England's Winter of Cricket 2023/24

First topic message reminder :

After the disappointment of the World Cup, can England be the first away team in 11 years to win a test series in India?

Three ODIs v West Indies (3rd December-9th December)
Five T20s v West Indies (12th December-21st December)
Five Tests v India (25th January-11th March)

Leach has no luck. This isn't a recurring body failure type of injury, so I don't see that he'll be replaced as the lead spinner for the summer.

What this is, however, is a totally avoidable type of injury. There is no sense in players diving life and death near the boundary to try and prevent one run, because the risk is too great for the reward, as evidenced here. I believe this is the second time Leach has got injured in this fashion, the other time was against NZ in 2022 when he concussed himself in a similar effort.

Agreed on Leach's place not being under threat, none of Bashir, Hartley or Ahmed have the control of length necessary to bowl spin in England. The big turn in India gives them some leeway but they'd all run the risk of being hit out of the attack at home.

guildfordbat wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:So, what are our series predictions then?
...

 

...
Eng
Top runs
Foakes
Top wickets jack Leach

I thought KP-f's punt on Foakes being our top run scorer in the series was interesting and bold. On the plus side, Foakes is a classical style batsman who values his wicket and is accomplished against spin. I might even go along with KP-f if Foakes were batting at 5, his usual number at Surrey. However, he's destined to be number 7 in the first Test and probably the series (or even a bit lower if we go down the fool's route of using nightwatchmen and nighthawks) which I think will count against him piling on the runs. He struggles to bat effectively with the tail - and ours sure looks long and weak - failing to alternate the strike or go big. I fear that once our sixth wicket falls (assuming it's not him), he won't add too many more to his score.

Agree about Leach being the top England wicket taker provided his body and guts hold up.

Personally I blame KP-f for Leach's early homecoming. I did try to warn him what might happen.

Duty281 wrote:What this is, however, is a totally avoidable type of injury. There is no sense in players diving life and death near the boundary to try and prevent one run, because the risk is too great for the reward, as evidenced here. I believe this is the second time Leach has got injured in this fashion, the other time was against NZ in 2022 when he concussed himself in a similar effort.

I posted the same at the time and have previously with this discussion, but this argument completely falls apart the second a game is close. I'd bet there wasn't an England fan on Earth, even Simon Jones, at Edgbaston in '05 thinking, "I just wish we had fewer runs to play with here from not trying in the outfield". The same at Headingley in '19. The same for Oz at Edgbaston in the Ashes just gone.

Realistically, those games are the reasons players throw themselves around to win the small margins. In the best games, the incredibly close finishes that we actually remember, the small gains matter and the risk there is very much worth the reward of winning games such as Edgbaston '05.

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:What this is, however, is a totally avoidable type of injury. There is no sense in players diving life and death near the boundary to try and prevent one run, because the risk is too great for the reward, as evidenced here. I believe this is the second time Leach has got injured in this fashion, the other time was against NZ in 2022 when he concussed himself in a similar effort.

I posted the same at the time and have previously with this discussion, but this argument completely falls apart the second a game is close. I'd bet there wasn't an England fan on Earth, even Simon Jones, at Edgbaston in '05 thinking, "I just wish we had fewer runs to play with here from not trying in the outfield". The same at Headingley in '19. The same for Oz at Edgbaston in the Ashes just gone.

Realistically, those games are the reasons players throw themselves around to win the small margins. In the best games, the incredibly close finishes that we actually remember, the small gains matter and the risk there is very much worth the reward of winning games such as Edgbaston '05.

Added to this, the tradeoff isn't one run/injury, it's more like 25 runs across a test if you stop all bowlers diving against a slightly increased chance of injury—a very different calculation.

James100 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:What this is, however, is a totally avoidable type of injury. There is no sense in players diving life and death near the boundary to try and prevent one run, because the risk is too great for the reward, as evidenced here. I believe this is the second time Leach has got injured in this fashion, the other time was against NZ in 2022 when he concussed himself in a similar effort.

I posted the same at the time and have previously with this discussion, but this argument completely falls apart the second a game is close. I'd bet there wasn't an England fan on Earth, even Simon Jones, at Edgbaston in '05 thinking, "I just wish we had fewer runs to play with here from not trying in the outfield". The same at Headingley in '19. The same for Oz at Edgbaston in the Ashes just gone.

Realistically, those games are the reasons players throw themselves around to win the small margins. In the best games, the incredibly close finishes that we actually remember, the small gains matter and the risk there is very much worth the reward of winning games such as Edgbaston '05.

Added to this, the tradeoff isn't one run/injury, it's more like 25 runs across a test if you stop all bowlers diving against a slightly increased chance of injury—a very different calculation.

Agreed. Though I'd argue it's likely much more than 25 runs across a Test when you consider how good outfielding now is and the number of diving stops a day compared to the relatively small number of injuries.

My view.

Whether it's a Test or a Sunday seconds, a captain and his bowlers want and are entitled to see everyone on their side give their all to save runs and pull off catches. Spectators and especially paying ones should be able to see the same. That should be throughout the entirety of the game, not just the final over with 4 runs or one wicket needed for victory. As James and Carlos suggest, runs saved or conceded earlier may well have greater significance.

