*Official* England in West Indies 2022

[slippy888]

Honestly I wouldn't have blamed them for just batting out the day and taking the draw. Fair play for at least having a go.

why would they do that when you need to win to get points for the table championship

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

why would they do that when you need to win to get points for the table championship

Because it's a road, they already sent down 190 overs in the first innings and I think if any more seamers break down Paul Collingwood would have to play himself as a specialist quick.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

The seamers haven’t bowled anyway. Fisher has bowled two overs. Root’s handling of the attack has been appalling.

 

[wpdavid]

I'm surprised that Mahmood wasn't invited to try and reverse the ball at the start of the last hour. Oh well.

 

[Beamer]

Windies positives:

• Managed a draw despite facing the worst conditions by far (this was a good toss to win).
• Kraigg is back then his best
• Blackwood batted responsibly for once
• Da Silva looks excellent with the bat.
• Jayden Seales toiled away well, still managed 3 wickets and will have learned a lot.

Windies negatives

• Campbell and Brooks batted like spuds, again.
• It wasn't Holders best match
• Permaul was not convincing at all, though better than Antigua.
• Still not convinced by Alzarri as a third seamer.
• These pitches have been disgraceful. Even a diehard fan like me switched it off for segments. We have a promising seam attack and these wickets gave them nothing.

For the next test I'd bring in Mayers for Brooks and I'd rest Seales for Phillip, mostly to ensure he doesn't break down.

 

[Beamer]

As for England, clearly the batting lineup putting up 500 in the first innings is a step forward regardless of conditions.

I really like Dan Lawrence, both as a cheeky, unorthodox batsman and a more than passable part time spinner.

It's too early to tell if Lee's will be up to it or not. My early impressions are not particularly positive, but let's see what he does in Grenada.

Mahmood was really impressive in conditions that made a lot of the other pacers look toothless. I'd give him a run, particularly in overseas tests and during dry summers.

Fisher looked promising, just not quite ready yet. Though hard to judge on this pitch.

Leach put in a marathon effort and is clearly bowling better now. I can't help but agree with Ian Bishop's analysis that better spinners than Leach and Permaul could have won this test, but he definitely put a shift in and looked threatening.

Only real negative for me was Woakes, who should not be playing this series IMHO. I just don't get the selectors logic.

 

[GotSpin]

Any life for the next wicket expected?

 

[Niall]

Who is the better opener

"Peak " Devon Smith or John Campbell?

Surely their has to be a limited over's blaster who could be worth a punt instead of John?

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Surely their has to be a limited over's blaster who could be worth a punt instead of John?

Evin Lewis

 

[Beamer]

Any life for the next wicket expected?

There has been no FC cricket in Grenada for ages, so there's no recent evidence to go on. If we look at tests, there have been 3 matches in 20 years and 3 flat wickets.

In 2002 we drew with NZ, with Scot Styris scoring a ton and Chris Gayle a double century. It didn't get to a 4th innings. Only Shane Bond took wickets.

Then in 2009 Bangladesh played a 4th string West Indies lineup due to a strike, winning by 4 wickets. That was pretty flat but the quality of batsmanship from both sides was poor, so there was a result.

In 2015 we lost to England by 9 wickets. Root scored 180 odd. General consensus was that Jimmy Anderson bowled really well on a flat track, taking advantage of the new ball.

So if I had to guess, it will be another flat one.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Grenada is called the Spice Island....and I'm sure that the pitch will be 'spicy'

 

[Niall]

Evin Lewis

From his cricinfo blog he has not played a FC match since 2017, that's a remarkable level of disinterest, even Andre Russell and Kieron Pollard played FC once in a blue moon before they focused on the white ball stuff.

 

[Beamer]

From his cricinfo blog he has not played a FC match since 2017, that's a remarkable level of disinterest, even Andre Russell and Kieron Pollard played FC once in a blue moon before they focused on the white ball stuff.

Tbh I'm beyond caring about how much red ball they have played recently. If the competition is a guy averaging in the 20s (Solozano) and a guy who is just not mentally up to tests (Campbell) we have nothing to lose.

 

[honestbharani]

Paul Collingwood would have to play himself as a specialist quick.

And be bowled into an injury by Root.

