Cricket fred

[Stom]

Woakes giving selectors a good problem to have.

I'm not sure he has, tbh. He's always been a superb bowler when it's overcast in England. But as soon as you put him in a dry, sunny Aussie pitch, his average almost doubles.

I'm not so sure Archer is right yet, though, either. I mean, he has some wonderful disguised variations - perfect for short form cricket - but he goes for a lot of runs and doesn't seem to have the same ability to keep the pressure on that the best bowlers do.

I think he needs to do a lot of work before he's up to the standard we need, tbh. And I'm a big Wood fan, even though he's a bit of a one trick pony, he does that one trick well.

[Galfon]

It was a technical issue with Broad, which he sorted.

maybe some of it, he was slowly becoming just 'good' and not as good as jimmy, or reliable with bat as Woakes.New real quickies arrived.. he has made his mark again and big plus for the squad.

[Banquo]

It was a technical issue with Broad, which he sorted.

maybe some of it, he was slowly becoming just 'good' and not as good as jimmy, or reliable with bat as Woakes.New real quickies arrived.. he has made his mark again and big plus for the squad.

No, it was a genuine issue- he changed to bowling cutters, and that changed his technique and he had to reverse out of that and rediscover his wrist action.

[Banquo]

Woakes giving selectors a good problem to have.

I'm not sure he has, tbh. He's always been a superb bowler when it's overcast in England. But as soon as you put him in a dry, sunny Aussie pitch, his average almost doubles.

I'm not so sure Archer is right yet, though, either. I mean, he has some wonderful disguised variations - perfect for short form cricket - but he goes for a lot of runs and doesn't seem to have the same ability to keep the pressure on that the best bowlers do.

I think he needs to do a lot of work before he's up to the standard we need, tbh. And I'm a big Wood fan, even though he's a bit of a one trick pony, he does that one trick well.

So its a good problem to have when selecting a side to play in England, nicht wahr.....which is the immediate question. If Stokes can bowl, who do you leave out of the next home tests v Pakistan? Archer....even though with nurturing and more red ball cricket he would be a big threat in Oz? I suspect others figures don't look as clever abroad, either.

[Big D]

Woakes giving selectors a good problem to have.

I'm not sure he has, tbh. He's always been a superb bowler when it's overcast in England. But as soon as you put him in a dry, sunny Aussie pitch, his average almost doubles.

I'm not so sure Archer is right yet, though, either. I mean, he has some wonderful disguised variations - perfect for short form cricket - but he goes for a lot of runs and doesn't seem to have the same ability to keep the pressure on that the best bowlers do.

I think he needs to do a lot of work before he's up to the standard we need, tbh. And I'm a big Wood fan, even though he's a bit of a one trick pony, he does that one trick well.

So its a good problem to have when selecting a side to play in England, nicht wahr.....which is the immediate question. If Stokes can bowl, who do you leave out of the next home tests v Pakistan? Archer....even though with nurturing and more red ball cricket he would be a big threat in Oz? I suspect others figures don't look as clever abroad, either.

Has to be Archer or Jimmy IMO depending on conditions. Anderson hasn't picked up any wickets in the second innings in this series but keeps it tight enough and Archer hasn't picked up many wickets full stop.

I'd drop Archer but not against dropping Jimmy as he is at that age where his past heroics don't necessarily indicate future performance.

[Puja]

I'm not sure he has, tbh. He's always been a superb bowler when it's overcast in England. But as soon as you put him in a dry, sunny Aussie pitch, his average almost doubles.

I'm not so sure Archer is right yet, though, either. I mean, he has some wonderful disguised variations - perfect for short form cricket - but he goes for a lot of runs and doesn't seem to have the same ability to keep the pressure on that the best bowlers do.

I think he needs to do a lot of work before he's up to the standard we need, tbh. And I'm a big Wood fan, even though he's a bit of a one trick pony, he does that one trick well.

So its a good problem to have when selecting a side to play in England, nicht wahr.....which is the immediate question. If Stokes can bowl, who do you leave out of the next home tests v Pakistan? Archer....even though with nurturing and more red ball cricket he would be a big threat in Oz? I suspect others figures don't look as clever abroad, either.

Has to be Archer or Jimmy IMO depending on conditions. Anderson hasn't picked up any wickets in the second innings in this series but keeps it tight enough and Archer hasn't picked up many wickets full stop.

I'd drop Archer but not against dropping Jimmy as he is at that age where his past heroics don't necessarily indicate future performance.

