The summer of cricket 2020

First topic message reminder :

Stokes gone at last...and Roach gets one at last ! Bit fluky , reverse leg side edge but I think Kemar was entitled to dome good fortune...

Hell of an innings from Stokes

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Lovely bit of bowling that from Bess - and much deserved reward. Personally think he's bowled better than his figures have shown over the two tests so far

Was a nice bit of bowling , indeed . Slightly surprised Holder went for the big hit...but glad Bess wasn't scared off and kept probing. Earned his reward

Has he got another ? No...didn't hit it , missing leg.

But looks threatening. Get a couple more close fielders in.

Bess now gets a catch. Stokes underlining his watertight MOTM credentials with another wicket.

Gabriel coming out, nearly 1-1 with one to play.

I'd love to be Ben Stokes ego right now

Gooseberry wrote:I'd love to be Ben Stokes ego right now

I got so big he pulled his groin with the strain of trying to contain it...

Don't like the look of Stokes walking off in some pain

A blot on England's otherwise clear horizon if Stokes misses the next test. Weakens the batting significantly.

Third test starts on Friday. First time I can remember three back-to-back tests.

And, in other cricket news, the T20 World Cup has been postponed a year, meaning it'll be run in 2021 and 2022, not 2020 and 2021.

Root bowling...not now Joe . Stop messing about , bring back Woakes and finish this...

Surprised Root continues with another over. Gabriel would surely prefer facing him.

Duty281 wrote:A blot on England's otherwise clear horizon if Stokes misses the next test. Weakens the batting significantly.

Third test starts on Friday. First time I can remember three back-to-back tests.

And, in other cricket news, the T20 World Cup has been postponed a year, meaning it'll be run in 2021 and 2022, not 2020 and 2021.

Wouldn't just weaken the batting. Messes up the bowling too as they need a fifth ...frankly , without him , England look a bit ordinary right now.

Of course West Indies have a few injury/workload issues of their own.

Stokes back on the field which is a good sign ...

What a catch to win the test.

Said England would do it with 15-20 overs to spare...14.5 left.

Well done England.

And a great catch by Ollie Pope is a fitting end to this enthralling match

Two for Bess , and Duty is correct , winning with (nearly) 15 overs to spare ...

Well done England

Edit : I wasn't copying your post , Duty , honest was typing simultaneously...

But a great prediction. Did you have any money on it ?

A convincing victory for England - quite a shellacking really, having lost the toss and a day to rain, they never looked in danger of losing and did a fantastic job of setting up the win having lost that day.

Fitness issues will play a big part of course, but good luck picking a bowling lineup for the next test...Woakes and Broad superb, Curran did well too. Good to see Bess pickup a couple today too.

alfie wrote:And a great catch by Ollie Pope is a fitting end to this enthralling match

Two for Bess , and Duty is correct , winning with (nearly) 15 overs to spare ...

Well done England

Edit : I wasn't copying your post , Duty , honest  was typing simultaneously...

But a great prediction. Did you have any money on it ?

Alas, I didn't. Great test match regardless, well set up for Friday's decider.

guildfordbat wrote:That was a neat snaffle by the Pope. He's a good and reliable fielder, particularly close in.

From yesterday morning. I'm putting in a claim for today's last wicket.

Cracking game and great turnaround performance by England. Stokes the MotM by a mile and more - just hope he's fit for Friday. Good to very good performances from others as well including Root and his captaincy. Judged the game perfectly.

Game really turned on two key moments I think, Broads burst yesterday and WIs meandering start to day 2 where were they let stokes and Sibley scratch around while the new ball was available.

Suspect they need bowling reinforcements for Friday. Some looked substantially below 100%

Was this a good advertisement for 4 day Tests ?

Seriously was a great performance from England to get a result from where they were at tea yesterday ! Stokes indeed MoTM hero ; but Stuart Broad really changed the game in that spell with the second new ball : game had been only a few minutes from hopeless stalemate.
Can the third game match these first two ? We should be so lucky...

alfie wrote:Was this a good advertisement for 4 day Tests ? .

Only if they're being played in the desert, this one took 5 days as did the last

Cracking win by England. Built on the foundation from Sibley that Stokes took full advantage off. I'll be interested to see the side they pick for the next Test.