 

[honestbharani]

Are we at the stage with the Windies wickets where it may actually be easier for them to produce a turner than a seamer? If the tracks are getting flatter and slower, you have a better chance of success in preparing a turner IMO which will at least produce a result.

 

[grecian]

Well, Mahmood has been a plus, and may justify their dropping of Branderson in the selector's eyes. The one thing I can think of why Woakes is there is almost purely his batting. I mean our "future" of Archer, Mahmood, Fisher, Parkinson, does make you think our tail-end isn't going to make beyond 50 hardly at all.

As someone that often dislikes our bowlers being picked on batting ability, those last 3 are pure number elevens, Jimmeh could bat above them all I think, Broad certainly would which is slightly worrying. Archer has some talent with the bat but never shown it in tests, and is broken most of the time anyway.

So even if they all have long and decent careers with the ball, which is no means guaranteed, it'll mean we have a collapsible tail throughtout those times.

 

[Xix2565]

Well, Mahmood has been a plus, and may justify their dropping of Branderson in the selector's eyes. The one thing I can think of why Woakes is there is almost purely his batting. I mean our "future" of Archer, Mahmood, Fisher, Parkinson, does make you think our tail-end isn't going to make beyond 50 hardly at all.

As someone that often dislikes our bowlers being picked on batting ability, those last 3 are pure number elevens, Jimmeh could bat above them all I think, Broad certainly would which is slightly worrying. Archer has some talent with the bat but never shown it in tests, and is broken most of the time anyway.

So even if they all have long and decent careers with the ball, which is no means guaranteed, it'll mean we have a collapsible tail throughtout those times.

I mean that's the way of bowlers when they bat tbh. Everyone suffers from that problem, and there's only so much one can do to mitigate it. Having consistent threats is worth the risk of a weak tail, and then you can try to solve the batting issues by strengthening the top order more so that the bowlers don't really need to chip in a lot.

 

[jayjay]

Well, Mahmood has been a plus, and may justify their dropping of Branderson in the selector's eyes. The one thing I can think of why Woakes is there is almost purely his batting. I mean our "future" of Archer, Mahmood, Fisher, Parkinson, does make you think our tail-end isn't going to make beyond 50 hardly at all.

As someone that often dislikes our bowlers being picked on batting ability, those last 3 are pure number elevens, Jimmeh could bat above them all I think, Broad certainly would which is slightly worrying. Archer has some talent with the bat but never shown it in tests, and is broken most of the time anyway.

So even if they all have long and decent careers with the ball, which is no means guaranteed, it'll mean we have a collapsible tail throughtout those times.

I'd change that line up going forward with Wood instead of Fisher. Arcer, Mahmood and Wood (when available) is a terrific trio. They just need to play regularly.

In terms of the tail batting, I've always found that an odd concern, if the top 6 batsmen can't do the job and the number 7 can't add some then what's the point of the batting line up itself?

 

[grecian]

I'd change that line up going forward with Wood instead of Fisher. Arcer, Mahmood and Wood (when available) is a terrific trio. They just need to play regularly.

In terms of the tail batting, I've always found that an odd concern, if the top 6 batsmen can't do the job and the number 7 can't add some then what's the point of the batting line up itself?

Well, I was just positing, why the hell is Woakes picked in a squad looking to be for the future. In the end Wood isn't exactly young either, if we're playing silly buggers and picking people for an imaginary time that hasn't happened, and having Wood, Archer and Mahmood fit, to play regularly let alone at the same time could definitely be a more a problem than how much runs they'll score. Calling them a terrific trio, well we'll see Mahmood had a nice first Test match.

I would say that a lot of the time, besides Root I would be saying what's the point of our top 6 most of the time. I am merely trying to work out the mysteries of selections, not really advocating for it. In the end I believe in picking the best players though, which can mean if there's not much between them with the ball, then extra proficiency elsewhere can be nice.

 

[Uppercut]

The English selections aren't even particularly consistent with a strategy of looking to the future. But if that's the plan, there's definitely a bit more upside with bowlers who can bat. Occasionally once they get in the camp the coaches find there's something they can really work with.

More generally, bits and pieces cricketers are useful when you have no real talent. Take it from an Ireland fan.