***Official*** England in West Indies 2015

[harsh.ag]

Yeah, but when looking towards the future, can only talk about things that can change. And add a "Yeah, we were **** with the bat in the second dig" beforehand.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Thanks for putting together an argument without the usual digs others are trying to put forth. Personally i wouldn't say the likes of India are "mediocre" while NZ aren't because quite frankly do you think NZ could go to india and win? No chance imo. To me there are top teams i.e SA and Aus , decent teams England, India, NZ and SL, average teams Pak and WI, and lastly poor sides Zim and Bang. I really don't see the need to call sides "mediocre" tbh.

I think NZ would absolutely have a chance of winning in India. I'd still back us to win if they toured right now, but it wouldn't be anywhere close to a foregone conclusion. Even the last time NZ toured here (2012 I think) they gave us a bit of a fright in one test where Southee ripped us a new one and took 7-50 odd. Since then, Southee, Boult, Kane, Anderson have all improved immensely. They also have excellent players of spin like KW, Latham, Taylor (on his day) and McCullum, and I see no reason why they couldn't cause huge problems for us. The current NZ side have the best tools in their history to succeed in the SC.

Really though, I think we're just arguing semantics about WI , India etc. They're all simply not great atm. But will get better.

 

[Cabinet96]

Haha yeah Its unbelievable isn't it?

People need to look at this **** batting lineup.

Tbf, the batting had been good/decent in the previous five tests, though admittedly not against much. With the youngsters going well and Cook finding some form it's not a major issue yet, though we might be looking in a different light after the Kiwis have got a chance at them.

 

[Daemon]

I think NZ would absolutely have a chance of winning in India. I'd still back us to win if they toured right now, but it wouldn't be anywhere close to a foregone conclusion. Even the last time NZ toured here (2012 I think) they gave us a bit of a fright in one test where Southee ripped us a new one and took 7-50 odd. Since then, Southee, Boult, Kane, Anderson have all improved immensely. They also have excellent players of spin like KW, Latham, Taylor (on his day) and McCullum, and I see no reason why they couldn't cause huge problems for us. The current NZ side have the best tools in their history to succeed in the SC.

Really though, I think we're just arguing semantics about WI , India etc. They're all simply not great atm. But will get better.

You can add the recent UAE performances to that

 

[OverratedSanity]

You can add the recent UAE performances to that

SL too

 

[NasserFan207]

I'd back NZ in India. Wouldn't necessarily call them favorites, would be a toss up as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Pratters]

For one because England's batting line up is not changing any time soon (apart from Trott), and two because, there is a capable replacement in the form of Adil Rashid when it comes to Ali, who looked mediocre on a pitch where Permaul looked quite dangerous, and even Samuels looked okay.

Edit: Didn't see the Windies innings yesterday, so going by the scorecard for that one.

I wouldn't judge Moeen's bowling based on the last two tests actually. He has come off an injury and was clearly short of practice. Bowled better in the final test than he did in the second but still not how he usually bowls. He has been really fine for a year or so before this.

 

[Top_Cat]

Just for context, losers like Jacques Kallis and Gary Sobers took four years of Tests to find their feet. And by finding their feet, I mean 'do anything significant'. There were people openly wondering after Kallis' first Test ton whether he had it in him to score another many more or whether he should do more with his bowling. Stokes has been at Test cricket 18 months and has a couple of top Ashes knocks under his belt already (bully for him) but it remains that making it as a Test all-rounder is ****ing tough. Aside from getting better at both disciplines at different rates, the biggest impediment to a talented all-rounder getting really good is knowing who'll be around him. Stokes, at the moment, could be batting in nice groove at 7 and bowling 2nd change today but has the game to be thrown in at 3 tomorrow and/or given the new ball depending on selection/panic.