1.Burns
2.Sibley
3.Crawley
4.Root (c)
5.Stokes (vc)
6.Pope
7.Buttler (wk)
8.Woakes
9.Leach
10.Broad
11.Anderson

I'd be tempted by that. With Stokes looking tired/stiff today England might want to limit his bowling load a bit for the 3rd Test. Woakes and Broad can both bowl long and probing spells.

It is all to win for England in the next test. West Indies will be without Gabriel as a minimum, and really Holder could do with a rest. Cornwall has apparently been doing long net sessions so chances are they will have two spinners. You'd think one of the batting reserves would be given a go too, cant be any worse than the players they already have.

That said if England were in a position of being two up they'd ideally rest Stokes, its not impossible they will anyway given his workload over the two tests so far and him pulling up and not finishing his last over. Post match interviews very cagey about the selections, look at the pitch and see who's fit. Pundits seem to be on the Leach train in spite of the late wickets for Bess, hes bowled too fast and flat to really be a threat when theres no lefties to bowl at.

I'd swap Archer for Woakes because I think that's our best 3 seamers in a must win game

England may also be served winding up broad again

I think England might hammer West Indies in the final test (weather permitting). Three back-to-back tests is going to be too much for the Windies seamers; the ones that remain will need a carefully managed workload, the replacements will be a big drop off in quality. England have a big advantage in that they have six quality seam bowlers to call upon, and they've already rotated sensibly. The fielding was also pretty ragged by the tourists in this test and, we shouldn't forget, they only took 12 wickets in this game, despite bowling in some very favourable conditions on day one.

So I expect England to rack up a 400+ score and knock the West Indies over for not very much in the third test. Innings win incoming...

GSC wrote:England may also be served winding up broad again

Got to be worth saying in the press tomorrow "Maybe Stuart will need a break again at his age" just to piss him off

GSC wrote:I'd swap Archer for Woakes because I think that's our best 3 seamers in a must win game

*puts hand up*

In England, is Chris Woakes not one of those best three seamers?

I'd probably go Robinson, Anderson*, Broad, Archer, Woakes in England. Albeit for the first time in forever Anderson has the most to prove.

Do wonder in hindsight whether they could have played Leach in this Test match - given they had Curran and Woakes playing so Bess' batting wasn't as required. And the right hand dominance of the Windies batting line up. Don't blame them for sticking with Bess though, as changing all four bowlers would have been a big jump! And I guess the Curran inclusion may have been last minute.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

GSC wrote:I'd swap Archer for Woakes because I think that's our best 3 seamers in a must win game

*puts hand up*

In England, is Chris Woakes not one of those best three seamers?

I think he is. The argument for Archer is based around extra pace and perceived potential rather than performances . Yes he took a lot of wickets last year - but against an Australian team that really only had two established batsmen , one of whom was in no sort of form. In four matches since , he hasn't produced any match winning efforts. One for the future , definitely. Automatic choice right now ? Not in my book.

This is not to say they can't change the attack. Archer , Wood ? ...even Robinson as well as Anderson must come into consideration , as a lot hinges on how the incumbents recover from a pretty solid workout over the last two days. Only three days rest ; and , if conditions suit , the option of bowling first must be available to a Root should he win the toss.


If they are all judged fully rested and ready to go again then I'd imagine both Broad and Woakes have to play again ; making Curran likely to make way for Anderson - and even that change to be made with a hint of regret as young Sam with his different angle took very important wickets in this match ; and has a good record of playing in winning England teams (the Bresnan effect )

I know there is a lot of enthusiasm for deploying extra pace when it is available. But is it really so vital in England ? We saw in the first Test that having Wood and Archer blasting away at this allegedly weak West Indian lineup was no guarantee of success. And this current attack did the job here despite the limitations of weather induced time constraints. (I do note that Stokes had to be used as a battering ram at times due to the lack of another express option. If he is fatigued - or , heaven forbid , unable to bowl - then the need for one of the 90 plus bowlers is enhanced) Would still question , however , whether pace for its own sake should be an overriding consideration in a game that , as we see , remains a must win.

I think at 1-1 any notion of using this series as a trial for future expeditions to Australia etc has been thankfully abandoned , no ?

The Leach or Bess question is an interesting one. Times in this match I had thought it would have been nice to have Jack to deploy against all those right handers. Has to be considered , just on tactical grounds.
I suppose if conditions suggest it makes sense they could even consider two spinners ! Unlikely , I concede. Especially as they won't want to overload poor Stokes this week.
Bess , as one or two have already said , didn't bowl too badly. He's still on L plates ; but he took some important wickets , as well as batting effectively. (And it ought to be remembered he was not blessed with much luck back in Southhampton )
I'd be inclined to stick with Bess. The fact that he is two matches in to his season while Leach would be coming in "cold" is a factor for me. But I agree it is a tight decision.

