***Official*** England in West Indies 2015

[Cabinet96]

I like Borthwick

Honestly, with the runs he's stacking up for Durham, he's starting to look like a not-terrible option if a few batting contenders fall over injured. The English Smitteh, only not as awesome.

He's OK. Should definitely not have been batting at 8 and playing as a main spinner though, and his selection despite not being in the squad for the previous 4 tests said a lot about England's demise. Plus that test just sucked. Literally a Smith ton was the only good thing.

 

[Goughy]

"Moeen isn't England's best spinner because he can bat too" is right up there with "any 'keeper who averages 40 with the bat must be a worse gloveman than the guy who averages 20".

Seriously, Moeen is a genuinely competent off spinner who just so happens to be a better batsman than the usual competent off spinner. Shakib doesn't stop being Bangladesh's best spinner just because he can bat too.

A "competent off spinner" doesnt deserve a place in a Test team. You have to offer a bit more than that. Moeen isnt a front line bowler. As much as people want to say he has improved he just doesnt have the control for different roles different game situations may require. He goes at 3.5 an over in both forms of long cricket which just isnt good enough. He just isnt the bowler or the player people want him to be. There is a lot of good will towards him, just not a lot of good judgement.

 

[Goughy]

Remember all those times England picked uber-specialist bowlers who literally couldn't hold a bat between them?

4th Test: England v New Zealand at The Oval, Aug 19-22, 1999 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Such a huge problem that they've found a lead spinner who can bat! They'd totally want Tufnell instead; he can't bat so he's a better bowler, right?

Ha! You pick a game where the England bowlers took 20 wickets for 400 runs and you want to blame the bowlers! And Yes, Tufnell was a far better bowler. England would be lucky to have him right now.

 

[BeeGee]

Drop Trott and Stokes. Play Lyth and Plunkett (Woakes when fit), Buttler bats six, Ali seven.

 

[hendrix]

Sorry, but if we have any aspirations of performing at a high level in the International game then you have to be aiming to beat one of the weakest opponents, home or away. How many of our players have performed at the levels you would expect of them? Had they done so, would we have won the series? Is that acceptable?

Graves may not have come up with a media-sanitised soundbite, but he's a Yorkshireman and you can't expect much else on that front. We've been railing against corporate speak and bland nothingness in the Moores era and yet a blunt challenge to our own side - and indeed an admission that we're not as good as we'd like to be - is unacceptable? Do we think the Australians will be hand-wringing when someone tells the world they're coming here to hammer a "mediocre" England?

We weren't good enough. Again. We've done that a lot recently and nothing has changed.

So maybe this time something might?

I think if you'd said "In this series, Joe Root will be the best batsman and Jimmy Anderson the best bowler" I would have believed you. However, I would have also thought that:

- Jason Holder being the best first change bowler and best allrounder
- Kraigg Brathwaite will be the best opener
- England's bowling would be wayward apart from Anderson
- Jerome Taylor would bowl some excellent spells
- Blackwood might look to be the goods
- Gary Ballance would flop

etc etc are all entirely plausible scenarios.

Yes they're a mediocre team but there are some good players and they're at home.

 

[Dan]

A "competent off spinner" doesnt deserve a place in a Test team. You have to offer a bit more than that. Moeen isnt a front line bowler. As much as people want to say he has improved he just doesnt have the control for different roles different game situations may require. He goes at 3.5 an over in all forms of long cricket which just isnt good enough. He just isnt the bowler or the player people want him to be.

And any other spinner on the English circuit is? Face it, England doesn't have anything better that a competent spinner available. You can pick Kerrigan, sure, but that's basically falling into the "he can't bat so he must be better" logic because he's hardly a worldbeater himself. Plus there goes the ability to pick a genuine fourth seamer to paper over the cracks of Moeen being an imperfect spinner.

Or, screw it, England doesn't pick a specialist spinner. So they go with 4 quicks and Stokes and make Root be the lead spinner (i.e. the same model New Zealand are regularly tempted by). Which is idiotic because you can't possibly use 5 genuine fast bowlers.

And FFS, using Moeen's career FC stats against him is utterly pointless; they're genuinely meaningless following the transformations in his game in recent years. Last 3 English summers and he's conceded ~3.2, 3.5 and 3.2 rpo each. At lower-than-career averages.

