***Official*** England in India

[Neil Pickup]

Do you think the University of Loughborough would be up for a revolutionary mind-meld?

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

Do you think the University of Loughborough would be up for a revolutionary mind-meld?

Is that a rhetorical question or not?

 

[Neil Pickup]

Is that a rhetorical question or not?

I dropped English nearly five years ago. I can't remember.

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

Shame, I'm sure that's on the Year 6 syllabus

 

[aussie]

I dropped English nearly five years ago. I can't remember.

that long eh, your pretty old

 

[Barney Rubble]

After all this debate, everyone knows what's going to happen. England will pick Blackwell and Panesar. Blackwell will play and everyone'll say Panesar should have. Blackwell will do average with the ball, but bat 6 or 7 and average 30-35 in the series, with a couple of useful, rapid fifties. Some will claim he should play instead of Giles when Giles comes back; some will claim Giles should play; some will claim he should never have played anyway and that Panesar should come in.

We can't win, metaphorically speaking, with Gilo injured - whoever replaces him will be on a hiding to nothing. Unless it's Udal, in which case they'll just be onto a hiding.

 

[marc71178]

I'm staggered that Blackwell is the favourite to replace Giles though.

It's a farce if that is the case.

 

[marc71178]

Mix and match the middle order to be honest, either way round 6-8 is strong on paper.

Apart from Blackwell that is..

 

[marc71178]

I'd prefer to see Panesar in over Blackwell, but I see your and Neil's points: play Panesar, and you're short on batting, play Blackwell and your short on bowling: looks like a lose/lose situation. On a real turner though, a more attacking spinner than Blackwell is a must.

I'm not so sure they would be if Panesar batted 11 after Harmison and Jones.

The hole would be at 8 then - short of playing an extra batsman I'm not sure how we plug it.

 

[honestbharani]

England should be looking at its top order guys to deliver. I cannot see how England will bowl out India all that cheaply on any of those tracks. Pace and short pitched stuff doesn't worry THIS Indian team. Maybe Flintoff with a lot of guys on the offside and bowling that defensive line might get on these guys' nerves, but with Sehwag there, that tactic could prove disastrously counter-productive. I feel it is all down to how well England will bat in this series....

 

[Barney Rubble]

England should be looking at its top order guys to deliver. I cannot see how England will bowl out India all that cheaply on any of those tracks. Pace and short pitched stuff doesn't worry THIS Indian team. Maybe Flintoff with a lot of guys on the offside and bowling that defensive line might get on these guys' nerves, but with Sehwag there, that tactic could prove disastrously counter-productive. I feel it is all down to how well England will bat in this series....

Surely you're contradicting yourself - if the Indian batsmen aren't worried by pace and England aren't going to threaten their batsmen as it stands, then surely the series comes down to how England bowl? If they bowl badly and bat well, then they'll probably draw the series, as India's batting is stronger than their bowling too. If they bowl well and bat badly, they have a much greater chance of forcing the victories they need to win the series. To suggest the series depends on their batting seems like you're suggesting the best they can ever hope for is to draw the series, which is unfair.

 

[wpdavid]

Blackwell will get picked as a batsman who would fill a fifth bowler role blocking up an end. Bell could also fill a few overs. Alternatively, you remove Hoggard for Collingwood, bat right down to nine and have three front line bowlers plus three cover.

Trescothick
Strauss
Vaughan
Bell
Pietersen
Blackwell
Flintoff
G Jones
Hoggard
Harmison
S Jones

Sorry, but that looks horrible! Blackwell has usually looked competely out of his depth with the bat even in ODI's, so I dread to think how he'd fare as a top 6 test batsman. The idea elsewhere that somehow he'll average about 35 with the bat just strikes me as completely fanciful.
Given that Fred's batting overseas has generally been awful, there's a strong case for playing Collingwood at 6, followed by Fred & Jones x 2, then Harmy & Panesar. I really don't see Hoggard being dangerous in India, although I accept it will be a brave move not to play him. Playing Blackwell instead of Giles just seems a soft option that would give us the worst of all worlds. So it will probably happen, I s'pose.

