To partner Cook?

Surely there must be someone out there.

The England cricket team seem to mirror the football side in that it has some very good players, but the rest are mediocre at best.

Spijed wrote:To partner Cook?

Surely there must be someone out there.

The England cricket team seem to mirror the football side in that it has some very good players, but the rest are mediocre at best.

Hameed - Made for an Ozzy tour

I agree that Hameed must surely be close to getting his chance.

It's a bit harsh judging the batsmeñ on this home summer. The ball has moved around more than I've ever seen, even by English standards.
The bowlers have been way on top for all three sides.

It's not the lack of scores.

It's the batsmen at 2, 3 and 5 showing the same flaws time and again in their dismissals.

Hopefully Malan will rectify tomorrow. A battling 50 from him tomorrow will go a long way toward winning this test.

Socrates wrote:It's not the lack of scores.

It's the batsmen at 2, 3 and 5 showing the same flaws time and again in their dismissals.

Hopefully Malan will rectify tomorrow. A battling 50 from him tomorrow will go a long way toward winning this test.

Malan looks promising has scored some important runs,in the context of this game a 50-60 could be pivotal,Stoneman and Westley must be approaching last chance saloon in the second dig,as ever the problem is who replaces them, Hameed should open showing some form recently, no3 is a problem you could promote Root but the danger then is Cook and Root could be exposed to the new ball early.

Root is getting exposed to the new ball after 7/8 overs pretty regularly anyway.

I think there's perhaps been a bit too much chopping and changing in the top order. Perhaps we have to accept that we're not going to find a Cook/Root quality batsmen at 2,3 and 5 and so need to decide who our best option is and stick with them.

Stoneman should have been selected earlier in the season so that he could be better evaluated. His stats are poor, but on at least 2 occasions i can think of, he got balls that were just about unplayable.

Think Hameed and Hales should go as openers to partner Cook.
Positions 3 and 5 are more worrying and I have no suggestions for those slots

I would stick Hales in at 3 and Bairstow at 5.

A couple in the lancs league they might have to pay um though utc

DAVETHEVICAR wrote:Think Hameed and Hales should go as openers to partner Cook.
Positions 3 and 5 are more worrying and I have no suggestions for those slots

Hales should definitely go based on his form this season, but remember that he has moved to the middle order at Notts. Can't see a logic in taking him as an opener, where he has not looked comfortable in test cricket, and a position he has now even vacated in County cricket.
He's in my team at 5
Hales, Stokes, Bairstow, Ali and Woakes would be a formidably powerful middle order, and if only 2 of them came off in each innings they could be quite destructive.

Who are your top 4
Assume Broad and Anderson are your 10 and 11

DAVETHEVICAR wrote:Who are your top 4
Assume Broad and Anderson are your 10 and 11

Due to the selectors messing things up this summer, I'm not sure, but 2 are obvious - Root and Cook.
I'd most likely go with Hameed and Stoneman as openers / no. 3, and Malan has a chance to secure a place in this test
Root could, of course, bat at 3 if they decide to go with Malan at 4, since he always comes in against the new ball anyway.
As things stand I would probably have those 5 as the batting options in the top 4.
Hameed should be sent out to Australia asap to get experience on their wickets. he definitely has a better technique than the others so is worth nurturing and coaching for the 5 day game.
(Broad is by no means a certainty nowadays. If Roland-Jones had played at Headingley I believe we would have won easily, but on Ausstralian wickets I would think Broad has the edge over Jones and Woakes. He'll be a walking wicket though on fast Australian tracks).

nil_desperandum wrote:Due to the selectors messing things up this summer, I'm not sure, but 2 are obvious - Root and Cook.
I'd most likely go with Hameed and Stoneman as openers / no. 3, and Malan has a chance to secure a place in this test
Root could, of course, bat at 3 if they decide to go with Malan at 4, since he always comes in against the new ball anyway.
As things stand I would probably have those 5 as the batting options in the top 4.
Hameed should be sent out to Australia asap to get experience on their wickets. he definitely has a better technique than the others so is worth nurturing and coaching for the 5 day game.
(Broad is by no means a certainty nowadays. If Roland-Jones had played at Headingley I believe we would have won easily, but on Ausstralian wickets I would think Broad has the edge over Jones and Woakes. He'll be a walking wicket though on fast Australian tracks).