He's a mercurial talent but there have been many others. The difference between trending toward Kallis' direction instead of Chris Lewis is the stability of the team built around them. Picking them without question every game isn't the solution in the same vein as dropping them at the first sign of trouble because it ignores the context of their selection. Once England sort out who should be batting around him (and this could take a while since they're transitioning), they'll go a long way to sorting out what they want from blokes like Stokes and getting the best out of him. Averages are pretty much irrelevant at this point in time.

 

[harsh.ag]

There is one thing that can be said about Adil Rashid. A look at their FC records puts across something interesting. While they have played nearly the same number of games, Rashid has bowled nearly twice the number of deliveries as has Ali. This has then translated in him taking a few more than double the wickets at a slightly better average and strike rate. I guess that's what most people mean when they say things like "frontline" or "specialist" spinner - one whose performance is as effective when taking on a lot more load of overs.

Ali has more to prove on that parameter I guess. And Rashid is no mug with the bat (has 9 hundreds and 29 50s), while obviously not as good as Ali.

English fans thoughts??

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Just for context, losers like Jacques Kallis and Gary Sobers took four years of Tests to find their feet. And by finding their feet, I mean 'do anything significant'. There were people openly wondering after Kallis' first Test ton whether he had it in him to score another many more or whether he should do more with his bowling. Stokes has been at Test cricket 18 months and has a couple of top Ashes knocks under his belt already (bully for him) but it remains that making it as a Test all-rounder is ****ing tough. Aside from getting better at both disciplines at different rates, the biggest impediment to a talented all-rounder getting really good is knowing who'll be around him. Stokes, at the moment, could be batting in nice groove at 7 and bowling 2nd change today but has the game to be thrown in at 3 tomorrow and/or given the new ball depending on selection/panic.

He's a mercurial talent but there have been many others. The difference between trending toward Kallis' direction instead of Chris Lewis is the stability of the team built around them. Picking them without question every game isn't the solution in the same vein as dropping them at the first sign of trouble because it ignores the context of their selection. Once England sort out who should be batting around him (and this could take a while since they're transitioning), they'll go a long way to sorting out what they want from blokes like Stokes and getting the best out of him. Averages are pretty much irrelevant at this point in time.

The problem isn't that there are one or two who need to find their feet, it's half a team. At Test level there should be competition for places with only one or maybe two new or unproven players in any one side when they've earned the chance to displace a regular team member. England have about three or maybe four established players who deserve to be in the side - plus a couple of promising players who might or might not make it - plus a pile of dung who shouldn't be within light years of the Test side.

 

[harsh.ag]

Just for context, losers like Jacques Kallis and Gary Sobers took four years of Tests to find their feet. And by finding their feet, I mean 'do anything significant'....

....Averages are pretty much irrelevant at this point in time.

Simpler times, TC. But tbh, Kallis' bowling in the first few years was damn good. Was bowling first change after Donald and Pollock in many games, and took many key wickets.

 

[Top_Cat]

The problem isn't that there are one or two who need to find their feet, it's half a team. At Test level there should be competition for places with only one or maybe two new or unproven players in any one side when they've earned the chance to displace a regular team member. England have about three or maybe four established players who deserve to be in the side - plus a couple of promising players who might or might not make it - plus a pile of dung who shouldn't be within light years of the Test side.

Absolutely and what I was trying to get at. Just saying his career should be judged in context. And stuff like this shows why selection is a much, much harder job than people give it credit for, especially when managing new talent where their exact job isn't clear yet.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Remember all those times England picked uber-specialist bowlers who literally couldn't hold a bat between them?

4th Test: England v New Zealand at The Oval, Aug 19-22, 1999 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Such a huge problem that they've found a lead spinner who can bat! They'd totally want Tufnell instead; he can't bat so he's a better bowler, right?

Well, yeah, Tufnell's a far better bowler than Ali.

And it wouldn't really hurt their batting all that much to have a 1993 Phil Tufnell in their side, and end up with Buttler back at 7.

