The cricket thread

Heartfeltdawn

Stuckfast said:

It was a crazy decision to drop Curran, and why are we playing a leg-spinner on seamer-friendly wickets? Unless the next test is being played on a dustbowl, Moeen has to come in for Rashid, Curran for Bairstow, and probably also Rory Burns for Jennings who looks very out of nick.

Pope is a keeper isn't he? Is he better than Buttler?

Because it's right to pick a spinner especially when that spinner currently has 7 wickets in 3 Tests on non-spinning wickets at 26.71 with a SR of 41.1. What exactly has Rashid done wrong? He came back well from being a bit loose at the start of each innings. 

Next Test is the Ageas Bowl. You might well see both sides with two spinners. 

If Pope keeps wicket, you're asking a young kid to keep and bat at 4, something which the management haven't asked two vastly more experienced guys in Buttler and YJB to do, and something that the like of Gilchrist and Dhoni didn't do. 

I'd happily bring Ian Bell back. He should have gone to Australia. 

It's interesting that people have talked about Stokes being irreplaceable and Curran has shown he isn't. There are two players we've never found replacements for in the last few years. Strauss is one. The other is Collingwood. Not pretty, not graceful, but someone who maximised their ability. And that's without touching on his ability in the slips and close in as well. 

So England: we're shit in the slips, our openers are either over the hill or not good enough, we have no real middle order, we can't bat a long time, we still have no stand-out lead spinner, and our seam attack beyond the two old chaps seems to be injury cases and a guy who becomes innocuous overseas. 

earwighoney

Heartfeltdawn said:

Stuckfast said:

It was a crazy decision to drop Curran, and why are we playing a leg-spinner on seamer-friendly wickets? Unless the next test is being played on a dustbowl, Moeen has to come in for Rashid, Curran for Bairstow, and probably also Rory Burns for Jennings who looks very out of nick.

Pope is a keeper isn't he? Is he better than Buttler?

Because it's right to pick a spinner especially when that spinner currently has 7 wickets in 3 Tests on non-spinning wickets at 26.71 with a SR of 41.1. What exactly has Rashid done wrong? He came back well from being a bit loose at the start of each innings. 

Next Test is the Ageas Bowl. You might well see both sides with two spinners. 

If Pope keeps wicket, you're asking a young kid to keep and bat at 4, something which the management haven't asked two vastly more experienced guys in Buttler and YJB to do, and something that the like of Gilchrist and Dhoni didn't do. 

I'd happily bring Ian Bell back. He should have gone to Australia. 

It's interesting that people have talked about Stokes being irreplaceable and Curran has shown he isn't. There are two players we've never found replacements for in the last few years. Strauss is one. The other is Collingwood. Not pretty, not graceful, but someone who maximised their ability. And that's without touching on his ability in the slips and close in as well. 

So England: we're shit in the slips, our openers are either over the hill or not good enough, we have no real middle order, we can't bat a long time, we still have no stand-out lead spinner, and our seam attack beyond the two old chaps seems to be injury cases and a guy who becomes innocuous overseas. 

IMO Swann and Trott are two other players who have the selectors have struggled to replace.

Heartfeltdawn

Swann definitely. Trott... in a perfect world, Root would have been that person. He had the ability to defend and attack from the get go with England and suffered through being thrown all over the place in the batting order and then given the captaincy. Root opening is now a distant memory... 

And that's one of the hallmarks of recent years with England selection: we don't know how to use people. The YJB-Buttler saga is now back with Bairstow's injury and Buttler's patchy display in the slips alongside everyone else in the slips (it's interesting how slip catching standards have diminished as limited overs cricket has flourished. All the practice in the world can't replicate keeping your concentration in the cordon over a whole day). 