Did someone really say that Robinson is the best seamer in English conditions? Really?
Shy of an injury crisis from tripping over their own hair you could get 500-1 on him being picked (side note yesterday was the anniversary of Chapple betting on England to win at those odds....).

The next easiest to leave out would be Curran, who was again expensive and was the "last choice" pick for this test it seems. If Stokes is rested though then his and Woakes' batting become a consideration again, and that leaves a very complicated debate around best bowlers vs batting depth. The only thing he really has going for him ahead of the others is offering the left arm variation, but I dont see that being a trump card. Hes just not one of the best 5 seamers England have available, let alone 3.

Archer they have a good excuse to leave out based on his disciplinary issues and missed training, but Wood really doesnt have a great record in home tests and Archer was in theory the first choice quick when fit. Its a margin call though and we can really see them as equal parts. I think the one thing we can be almost certain of that it will be at most one of them, and neither is quite possible. The first test selections and all the talk from England over the past year though makes it clear they want a genuine quick in the side, and even in this victory we saw why. If Stokes doesnt play then as above it causes a dilema, do they try to pack the batting which in spite of Stokes and the rise of Sibley has been Englands weakpoint in the series to date and end up either leaving out one of their senior home conditions bowlers or does it guarantee a quick a place so theres someone to bowl the leg theory in the middle overs?

Woakes has the most absurd home record, there were all kinds of stats quoted on this but suffice it to say its a surprise that he only just passed 100 test wickets. He's rarely been given the new ball, but when he has has been absolutely devastating with it. Broad stole all the headlines with his burst in the first innings, but Woakes' figures were better and there wasn't much to choose between the two of them in the second. He can bowl long spells too, which is worth considering if they have a quick and Anderson in the side who ideally wont be doing 11 over stints. He maybe doesnt have the length of service of Anderson and Broad but in home tests hes been every bit as effective and is bang on form after coming in cold.

Anderson was on of the first choice three form the first test. He bowled well enough to justify that, on top of just being Anderson. How do you leave him out on what might be his last test at his home venue infront of the stand named after him? Its just one of those things that feels unthinkable, but is his body up to tests, he did fade in the second innings? If you have an eye on what to do with the old ball than other than the quicks hes the one bowler you'd think could find some magic, and England did struggle to make things happen with the sponge. But I dont think its beyond England to leave him out, they will just want to do it in a way that keeps him motivated to stay on for the winter because going to India (if that happens!) without him feels unthinkable.

Broad did make his point and is it even worth the hassle of dropping him, even if hes already had to accept that hes a reserve even in home tests? His figures maybe flatter a bit as he largely bowled with the new ball but he did the business in a way Archer didnt in the first.

In all of this its worth remembering that England will be looking for 20 wickets to win the test. We saw from the first test selection that England were willing to trust their top 7 and not hedge their bets on allrounder in the tail at the expense of what they thought was the best bowling attack. Its a bigger deal for them to win the series than it is for the West Indies who would be pretty happy with a draw and retaining the trophy.

Don't think two spinners for England is at all likely unless the pitch ends up being really dry which is unlikely given the weather forecasts. Leach for Bess has been heavily signaled all over the place, and Roots lack of trust in Bess in the second innings points that way too. Harsh but he got his call up as third choice and Leach has been incredibly unlucky in his test career so I certainly don't begrduge him getting a chance. The left armer at right arm batsmen and potential tandem bowling with Root just makes sense. For the winter the Bess Leach partnership will be key, but its just not going to happen at home.

So it will come down to who's fit and the the way they read the pitch(something that they have been pretty terrible at in recent times!). Which is exactly what Root said in his post match interview. Theres a fair bit of WEATHER forcast sadly, so we had better hope that the West Indies batting reverts to type and gets even more fragile than it has been. England should be picking a side with the strongest wicket taking attack possible with any age ball, they need to win.

Things to listen to if you have time on the BBC podcasts

Carlos Braithwaite on why West Indians don't bowl short anymore, and why their batsmen are weak against it. Also why Chris Woakes is his favorite England player and a good role model.