I'd agree on Jimmy, but for different reasoning. We want to eke as much out of Jimmy as we can and if that means playing him one test a series, I'm okay with that. I think Archer has to be invested in though - Woakes does the business in England, but we don't play all our games in England and I strongly suspect he would get laughed at on Australian pitches. Archer has the potential to be a real threat there.

Of course, base on this series, the obvious person to drop for the first test is Stuart Broad.

Puja

[Galfon]

No, it was a genuine issue- he changed to bowling cutters, and that changed his technique and he had to reverse out of that and rediscover his wrist action.

That means it was probably a mental issue, possibly borne from general grind and slog from a long and successful career - bowlers never forget arm/wrist/finger technique that brings dividend I would say, if anything learn new tricks along the way.
He looks alot sharper and fired up, maybe the rest helped.

[Banquo]

No, it was a genuine issue- he changed to bowling cutters, and that changed his technique and he had to reverse out of that and rediscover his wrist action.

That means it was probably a mental issue, possibly borne from general grind and slog from a long and successful career - bowlers never forget arm/wrist/finger technique that brings dividend I would say, if anything learn new tricks along the way.
He looks alot sharper and fired up, maybe the rest helped.

He was our best bowler before the rest, statistically. It was described by Hussein as a technical issue- he learned a new trick, but it affected his action. Even high quality bowlers do lose their technique- see Gillespie.

[Banquo]

So its a good problem to have when selecting a side to play in England, nicht wahr.....which is the immediate question. If Stokes can bowl, who do you leave out of the next home tests v Pakistan? Archer....even though with nurturing and more red ball cricket he would be a big threat in Oz? I suspect others figures don't look as clever abroad, either.

Has to be Archer or Jimmy IMO depending on conditions. Anderson hasn't picked up any wickets in the second innings in this series but keeps it tight enough and Archer hasn't picked up many wickets full stop.

I'd drop Archer but not against dropping Jimmy as he is at that age where his past heroics don't necessarily indicate future performance.

I'd agree on Jimmy, but for different reasoning. We want to eke as much out of Jimmy as we can and if that means playing him one test a series, I'm okay with that. I think Archer has to be invested in though - Woakes does the business in England, but we don't play all our games in England and I strongly suspect he would get laughed at on Australian pitches. Archer has the potential to be a real threat there.

Of course, base on this series, the obvious person to drop for the first test is Stuart Broad.

Puja

Quite. But he does need some advice imo, and again, hasn't played much red ball cricket really.

[Stom]

Has to be Archer or Jimmy IMO depending on conditions. Anderson hasn't picked up any wickets in the second innings in this series but keeps it tight enough and Archer hasn't picked up many wickets full stop.

I'd drop Archer but not against dropping Jimmy as he is at that age where his past heroics don't necessarily indicate future performance.

I'd agree on Jimmy, but for different reasoning. We want to eke as much out of Jimmy as we can and if that means playing him one test a series, I'm okay with that. I think Archer has to be invested in though - Woakes does the business in England, but we don't play all our games in England and I strongly suspect he would get laughed at on Australian pitches. Archer has the potential to be a real threat there.

Of course, base on this series, the obvious person to drop for the first test is Stuart Broad.

Puja

Quite. But he does need some advice imo, and again, hasn't played much red ball cricket really.

I guess you’re right in that he needs to play red ball cricket, I just never like to see players learning their trade at the top level, he should be doing that in county cricket.

[Banquo]

I'd agree on Jimmy, but for different reasoning. We want to eke as much out of Jimmy as we can and if that means playing him one test a series, I'm okay with that. I think Archer has to be invested in though - Woakes does the business in England, but we don't play all our games in England and I strongly suspect he would get laughed at on Australian pitches. Archer has the potential to be a real threat there.

Of course, base on this series, the obvious person to drop for the first test is Stuart Broad.

Puja

Quite. But he does need some advice imo, and again, hasn't played much red ball cricket really.

I guess you’re right in that he needs to play red ball cricket, I just never like to see players learning their trade at the top level, he should be doing that in county cricket.

Its certainly a problem- it also used to be where fast bowlers built up their stamina. But even Anderson has only played 250 f/c games, of which 153 are tests- Broad's are 225 and 140 respectively. Jofra's ratio is better but has still only played 38 f/c games...very respectable figures to be fair.