Does that mean I want to see players hurt? No. Of course not. But it needs to be accepted that injuries occur in almost all sports. The emphasis should be on ensuring that players are fit enough to play and the grounds are as safe as possible for them to do so.

As regards the safety of grounds, we should never be complacent and we still see certain outfields, particularly some overseas, where it would be generous to refer to them merely as ''dodgy''. However, massive improvements have certainly been made over the years. Some might be surprised how bad things once were.

One of my early cricket memories is watching grainy black and white highlights of an Ashes Test from Down Under in 1971 and seeing an injury to England's leading bowler of that series, John Snow. Whilst fielding in the deep, Snowy attempted a boundary catch, only to end up hospitalised when his hand got tangled up in the low wooden fence which served as a boundary marker and the other side of which were the spectators. On another occasion fielding in a similar spot, a home supporter the worse for drink and unhappy with Snow's ferocious bowling manhandled him from the fence and for a short while threatened the Test and the series.

At least we don't have those sort of issues to contend with now.

Agree with guildford. Modern fielding practices require that sort of effort from all players...long gone the days of the main bowlers stopping balls with their feet etc... Sure it brings risks ; but it is part of the the game now.

As was also mentioned : lot of grounds used to have the fence as the boundary rather than the omni-present rope/advertising soft markers. This encourages amazing feats on the edge of play with occasional unfortunate injury issues but is also clearly safer than would be crashing into a hard picket at speed !

Remember the Snow incidents well. The spectator business indeed produced  an uproar at the time : England were even threatened with forfeiting the match after Illingworth (reasonably enough , I think , in the face of some serious crowd behaviour : Sydney had it's share of ruffians in attendance that day ) took his team off the field for a time ; but then that freakish injury on the penultimate day of the series might well have cost England the Ashes after a series which they had largely dominated , as Australia were chasing a target which didn't appear particularly imposing. Losing their main bowler after just a couple of overs - and one wicket -would have rocked many teams. Fortunately Lever and Willis took vital early wickets ; and on the final morning Australia lost their last five wickets for about thirty to a combination of Underwood Illingworth and D'Oliveira (Sydney was pretty good for spinners in those days) to fall about sixty runs short. Justice done.

As for Leach : yes I think it is just bad luck that seems to follow him. He may not be as physically robust as some - and top level cricket is pretty demanding ; but it is not as if it is one type of issue constantly derailing him. Rotten timing though : thought he would be back for the remaining games and likely to play a big part if we saw a pitch or two that was heavily tilted in favour of the spinners. The young fellows have generally performed admirably so far but I England could really miss Leach if they get to bowl last on a real minefield.
As for his future : I don't think they will be in any hurry to bin him , once he's fit again. But even without the injury I think his place is likely to come under pressure from Hartley in the medium term given the latter's obvious skill with the bat and apparent ability to fulfill a similar role with the ball - though this will of course depend on how Hartley develops his bowling from this promising start.

Leach's injury record, in fact the timing, might end up really damaging his international career I sense. Both Rehan and Hartley are young, bring more than 1 skill to the table, and Hartley particularly, though not the best of spinners, can do the same job, of chipping in with a few wickets in the 2nd innings and trying to bowl a steady set of overs in the first innings without getting smashed. It was noticable that Hartley was willing to give the ball a bit more air in the 2nd test rather than firing it in always. The lad is confident, not too many would recover from the kind of start he has had that soon and that well. Might become a version of the underappreciated Ashly Gyles. Handy with the ball, handy with the bat... Perhaps England will be better off investing in Rehan and Hartley. Rehan, if he can get it right, can be a better attacking, wicket taking bowler, and in a world wherein Stokes can bowl his 10-15 overs for the innings, they may be able to go down that line. Will also depend on the make of the pace bowling department. Robinson and Wood when fit, then who else in a post-Anderson world to offer control and wickets?

Rajkot.....pitch is likely to be similar to Vizag or even flatter with no exaggerated help for spinners
Traditionally draw would have been a highly likely scenario......But with the way Eng play, they will play themselves to a defeat rather than a draw.

Decisions for India
(I)
2 seamers or 1
if 2 seamers
-Is it Akashdeep or Siraj as second seamer?

If 2 seamers
-Which spinner goes out? Kuldeep or Axar

(II)
Do they play Jurel finally as a WK?

Decisions for Eng

Do they play a 2nd seamer?
If yes which one and  you'd presume  Bashir goes out.

i feel for leach, is he ever gonna stay fit.....dawson might have been worth a call up in his absence

wisden wrote:i feel for leach, is he ever gonna stay fit.....dawson might have been worth a call up in his absence

Callum Parkinosn it might be if they replace Leach

KL Rahul is injured and out of T3
Devdutt Padikkal replaces him in the squad. I thought Sai Sudarshan had done more.