Broad would be picked before Jimmy in Australian conditions.
It might be worth going with 5 quick bowlers if we're not getting benefit from the extra batter. Someone like Wood or Finn for the extra bounce. It would keep them fresh in the high temperatures.

Quickenthetempo wrote:Broad would be picked before Jimmy in Australian conditions.
It might be worth going with 5 quick bowlers if we're not getting benefit from the extra batter. Someone like Wood or Finn for the extra bounce. It would keep them fresh in the high temperatures.

The way Anderson and Broad have bowled this summer, there's no way you would pick him ahead of Jimmy, and also statistically Anderson has a better record than Stuart Broad in Australia.

It's not the players, it's cricket in general.
30 years ago, no way would 14 wickets have fallen on the first day. Players 'played' themselves in, and if wickets fell early the following batsmen dug in and picked their shots. Today everybody swings their bat at everything. T20 and the short game are to blame, all exciting formats but they teach cricketers nothing about test match cricket. How many modern tests go 5 days, or end in draws. Anyone can be done by a 'good' ball, but England can chuck their wickets away so cheaply at times. I'm glad my Dad isn't around to see it, it would have driven him mad.

nil_desperandum wrote:The way Anderson and Broad have bowled this summer, there's no way you would pick him ahead of Jimmy, and also statistically Anderson has a better record than Stuart Broad in Australia.

I'm quite surprised that Broads stats are worse than Andersons in Australia. They have both learned to be a lot more economical in away test matches when wickets aren't coming but aren't the superstar bowlers they are over here.

Colburn_Claret wrote:It's not the players, it's cricket in general.
30 years ago, no way would 14 wickets have fallen on the first day. Players 'played' themselves in, and if wickets fell early the following batsmen dug in and picked their shots. Today everybody swings their bat at everything. T20 and the short game are to blame, all exciting formats but they teach cricketers nothing about test match cricket. How many modern tests go 5 days, or end in draws. Anyone can be done by a 'good' ball, but England can chuck their wickets away so cheaply at times. I'm glad my Dad isn't around to see it, it would have driven him mad.

But on the other hand most team scores under 100 will of been posted more than 30 years ago.

Buttler and Hales to open. Imagine how quickly they'd get their no runs.

Of all the players to have opened the batting for England, only Cook, Strauss, Trescothick, and Vaughan have made a real success of the role since Atherton and Stewart began. Of those, Cook made his debut in India and spent the whole of the following summer batting at number 3, and Vaughan started off by batting in the middle order before being promoted. In addition, both Strauss (remarkably, looking back) and Trescothick made their test debuts as openers only after spending an (admittedly short) period in the one day team, making a decent impression and getting some exposure to international cricket.

In addition, both Atherton and Stewart played their formative tests batting at 3.

All of which suggests that starting a test career as an opener, in England (or indeed anywhere outside the sub-continent or West Indies where the slow pitches can make opening the easiest place to bat fluently), is fiendishly difficult and has been an almost insurmountable challenge for the best part of 30 years. So its no surprise that the various contenders who have tried more recently, in an era when new ball bowling in county cricket has been less intensely high-class, have largely failed.

If England want to find a long-term successor to Alistair Cook, they should probably locate the man they really want (which may be Hameed, once he has regained form), and bat him at 3 or 5 in the test team initially.

The England cricket team seem to mirror the football side in that it has some very good players, but the rest are mediocre at best.

Nonsense. We have won plenty at test level over the last 15years and quite a few of the cricket team would get in a world team. I can't think of one England footballer who would be any where near a world eleven!

We are really close to have a cracking test team so it is frustrating that we can't find a couple of test level batsmen for the top 5.