Reading back over our 2012 victory in India, this paragraph by Andrew McGlashan stood out:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/22108189/from-fitness-fieldinghow-england-won-india

"Nick Compton's first tour was not prolific, but he and Cook ensured the middle order was not regularly exposed early. England accepted that a run-rate of three-an-over would often be the summit of their ambitions, but knew the value of keeping India in the field for hours on end. Of course, Kevin Pietersen's 186 in Mumbai was a glorious, thrilling exception but it was an innings that could only be played by a unique, and perhaps great, player. He was the only England specialist batsman to have a strike-rate over 50. Most of the time it was head down and dig in. The series finished on such a note, with Jonathan Trott and Ian Bell refusing to yield, facing a combined 616 balls between them."  


In these modern times, a strike rate under 50 and three runs per over is considered funereal. It brought us victory in a place that is so hard for overseas teams to succeed in. That we ignore those lessons now is down to the influence of one thing. The mention of Compton is also important. Runs-a-plenty he was not but Compton supported Cook. In 23 innings they had three century partnerships. A look at other partnerships.

Cook and Jennings: 18 innings, 1 ton partnership. 
Cook and Stoneman: 20 innings, 0 ton
Cook and Lyth: 13 innings, 1 ton. 
Cook and Robson: 11 innings, 0 ton. 
Cook and Carberry: 12 innings, 1 ton. 
Cook and Hales: 21 innings, 1 ton. 

As much as Cook could and has played the sheet anchor role, it's pretty clear that having someone there who could be the sheet anchor at the other end helped Cook, perhaps another reason why he was so successful with Trott. One holds it together, gives the other some room to attack, they can swap over easily. 

Cook and Trott partnerships: 51 inning, 10 ton partnerships. 

earwighoney

Heartfeltdawn said:

Swann definitely. Trott... in a perfect world, Root would have been that person. He had the ability to defend and attack from the get go with England and suffered through being thrown all over the place in the batting order and then given the captaincy. Root opening is now a distant memory... 

And that's one of the hallmarks of recent years with England selection: we don't know how to use people. The YJB-Buttler saga is now back with Bairstow's injury and Buttler's patchy display in the slips alongside everyone else in the slips (it's interesting how slip catching standards have diminished as limited overs cricket has flourished. All the practice in the world can't replicate keeping your concentration in the cordon over a whole day). 

Reading back over our 2012 victory in India, this paragraph by Andrew McGlashan stood out:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/22108189/from-fitness-fieldinghow-england-won-india

"Nick Compton's first tour was not prolific, but he and Cook ensured the middle order was not regularly exposed early. England accepted that a run-rate of three-an-over would often be the summit of their ambitions, but knew the value of keeping India in the field for hours on end. Of course, Kevin Pietersen's 186 in Mumbai was a glorious, thrilling exception but it was an innings that could only be played by a unique, and perhaps great, player. He was the only England specialist batsman to have a strike-rate over 50. Most of the time it was head down and dig in. The series finished on such a note, with Jonathan Trott and Ian Bell refusing to yield, facing a combined 616 balls between them."  


In these modern times, a strike rate under 50 and three runs per over is considered funereal. It brought us victory in a place that is so hard for overseas teams to succeed in. That we ignore those lessons now is down to the influence of one thing. The mention of Compton is also important. Runs-a-plenty he was not but Compton supported Cook. In 23 innings they had three century partnerships. A look at other partnerships.

Cook and Jennings: 18 innings, 1 ton partnership. 
Cook and Stoneman: 20 innings, 0 ton
Cook and Lyth: 13 innings, 1 ton. 
Cook and Robson: 11 innings, 0 ton. 
Cook and Carberry: 12 innings, 1 ton. 
Cook and Hales: 21 innings, 1 ton. 

As much as Cook could and has played the sheet anchor role, it's pretty clear that having someone there who could be the sheet anchor at the other end helped Cook, perhaps another reason why he was so successful with Trott. One holds it together, gives the other some room to attack, they can swap over easily. 

Cook and Trott partnerships: 51 inning, 10 ton partnerships. 

Agree.  The value of defensive cricket is underappreciated. 

Slip catching success is an interesting one.   I believe part of that is down to fielding behind the stumps in England is one of the more difficult than elsewhere as the ball moves around.  From my memory, Bangladesh looked like conditions were tough to keep and field in the slips as well.