Anyway Sarfaraz set for debut.
Let's see of Jadeja remains fit till start of T3

wisden wrote:i feel for leach, is he ever gonna stay fit.....dawson might have been worth a call up in his absence

Three frontline spinners, albeit all inexperienced, plus a bit of Root seem to be considered sufficient for the remaining three Tests. I can't really disagree with that although have always liked Dawson. He played the last of his three Tests almost seven years ago and regrettably I suspect both the management and the player view that ship as having sailed.

alfie wrote:As for Leach : yes I think it is just bad luck that seems to follow him. He may not be as physically robust as some - and top level cricket is pretty demanding ; but it is not as if it is one type of issue constantly derailing him. Rotten timing though : thought he would be back for the remaining games and likely to play a big part if we saw a pitch or two that was heavily tilted in favour of the spinners. The young fellows have generally performed admirably so far but I England could really miss Leach if they get to bowl last on a real minefield.
As for his future : I don't think they will be in any hurry to bin him , once he's fit again. But even without the injury I think his place is likely to come under pressure from Hartley in the medium term given the latter's obvious skill with the bat and apparent ability to fulfill a similar role with the ball - though this will of course depend on how Hartley develops his bowling from this promising start.

Further to Alfie's post and msp's follow up, a potential blot on Hartley's development landscape relates to how much red ball cricket he'll get in the coming season with his county side, Lancashire. Lancs have signed Nathan Lyon to play in all formats throughout the whole season. With seven of Lancs' fourteen Championship fixtures to be played in April and May when conditions traditionally favour seam and not spin, I doubt that Lancs will be keen to play both at that time.

Bashir may similarly find his opportunities limited at Somerset by the presence of his county teammate, Leach. That assumes Leach is fit to play and England don't insist on him resting.

Another issue Bashir might have is that, if he really is a worst batsman than Jimmy Anderson, then he's going to have to be a far better spinner than the likes of Ahmed and Hartley if he's ever going to be first choice

Indian newspapers report the team management is finally done with KS Bharat, and that Dhruv Jurel is likely to debut in the next test. Sarfaraz also set to debut as Rahul isn't fit and Iyer dropped. They badly need Jadeja to be fit and ready, as much for his batting and experience as for his bowling. If the pitch has good life for spinners and not much for seamers, only Bumrah who is above conditions should be playing and not a 2nd seamer, and Jadeja can come in for Mukesh. Else, think Axar has to give way for Jadeja, with Siraj in for Mukesh. Kuldeep has to be the 2nd spinner, Axar hasn't been demanding a place with the ball of late, and though his batting is more than handy, Kuldeep is likely to deliver considerably more with the ball at this point, and he can hold a bat and will not be the worst option at 9.
Rohit
Jaiswal
Gill
Patidar
Sarfaraz
Jadeja
Jurel
Ashwin
Axar/Siraj
Kuldeep
Bumrah.
Would bat Axar ahead of Ashwin, and Kuldeep at 9 else.

msp83 wrote:Indian newspapers report the team management is finally done with KS Bharat, and that Dhruv Jurel is likely to debut in the next test. Sarfaraz also set to debut as Rahul isn't fit and Iyer dropped. They badly need Jadeja to be fit and ready, as much for his batting and experience as for his bowling. If the pitch has good life for spinners and not much for seamers, only Bumrah who is above conditions should be playing and not a 2nd seamer, and  Jadeja can come in for Mukesh. Else, think Axar has to give way for Jadeja, with Siraj in for Mukesh. Kuldeep has to be the 2nd spinner, Axar hasn't been demanding a place with the ball of late, and though his batting is more than handy, Kuldeep is likely to deliver considerably more with the ball at this point, and he can hold a bat and will not be the worst option at 9.
Rohit
Jaiswal
Gill
Patidar
Sarfaraz
Jadeja
Jurel
Ashwin
Axar/Siraj
Kuldeep
Bumrah.
Would bat Axar ahead of Ashwin, and Kuldeep at 9 else.

Yup media is quoting BCCI sources to unanimously confirm Jurel will debut
I have to see it to believe it......why have they kept Bharat still in the squad?

If 3 spinners play....Axar will for sure play.....no reason to drop him.
Choice will come down to between Kuldeep & a seamer.

Batting line-up i might be tempted to put Jadeja at 4, and Patidar at 6

guildfordbat wrote:

alfie wrote:As for Leach : yes I think it is just bad luck that seems to follow him. He may not be as physically robust as some - and top level cricket is pretty demanding ; but it is not as if it is one type of issue constantly derailing him. Rotten timing though : thought he would be back for the remaining games and likely to play a big part if we saw a pitch or two that was heavily tilted in favour of the spinners. The young fellows have generally performed admirably so far but I England could really miss Leach if they get to bowl last on a real minefield.
As for his future : I don't think they will be in any hurry to bin him , once he's fit again. But even without the injury I think his place is likely to come under pressure from Hartley in the medium term given the latter's obvious skill with the bat and apparent ability to fulfill a similar role with the ball - though this will of course depend on how Hartley develops his bowling from this promising start.