Cook on why the squad players not playing in the tests will get more from 6 weeks training with England than they would being with a county for an active season, and why he didn't think twice about going back to Essex instead of taking a full time media contract.

alfie wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

GSC wrote:I'd swap Archer for Woakes because I think that's our best 3 seamers in a must win game

*puts hand up*

In England, is Chris Woakes not one of those best three seamers?

I think he is. The argument for Archer is based around extra pace and perceived potential rather than performances . Yes he took a lot of wickets last year - but against an Australian team that really only had two established batsmen , one of whom was in no sort of form. In four matches since , he hasn't produced any match winning efforts. One for the future , definitely. Automatic choice right now ? Not in my book.

Think you're being a touch harsh there Alfie - he's played five home tests, taken 25 wickets (including two five wicket hauls), averages 22.08 with a strike rate of 46, can't ask for much better than that really! (for context, in ten home tests Wood has only taken 24 wickets, at an average of 44.92 and strike rate of 77, and has only ever taken 3 wickets tops in an innings). He struggled in the winter for sure, but at home he's off to the best start to a bowling career we've seen in a long time.

I think a lot of it comes down to whether Stokes is fit to bowl, and the weather forecast. I think the suggestions were it was just (understandably) tiredness and stiffness for Stokes yesterday, so it will come down to recovery...I would bank on him being fit.
The forecast, while you can't always rely on it, is really really not very good. Meant to rain a fair bit between tests, which will hinder pitch preparation, and then rain most of the weekend...I think we can safely assume we're not going to be getting five days of 90 overs (you can probably always assume that when we're up north away from Guildford's sunny south! )
It might bring into consideration the all seam attack anyways, with Root/Stokes making up the 5th bowler overs between them. If we did go down that route, Woakes/Archer/Broad/Anderson would be the clear attack for me.

I think you've got a pretty clear top four in home conditions of the four above, with Curran in the next tier behind, and Wood, in home tests, a clear reserve/break in case of emergency only at this point.

If we do stick conventional, I would consider Leach over Bess for this final test...purely for the fact the West Indies only have one left hander, and all others right handers in the lineup (and the leftie is always out before Bess comes onto bowl!). Leach round the wicket spinning it away from the right handers, should in theory be much more of a threat. (that's not to say I think Bess has bowled badly, I agree with you Alfie that he bowled without luck in Southampton and did ok here).

These are very much "good" selection issues to have!

Interesting "surely that cant be right" stat:
Stokes scored more runs in his first 10 tests than he has in his last 10, and took more wickets in his first 10 tests than he has in his last 14.
Despite that he averaged 36 with the bat and 40 with the ball after the first 10 tests.
In the last 10 hes averaged 54 with the bat and 28 with the ball.

Its hard to quantify just how much hes dragged England along into a competitive team this year, but really his contribution that that test was absurd. Even when he was injured he went to slip!
I do think theres a very strong chance they will have to rest him for the next test. The hope is that the West Indies are also push so deep into their B team and had their morale broken to the extent where they can cope with it.
It really does put it on the likes of Pope and Burns to step up and make big contributions with the bat. Even with Stokes' contributions England have been a touch short of runs in the series, and I really agree with Cooks analysis that it was the batsmen performances not the bowler selections that lost England the first test.

I don’t think that stat is true? Stokes scored 648 runs in his first 10 Tests and has nearly 1000 in his last 10 as far as I can tell? He got 250 in this match alone!

Don't see us going all seam and relying on Root as the spin option - just ends up too one dimensional. Of course, it will now turn out that Stokes can bowl a bit of leg spin that Warne would be proud of... Possibly left handed with his eyes shut...

No changes to the top 6, and I can't see Buttler getting dropped for this game, despite his recent performance level.

So three seamers and a spinner. I think the selectors would like to go with Archer, Broad, Anderson and Leach, but that's quite a bit of a tail to the batting order especially if Jos isn't getting runs, so you're looking at either Woakes or Bess to bolster the batting.

