The cricket thread

Stuckfast

IMO Moeen Ali is the best spinner England have, Rashid included. Yes he had a horrible Ashes, but apparently was bowling with a split finger the whole time. He's also a genuine all-rounder. If we have him, Curran, Woakes and Stokes that's a hell of a batting line-up.

Can't believe they have recalled bloody James Vince again.

Teetonetal

Stuckfast said:

IMO Moeen Ali is the best spinner England have, Rashid included. Yes he had a horrible Ashes, but apparently was bowling with a split finger the whole time. He's also a genuine all-rounder.

On his day he is also a match winner. He was excellent last summer.

Honestly you'd think that selectors would realise it's exactly at the pinnicle of sports, where you can't risk injured players. So often across national sports a name gets picked regardless and then it's wondered why they don't perform. You could tell he was just not up to it in the ashes.

Now, Moeen is bang in form,  a double hundred and a 6 for in the last game and it's known he can do it at international level. Get him in the team.

sixstringsupplies

Now, Moeen is bang in form,  a double hundred and a 6 for in the last game and it's known he can do it at international level. Get him in the team.

You got your wish - Moeen in the team. Glad Curran is in the team too.
Looks a strong XI...despite a near 11 of allrounders. What happened to the glory days of 5 specialist batsman, an allrounder, a wicket keeper and 4 bowlers (3 seam and 1 spin) 

Heartfeltdawn

Some curious elements from the BBC article on the squad: 

"We're very fortunate to be blessed with two brilliant international keepers," said Root. "Jos has a huge amount of experience. It's a no-brainer with a slight injury to Jonny that Jos comes in to take that role.

"There's no assurances been given to Jonny. It's like anything in international sport. If you get an opportunity and you take it, someone else has to work hard to get your spot.

If this is the case, then it paints an interesting picture. YJB hasn't gone to India to play in the IPL. Test cricket has been his priority: it hasn't for Buttler. So the idea of there being no loyalty toward the number 1 keeper, which YJB is, is bloody weird. However you then think about loyalty in other areas. Show loyalty in Jennings and Ali, Pope gets none and someone like Malan probably won't be seen again for England in Test colours. 

You look at Stoneman, Vince, Malan, Pope, Jennings, and others. They're averaging 20-30. Essentially we drop one of them when they sink to a mid-20s Test average and replace them with someone who ends up averaging mid 20s. They aren't given the time to develop. Malan is out of the squad after 15 Tests, 1 ton, 724 runs at just under 28. 

That's better than Jacques Kallis after 15 Tests (608 runs at 26.47). Malcolm Marshall after 15 Tests: 45 wickets at 29: he ended up with an average 9 runs less than that start. It takes time to develop even a great like him. One SK Warne had 14 wickets after 8 Tests at 50: even Ian Salisbury had more after 8 Tests (albeit at 60)*.

The Bayliss era at Test level is all about failing to develop players for me. Outside of Broad and Anderson, we don't have any clear first pick seamers as they're either crocked, lost form, or inconsistent like Woakes. We still have no recognised opening pair, the middle order is a lottery, we're hedging our bets on Moeen again who has batted nearly everywhere in the top and middle order, and the captain says that we haven't even got a first choice wicketkeeper for fuck's sake.

*I could go into my usual cricket debate about how underrated Peter Such was... instead I'll say that after 8 Tests Rashid had 33 wickets to Warne's 14. If only we'd handled Rashid better.

sixstringsupplies

Heartfeltdawn said:

Some curious elements from the BBC article on the squad: 

"We're very fortunate to be blessed with two brilliant international keepers," said Root. "Jos has a huge amount of experience. It's a no-brainer with a slight injury to Jonny that Jos comes in to take that role.

"There's no assurances been given to Jonny. It's like anything in international sport. If you get an opportunity and you take it, someone else has to work hard to get your spot.

If this is the case, then it paints an interesting picture. YJB hasn't gone to India to play in the IPL. Test cricket has been his priority: it hasn't for Buttler. So the idea of there being no loyalty toward the number 1 keeper, which YJB is, is bloody weird. However you then think about loyalty in other areas. Show loyalty in Jennings and Ali, Pope gets none and someone like Malan probably won't be seen again for England in Test colours. 

