***Official*** England in India 2016/17

[S.Kennedy]

Just blame the English spinners as per the test series, granted Stokes was expensive also but at least he gets wickets.

 

[Burner]

Are the specialist bowlers better than the allrounders though?

And it's strange to say our batting depth is redundant, we had No 9 at the crease in this game and got 90 runs out of 2 of our allrounders. In the warm up game we only got to a half decent score due to runs from No 9 and 11.

Yeah I don't know of many specialists that are better than the all rounders. I know it's strange to say that the batting depth is redundant but I really believe that England has a good enough batting line up to put up good scores without the need of the tail. Morgan has to get into form though.

The problem for England though is that they don't have any specialists waiting outside. Maybe Broad?

As to how the lower order is chipping in, I believe that in the long run they'll win more matches with better bowlers even if their batting depth diminishes a little.

 

[Burner]

But I'll say one thing, I'll give the the remaining matches to the same line-up to see how they go and try not to judge them based on just this match. This was a nightmare of a cricket ground for bowlers.

 

[S.Kennedy]

Two spinners are still shite though: Rashid 10.00 econ; M. Ali 7.78.

 

[Burgey]

Looks a great chase. Kohli is a flat out insane LO player. Even today, that will be the most exciting thing to happen to Jono

 

[Prince EWS]

England seriously lacking in the bowling department. I think that their batting depth is a little redundant and can afford to get in some specialist bowlers if you can't have both.

Moeen and Stokes aside (who are batting in the top seven), they're not really picking these blokes as allrounders though; they're picking them because they think they're the best bowlers available. They may be wrong about that, but they shouldn't drop them just because they can bat if they're still believed to be the best bowling options.

 

[Burner]

My bad. If England had better bowlers who were not as good with the bat then they could afford to play those guys is what I was aiming at but if there isn't then there's no other plan for England tbh.

 

[Burner]

Kohli being a dick to Jadhav for the running was his way of telling him "you can't be fat in my team" also I think, aside from him showing off his asshole quotient obviously.

 

[social]

I only watched the England innings and some of the Indian bowling and captaincy was deplorable

Can only imagine how bad the Poms must have been in the field to lose it from there

 

[Adders]

I only watched the England innings and some of the Indian bowling and captaincy was deplorable

Can only imagine how bad the Poms must have been in the field to lose it from there

I didn't see the Indian batting innings either, but to assume we lost because we were terribad in the field is ridiculous. India have this batsmen right who is reasonably good at run chases.......Eng could have scored 400+ and i still wouldn't bet against india chasing it down.........it's what they do.

 

[cnerd123]

Yea Morgan's captaincy was fine, and England only really started falling apart towards the end

 

[cnerd123]

Two spinners are still shite though: Rashid 10.00 econ; M. Ali 7.78.

TBF I'm struggling to think of any spinner in world cricket at the moment bar Ashwin/Jadeja who would have been able to do a better job in that situation

Maybe a skiddy legspinner like Badree or Afridi

 

[centurymaker]

I only watched the England innings and some of the Indian bowling and captaincy was deplorable

Can only imagine how bad the Poms must have been in the field to lose it from there

England weren't poor! (maybe Rashid was to some extent). It's just that the two centurymakers played calculated aggressive cricket really really well.. They pulled it off, although on a batting pitch with fast outfield and short boundaries.

350 here was like 300 at some other bigger ground in India.

 

[mackembhoy]

People give Chris Jordan some flac for some reason but I found him an useful death bowler in the World T20.

Cos he is ****ing mince mate.

Bowls a decent death over once in a while. 95 percent of the time he's just crap.

 

[FBU]

We have bowlers who can bat

Stokes 37.70 econ 6.05
Woakes 35.37 econ 5.67
Jordan 35.37 econ 5.95
Plunkett 34.88 econ 5.86

and then you look at the difference of

Starc 19.66 econ 4.75
Morkel 24.60 econ 4.96
Boult 24.68 econ 4.88
Amir 24.73 econ 4.68

 

[viriya]

I jinxed England by calling them the best team right now when Dhoni got out.

Sorry about that - they are actually shite.

 

[Zinzan]

We have bowlers who can bat

Stokes 37.70 econ 6.05
Woakes 35.37 econ 5.67
Jordan 35.37 econ 5.95
Plunkett 34.88 econ 5.86

and then you look at the difference of

Starc 19.66 econ 4.75
Morkel 24.60 econ 4.96
Boult 24.68 econ 4.88
Amir 24.73 econ 4.68

Very telling that actually. Good point.

Although it shouldn't be forgotten that England have played on some spectacularly high-scoring home pitches in their last couple of summers, but could that be a chicken or the egg question as to why?

 

[Furball]

England's batsmab don't bat against their own bowlers and I doubt Starc, Boult or Amir bowled that economically on their last tours of England.

 

[Howe_zat]

Reckon Plunkers can feel hard done by to be missing out. He injured?

 

[vcs]

Another one for Jono's stash