 

[Prince EWS]

I hate this post so much.

Haha yeah I sure called that one. Would've been much happier to be wrong though.

 

[Dan]

Ha! You pick a game where the England bowlers took 20 wickets for 400 runs and you want to blame the bowlers! And Yes, Tufnell was a far better bowler. England would be lucky to have him right now.

Is that, at all, related to his batting (in)ability? Pretty bloody obviously not. This idea that "you can bat so you must be a worse bowler" (and it's corollary, "you can't bat so ceteris paribus, you're better than the spinner who can bat") is what I'm taking issue with.

Shakib ain't a worse spinner than Razzak because Shakib can bat and Razzak can't.

 

[Goughy]

If Moeen wasn't the best spinner in the country he wouldn't be playing. Full stop. His batting is the bonus, not the other way round.

He cant be though can he? Surely not?

 

[Niall]

Moores will probably keep his job, but very much on the Gillespie bandwagon. Its probably only a matter of time before Australia or an IPL team comes calling if they don't move on him.


Jason Gillespie turns down South Australia job opening door for England role - Telegraph

By Nick Hoult12:09AM
Jason Gillespie has turned down the chance to coach South Australia opening the door for him to replace Peter Moores whose job as England coach is under major scrutiny West Indies levelled the series in Barbados.
Gillespie agreed earlier this year to coach the Adelaide Strikers in the Big Bash and Telegraph Sport revealed last month that he had been approached to coach South Australia full-time, a move that would have meant him giving up his job at Yorkshire.

But Gillespie told South Australia on Saturday night that he will remain at Yorkshire, a decision that leaves him in pole position to replace Moores if the England & Wales Cricket Board decides a change is needed in the England coaching set up.

It is a decision that will be made by England’s new director of cricket, although the defeat in the Test match in Barbados will have an impact on that appointment.
Gillespie has become the favourite to be the next England coach after a successful stint at Yorkshire that has seen him guide the side to the championship title and help bring through a string of players subsequently picked by England.


He is highly regarded by Colin Graves, who takes over as ECB chairman next week. Graves appointed him as Yorkshire coach in 2011 but if Gillespie had returned to Australia, and uprooted his young family, it is unlikely he would return to to this country to take the England job in the near future.
He has a clause in his contract with the Adelaide Strikers that allows him to pull out of his commitments if he is offered a job in international cricket, which clears any legal issues if he is approached by England should it be decided to sack Moores.
Moores’s future is in the balance given England’s performances in the West Indies so soon after a poor World Cup.
Graves takes office with strong views on the England team but will delegate decisions to Tom Harrison, the chief executive of the ECB.
If England are to make a change they will have to move quickly with New Zealand, the first touring side of the English summer, arriving at Lord’s on Monday for their first net session

 

[Goughy]

And any other spinner on the English circuit is? Face it, England doesn't have anything better that a competent spinner available. You can pick Kerrigan, sure, but that's basically falling into the "he can't bat so he must be better" logic because he's hardly a worldbeater himself. Plus there goes the ability to pick a genuine fourth seamer to paper over the cracks of Moeen being an imperfect spinner.

Or, screw it, England doesn't pick a specialist spinner. So they go with 4 quicks and Stokes and make Root be the lead spinner (i.e. the same model New Zealand are regularly tempted by). Which is idiotic because you can't possibly use 5 genuine fast bowlers.

And FFS, using Moeen's career FC stats against him is utterly pointless; they're genuinely meaningless following the transformations in his game in recent years. Last 3 English summers and he's conceded ~3.2, 3.5 and 3.2 rpo each. At lower-than-career averages.

His batting has got nothing to do with it for me. I included his FC ER as it is identical to his Test ER which for an off-spinner is poor. If he is England's best spinner then he should probably play but what is his role? He cant hold an end down and keep it tight and "competent off-spinners" are not exactly consistent wicket taking options.

For some unknown reason you brought Stokes into the conversation. Why on earth would I play 4 seamers + Stokes + Root? If 4 seamers were played then Stokes wouldnt be close to the Team.

I see why England are enamored by Stokes and Ali but I dont think either have a clearly defined role or one that they are currently capable of fulfilling.

 

[Dan]

His batting has got nothing to do with it for me. I included his FC ER as it is identical to his Test ER which for an off-spinner is poor. If he is England's best spinner then he should probably play but what is his role? He cant hold an end down and keep it tight and "competent off-spinners" are not exactly consistent wicket taking options.