Further to Alfie's post and msp's follow up, a potential blot on Hartley's development landscape relates to how much red ball cricket he'll get in the coming season with his  county side, Lancashire. Lancs have signed Nathan Lyon to play in all formats throughout the whole season. With seven of Lancs' fourteen Championship fixtures to be played in April and May when conditions traditionally favour seam and not spin, I doubt that Lancs will be keen to play both at that time.

Bashir may similarly find his opportunities limited at Somerset by the presence of his county teammate, Leach. That assumes Leach is fit to play and England don't insist on him resting.

Is a concern re Hartley. Don't know what they could do to prevent this sort of thing ; but it is hard to imagine an Australian State team utilizing an experienced English import at the cost of development time for one of their own up and coming talents - especially in an area where there are vacancies at the top level ! Perhaps Hartley might need to take a loan somewhere he could be assured of serious game time ?
The limited opportunities for English spinners seem to me to be a very real concern. Ahmed , Bashir , Hartley - and others like the almost forgotten Bess - need to improve their craft so that this important part of the national team doesn't just rely on lightning striking at a convenient time.
Can't fix the climate (and won't fix the fixtures. ) So it really is essential that promising spinners don't find themselves left with a choice between second eleven cricket and waiting for an occasional chance in the CC or just concentrating on white ball stuff...

Our Indian friends seem to be pretty happy about Bharat's apparent impending omission : seems the selectors have at last listened to our experts

Would have thought though that with Rahul injured and no Kohli you are setting up a rather inexperienced (at this level) 4/5/6 - or 4/5/7 if Jadeja or Axar are playing and can be inserted ahead of the new keeper ... Still plenty of depth with those spin bowlers who can bat , of course ; but perhaps a bit of a risk if the top three don't get off to a solid start ?

And I see Rehan has also been afflicted by visa problems in re-entering India after the break. Doesn't seem it is going to be a huge problem as they've apparently arranged a quick fix and all will be smoothed out in a day or two ; but it underlines that ECB need to be very careful In making sure all the paperwork is perfect when touring in these parts - something they don't look to have been quite on top of this trip.

England vice-captain Ollie Pope has hinted that there is every chance England could go with two seamers for the upcoming Rajkot Test against India, starting on February 15. upon looking at the pitch
Wood or Robinson ....
Wood's more likely to find Bumrah like reverse


The pitch itself looks quite green except in the close-up green is in the middle and good length spots are quite barren and cracked.

England launching new league with IPL owners!

'The Hundred' likely to become 'Mini IPL' details on 'CricketGully' telegram channel!

If true darker, dystopian BCCI controlled future awaits us

KP_fan wrote:

msp83 wrote:Indian newspapers report the team management is finally done with KS Bharat, and that Dhruv Jurel is likely to debut in the next test. Sarfaraz also set to debut as Rahul isn't fit and Iyer dropped. They badly need Jadeja to be fit and ready, as much for his batting and experience as for his bowling. If the pitch has good life for spinners and not much for seamers, only Bumrah who is above conditions should be playing and not a 2nd seamer, and  Jadeja can come in for Mukesh. Else, think Axar has to give way for Jadeja, with Siraj in for Mukesh. Kuldeep has to be the 2nd spinner, Axar hasn't been demanding a place with the ball of late, and though his batting is more than handy, Kuldeep is likely to deliver considerably more with the ball at this point, and he can hold a bat and will not be the worst option at 9.
Rohit
Jaiswal
Gill
Patidar
Sarfaraz
Jadeja
Jurel
Ashwin
Axar/Siraj
Kuldeep
Bumrah.
Would bat Axar ahead of Ashwin, and Kuldeep at 9 else.

Yup media is quoting BCCI sources to unanimously confirm Jurel will debut
I have to see it to believe it......why have they kept Bharat still in the squad?

If 3 spinners play....Axar will for sure play.....no reason to drop him.
Choice will come down to between Kuldeep  & a seamer.

Batting line-up i might be tempted to put Jadeja at 4, and Patidar at 6

Axar's primary job is with the ball, and he hasn't been doing that well since the Australia series. His batting has given him an extended stay, but with Kuldeep finding form, and with him likely to be more effective when pitch conditions do not offer much for the bowlers, Axar's batting shouldn't be enough to save his place. In fact, I am tempted to bench him for Washi Sundar even if we play 4 spinners. Washi has the makings of a proper batter. The only reason I wouldn't do it yet, is because Axar has got starts in all his trips to the crease so far.
As for Jadeja batting 4, not the worst option, and Jadeja can very much handle himself I feel. But, I wouldn't want a 5-6-7 of Patidar/Sarfaraz/Jurel, particularly if Axar/Sundar aren't playing. Jadeja can, and should bat 5 for me, splitting Patidar and Sarfaraz.

