England post ashes 13/14

[vic_orthdox]

You don't solve your spinner question by not playing one.

Give Stokes the chance to bat at 6, play a keeper and then pick a proper spinner.

 

[grecian]

You don't solve your spinner question by not playing one.

Give Stokes the chance to bat at 6, play a keeper and then pick a proper spinner.

spinners union in effect?, nah mate there's no-one good enough at the moment, let's see how we go through the year, and if anyone stands out by July-August time. I think giving Stokes the chance to bat at 6 may be detrimental TBH, give him the chance to bat lower and develop his bowling.

 

[vic_orthdox]

You give him the chance and the impetus to improve his batting and you end up with a solid top 7 over the next ten years with the opportunity to play five bowlers. Nothing I've seen from Stokes would make me want to put him at 8 and Patel at 6, as was earlier suggested.

Why limit him to being a good number 8? Put the heat on him to be a better version of Watson, his bowling has shown a bit but there is much more potential in his batting.

 

[howardj]

Vaughan's Team

Root
Cook
Bell
Pietersen
Ballance
Stokes
Bairstow
Borthwick
Broad
Anderson
Finn

 

[Mark68]

Ahh is it, good then, does give them a bit of time

Edit: Just looked at our fixture, WTF is that stupid Windies tour about?

Anyway, first four test matches are Lords, Headingley, Lords, Trent Bridge. Have to say even more happy if we don't play a spinner. Monty has been good at Old Trafford and The Oval, and I'd have probably giving him a shot there. All the spinning pitches are near the end of the year, so to start, I'm even more convinced no specialist spinner.

I can see this new breed of young Indian batsmen playing Monty with the proverbial stick of rhubarb, particularly with his loss of parts of his action. Doesn't look the same bowler to me. We have to pick a strong seam attack in England, including Stokes.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Ollie Rayner is a name I haven't seen mentioned in the spin discussion but one that is worthy of consideration.

Bats (averages mid-20s), is tall so gets good bounce and dip, accurate and, whilst not a massive turner of the ball, can utilise pitches that assist. Took what I thought should've been a more eye catching 15 verses Surrey at The Oval in Sept, which is usually the kind of eye-catching and timely performance that brings a chap into consideration, especially in light of Kerrigan's woes on debut at the same venue.

 

[Prince EWS]

Ollie Rayner is a name I haven't seen mentioned in the spin discussion but one that is worthy of consideration.

Bats (averages mid-20s), is tall so gets good bounce and dip, accurate and, whilst not a massive turner of the ball, can utilise pitches that assist. Took what I thought should've been a more eye catching 15 verses Surrey at The Oval in Sept, which is usually the kind of eye-catching and timely performance that brings a chap into consideration, especially in light of Kerrigan's woes on debut at the same venue.

Yeah good shout; someone I noticed last season too. Has never looked much when I've seen him bowl on TV though.

I'd just pick Panesar for now though.

 

[Spikey]

You don't solve your spinner question by not playing one.

agree with this. particularly if stokes is playing. reminder: lyon was picked off 4 FC games or something. i'm sure there's at least one spinner in England that the selectors think has the tools to perform at international level (even if they end up failing).

 

[Garson007]

Vaughan's Team

Root
Cook
Bell
Pietersen
Ballance
Stokes
Bairstow
Borthwick
Broad
Anderson
Finn

I think best option here is to go with a 'B' team; a team filled with players with a surname starting with a B.

 

[grecian]

You give him the chance and the impetus to improve his batting and you end up with a solid top 7 over the next ten years with the opportunity to play five bowlers. Nothing I've seen from Stokes would make me want to put him at 8 and Patel at 6, as was earlier suggested.

Why limit him to being a good number 8? Put the heat on him to be a better version of Watson, his bowling has shown a bit but there is much more potential in his batting.

You're probably right, but personally after our tail capitulating in such a woeful manner, I wouldn't mind a decent bat at 8.

The point being of not playing a spinner, is only if you get Moeen in the side, if you look at our EPP stuff this year, he's bowling as many overs as anyone.

He's a late developer with the bowling really, but he's taken over 60 wickets combined in the last two season, at about an average of 30.N

Admittedly his form with the bat has been disappointing in the top division, but he was great in all forms last year, maybe he's kicking on.

 

[Pothas]

If Kerrigan starts the season well then I would go with him, his debut was so hideously bad that I can't believe he bowls anything like that the rest of the time. Obviously if it happens again then we forget about him for the foreseeable future but his first class performances have been so much better than anyone else, deserves another go.

 

[GuyFromLancs]

1. Cook
2. Carberry
3. Bell
4. KP
5. Ballance
6. Stokes
7. Bairstow
8. Broad
9. Finn
10. Anderson
11. Monty

No Root, he needs to figure out what exactly he is for out there. Although Carberry didn't exactly inspire last time out either.

 

[Tangles]

Carberry looked like he was batting for his life. It destroyed any confidence he had. All he was looking to do was survive. Doesn't naturally turn over strike so that's a problem.

 

[MW1304]

I think best option here is to go with a 'B' team; a team filled with players with a surname starting with a B.

Burns
Bell-Drummond
Bell (c)
Bopara
Ballance
Bairstow
Buttler (wk)
Borthwick
Bresnan
Barker
Broad

Um...strong tail.

 

[91Jmay]

Burns
Bell-Drummond
Bell (c)
Bopara
Ballance
Bairstow
Buttler (wk)
Borthwick
Bresnan
Barker
Broad

Um...strong tail.

Most tails are strong when they start at 4.

 

[Watson33]

Can't see why in the world Borthwick was selected as a batsmen/spinner. If you're going for a man who's main job is to bat and only has to bowl a bit of spin, look no further than Moeen Ali. Ridiculous.

 

[Mark68]

Can't see why in the world Borthwick was selected as a batsmen/spinner. If you're going for a man who's main job is to bat and only has to bowl a bit of spin, look no further than Moeen Ali. Ridiculous.

Strange selection. He was way down Durham's list for bowling averages but that isn't the point. A leg-spinner pitted against hyper aggressive in-form batsmen is a disaster waiting to happen and so it proved. It doesn't mean he hasn't got a future if he works hard on his art and learns from a mentor...dare i say Shane?

 

[Watson33]

Strange selection. He was way down Durham's list for bowling averages but that isn't the point. A leg-spinner pitted against hyper aggressive in-form batsmen is a disaster waiting to happen and so it proved. It doesn't mean he hasn't got a future if he works hard on his art and learns from a mentor...dare i say Shane?

I'm not saying he hasn't got a future in test cricket, but for me and many others Moeen Ali should have been given a go ahead of him.

 

[Tangles]

He was already in Sydney and didnt need a plane ticket.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Brought in Tredders too tho, who wasn't.

Part of me can't help but think it was Swann's stamp of approval of Borthwick as his anointed successor that got him the gig, a la Warne and Beer in 10/11.

Whatever happened to him, btw?