For some unknown reason you brought Stokes into the conversation. Why on earth would I play 4 seamers + Stokes + Root? If 4 seamers were played then Stokes wouldnt be close to the Team.

I see why England are enamored by Stokes and Ali but I dont think either have a clearly defined role or one that they are currently capable of fulfilling.

You want 5 bowlers in a Test side, no? 4 specialists and an all-rounder (or, at least, a batsman who can bowl).

If you don't pick Moeen, and there isn't a specialist spinner better than Moeen, then you end up with 4 quicks + a seam-bowling all-rounder. Which is complete and utter overkill.



As for English spinners, you have Riley and Kerrigan as options. Riley is far from proven and more a pick on potential, Kerrigan's a county giant who also isn't exactly a worldbeater. The better balance option is to pick Moeen as the best of a bad bunch, bat him in the top 7, and use the spot opened up to pick the next-best seamer (which, let's face it, is England's bowling strength atm).

 

[Prince EWS]

You want 5 bowlers in a Test side, no?

If I remember Goughy's position on this in the past, it was pretty much "no".

 

[Dan]

...but if you pick 4 seamers (because if you're dropping Moeen you either have to bring in an inferior spinner who can't bat, or pick another quick bowler), then Root's shouldering the entire spin bowling load (insanity on turning tracks, at the very least, and hardly likely to help his batting career), and relying a hell of a lot on fast bowler durability (i.e. bowling Jimmeh into the ground yet again).

4 bowlers is fine, but to do that on a regular basis one of the bowlers does kinda need to be a spinner, or someone in the top order has to shoulder quite a bit of a load.

 

[Daemon]

Sorry, I don't get it?

 

[Prince EWS]

I think all the talk of balance is actually concealing the real point of difference in opinions here which is the quality of Moeen's bowling.

The pro commentators in particular are quick to call him "not a specialist spinner" but I think this is very much just a euphemism for "not a good spinner" in their eyes, doing their best to avoid offending him by painting a picture of the fault lying with the team balance and not his bowling. I think they're wrong, but it's annoyingly difficult to actually mount a case against it when they're so unclear about what they mean.

Whether he's a specialist isn't the point. Flintoff wasn't a specialist bowler and he for much of his career he wouldn't have made the side on batting alone, but if England wanted to strengthen the batting they wouldn't have left him out; they'd have left out Ashley Giles, Saj Mahmood or whoever else was the weakest third specialist seamer at the time, because he was a better bowler than them.

Specialisation is a red herring. Some people on CW think Moeen's bowling is good, and some think it isn't. This is the debate we should be having, preferably through comparing him to the other spin options.

 

[social]

Reckon people are being a bit hard on Moeen's bowling

He is very inexperienced, should improve and, in any event, hardly the reason for the loss

Don't fall into the Oz pattern of picking everyone under the sun before deciding that he wasn't hat bad to start with

 

[Niall]

Reckon people are being a bit hard on Moeen's bowling

He is very inexperienced, should improve and, in any event, hardly the reason for the loss

Don't fall into the Oz pattern of picking everyone under the sun before deciding that he wasn't hat bad to start with

Agreed.

England have to play with a spinner for at least a few tests this summer. Their is no other alternative at the moment, Tredwell is a giant meh, Rashid has improved but would he do any better than Ali? Doubtful.

Guys like Riley, Kerrigan, Monty, Borthwick for various reasons aren't realistic options yet. Heck the fact that Riley is touted so often really highlights how few the options are.

Its not ideal and Ali was rubbish this test, but they need to persist with him for a little longer as he has done decently enough so far in his brief career and its very tough to expect a kid like Riley, outcasts like Kerrigan and Monty to make any impact any quicker than Ali.

Lets how he does against NZ at least.

 

[Tangles]

Good result for WI. Only saw a bit the last couple of days but good to see young players stepping up for them. Hopefully it continues vs the Aussies and we get some good cricket.

 

[harsh.ag]

Was so sure I made a post about how it would be killer if Broad got bowled out stuck in his crease as England were 90/8 as the game began yesterday. Turns out the post never came through, but that was so predictable...

Didn't see any of the Windies innings. How was Bravo's innings??