he picked than now he isn’t. If they’d handled it better, maybe, but this way of doing it now means the press have to ask a lot of questions about whether it’s disruptive. I don’t think a player suspended and then playing again would be nearly as bad.

Duty, your comments on the Liew article are so on brand and off target that it’s genuinely a bit sad.

There are comments that do not reflect well on the players that have given them and doubts being raised across many platforms about negative impact and attitude where there is no just cause.

If this England squad cannot take a better player coming in because one of their mates gets dropped, they won’t win much.

These doubts are different to the ones about the system with Irish players, and those doubts were not vociferous at the time and never have been.

If any player misses out for Archer, that shows they were not good enough and the management lacked confidence in them regardless.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Duty, your comments on the Liew article are so on brand and off target that it’s genuinely a bit sad.

There are comments that do not reflect well on the players that have given them and doubts being raised across many platforms about negative impact and attitude where there is no just cause.

If this England squad cannot take a better player coming in because one of their mates gets dropped, they won’t win much.

These doubts are different to the ones about the system with Irish players, and those doubts were not vociferous at the time and never have been.

If any player misses out for Archer, that shows they were not good enough and the management lacked confidence in them regardless.

Not in the slightest. If Liew thinks a very specific type of racism is the problem, then he should at least have the moral courage to actually say this in his inaccurate diatribe, rather than dancing around it.

I'll reiterate that I haven't seen anyone have a problem with the potential inclusion of Archer, other than a few misleading headlines taken out of context.

Morgan confirms that Archer, Foakes and Malan will all debut tomorrow

Guaranteed loss, some of the lads will have been dreaming of this game and to see Archer in that team will damage them.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Morgan confirms that Archer, Foakes and Malan will all debut tomorrow

Usual situation for England at ODIs - experimenting just before the World Cup begins! Granted, this time it is enforced, with Archer previously being ineligible, Billings injured and Hales banned.

This puts a bit more context to why Hales is so pissed off and the lack of integrity that the ECB has in regard to this sort of thing.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/48136883

Either way it's still ultimately his fault, and frankly he's got off lightly with the night club incident and the short ban. It's kind of inevitable that it would've leaked anyway.


Nice to see Malan get another cap but really he must be an absolute rank outsider for a spot even with all the back spasms and drugs going round.
Both he and Foakes being the ones tonget a cap suggests that England really can't be bothered to look outside of players they already now as the fifth line emergency cavalry. Something about Hain averaging 58 in list A cricket and having done ok with the lions.

https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/cricket/eoin-morgan-reveals-meeting-between-senior-england-players-ended-alex-hales-world-cup-hopes-a4132871.html

Morgan says the decision came from a meeting between him, Buttler, Root, Moeen, Woakes and Stokes, where they all decided it was best to get rid of Hales.

A key quote might be -

“When the news broke on Friday I found out like everybody else, there was a concern around what was going on with Alex,” he said.

“I was certainly one guy who texted him after the first game he missed for Notts, asking how he was and if he needed any support or help.

“He assured me everything was fine and there was no concern and that he would see me in Cardiff. When the news broke the day before we met in Cardiff, it left me to think about how this would affect the team and the culture in particular."

Yeah I've just read about that this morning.
Again puts yet another light on it, and also how important the dressing room culture is there.
The loyalty and trust works both ways.

As for Hales long term future it probably helps that Morgan will almost certainly retire post world cup, and at least they will both have something write about in their biographies now.

The spat is at risk of becoming a major ditraction, which is quite ironic. But if Hales were a real team man he would shut up and let them get on with winning the thing and concentrate on bullying the second string county scene while all the stars busy world cupping. That would also help restore people focus on what a good player he is rather than his failed drug tests.

Looking at the weather forecast for Dublin we seem unlikely to get a full days play, and with the rain forecast to set in through the afternoon maybe not a result either.

Well now we know a bit more about the Hales matter...

Was a difficult one , to be fair : Giles is presumably correct in saying that if he was bound by a confidentiality agreement he had no choice but to take no initial action since leaving Hales out of the squad would have provoked all sorts of reactions and questions.  But once the story leaked this no longer applied so the logical course of action was to consult those most affected...with the result we see.