Sky Sports put up a stat of slip catching by success over the last 3 years in Test Cricket, I think there was a minimum of 15 chances.  Top of the list was Faf Du Plessis with 97% catch success and bottom of the list was Ali Cook with 70% success, Faf Du Plessis having the highest catch ratio, his figures he plays a lot of white ball cricket whilst Ali Cook plays near enough nothing. 

Of course it's just two players and they don't represent the entire situation but I'm not of the belief it is only white ball cricket which has diminished the standards of slip fielding is truly absolute, it may have some application in some context though. 

scrumhalf

Heartfeltdawn said:

Cook and Jennings: 18 innings, 1 ton partnership. 

And there it will remain. Jennings out to the fifth ball of the day. Bye-bye. Time to pick someone else.

crunchman

Cook now out as well.

See the replay of the Jennings dismissal.  Feet didn't move at all.  Just on the crease.  Neither forward or back.  He just doesn't look like a test batsman.

Heartfeltdawn

earwighoney said:

Agree.  The value of defensive cricket is underappreciated. 

Slip catching success is an interesting one.   I believe part of that is down to fielding behind the stumps in England is one of the more difficult than elsewhere as the ball moves around.  From my memory, Bangladesh looked like conditions were tough to keep and field in the slips as well.

Sky Sports put up a stat of slip catching by success over the last 3 years in Test Cricket, I think there was a minimum of 15 chances.  Top of the list was Faf Du Plessis with 97% catch success and bottom of the list was Ali Cook with 70% success, Faf Du Plessis having the highest catch ratio, his figures he plays a lot of white ball cricket whilst Ali Cook plays near enough nothing. 

Of course it's just two players and they don't represent the entire situation but I'm not of the belief it is only white ball cricket which has diminished the standards of slip fielding is truly absolute, it may have some application in some context though. 

That's some good stats there on the slip catching. It isn't a surprise that a South African would be top of the pile. With the greater bounce and pace of SA wickets coupled with a quicker seam attack and atmospheric conditions, the slip cordon can stand back a bit further and thus have greater time to react. In England with our slower and lower wickets, the cordon has to come up a bit and you'll get more balls dying on the way to the cordon. 

My comments over white ball cricket is more about the quantity of good slip fielders. You'll have no more than two slips for a 50 over game, possibly none for T20. Going back to the 1980s, you could rely on most sides having two absolute gun slip fielders. Combos like Kallis and Smith for SA, Marks Taylor and Waugh for Australia, and others. England in 2005 had two reliable unspectacular types in Tresco and Flintoff. Now for England... our options look very poor. Cook shouldn't be in that cordon in my view. But who should? Buttler's shelled some, Jennings looks horrific in there (the missed catch where it's gone through his the other day is proper village), Stokes generally goes wider... 

So white ball cricket undoubtedly has made outfielding better. Some of the boundary catches being taken in the Blast this season have been superb 

Heartfeltdawn

scrumhalf said:

Heartfeltdawn said:

Cook and Jennings: 18 innings, 1 ton partnership. 

And there it will remain. Jennings out to the fifth ball of the day. Bye-bye. Time to pick someone else.

Maybe a whole new opening partnership then. If England wanted to be daring, go with something totally new for Test cricket: Rory Burns and Jason Roy. 

crunchman

Just seen the replay of the Cook wicket.  Poor foot movement again.  His back foot moves after he has hit it.  His bat is way outside his eyeline.

Cook does have the quality, but he needs a change of technique.  Bowlers have worked him out.  If they go round the wicket, pitch it up and get a bit of movement then he will nick it.

If they pick him for Sri Lanka, the ball won't move like that.  He'll probably do better than some of the young guys in county cricket against the Sri Lankan spinners - but that won't help for the Ashes next year.