In the mean time, seems there is more to the Ishan Kishan story. The BCCI has mandated that the players not on national duty, or not under rehabilitation, should make themselves available for Ranji and other domestic cricket. Kishan seemingly prioritizing IPL preparations over Ranji and possible national duties, hasn't gone down well with the BCCI it seems. Would apply to the likes of Deepak Chahar and the recently dropped Shreyas Iyer as well.
I am with the BCCI on this one...

msp wrote:Axar's primary job is with the ball, and he hasn't been doing that well since the Australia series. His batting has given him an extended stay, but with Kuldeep finding form, and with him likely to be more effective when pitch conditions do not offer much for the bowlers, Axar's batting shouldn't be enough to save his place. In fact, I am tempted to bench him for Washi Sundar even if we play 4 spinners. Washi has the makings of a proper batter. The only reason I wouldn't do it yet, is because Axar has got starts in all his trips to the crease so far.
As for Jadeja batting 4, not the worst option, and Jadeja can very much handle himself I feel. But, I wouldn't want a 5-6-7 of Patidar/Sarfaraz/Jurel, particularly if Axar/Sundar aren't playing. Jadeja can, and should bat 5 for me, splitting Patidar and Sarfaraz.

We need runs....if we drop the only batsman who has gotten 20+ in all 4 innings in this series and in all the innings vs Aus in last home series where will runs on board come.from?
Axar's bowling is a bonus...he cannot and will not be dropped for the assured runs he offers
Such is team's confidence he was promoted to 6...although 8 is in my view his bets spot

The only way I see kuldeep playing is if they play 4 spinners
Or crazy dravid plays 6 bowlers

England set to pick Wood over Bashir and go the correct way with two spinners + Root.

That is, of course, if Rehan is able to play on Thursday.

Any further word on Root's finger? Guess he has to be fine, didn't hear anything after the last test on that... Going by the obnoxious way he batted in that 2nd innings, I felt it wouldn't have been surprising had it been a more serious injury than we were told...

msp83 wrote:Any further word on Root's finger? Guess he has to be fine, didn't hear anything after the last test on that... Going by the obnoxious way he batted in that 2nd innings, I felt it wouldn't have been surprising had it been a more serious injury than we were told...

There is word that Gill missed nets because the finger injury he incurred has not healed yet

Duty281 wrote:England set to pick Wood over Bashir and go the correct way with two spinners + Root.

That is, of course, if Rehan is able to play on Thursday.

Hi Duty - you've been remarkably and surprisingly restrained on that ... so far anyway.

KP_fan wrote:

msp83 wrote:Any further word on Root's finger? Guess he has to be fine, didn't hear anything after the last test on that... Going by the obnoxious way he batted in that 2nd innings, I felt it wouldn't have been surprising had it been a more serious injury than we were told...

There is word that Gill missed nets because the finger injury he incurred has not healed yet

Doesn't sound good. Padikkal an inch closer to that test debut then?

msp83 wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

msp83 wrote:Any further word on Root's finger? Guess he has to be fine, didn't hear anything after the last test on that... Going by the obnoxious way he batted in that 2nd innings, I felt it wouldn't have been surprising had it been a more serious injury than we were told...

There is word that Gill missed nets because the finger injury he incurred has not healed yet

Doesn't sound good. Padikkal an inch closer to that test debut then?

Possibly...
It's tough and not ideal but circumstances are forcing us to go sifting thru the next-gen test match batters
Sai sudarshan should be the next one to break thru should any one else get injured or if Patidar fails in both innings here

msp83 wrote:Any further word on Root's finger? Guess he has to be fine, didn't hear anything after the last test on that... Going by the obnoxious way he batted in that 2nd innings, I felt it wouldn't have been surprising had it been a more serious injury than we were told...

I think that was more down to Rohit attacking a lot with the field when batters first came in, but pushing the field back fairly quickly if they settled. I'd guess that with some uneven bounce and Bumrah peak Bumrah-ing, Root decided to try to push the field back as quickly as possible, then try to milk the gaps. If it works you look like a genius, if not you look an idiot.

I don't mind the unorthodox batting approach in those scenarios though. They needed to score 123 runs more than the highest successful chase by a team touring India. It was going to take something absurd. Root getting stumped running past an innocuous Lyon ball in the Ashes feels different, as there they didn't need something ridiculous, just something smart. History shows that it's nearing impossible to chase 400 in India batting conventionally though.

I like that bit of game theory coming into cricket more. Pietersen did a lot of it. Targeting key bowlers to hit them out the attack or key periods where he'd try to push fielders back. Rishabh is brilliant at it too - god I miss watching that lunatic bat.

msp83 wrote:Any further word on Root's finger? Guess he has to be fine, didn't hear anything after the last test on that... Going by the obnoxious way he batted in that 2nd innings, I felt it wouldn't have been surprising had it been a more serious injury than we were told...

I think that was more down to Rohit attacking a lot with the field when batters first came in, but pushing the field back fairly quickly if they settled. I'd guess that with some uneven bounce and Bumrah peak Bumrah-ing, Root decided to try to push the field back as quickly as possible, then try to milk the gaps. If it works you look like a genius, if not you look an idiot.

I don't mind the unorthodox batting approach in those scenarios though. They needed to score 123 runs more than the highest successful chase by a team touring India. It was going to take something absurd. Root getting stumped running past an innocuous Lyon ball in the Ashes feels different, as there they didn't need something ridiculous, just something smart. History shows that it's nearing impossible to chase 400 in India batting conventionally though.