Did Morgan & co make the "right" call ? Probably : the key words seem to be "loss of trust" . Perhaps had Hales been upfront with his teammates from the start the result might have been different ? It seems clear the senior players felt let down and just weren't willing to embrace unnecessary extra pressure for the sake of protecting a goose...

In any case the decision is made for better or worse ; and frankly Hales cannot complain too much as he was surely walking on thin ice after previous indiscretions.  If the team gets the job done this will no doubt be seen as a sensible move - if the wheels come off I suppose it will be seen as a pivotal error

I am not without sympathy for Hales : as a white ball specialist this was potentially his big moment ( albeit he risked carrying a lot of drinks ) and he is perhaps unlikely to make another 50 over WC ; but all the more reason he should have been a bit more careful not to get into off-field trouble. He may well return to action for England if he doesn't go right off the rails : I hope he does. But I think on balance this may be the best outcome for all parties concerned and hope the British press doesn't harp on it for the next few weeks to the detriment of the team...

LondonTiger wrote:Looking at the weather forecast for Dublin we seem unlikely to get a full days play, and with the rain forecast to set in through the afternoon maybe not a result either.

Looks like a no-result. Drainage facilities very poor, rain on and off all afternoon. Low-key start to the greatest summer of English cricket!

Jofra Archer's first ball hit for 4

looks like the england bowlers were right amirite lads

Irish openers did quite well . Archer on the scoreboard with an eventually well taken catch - overcoming a slight initial misjudgment. Tom Curran deserved that.

Not sure we will learn a lot from this shortened game in damp conditions.

Looks like another one gone now as Plunkett gets Porterfield caught down leg side ...he was ready to walk as soon as Morgan called the review...

60/2 will suit England better.

Excellent catch by Joe Denly to give Curran his second wicket ! He's bowled very well , and O'Brien was a significant wicket. Ireland in trouble now at 77/4.

Would Hales have also been bound by the confidentiality clause? I actually think lying to teammates is worse than the drug issue.

alfie wrote:Excellent catch by Joe Denly to give Curran his second wicket ! He's bowled very well , and O'Brien was a significant wicket. Ireland in trouble now at 77/4.

Oh yes, Tom is more than Sam's big brother.

I would actually like to see Balbirnie and Wilson put on a few. I've rated Balbirnie for a while (intelligent cricketer who normally judges the match situation well and plays accordingly) whilst Wilson is the ultimate team man and all round top bloke.

Foakes - so savvy and switched on for that stumping.

guildfordbat wrote:Foakes - so savvy and switched on for that stumping.

Seen some people suggesting on Twitter that this was poor from Foakes and against the spirit of cricket.

Absolute nonsense - an excellent bit of work both with the gloves and mentally as well.

Speaking of Sam Curran, he’s just spanked a 24 ball 50 in the IPL

We’re currently in the process of making Josh Little look like Chaminda Vaas

It was 30/0 when I last checked, now it's 75/5! Oh England, never change.

Not sure if England have got the batting depth to score the remainder of the runs - two more wickets and it's the tail.

86-5 Frak off england pathetic!

101/6. Willey and Foakes crawling along, until the former spoons it to a fielder.

Little has 4!

wisden wrote:86-5 Frak off england pathetic!

I mean, half of their best team is not playing. I wouldn’t be getting too worked up about it

Bad light potentially an issue, not good news for England who are probably behind on DLS.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

wisden wrote:86-5 Frak off england pathetic!

I mean, half of their best team is not playing. I wouldn’t be getting too worked up about it

dosen't matter still should be cruising a chase of 199!

Looks like England will get over the line, thanks in no small part to Ireland not reviewing a decision against Foakes that would have been overturned.

wisden wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

wisden wrote:86-5 Frak off england pathetic!

I mean, half of their best team is not playing. I wouldn’t be getting too worked up about it

dosen't matter still should be cruising a chase of 199!

And they did.