Heartfeltdawn

Very similar positions. It's part technique and part strategy that is failing. Ishant isn't someone you think would get a load of LBW decisions but his percentage of LBW victims is actually about the same as Dale Steyn and more than Jimmy Anderson, both bowlers you associate with pitching the ball up. Because of his height, people stay on the crease or back to Ishant, and so those deliveries that don't bounce will snare people. 

He bowls just short of a good length for the most part. Batsmen will bat out of the crease to negate swing. Ishant isn't a swinger (or so my mum says) and less than 10% of his deliveries will hit the stumps. If you bat out of your crease, you can negate his length, knowing you're pretty safe if you bat further out when it comes to LBW and force him to do something new. 

https://i.imgur.com/HvFsvZm.png

 

sixstringsupplies

Decent partnership building now. Given these two are our most naturally attack minded players, it must be a struggle to reign it in as they have. If only the top 4 had showed a little more fight.

this is likely the last partnership though - I can see the wheels falling off when one of these two goes. 

Heartfeltdawn

It shows what you can do when you put in some application and that some time being defensive can open up the opposition later on. 

scrumhalf

And it's all going tits up (as Jim Swanton was fond of saying). Seven down.

sixstringsupplies

right then - what is your XI for the next test match? Starts next thursday I believe. Or  would you keep the same team? 

For me:

1) Cook
2) Jennings
3) Bell
4) Root
5) Stokes
6) Pope
7) Buttler
8) Curran
9) Rashid
10) Broad
11) Anderson

I'm assuming Bairstow is out with a broken finger and Woakes....harsh, but I believe Curran offers more with the ball more being a left armer.

Ian Bell was discarded far too early by the ECB - he was part of the collapse culture at the time, but noone else is putting their hands up.

I would drop Jennings, but I can't see anyone else capable. I know Burns has scored a few runs, but it would be yet another batsman in and out within 5 tests. 

Nick Compton's name has been mentioned by pundits because he has the test match batting patience, but I'm not sure he is playing much these days.

NickL

Moeen Ali seems to be in decent county form with bat and ball at the moment - a double hundred and 6-49 in the Championship last week - and was already in the test squad. Is Southampton a ground where a second spinner would be useful?

Heartfeltdawn

Compo hasn't played this season so isn't an option. CC match that ended today at Southampton saw Liam Dawson getting considerable turn. You need a frontline spinner and a second option. India should play Jadeja alongside Ashwin. 

For England.... eh, by gum. It's such a hard choice. All the talk is that Jennings will get the series to nail his spot down. If we win at Southampton, then final Test is a dead rubber so you might well see some fun changes there, perhaps both openers if Jennings fails at Southampton moving out for an experimental line up (I'd love to see Burns and Roy opening at Test level because it'd be one of the maddest bits of selection ever). 

So Southampton:

Cook
Jennings
Root
Moeen (his county coach was making the case for him to bat at 4 for England)
Pope
Stokes or Curran (BS has a small knee niggle. If not 100% fit, Curran in). 
Buttler
Rashid
Broad
Anderson

scrumhalf

Bloody hell, they've recalled James Vince.

Well, the modern generation now has its own Bill Athey.

guitars4you

There is talk about Bairstow will be okay to bat - If so assume Butler will take the gloves - If so is it worth letting Bairstow open with Cook and play this match only as a batsman

So - Cook - Bairstow  - Root - Pope - Stokes  - Butler  - Woakes - Curran - Rashid - Broad - Anderson   

sixstringsupplies

Interesting selections. I think Ali will get the nod and sincerely hope they make room for Curran, regardless of Stokes’ fitness.

im surprised that Bairstow is possibly going to bat only. I’ve kept wicket, and batted. Batting with a broken finger can’t be fun. Particularly with the pace of India’s bowlers. 

Heartfeltdawn

if YJB can bat but not keep wicket, then it isn't worth the risk. Ask Tim Paine about the danger of finger injuries and how they can balls up your career. 

Weather in Southampton leading up to 30th August is patchy. One day dry, one day wet. Horses for courses selection. If it's dry and looks like a turner, you play Moeen, if it doesn't then you play Curran (assuming Stokes is fit).