 

[steds]

play Blackwell and your short on bowling

And not much better off batting wise than Panesar.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

This is my idea of an England team for the first Test:

1. Trescothick
2. Strauss
3. Vaughan
4. Bell
5. Pietersen
6. G. Jones
7. Flintoff
8. Hoggard
9. Harmison
10. S. Jones
11. Panesar

And an Indian team:

1. Gambhir
2. Sehwag
3. Dravid
4. Tendulkar
5. Yuvraj
6. Laxman
7. Dhoni
8. Pathan
9. Kumble
10. Harbhajan
11. Zaheer Khan

 

[wpdavid]

This is my idea of an England team for the first Test:

1. Trescothick
2. Strauss
3. Vaughan
4. Bell
5. Pietersen
6. G. Jones
7. Flintoff
8. Hoggard
9. Harmison
10. S. Jones
11. Panesar

And therein lies the problem. Hoggard & Harmison will get a nosebleed at 8 & 9 respectively, so we're looking at the last 5 wickets falling for next to nothing. That's OK if our top 7 are batting like gods, but I don't know anyone who thinks that will happen. And I don't really see what G Jones has done to justify a place in the top 6, although admittedly Fred's overseas form with the bat is so poor that he doesn't merit a top 6 place either.

If the selectors are serious about playing a wicket-taking spinner, then Panesar has to play. If they take the view that none of our spinners will really threaten, so we might as well play someone who can bat a bit at 8, then it's Udal or Blackwell. Trouble is, Blackwell has given no indication whatsoever that he can bat at this level, so he isn't really a safe bet anyway.
Maybe Udal is the likeliest option, as the pitches must be more helpful than in Pakistan. Given the recent Pak/India tests and the performances of both sides' spinners on those tracks, Udal's performances last year are a lot more understandable.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

There's no point of going to India, with the intent of winning, without quality bowlers. Otherwise you might as well play 11 batsmen. India's batting line-up is far too good to lose 20 wickets to any four-man attack that doesn't include Warne and McGrath.

The reason I put Jones at 6 is because Freddie's bowling load is far too much these days with the extra responsibility that a top six spot brings. It wouldn't hurt Geraint to learn how to build an innings without batting with the tail, too.

Udal should not be regarded as an asset to England. Flat pitches aside, he is 36 and has done nothing to justify his place. for him to be a long-term option (read: two years) he would have to take the world by storm in Pakistan to keep his place in my book.

England need to win in India to be compared with Australia. They won't achieve that with negative options like Udal and Blackwell.

 

[Scaly piscine]

If any of England's bowling is going to win a game, it's likely to be one of Simon Jones, Flintoff or Harmison (I would still have Blackwell in for Giles and Panesar for Hoggard personally). I don't see a problem with 'negative' options like Udal or Blackwell when the other bowlers are likely to get the wickets anyway.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Would you rather have 5 wicket-taking options or 3, considering subcontinental conditions?

 

[Neil Pickup]

Would you rather have 5 wicket-taking options or 3, considering subcontinental conditions?

It's not as simple as that, is it? If five leaves you with six-down all-down, then perhaps three is a better bet

(and yes, Blackwell at six probably should have read Blackwell at eight, unless he shows something stunning in the near future. I think I'm looking at it rose-tintedly in the hope that the Indian seam attack will compare favourably with the county trundlers he's so fond of biffing).

 

[Neil Pickup]

Shame, I'm sure that's on the Year 6 syllabus

Well, that's ten years back...

For the record, the mind-meld doesn't exist anywhere outside Star Trek. So, whilst the question is not a rhetorical one (I have no idea if the scientists would fancy trying a Blackwell-Panesar combination job), it's merely a hypothetical one.