Like I said, nothing to get too worked up about, a fairly meaningless game, albeit Curran has certainly helped his World Cup chances

Yeah not ideal when peripheral players are the best thing in a bad job.

Must be all this talk about Archer unsettling them *cheeky wink

Archer, Bairstow, Buttler, Curran, Denly, Moeen, Morgan, Rashid, Root, Roy, Stokes, Vince, Woakes, Wood

14 players there. I have a feeling that Plunkett and Willey might be fighting for the 15th place as I can't see Archer's pace being overlooked and Tom Curran is playing some really good cricket.

Personally I think Willey should be the odd man out, but I think they’ll leave Archer out to be honest

They should leave out Willey, he’s not the talent of the others.

As I said during play , this match wasn't likely to prove much one way or the other. Due respect to Ireland but they're hardly gold standard opponents.
Tom Curran certainly underlined his credentials...he's surely the most "in form" of the fast bowlers at the moment and reminded everyone that he can bat too. I do expect him to remain in the squad anyway.

Archer didn't really add much to the argument - and frankly I didn't expect him to in this damp low key match : nothing too startling about his bowling spell , which neither served to puncture the hype or demand automatic selection. The ability is obvious ; whether it means that he - at this stage of his development - is a better bet for one of the pace bowling options than the left arm variety and swing of Willey or the experience and proven wicket taking of Plunkett remains to be seen. Perhaps the Pakistan games will give a better indication.
Of course the chances of both Wood and Woakes remaining injury free for the next couple of months are surely slim so it probably won't matter at all

Meant to add : that was a neat bit of pickpocket work from Foakes ! Seems to have caused some aggro on the net about the spirit of the game but in truth it all happened quickly enough ( when not slowed down by TV for replays) that it is clear he was just alert to the chance the batsman 's balance wasn't perfect and took his moment nicely.
Some sympathy for the batsman losing his wicket to a dreadful wide in that manner but it really wasn't a "dead ball" situation to my view so no controversy should exist. Won't stop the angry ones , of course...

Also his batting underlines the potential of Foakes as a cricketer : does seem unfortunate that England should be blessed/cursed with all these talented players contending for , basically , one definite spot ; while scratching around for half a dozen other positions to be filled. If they were a football club they could happily trade a keeper or two for an opening bat and an express fast bowler

alfie wrote:Meant to add : that was a neat bit of pickpocket work from Foakes ! Seems to have caused some aggro on the net about the spirit of the game but in truth it all happened quickly enough ( when not slowed down by TV for replays) that it is clear he was just alert to the chance the batsman 's balance wasn't perfect and took his moment nicely.
Some sympathy for the batsman losing his wicket to a dreadful wide in that manner but it really wasn't a "dead ball" situation to my view so no controversy should exist. Won't stop the angry ones , of course...

Also his batting underlines the potential of Foakes as a cricketer : does seem unfortunate that England should be blessed/cursed with all these talented players contending for , basically , one definite spot ; while scratching around for half a dozen other positions to be filled.  If they were a football club they could happily trade a keeper or two for an opening bat and an express fast bowler

I commented on the Surrey v Middlesex RL 50 thread the other week what a good stumping Foakes made off a leg-side wide from Will Jacks in that game. As well as neat glovework, he's so alert to any opportunity. As touched on by Alfie, the slowing down in the tv replays of what he did yesterday significantly contributed to some regarding it as questionable or worse and took away from what an excellent dismissal it was.

Now as for his batting - I see he scored his undefeated 61 off 76 balls, a strike rate of 80. All credit to him for doing exactly what was needed and, along with Tom Curran, taking us to the win which had been looking far from certain a little earler. The one point I would make here is that going at a strike rate of 80 is pretty ideal for Foakes  - he's a ''proper'' batsman who gets the majority of his runs in singles. Generally, that's commendable - especially in the longer form of the game - but it can cause frustrations in white ball cricket when 8 or 9 an over is needed. His game is not about biffing it and he often gets out when trying to do so. Just think this is worth keeping in mind if he does become even a semi-regular in the ODI side.

alfie wrote:As I said during play , this match wasn't likely to prove much one way or the other. Due respect to Ireland but they're hardly gold standard opponents.
Tom Curran certainly underlined his credentials...he's surely the most "in form" of the fast bowlers at the moment and reminded everyone that he can bat too. I do expect him to remain in the squad anyway.

