England players and selection discussion thread

[wpdavid]

Beyond the rotation policy, there will always be issues with form and fitness, so an ideal XI just isn't going to happen. HB's squad and team structure is probably pretty close to what will happen, possibly without Bairstow as a 3rd keeper option. Out of the openers, Burns is on the thinnest ice after his shocker of a series against Pakistan last year. I hope he improves, because I like having Crawley at 3 rather than opening. I wonder how Bess will do now he's playing for Yorkshire. Not an obviously ideal location for spinners, but if he does start pitching the ball consistently and still taking wickets, then you'd think that Root and Silverwood will know about it.

 

[Starfighter]

but runs at 8 are genuinely so important.

There's six guys in the team selected specifically to score runs. I'd suggest sorting out the issue with them first. It's this kind of selection thinking that has held England back for... getting on for decades now.

 

[wpdavid]

I don't think it's as easy as just sorting out the top 6; the guys who could average 45+ in test cricket just aren't there. And we have tried a few over the last 10 years.

 

[Starfighter]

I'm not a fan of the 'well the batting's bad so let's weaken the bowling' strategy.

 

[Flem274*]

There's six guys in the team selected specifically to score runs. I'd suggest sorting out the issue with them first. It's this kind of selection thinking that has held England back for... getting on for decades now.

disagree, bowling allrounders are so valuable.

 

[wpdavid]

I'm not a fan of the 'well the batting's bad so let's weaken the bowling' strategy.

Yeah, I get that. But Woakes isn't going to weaken the bowling in England. Almost by default, he's become one of our most important players nowadays.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Yeah agree. You have to play either Woakes/Curran at 8. Lower-order runs are absolutely crucial

 

[wpdavid]

Yeah agree. You have to play either Woakes/Curran at 8. Lower-order runs are absolutely crucial

If Curran plays, we need Stokes to be fit and firing with the ball, because Sam isn't a 3rd seamer in English conditions. It's been an odd series for Stokes' bowling. We barely saw him for three tests, then he was outstanding in the fourth one. I don't know how much that's down to an injury that we haven't been told about, or simply him not being deemed suitable for the conditions.

 

[Starfighter]

Yeah, I get that. But Woakes isn't going to weaken the bowling in England. Almost by default, he's become one of our most important players nowadays.

I'll be waiting to see if Root actually rates Woakes' bowling first, still haven't gotten over his baffling treatment in the Ashes.

disagree, bowling allrounders are so valuable.

The two best teams in history didn't have one. Selecting an allrounder because they're an allrounder got us years of Mitchell Marsh failures and in England's case they've already got Stokes.

Yeah agree. You have to play either Woakes/Curran at 8. Lower-order runs are absolutely crucial

If you're leaving out a better player to play a worse one because they might be better in their secondary discipline you're automatically saying the specialists in that secondary discipline aren't good enough. More top order runs means less need. I'd be more sympathetic to the idea that there's no alternatives if they weren't carrying Bairstow.

 

[morgieb]

The two best teams in history didn't have one

Warne + Marshall with the bat >> England's bowlers though.

EDIT: And on the Bairstow point, I don't think he'll be in England's Best XI at home.

 

[Duckster]

Bairstow should stick to white ball cricket, his test record is very poor. The techniques and physical tics of Sibley and Burns are ripe to be dismantled in Australia by the pitches and Aussies quicks. Pope should be moved up the order. On a positive note, Bess has good character for test cricket, his head does not drop when getting smacked about. Give him long spells in England where he can learn variation and control on usually unhelpful wickets.

 

[Pup Clarke]

If you're leaving out a better player to play a worse one because they might be better in their secondary discipline you're automatically saying the specialists in that secondary discipline aren't good enough. More top order runs means less need. I'd be more sympathetic to the idea that there's no alternatives if they weren't carrying Bairstow.

I see that argument, but I don't think Archer being a bit better than Woakes/Curran with the ball (debatable with Woakes in English conditions) offsets the fact that he is in no possible way a test match number 8 - neither is Leach too.

When you're into the tail 6 wickets down I'm sure it would give the opposition a big psychological boost. Curran v India in 2018 being a prime example of the reverse to this. He scored crucial match-changing runs

 

[wpdavid]

I'll be waiting to see if Root actually rates Woakes' bowling first, still haven't gotten over his baffling treatment in the Ashes.

Yes, I'll give you that. I'm guessing that you're specifically thinking of the start of Australia's first innings at the end of Day 2 at Lord's when conditions were ideal for Woakes but Root seemed too excited about Archer's pace. I'm not sure that Root feels that way now, and I think that Woakes was treated more sympathetically last year.

 

[morgieb]

England's biggest problems I think come in the Southern Hemisphere, Woakes is proven to be ineffective away from home with the ball and I can't imagine Curran being very effective either (maybe more so in South Africa?) I guess you could go to Wood but I don't think he's good enough for typical Australian or New Zealand conditions.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

^ there is stone, although given the current google results the people have little faith in him

 

[Flem274*]

The two best teams in history didn't have one. Selecting an allrounder because they're an allrounder got us years of Mitchell Marsh failures and in England's case they've already got Stokes.

shane warne, malcolm marshall and brett lee were on the cusp of being such, and have 27 test fifties between them. the west indies also picked roger harper for 25 tests. mitchell marsh was selected as a balanced allrounder not a bowling allrounder, so not a real comparison.

by focusing on the two best sides ever, who had four guys who were basically lower end bowling allrounders, you conveniently ignore the dozens of strong test sides who were strong in no small part due to their bowling allrounder(s).

the last time england were #1, a decent chunk of it was built on the batting just keeping on going thanks to the likes of early broad, swann and bresnan. nz are a better side for having jamieson instead of santner or southee at #8 and india are also greatly bolstered by ashwin and jadeja.

you can't be five out all out and rise above the mid-table.

 

[morgieb]

^ there is stone, although given the current google results the people have little faith in him

I'm more trying to figure out who should bat 8 for England. Obviously Woakes/Curran can fill in at home and Moeen (or Bess if he improves) in the subcontinent but those options won't work in SANZA. Stone's FC stats don't inspire confidence that he'll be a good enough 8 at Test level.

 

[wpdavid]

England's biggest problems I think come in the Southern Hemisphere, Woakes is proven to be ineffective away from home with the ball and I can't imagine Curran being very effective either (maybe more so in South Africa?) I guess you could go to Wood but I don't think he's good enough for typical Australian or New Zealand conditions.

Curran's main contribution in SA last year was his habit of dismissing QDK, which was handy after the latter's batting had set up SA's win in the first test. But he still wasn't a 3rd seamer really. I'm going to repeat my view that Curran needs a summer when he plays lots of cricket in the CC. At the moment, his only FC cricket is when he occasionally plays for the test team, and I don't think that's helped his development at all.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

I'm more trying to figure out who should bat 8 for England. Obviously Woakes/Curran can fill in at home and Moeen (or Bess if he improves) in the subcontinent but those options won't work in SANZA. Stone's FC stats don't inspire confidence that he'll be a good enough 8 at Test level.

No that's fair. One alternative would be to bat the wicketkeeper 8 but there aren't many batsmen who can bowl a bit either.

 

[Flem274*]

show curran's pitch map to woakes and play woakes everywhere. woakes has oodles more bowling talent but curran's always the bigger threat away from home because he hucks it up there looking for movement.