[Banquo]

Nice to see YJB in the runs. His ODI record is excellent- personally, I think he should give up keeping if he wants to get his test batting form back- that said, after 70 tests and an average of 34, maybe his time has gone, unless its replacing Buttler

[Mellsblue]

He’s test quality but needed to be a middle order batsman or not in the team. Not sure whether the moves around the batting order were him, selectors or a bit of both but it hasn’t helped him. From what I’ve heard and read, the desire to be wk stemmed from a lack of self belief that his batting alone was good enough to keep him in the team. If true, it obvs didn’t work out for him.

[Stom]

He’s test quality but needed to be a middle order batsman or not in the team. Not sure whether the moves around the batting order were him, selectors or a bit of both but it hasn’t helped him. From what I’ve heard and read, the desire to be wk stemmed from a lack of self belief that his batting alone was good enough to keep him in the team. If true, it obvs didn’t work out for him.

He also developed a flaw in his game, was told to go away and work on it and came back with the same flaw. Remind you of another Yorkshire batsman who had a wonderful average fit a while before falling off a cliff?

[Mellsblue]

He’s test quality but needed to be a middle order batsman or not in the team. Not sure whether the moves around the batting order were him, selectors or a bit of both but it hasn’t helped him. From what I’ve heard and read, the desire to be wk stemmed from a lack of self belief that his batting alone was good enough to keep him in the team. If true, it obvs didn’t work out for him.

He also developed a flaw in his game, was told to go away and work on it and came back with the same flaw. Remind you of another Yorkshire batsman who had a wonderful average fit a while before falling off a cliff?

What was the flaw? Did it manifest whilst keeping?

[Banquo]

He’s test quality but needed to be a middle order batsman or not in the team. Not sure whether the moves around the batting order were him, selectors or a bit of both but it hasn’t helped him. From what I’ve heard and read, the desire to be wk stemmed from a lack of self belief that his batting alone was good enough to keep him in the team. If true, it obvs didn’t work out for him.

He also developed a flaw in his game, was told to go away and work on it and came back with the same flaw. Remind you of another Yorkshire batsman who had a wonderful average fit a while before falling off a cliff?

He had previously fixed one flaw when rejected first time round, and came back with a new very successful technique; I think there is a different issue now. Its unlike Ballance, who just lost his bottle against pace. But I suspect YJB's time may have gone.

[Banquo]

this shows selection dilemma well

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/53636915

[Digby]

Best players Vs best team.

[Puja]

this shows selection dilemma well

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/53636915

Very interesting point of the variety bringing better results out of the other bowlers. I wouldn't want to be the selector at the moment - some very tough calls.

Puja

[Banquo]

this shows selection dilemma well

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/53636915

Very interesting point of the variety bringing better results out of the other bowlers. I wouldn't want to be the selector at the moment - some very tough calls.

Puja

Just as having an accurate and dangerous bowler like Anderson brings results at the other end. Think I'd rather be a selector with these problems than a selector with no choices

[Big D]

For me it is Broad plus one of Anderson and Woakes and one of Archer and Wood. With the caveat that Stokes is fit to bowl.

I respect Anderson a lot and half expect him to prove me wrong (good!) but in his last 20 innings he hasn't taken a wicket in 9 of them and has only taken more than one 7 times. In 20 innings the only 3 times Woakes chipped in with 0 were ones he bowled 10, 7 and 3 overs.

The time is coming where Root and the selectors will need to make a big decision.

Stokes not being fit to bowl is huge. Pressure on the batting line up.

[Banquo]

Still think Buttler at 6 is too high, as is Root at 3. Stokes being able to bowl or not makes a huge difference. Solid start from Pakistan.

[Stom]

Still think Buttler at 6 is too high, as is Root at 3. Stokes being able to bowl or not makes a huge difference. Solid start from Pakistan.

They can perform in those roles if they apply themselves. I’m a bit more worried about the bowling attack being a little one paced with broad, Anderson and woakes together.

[Banquo]

Still think Buttler at 6 is too high, as is Root at 3. Stokes being able to bowl or not makes a huge difference. Solid start from Pakistan.

They can perform in those roles if they apply themselves. I’m a bit more worried about the bowling attack being a little one paced with broad, Anderson and woakes together.

They are the wrong places for them to bat; Pakistan also have a pretty tasty pace attack. Ill balanced unless Stokes bowls (also batting one place higher than ideal imo, though he has done Ok there ).

[Stom]

Also, when was the last England test where the commentators could not say:

England have bowled a little bit too short.

It’s a plague upon our bowlers.