Archer didn't really add much to the argument - and frankly I didn't expect him to in this damp low key match : nothing too startling about his bowling spell , which neither served to puncture the hype or demand automatic selection. The ability is obvious ; whether it means that he - at this stage of his development - is a better bet for one of the pace bowling options than the left arm variety and swing of Willey or the experience and proven wicket taking of Plunkett remains to be seen. Perhaps the Pakistan games will give a better indication.
Of course the chances of both Wood and Woakes remaining injury free for the next couple of months are surely slim so it probably won't matter at all

Your last sentence is probably bang on Alfie - we’ll have all these debates and they’ll all end up in the squad! I’m worried about Woakes’s knee in particular, seems to be an issue he hasn’t been able to shake for around a year now, and his new ball bowling is crucial to our ODI side imo (not to mention he’s a bloody handy option with the bat too!)

Malans out replaced by Phil "who" Salt for the pointless T20

I too do now suspect injuries may do as much to drive final selections as these games too to be honest. England are looking frayed at the edges

guildfordbat wrote:An RL 50 ton today for Sussex's 22 year old opening bat Phil Salt. Even if Hales does need replacing, this
summer is probably too soon for Salt. However, he could be worth keeping an eye on ....

EDIT: he ended up with 137 not out off 106 in taking Sussex to a 7 wicket win over Kent with 10 overs to spare.

Goose - if only I knew how to do a ''cough'' emoji. From 21 April here.

Well I was about to write : Phil Salt ? Who he ?

But now see the astute guildford had flagged him a few weeks ago...

Afraid I know absolutely nothing about him but look forward to seeing what he can do with this slightly surprising opportunity .

Anyone else surprised they've pulled another new batsman into the mix given all the options jostling for places ?

As expected Duckett plays for Malan in the only change from the Ireland game

Pakistan win the toss and bat first

That is a shocking bit of umpiring. Vince hits the ground and because there is a spike he's given out. So poor from the 3rd umpire

Root single handedly keeping Pakistan in this

Got to back England from here. Sky commentators banging on about how England are just behind where Pakistan were at this stage, but it's practically irrelevant.

61 from 36 balls in a T20, 8 wickets left - batting side should win 9 times out of 10.

Bizarre by England to send Denly out in this position.

England win. Good innings from Morgan to see his team over the line.

Nasser Hussein was continually hyping up the overrated and talentless Pakistan pace attack. Not a single one of them got near the pace of Jofra Archer. Hasnain literally has no skill aside from bowling reasonably briskly. Hassan Ali and Shaheen Afridi medium pacers whom only had slower balls as their ‘incredible skills’.

alfie wrote:Well I was about to write : Phil Salt ? Who he ?  

But now see the astute guildford had flagged him a few weeks ago...

Afraid I know absolutely nothing about him but look forward to seeing what he can do with this slightly surprising opportunity .

Anyone else surprised they've pulled another new batsman into the mix given all the options jostling for places ?

I can't claim to know much about Salt but he's a 22 year old right-hander who normally opens the batting for Sussex. He has a reputation for liking to get on with it, seemingly merited with an impressively high strike rate comparable to the likes of Roy, Hales and Bairstow. His average is not as good though and he will need to up that.

He was educated in Surrey and was a leading name in schools cricket there - that's how I first heard of him - before joining the Sussex staff. I him saw score a quick 30 against Surrey at Hove on Good Friday - he looked good but, as the score shows, didn't properly kick on.

I think England did the right thing today in playing Duckett and leaving Salt on the bench just to get a feel of the international set up. As I said the other week, it's a bit early for him yet and he does really need to prove himself more.

So what you're essentially saying, Guildford, is that you can add Salt later?

As much as I rate Joe Root, is he really up to T20 cricket? He is a very good option to anchor an end in ODI but in T20 I feel he is just not attacking enough.