ImpatientLime
International Regular
so, super grim era this lads......
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
England players and selection discussion thread
- Thread starter Bijed
- Start date
Lillian Thomson
Hall of Fame Member
Bring on the champions. 
flibbertyjibber
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Just need to drop Pope.
wpdavid
Hall of Fame Member
They should, with Compton coming in to open and Crawley batting at 3.
But they probably won't.
Red_Ink_Squid
Global Moderator
Yeah don't see them changing the batting after one Test which they won, even if Root basically solo'd it. Would be happy to see Compton in for any of the top 3 but don't think it'll happen. Stokes was full of praise for Bairstow's, erm, 16, so don't think Brook is a chance either.
Only spot up for grabs is the spinner slot, depending on Leach's fitness and then whether they choose to play a spinner at all.
Only spot up for grabs is the spinner slot, depending on Leach's fitness and then whether they choose to play a spinner at all.
Lillian Thomson
Hall of Fame Member
Compton will probably have to wait for at least this series, by which time he’ll probably have lost form.
flibbertyjibber
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Always the way. Him and Brook will be picked when out of form.
grecian
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I've already said something about this on the other thread, but yeah don't see any change, ah well, maybe they'll feel a bit of confidence coming out of a win, but if Pope ever makes it as a Top-class international number 3 I'll buy A plymouth Argyle shirt, and wear it to work.
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Archer bowls with one of the least durable actions I've seen, which gave England two options. They could have tried to remodel it, but that's always a difficult process. Lots of the "science" behind which bowling actions cause injury is a bit fake, and there are at least as many disaster stories as success stories. I also think that psychologically a player usually needs to have experienced quite a bit of injury to fully commit to overhauling their action.
The other option was to carefully manage his injury risk. There are lots of ways to do this - typically you would want a bespoke strength and conditioning program, and different physios would quibble over the details. But the most basic, well-established principle would be avoiding spikes of activity at a much higher intensity or length than the player is used to. And they're allowing him to come into his first test ever and bowl 10-over spells flat-out.
I don't know if you could say that it "caused" his injury problems, but it's indicative of a team culture that either doesn't have competent conditioning staff, or (much more likely) doesn't pay any attention to them. If Archer's bowling 10-over spells, there's a lot else they're not taking very seriously too. I don't want to be overcritical - there's a balance to be struck, because medical staff are always very risk-averse, and any decent top-level sports team will ignore them a lot. But if there's one player who should have been handled very carefully, it was Archer, and they didn't do it.
Australia have really got their **** together on this stuff lately. Archer's 10-over debut spell was in a series where their attack outlasted England's by using heavy rotation. It wasn't commented on much, but if they'd lost I think all of their rotation would have become a major talking point.
Nintendo
Cricketer Of The Year
I mean tbf just after that ashes we said **** it and just played cumm-starc-haze 4 matches in a row vs India, wh
The vast bulk of Archer's cricket is T20. He's played 120+ T20 matches, whilst he's only played 43 FC matches (13 of those Tests) and 31 50 over matches (17 of those ODIs).
He's bowling around 33 overs per Test. He obviously got through a lot of overs in the Summer/Winter of 2019 but was still playing Tests until early 2021. Is that a big workload for a lad in his mid-20s?
I'd be surprised if we really see much of him in longer formats. He could very easily be a Tymal Mills, albeit far more effective. T20 was his strongest suit anyway.
He's bowling around 33 overs per Test. He obviously got through a lot of overs in the Summer/Winter of 2019 but was still playing Tests until early 2021. Is that a big workload for a lad in his mid-20s?
I'd be surprised if we really see much of him in longer formats. He could very easily be a Tymal Mills, albeit far more effective. T20 was his strongest suit anyway.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Workload is not something you measure in absolutes over days. Its usually per day stuff.
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I remember Goughy (the poster, not Darren) had a unique take on Paul Collingwood. He thought he'd created a reputation as an honest grafter, but really he was too lazy to develop proper technique, and becoming a decent test batsman with such an ugly style just revealed immense hand-eye co-ordination that was going to waste.
I don't know if it was true, but it really changed how I think about talent. Crawley is thought of as talented because his form is so good when he plays attacking shots, but maybe that's actually a sign that his talent is maxed out. If there were technical issues you could fix them, but if he's technically not bad but keeps getting out because his eye isn't sharp enough, where do you even go from there?
I don't know if it was true, but it really changed how I think about talent. Crawley is thought of as talented because his form is so good when he plays attacking shots, but maybe that's actually a sign that his talent is maxed out. If there were technical issues you could fix them, but if he's technically not bad but keeps getting out because his eye isn't sharp enough, where do you even go from there?
grecian
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I think it's a more prevalent view than you may think, I remember Bumble babbling on about various bats getting out only being a technical problem, when he was leader. Seemed bizarre to me at the time, and TBH I still think it is.
ImpatientLime
International Regular
the challenge for Keysey is that he runs the risk of weakening his beloved Kent if he releases Crawley back to them. tricky one.
grecian
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
It's an interesting one isn't it, do they take the victory as a sign this side is great and we can remain unchanged, or just give a few a chance. As much as I love him Leach underperformed here, not sure bringing back moeen is going to help things in the long run, give Parky another game.Surely Crawley can't get another life now?
What better time to blood a newb when the series is already tucked in your sky rocket?
Although I note Compton failed in his last innings; only scored 80, the hack fraud.
I just hope, if Stokes has buggered his knee to any extent they just let him rest, the just play him as bat when he won't be allowed a runner seems so stupid.
flibbertyjibber
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Crawley should go. Not good enough.
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I would never openly oppose the selection of a leggie but Parkinson surely needs another gear to make it in tests.
I’ve wanted them to stick with someone at opener and give them a chance to improve, but I never liked the Crawley selection. Any other summer I’d say I was conflicted but Compton banging the door down in the CC makes this an easy call.
I’ve wanted them to stick with someone at opener and give them a chance to improve, but I never liked the Crawley selection. Any other summer I’d say I was conflicted but Compton banging the door down in the CC makes this an easy call.