You look at Stoneman, Vince, Malan, Pope, Jennings, and others. They're averaging 20-30. Essentially we drop one of them when they sink to a mid-20s Test average and replace them with someone who ends up averaging mid 20s. They aren't given the time to develop. Malan is out of the squad after 15 Tests, 1 ton, 724 runs at just under 28. 

That's better than Jacques Kallis after 15 Tests (608 runs at 26.47). Malcolm Marshall after 15 Tests: 45 wickets at 29: he ended up with an average 9 runs less than that start. It takes time to develop even a great like him. One SK Warne had 14 wickets after 8 Tests at 50: even Ian Salisbury had more after 8 Tests (albeit at 60)*.

The Bayliss era at Test level is all about failing to develop players for me. Outside of Broad and Anderson, we don't have any clear first pick seamers as they're either crocked, lost form, or inconsistent like Woakes. We still have no recognised opening pair, the middle order is a lottery, we're hedging our bets on Moeen again who has batted nearly everywhere in the top and middle order, and the captain says that we haven't even got a first choice wicketkeeper for fuck's sake.

*I could go into my usual cricket debate about how underrated Peter Such was... instead I'll say that after 8 Tests Rashid had 33 wickets to Warne's 14. If only we'd handled Rashid better.

I completely agree - players are not given the time to develop in the Test arena. It is no coincidence that our world class players (or recent, in some cases) - Cook, Root, Broad and Anderson, all made their debuts at a very young age and were left to develop and learn the international trade (ok Anderson was mucked about a bit in his early career by England)

I do however, prefer Buttler was WK and Bairstow as a batsman, No point having a specialist batsman come in at number 7.

The problem for Malan is his age. I can see the point in playing a Pope, or a Hameed, averaging below 30 after 15 tests or so and carrying on with them, allowing them to develop. Someone who is 30 already, rightly or wrongly, won't be shown the same level of patience. 

PS i meant to ask you...where do you get your stats for players after a certain number of tests? Is it on cricinfo?

Heartfeltdawn

Yep, all Cricinfo. Cricket stats are fascinating things to see trends and patterns, and one is that it doesn't matter how good you are, it takes time to bed into Test cricket. People don't consider that Dale Steyn had only 8 wickets at 52 after 3 Tests, that a young Tendulkar averaged 35 after 13 Tests with one ton, or how Glenn McGrath grew into the player he was. After 8 Tests, he had 19 wickets at 43.68 at a strike rate of 101 and his eighth Test saw him have match figures of 0 for 101 against England. He rather improved on that in later years...

Anderson was mucked about pretty badly in his younger days. As much as Troy Cooley did for the seamers, getting Jimmy to change his action was a poor choice. Root too suffered from being mucked about: the days of opening seem a long way away now. I've said this many times elsewhere that in Root, YJB, and Buttler, we have three amazing talents. All three of them have been mucked about. Jos left Somerset because he wanted the gloves: I thought he should have focused on the batting primarily because he to me was the only person in the country who could replace Pietersen and play in a similar manner to him. I still maintain that now. He's shown he can play in a more cautious way and then explode into life when the bowlers are a bit more tired. He shouldn't be down at 7. It's beyond sanity in my view that you can keep him down the order and basically throw a young player like Pope in at 4 and expect him to handle it. Young players should come in lower down the order and feel their way into the game for the most part (remember Root debuting at 6? Ponting debuted at 5, Tendulkar at 6. Interestingly the Windies went the other way: both Richards and Lara debuted at 4. I agree, there is no point in a specialist batsman coming in at 7... but this is what we had in India over the winter 2016 tour with YJB having the gloves and batting at 5 and JB in at 7. 

YJB currently averages 39: JB 35. That's pisspoor considering how talented they both are and how poor some of the opposition sides are now. Graeme Hick will always be considered a Test failure averaging 31 and he played against some of the best sides and players in the history of the game. We don't come up against Ambrose and Walsh or Wasim and Waqar now like Hickie did (and whilst debuts are still in the mind, Hick debuted at 3 facing Ambrose, Walsh, Marshall, and Patrick Patterson who was still bowling fucking quick back then prior to his no-ball and run up problems). 