 

[Beamer]

Well that was an enjoyable test. I'm delighted with the way the youngsters stuck at it and we saw so many good things in this series. I said right at the start of this thread that the English media were being ridiculous with their over-rating of their side and bashing of ours. We're not a good test side but give us 2 years or so and I have genuine belief we might well be. We have all the talent you could wish for it just has to be harnessed and matched with a good work ethic. So far so good on that front. This is certainly not a brilliant England side IMHO and they're really not that much better than us so I thought there was every chance we might win a test if we put it together and that's exactly what happened.

Everyone is moaning at Graves, and I thought he could have phrased his comments a lot better (pretty basic stuff for someone in a senior position). But the media were far, far worse. Botham said the tests would hardly last 4 days. Well, he was right about one of them but that wasnt our fault!

As for our players, I loved what I saw from Blackwood and Holder. When you add Kraigg into the mix and hopefully a rejuvenated Darren Bravo, things aren't looking too bad. With Taylor's outstanding bowling, we're starting to develop a core of players we can work with.

Shiv might well be on the way out, I think he ought to retire after the Australia series so we can give him the send off he deserves. Shai Hope is not an opener but it's better than just playing Devon over and over. I actually think Blackwood should eventually move up to 3, Bravo at 4, Samuels at 5 and Shai Hope can slot in at 6 when shiv retires. In the meantime I agree with Prince EWS, they should give Johnson a run in the opening slot, he didn't do much wrong.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Wow all the numpties coming out of the woodwork to have a go at Stokes? Seriously?

His batting was okay in this series, his stats don't look anything exceptional because the situation dictated he had to throw his bat a bit in most of the innings. His bowling was unlucky and he was used the most on the flattest pitches and the least when it actually did something or when the ball was even remotely new. He was always going to peripheral the way he was used. The sub-continent type conditions are the least favourable for his cricket anyway. The responsibility ultimately lies with the 3 main seamers, the main spinner and the front line batting,

It would be absolutely ludicrous to drop him. He's bought himself a prolonged run in the side and hopefully he'll be given responsibility in England.

His first series:

Cricket Records | The Ashes, 2013/14 - England | Records | Batting and bowling averages | ESPN Cricinfo

Best batsman and only outbowled by Broad. As for Woakes and Jordan they did absolutely nothing in the first place to move ahead of Stokes and that hasn't changed. Only England could **** about so much with their best bat and second best bowler in the Ashes. He's been at least serviceable in one of batting or bowling since. He seems to be a victim of the fact that he can do both so if one's not firing he should be dropped. What a load of bollocks.

As for comparisons with Ealham, Ben Hollioake etc. - utterly ridiculous. They were limited players. Stokes has the raw ingredients to be a top class batsman or bowler.

The main batsmen need to bat better, simple as that. England also need to back the CC. What more can you expect Lyth to do?

He needs to be treated as a main batsman. As soon as it's decided he's not one of the best six batsman (aside from the keeper), he shouldn't be played. Cricket at international level is too hard to spend half your time thinking you have to bat in the top six and work on that, and then the next week being the third/fourth seamer.

 

[marc71178]

I wish Stokes was just a bit better or a bit worse then we would know what to do about him. As it is I have absolutely no idea.

At this stage he is neither good enough with the bat to be in the top 6 or with the ball to be a front line bowler.

Until that changes he shouldn't be in the team.

 

[Pothas]

English fans thoughts??

Moeen was not really a bowler at all until about 3 years ago. We have been through this so many times already.

 

[harsh.ag]

Moeen was not really a bowler at all until about 3 years ago. We have been through this so many times already.

Didn't know that.

 

[SteveNZ]

I'd back NZ in India. Wouldn't necessarily call them favorites, would be a toss up as far as I'm concerned.

Any non sub-continental side would go to the sub-continent and start toss-up at best - Australia being the possible exception, given Lyon and the ability to play spin well. And vice versa.

 

[WindieWeathers]

At this stage he is neither good enough with the bat to be in the top 6 or with the ball to be a front line bowler.

Until that changes he shouldn't be in the team.

Hello marc...enjoy the series mate?