I like that bit of game theory coming into cricket more. Pietersen did a lot of it. Targeting key bowlers to hit them out the attack or key periods where he'd try to push fielders back. Rishabh is brilliant at it too - god I miss watching that lunatic bat.

Does seem unreasonable to complain when someone slightly overdoes the attacking plan which has been reaping fine rewards and gets out as a consequence - can't have rewards without risk , eh ?
So I generally agree with KC on this. The reservation I have is that Root in particular seems to occasionally get just a little carried away ... more than most players he is adept at scoring rapidly with few risks ; and in the innings we are discussing he had already played a number of shots which must have had the bowlers thinking twice . Plan was fine - but perhaps the ball he went for and the way he went at it wasn't the best choice ? More execution failure than bad planning , really.

Think there might be room for consideration about the methods of both Root and Stokes in that the former seems to be more urgent from the start ; while Stokes has gone the other way in emphasising a cautious approach for quite a long part of his innings ; which seems somewhat counterintuitive given their respective skill sets ? Striking a perfect balance isn't easy , of course...

Duty281 wrote:England set to pick Wood over Bashir and go the correct way with two spinners + Root.

That is, of course, if Rehan is able to play on Thursday.

No guarantee of course. But that seems the choice as they've settled on a 12. Stokes seems confident Rehan's issues will be sorted so it all comes down to what they think of the pitch on the next inspection. The "correct" way is not something we can reliably assess from a distance , given the variability of pitches in these parts

But I must agree I would be happier seeing a second pace man involved ; so hope they see enough to enable that choice.

Eng name their 11 and Wood for Bashir
I totally see no point though in announcing the team a day earlier

guildfordbat wrote:

alfie wrote:As for Leach : yes I think it is just bad luck that seems to follow him. He may not be as physically robust as some - and top level cricket is pretty demanding ; but it is not as if it is one type of issue constantly derailing him. Rotten timing though : thought he would be back for the remaining games and likely to play a big part if we saw a pitch or two that was heavily tilted in favour of the spinners. The young fellows have generally performed admirably so far but I England could really miss Leach if they get to bowl last on a real minefield.
As for his future : I don't think they will be in any hurry to bin him , once he's fit again. But even without the injury I think his place is likely to come under pressure from Hartley in the medium term given the latter's obvious skill with the bat and apparent ability to fulfill a similar role with the ball - though this will of course depend on how Hartley develops his bowling from this promising start.

Further to Alfie's post and msp's follow up, a potential blot on Hartley's development landscape relates to how much red ball cricket he'll get in the coming season with his  county side, Lancashire. Lancs have signed Nathan Lyon to play in all formats throughout the whole season. With seven of Lancs' fourteen Championship fixtures to be played in April and May when conditions traditionally favour seam and not spin, I doubt that Lancs will be keen to play both at that time.

Bashir may similarly find his opportunities limited at Somerset by the presence of his county teammate, Leach. That assumes Leach is fit to play and England don't insist on him resting.

He will be played as an All-Rounder I feel.

Remember, Steve Smith started as a spinner, who knows where Hartley will be in 10 years... Opening with Crawley

And here is the final "execution" version of the pitch.......not a blade of green grass....not a bucket of water on the good length areas in last 3 or 4 days seemingly...cracks already visible......we might be seeing a semi-rank turner

alfie wrote:Does seem unreasonable to complain when someone slightly overdoes the attacking plan which has been reaping fine rewards and gets out as a consequence - can't have rewards without risk , eh ?
So I generally agree with KC on this. The reservation I have is that Root in particular seems to occasionally get just a little carried away ... more than most players he is adept at scoring rapidly with few risks ; and in the innings we are discussing he had already played a number of shots which must have had the bowlers thinking twice . Plan was fine - but perhaps the ball he went for and the way he went at it wasn't the best choice ?  More execution failure than bad planning , really.

Think there might be room for consideration about the methods of both Root and Stokes in that the former seems to be more urgent from the start ; while Stokes has gone the other way in emphasising a cautious approach for quite a long part of his innings ; which seems somewhat counterintuitive given their respective skill sets ?  Striking a perfect balance isn't easy , of course...

Root's career average has marginally gone up under McCullum and Stokes. For me, I think he's got the balance right more often than not. Given I think he's just England's best batter of the modern era (taking that as post Barrington, given he was the last of those great batters who started in the 50s, when averages were a bit higher and competition more sparse), I'd give him the license to make those mistakes whilst the average is still so high.

Stokes is a more curious one. He started his captaincy being genuinely ludicrous with the approach at times. He was clearly just setting an example that players wouldn't be criticised for making errors. More recently he's taken on a bit of an anchor role early in the innings. I have wondered if the knee injury hampered his running to the extent that he no longer has 'gears'. He was one of the best runners between the wickets I've seen at his peak athleticism. Then he couldn't move. He started either blocking or hitting boundaries, with little in between.

He's been moving far better in this series though but has still taken that approach at times. On the other hand he's had pretty good returns in the first two Tests, coming in at tough times as well. Especially when considering how brutal it is to be a LHB in India, against Ashwin.