I don't think Bess has bowled badly on pitches that didn't really do as much as expected for the spinner (bar day 1 here); the change to Leach would simply be for the advantage of the ball turning away from the bat with the very right hand-dominated Windies batting order. The question is whether you think the natural advantage of Leach's spin direction is sufficient to offset the loss of batting strength (of course Jack has done a good job with the bat for England on a couple of occasions, compared with expectations of him being a fox [goes in after the rabbits])

If you keep Woakes, who misses out? In terms of 'like for like', Anderson is the most similar, but he's been England's best bowler for the last 5 years and playing at his home ground (even if not in front of a crowd). Broad just bowled the two most important spells in this Test, without which we very likely would only have drawn - would likely spontaneously combust if left out. Archer obviously is in the bad books, but does offer the threat of absolute pace and bounce that the others cannot match - a lineup of Anderson, Broad and Woakes would be a bit samey as fast-medium right arm over.

Obviously England don't need to pick their side until the start of the match on Friday, so can wait and see regarding the surface and the weather.

JDizzle wrote:I don’t think that stat is true? Stokes scored 648 runs in his first 10 Tests and has nearly 1000 in his last 10 as far as I can tell? He got 250 in this match alone!

Yes, and as far as I can see Stokes has taken 31 wickets in his last 14 tests and 28 wickets in his first 10 tests.

Hi Olly

Yes you are right about Archers's good start : I didn't really mean to come across as too critical of him for a poor winter. Just that I do think the media are a little too over the top about him , due to his "excitement " factor. You rightly point out that he did take a lot of wickets last summer , so even if recent efforts aren't up to that mark he has a good case to be in front of Wood - in England at least.

However I wasn't comparing him with Wood. If we accept that Jimmy comes back in , it is between Archer and Woakes , no ? Even forgetting their batting , right now it is Woakes for me , in the sort of conditions around at the moment.

The idea of four pace men does not appeal to me very much. Denly not there now so just Root to provide variety ? All pace attacks often sound good in principle if the weather is grim , but rarely come off in practice.

Eng won desrvedly.....they should have in first test also had they the right bowling mix.
The loss of top-4 to new ball was too muhc for WI to recover from

and that extra effort from stoke to bounce out Blackwood was the killer blow.

In T3 I would love to see WI bat first and Eng batting last

Looking at the Windies XI you'd presume that Raymon Reifer and Rahkeem Cornwall will come in. Gabriel carrying a niggle and Joseph looked exhausted. Holder was looking weary as the Test went on but I see no chance of the Windies resting their skipper for the decider.

Reifer is a good bowler who I think could do well in English conditions if it's nipping around. He reminds me a little bit of Praveen Kumar, who had a good tour of England in 2011, in his bowling style. Albeit he is left handed. He bustles in, puts it on a spot and can make it do a bit either way. Similar to Kumar I think he will struggle to do anything more than contain if the ball stops moving though.

Gabriel would be a big loss for them though and Joseph has bowled really well in the series until he started to tire.

Their other option is young quick Chemar Holder - no relation to Jason. He's got pace and an action reminiscent of Archer but he's played very little first class cricket.

The 3rd Test should be a chance for England to take advantage of their depth in the seam attack. My fear is that we will see a wicket that turns big and early. Which given how England play spin and Cornwall being a better bowler than some give him credit for.

Weather forecast looks very poor for the next test. However, it might clear away with a bit of luck. Either way, England are an excellent price of 4/5 to win the next test which has to be taken - the West Indies will be demolished if there's enough time to put in 300+ overs.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/6691246

Overcast works in England's favour as well. The Windies will be wanting dry weather so they can pick Cornwall to lengthen the batting lineup and rotate their quicks.

Overcast will suit Holder and Reifer but it will suit the England seamers more.

Definitely hard to say what England's best bowling combination is in home conditions. Good to have options and I would err towards Woakes, Broad, Archer at the moment. I think Leach is worth a go with the lack of left handers in the Windies line up, though its a bit of a gamble with his lack of cricket

VTR wrote:Definitely hard to say what England's best bowling combination is in home conditions.  

Having watched Eng very closely for many years......but with detachment that one has for non-home team
I believe today Eng's best bowling would be:

-Anderson, Broad, Woakes, Archer.....and Moeen the spinner...coming in for a batsman or for Butler....and let Oli Pope keep wkts.

-The thing with Moeen is with the bat he can be equivalent of a low-performing batsman easily.....his bowling is better( certainly no worse)  in my view than many other spinners in Eng.......and this 5 bowler + Stokes.....reduces the work-load  on Stokes , Broad and Anderson.

