https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/53363367
( is the 'Brian Broad' official in this Test the same as Chris Broad, Stuart's dad ?. A rare conflict of interest if so

Our batting is a tad shunt it has to be said.Stom wrote:I’d love to see Foakes get his chance but if it’s between Buttler and Barstow, I know which one I choose, and he’s not a red head.
I’m more concerned with Sibley. He’s not looked like the great accumulator... hope he comes good, though you could always move Crawley up and Pope will eventually be #3.
I’d say it’s not too bad now, just a little green in places and without root a little shunt.Banquo wrote:Our batting is a tad shunt it has to be said.Stom wrote:I’d love to see Foakes get his chance but if it’s between Buttler and Barstow, I know which one I choose, and he’s not a red head.
I’m more concerned with Sibley. He’s not looked like the great accumulator... hope he comes good, though you could always move Crawley up and Pope will eventually be #3.
Burns is ok, but barely averaging 34 despite being 'settled'; Sibley has had 7 starts and starts not to look the part (you expressed concern yourself); Crawley is new, and looks promising ( 5 tests at 31...) ; Root has batted poorly in the last year, and captaincy and runs look like they are incompatible; Stokes is a quality six or seven, and pulls of some remarkable innings, but still only averages 37, which is low for a 5; Pope looks good I grant you (but averages 41). The lower order still is collapso city, even when stickimng Woakes and Curran in. Fag paper between being a tad shunt (and even there, that's about collective failure rather than individuals- it was bad in the first innings and collective failed from 5-11 in the second) and 'not too bad. (based on potential rather than actual) imo.Stom wrote:I’d say it’s not too bad now, just a little green in places and without root a little shunt.Banquo wrote:Our batting is a tad shunt it has to be said.Stom wrote:I’d love to see Foakes get his chance but if it’s between Buttler and Barstow, I know which one I choose, and he’s not a red head.
I’m more concerned with Sibley. He’s not looked like the great accumulator... hope he comes good, though you could always move Crawley up and Pope will eventually be #3.
Pope, Crawley and Sibley are all newcomers, Stokes has started to put together some more consistent scores, Burns is OK, just leaves the wk, where Buttler is out of sorts, YJB isn’t as good as he thinks he is and Foakes is overlooked
Given how well he bowled iin the second innings, and given what we have ended up with I'd have wanted him, we could be very pop gun if this track is as flat as they are saying at the mo.Stom wrote:Well, in a round score way I got my wish with archer missing out, lol. Stupid.
....as I said, a tad shunt. All three uber soft dismissals.Digby wrote:I was about to say something nice