As said quite a few times, my biggest concern with Stokes the batter isn't his quality or approach but whether England can balance their side in most conditions with a specialist batter at 6. Even when it makes the XI look a bit messier, I think England are generally improved in most conditions when they shoehorn that 5th bowling option in. Doing that with a batter at 6 is very difficult.

India (probable) 1 Rohit Sharma (capt), 2 Yashasvi Jaiswal, 3 Shubman Gill, 4 Rajat Patidar, 5 Sarfaraz Khan, 6 Ravindra Jadeja, 7 Dhruv Jurel/KS Bharat (wk), 8 R Ashwin, 9 Kuldeep Yadav, 10 Jasprit Bumrah, 11 Mohammed Siraj.

India's expected team, courtesy of Cricinfo. Right call not to rest Bumrah for this key test. Jadeja coming back is a huge boost for India; the experience, skillset and balance he adds is invaluable. Will be interested to see Khan's test debut and whether he can live up to his big FC numbers. Big test for Rohit, also. He's had a few starts but made nothing substantial. His first innings last time was quite painful to watch.

England's team is probably the right one, though I agree it's silly to name it 24 hours before. A few names in the batting order starting to come under a little pressure. Duckett's gone nine innings without a 50. Root, as mentioned, has gone 12 innings without a ton, stretching all the way back to the very first innings of the Ashes series. Bairstow, perhaps, never done amazingly in India, and has had a quiet start to the tour.

India are certainly favourites, with Bumrah in excellent form and Jadeja's return, but there is a potential vulnerability in that somewhat inexperienced batting order for England to exploit.

KP_fan wrote:Eng name their 11 and  Wood for Bashir
I totally see no point though in announcing the team a day earlier

Pretty much the eleven most of us expected for the first Test once Brook had departed other than Hartley in for Leach and it was perhaps a toss up between Wood and Robinson.

Quirky and sad stat - of all the bowlers from both sides in this series, the top two for best economy rates are, unsurprisingly, Anderson @2.17 and, very surprisingly, Wood @2.48. Be great if they are still in those positions at the end of this coming Test with Wood having a few wickets to boot.

Duty281 wrote:India (probable) 1 Rohit Sharma (capt), 2 Yashasvi Jaiswal, 3 Shubman Gill, 4 Rajat Patidar, 5 Sarfaraz Khan, 6 Ravindra Jadeja, 7 Dhruv Jurel/KS Bharat (wk), 8 R Ashwin, 9 Kuldeep Yadav, 10 Jasprit Bumrah, 11 Mohammed Siraj.

India's expected team, courtesy of Cricinfo. Right call not to rest Bumrah for this key test. Jadeja coming back is a huge boost for India; the experience, skillset and balance he adds is invaluable. Will be interested to see Khan's test debut and whether he can live up to his big FC numbers. Big test for Rohit, also. He's had a few starts but made nothing substantial. His first innings last time was quite painful to watch.

England's team is probably the right one, though I agree it's silly to name it 24 hours before. A few names in the batting order starting to come under a little pressure. Duckett's gone nine innings without a 50. Root, as mentioned, has gone 12 innings without a ton, stretching all the way back to the very first innings of the Ashes series. Bairstow, perhaps, never done amazingly in India, and has had a quiet start to the tour.

India are certainly favourites, with Bumrah in excellent form and Jadeja's return, but there is a potential vulnerability in that somewhat inexperienced batting order for England to exploit.

I doubt if in Dravid's mind Axar is even a discussion point.
Axar would cast and set in stone....the variable is Siraj vs Kuldeep

alfie wrote:Does seem unreasonable to complain when someone slightly overdoes the attacking plan which has been reaping fine rewards and gets out as a consequence - can't have rewards without risk , eh ?
So I generally agree with KC on this. The reservation I have is that Root in particular seems to occasionally get just a little carried away ... more than most players he is adept at scoring rapidly with few risks ; and in the innings we are discussing he had already played a number of shots which must have had the bowlers thinking twice . Plan was fine - but perhaps the ball he went for and the way he went at it wasn't the best choice ?  More execution failure than bad planning , really.

Think there might be room for consideration about the methods of both Root and Stokes in that the former seems to be more urgent from the start ; while Stokes has gone the other way in emphasising a cautious approach for quite a long part of his innings ; which seems somewhat counterintuitive given their respective skill sets ?  Striking a perfect balance isn't easy , of course...

Cricinfo's Sambit Bal has an interesting article on Bazball. The most interesting bit for me, is that Ben Stokes has a strike rate less than that of all but the other Ben, in that batting lineup, in the Bazball era. All of England's batters, seem to have done better in terms of both average and SR in the Bazball era, but the jump isn't massive for Stokes, from an SR of 57 to 69, with the average going up by 3 runs per innings. After some led from the front recklessness, Stokes for me, has figured things out, better than most. Root on the other hand, a busy player who is one of the best batters of his generation, has to remind himself that he's not some mediocre player who has to get the most while he stays out there. I wouldn't have minded the shot from a Pope or a Crawley or a Duckett. Even a Bairstow for that matter. But not from Root... From the rest it would be maximising, from him it was just downright obnoxious.
But of course, I hope he continues to muddle through the series, and work things out for himself only after we are done here!

king_carlos wrote:

alfie wrote:Does seem unreasonable to complain when someone slightly overdoes the attacking plan which has been reaping fine rewards and gets out as a consequence - can't have rewards without risk , eh ?
So I generally agree with KC on this. The reservation I have is that Root in particular seems to occasionally get just a little carried away ... more than most players he is adept at scoring rapidly with few risks ; and in the innings we are discussing he had already played a number of shots which must have had the bowlers thinking twice . Plan was fine - but perhaps the ball he went for and the way he went at it wasn't the best choice ?  More execution failure than bad planning , really.