-Woakes should never be dropped in Eng......although Anderson is irreplaceable....Woakes is the next best Eng has in seaming, swinging conditions. So every effort should be made to groom the next Super Home condition bowler.
While its easy to strive for all condition bowlers, one should not take for granted  Super-Home-Condition-Bully bowlers like anderson and Kumble. Only in their absence do you realize winning even in home conditions ain't as easy a piece of cake that they made it appear.
And bear in mind Woakes will get you 10 to 15 runs more with the bat than an average bowler.

-While Archer is exciting and will serve Eng long.......should Eng decide  to keep the extra batsman and play one bowler less....then Archer sits out for now. He is 4th seamer in my Pecking order.

I'd be going Anderson, Broad and Woakes. My preference would be for Leach as spinner, but Silverwood has apparently hinted at Bess retaining his spot. Hopefully Stokes is fit for the third test, no news may be good news where that's concerned.

If Stokes isn't fit to bowl, and can only play as a bat...who drops out from the batting? Crawley?

That would cement Woakes's place in the side (albeit his batting in tests has fallen off a cliff the past 12-18 months)...probably could go;

Burns
Sibley
Root
Stokes
Pope
Buttler
Woakes
Bess
Archer
Broad
Anderson

If Stokes can't bowl.

That does look like a long tail with the form Woakes is in, but does show the balance Stokes brings. Picking up on KP Fan's post, I don't think Pope is a keeper at Test level. Surrey fans on here probably able to expand more on that. I think the idea of home bowlers for home conditions will apply for this Test, the first test did look like an away Ashes bowling lineup and didn't go so well. I'd rather not lose at home to the Windies!

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:If Stokes isn't fit to bowl, and can only play as a bat...who drops out from the batting? Crawley?

That would cement Woakes's place in the side (albeit his batting in tests has fallen off a cliff the past 12-18 months)...probably could go;

Burns
Sibley
Root
Stokes
Pope
Buttler
Woakes
Bess
Archer
Broad
Anderson

If Stokes can't bowl.

Hope Stokes can bowl then ! That looks a very decent bowling lineup...but more tail than body

You say Woakes's batting may have produced little lately ; but what about Buttler ? And Pope hasn't made any yet in this series... Can't expect Stokes to make all the runs every week , can we ?

Not sure how else you cover Stokes , to be honest. (Suppose you might retain Crawley rather than Pope ; or let Pope keep wicket...but neither of those appeal much more)

Underlines the inherent weakness in England's batting at the moment , I think. Some good promise there in the youth , yes : but it still looks the sort of order that could easily be blown away if a couple of key players got out cheaply.

On the flip side , Burns is due a score...

Of course, if Stokes can't bowl but can bat, you could just risk it and leave the team as is. Trust Bess and the three seamers to deliver with the ball, with a few overs chipped in from Root.

Might be a little light bowling-wise, but I'd rather that than Buttler in at 4 down!

The real problem arrives if Stokes misses out altogether.

Gooseberry wrote:Sir Chris ......

As goose would say, things which you wouldn't expect but are the case*:

In the last Test, his 34th, Sir Chris Woakes reached the double milestone of 1,000 runs and 100 wickets quicker than Holder, Stokes, Flintoff and Sobers.

* and this is actually the case.

guildfordbat wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:Sir Chris ......

As goose would say, things which you wouldn't expect but are the case*:

In the last Test, his 34th, Sir Chris Woakes reached the double milestone of 1,000 runs and 100 wickets quicker than Holder, Stokes, Flintoff and Sobers.

* and this is actually the case.

A very fine cricketer, particularly in English conditions. I accept that England having an abundance of seamers who are 'good with the Dukes ball in English conditions' is part of the Test sides bigger issues but there is a home Test series to be won on starting Friday.

With Stokes having a niggle I think I'd retain Broad and Woakes as they can bowl longer spells. Then replace Curran with Anderson for his class in these conditions. Those 3 seamers are also economical which would hopefully allow Bess/Leach to bowl a more attacking line to more aggressive fields.

There is a risk in leaving out Archer's pace but as seen in the last Test it's the batting not so much the bowling that will win England games in these conditions.

No place for Leach in the 14 so Bess retained

All six fast bowlers in the 14. So all options open.

Including , I suppose - in the light of grim weather forecast - the possibility of playing an all-pace attack. I never like that plan - too much "eggs in one basket" for mine ; but I guess if Stokes were considered unlikely to bowl at full capacity it might be considered.

If they are taking any three I have no idea which trio they are likely to select. I know who I'd pick but wouldn't dare try to answer for the selection panel after some of their recent antics ...