Malan and age: it is an odd thing when more patience is given to a 24 year old than a 30 year old. If the 30 year old succeeds, you can get 6 to 10 years out of him at Test level. That's not a small length of time, it'd cover two Ashes series. It's even more odd when the young ones who have been given chances haven't done anywhere near enough to show they should get more. Now James Vince on his day is a classy bloke. He's scored well in domestic cricket. Do you give him another chance? Is he worth more patience rather than Malan? That's the call selectors have to make. If all you do is ignore both and throw another possibility into the equation like Pope based on heavy domestic scoring, then you make it all the more complex. Of course, it is harder to make selection calls in the manner of Duncan Fletcher regarding Trescothick and Simon Jones when county cricket is a bit rubbish at the minute when it comes to breeding potential Test cricketers...

Teetonetal

^lots of wisdom there. We seem to live in an age of win at all costs. Players need time and development. They are just not given it sadly. 

Heartfeltdawn

Michael Vaughan is another who was given time to develop. After 16 Tests, an average of 31 was hardly world beating. It soon picked up and so did his captaincy and our results. 

If there were a steady stream of individuals racking up big scores and making a claim for a batting slot, then I could understand some of the short termism. We don't have that, we're not Australia in the 90's when their A team would have beaten most Test sides. Instead we seem to pick people who might succeed without having any conviction that they will succeed, albeit that Ed Smith has rather bucked this trend with the return of Buttler. 

Jennings in and out already. Horrible dismissal. root then plumb on a no-ball. That's what happens when you lose form, you don't get those breaks and Jennings needs a break or two. 

crunchman

Root gone now.  Might have been a good toss to lose.

Bairstow in in the 8th over when the ball is swinging might not end well.

scrumhalf

28-3.

And it was such a lovely morning.

Heartfeltdawn

Ishant Sharma is bowling beautifully. No coincidence that he worked with Jason Gillespie at Sussex earlier in the season. 

Heartfeltdawn

It gets worse and worse... 

crunchman

Listening to Boycott's view on TMS was quite entertaining.

They just don't know how to bat in this kind of cricket any more.

scrumhalf

I've stopped watching and now have TMS on.

As they've been saying, it's a very unbalanced batting lineup. Too few specialist batsmen although you can blame the counties for not prividing many options. They drop Pope after one test, they drop Woakes after a great performance in the last test (has he been worse than Stokes?). Too many 6s/7s batting across the lineup.

None of which would matter if we weren't four down before lunch on the first day having chosen to bat. But we are, and it does. Oh for the days of losing the fourth wicket at 90.

Heartfeltdawn

The one person who does, Cook, is playing nothing shots like that. I still don't think he's finished at Test level but I would drop him for the winter. Give him a complete break from the game, see how that goes with an eye to the Ashes next year. 

crunchman

Who is this woman on TMS talking about "executing their skills".  She is rubbish.  Not because she's a woman.  She just isn't good.  I like Isa Guha on Sky.

Heartfeltdawn

Alison Mitchell's OK. A lot of the female commentators overuse the cliches (witness the ones on the Big Bash for sheer tedium). Isa Guha's pretty decent. Donna Symonds is probably the best of the female commentators. 

sixstringsupplies

This is tragic viewing!

Woakes is injured by the way - only reason he is not playing

crunchman

Heartfeltdawn said:

Alison Mitchell's OK. A lot of the female commentators overuse the cliches (witness the ones on the Big Bash for sheer tedium). Isa Guha's pretty decent. Donna Symonds is probably the best of the female commentators. 

To be fair to her, she's not as bad as Michael Vaughan.  He does spout some rubbish.

Heartfeltdawn

Yes, Woakes has a quad injury. Yet another bowler who has been hampered by injury.

I have close to zero time for Michael Vaughan. He's very much rooted in his time and way of doing things, amusingly a bit like Botham. Nasser Hussain across the various platforms is my favourite commentator because he balances up his cricketing knowledge from the era he played with respecting the changes in cricket now. This was why Richie Benaud was so good: respect for the past but also positive words for the present and the future, as he showed when he approved of World Series Cricket.