Think there might be room for consideration about the methods of both Root and Stokes in that the former seems to be more urgent from the start ; while Stokes has gone the other way in emphasising a cautious approach for quite a long part of his innings ; which seems somewhat counterintuitive given their respective skill sets ?  Striking a perfect balance isn't easy , of course...

Root's career average has marginally gone up under McCullum and Stokes. For me, I think he's got the balance right more often than not. Given I think he's just England's best batter of the modern era (taking that as post Barrington, given he was the last of those great batters who started in the 50s, when averages were a bit higher and competition more sparse), I'd give him the license to make those mistakes whilst the average is still so high.

Stokes is a more curious one. He started his captaincy being genuinely ludicrous with the approach at times. He was clearly just setting an example that players wouldn't be criticised for making errors. More recently he's taken on a bit of an anchor role early in the innings. I have wondered if the knee injury hampered his running to the extent that he no longer has 'gears'. He was one of the best runners between the wickets I've seen at his peak athleticism. Then he couldn't move. He started either blocking or hitting boundaries, with little in between.

He's been moving far better in this series though but has still taken that approach at times. On the other hand he's had pretty good returns in the first two Tests, coming in at tough times as well. Especially when considering how brutal it is to be a LHB in India, against Ashwin.

As said quite a few times, my biggest concern with Stokes the batter isn't his quality or approach but whether England can balance their side in most conditions with a specialist batter at 6. Even when it makes the XI look a bit messier, I think England are generally improved in most conditions when they shoehorn that 5th bowling option in. Doing that with a batter at 6 is very difficult.

Indian media has reported that Stokes, though unlikely to bowling in a match situation as of now, has resumed bowling full tilt in the nets already. So he should be back bowling by the English summer I suppose.

I hope for India, there is no / between Jurel and Bharat. Has to be Jurel, or the coach can come out of retirement and take up the gloves! But KS Bharat shouldn't be getting another free pass. He isn't too old, may have had some valuable learnings from his time at the top. But as of now, he doesn't belong there, so time to go back to the grind...
With Jadeja back, hope they'll go for the aggressive bowling option of Kuldeep. Axar's been poor with the ball for too long now. But then, I wouldn't mind if they go for him instead of Kuldeep for the all-round contribution he can bring to the table. .

msp83 wrote:Indian media has reported that Stokes, though unlikely to bowling in a match situation as of now, has resumed bowling full tilt in the nets already. So he should be back bowling by the English summer I suppose.

A bit of a, "I'll believe it when I see it", one for me. I just really doubt that he'll be able to bowl as he used to for any prolonged period again in Tests.

He was already noticeably slower than his peak before he could barely run. The ability to crank it up to a bit quicker than fast-medium was a big part of his value. He's never had the best control of length, as such could often go for a few. That bit of extra pace compared to so many of England's medium-fast to fast-medium battalion made him dovetail so well with the other seamers though.

If it were a specialist seamer who was that badly crocked then I think there'd be massive questions about them returning as Test bowlers. Sort of Ryan Harris or Simon Jones during their last comeback levels of, "Oh, god, they're f***ed aren't they?", but Stokes is that peculiar scenario through being an all-rounder. So he can still bat, is therefore still about to keep us wondering if he might be an all-rounder once more.

I think he'll bowl in Tests again. Whether he's ever that real 5th bowler he once was is a different question. I.e. able to bowl a similar workload to the frontline seamers. I'd love to be proven wrong but I reckon he might be more of a late stage Shane Watson very reluctantly taking off his jumper once the proper bowlers are knackered and bowling barely faster than Paul Collingwood.

Bowling quick is brutal. It breaks the body. A terrible life choice. Being a batter is brutal. It breaks you mentally. A terrible life choice. Being a spinner is brutal. One in the side, underappreciated, conditions dependent. A terrible life choice. Fielding is brutal. So boring, then you look like an idiot if something goes wrong. A terrible life choice. I'll never understand how this stupid sport survived so long.

I certainly don't expect Stokes to be bowling 25 overs when he does resume ... But I reckon he has a decent chance of filling the fifth bowler role again , even if he might have to abandon any idea of playing the short ball "enforcement " business in favour of surprising them with the odd one...

Looking ahead to this afternoon I'd be mainly hoping he can call correctly as you'd think batting first will be a considerable advantage. Of course , England could do with a par score at least in their first innings for a change , whoever gets first use. Nicely poised , this series so hopeful of another good match

All the talk about Bumrah being rested...