*Official* India Tour of England 2018

[Jack1]

Presuming Bairstow and Cook are out Burns and Jennings to open. I like the idea of Vince as you can drop Root and Pope down a spot each. The downside being Vince has a 24 test batting average. Give Buttler the gloves which will stop people bitching about him at 7 for at least as long Bairstow comes back. Besides he's only really messed up against Oz. Its a dodgy looking side. Keep the pace attack though Curran may bump Woakes. Bring back Ali for Rashid. He's made runs apparently and he is the best **** house bowler I've seen. Certainly better than Rashid.

I hope Jennings is dropped no matter what. He's completely out of his depth with bat and in field at this level. I'd open with Burns and Vince.

 

[harsh.ag]

Let Buttler play a few games jeez

 

[marc71178]

BBC sport quote - England batsman Jos Buttler said his maiden Test century was his "proudest moment in an England shirt". This makes me worry Buttler has been batting for himself in red ball cricket and it's why he's been failing badly. When the pressure is on you have to bat for the team , not yourself, or you are going to crumble as an individual and team in my view.

It tells me that he values Test cricket over ODIs.

Besides that, in what circumstance does batting for yourself not benefit the team, especially in the situation he came in?

 

[OverratedSanity]

It wasn't really a hugely consequential innings but it's a far more encouraging kind of knock than a run a ball second innings declaration ton or the first innings cameo with the tail. He atleast showed he can play a proper test innings. Whether he can replicate some of this when the game is actually alive remains to be seen but it should still be seen as a bit of a positive for England.

 

[marc71178]

Oh I totally agree that in the grand scheme of things performances in the 2nd innings of that match from an England point of view were irrelevant as they were effectively pressure-free but at least he (and Stokes) showed some battle.

 

[wpdavid]

Oh I totally agree that in the grand scheme of things performances in the 2nd innings of that match from an England point of view were irrelevant as they were effectively pressure-free but at least he (and Stokes) showed some battle.

Beyond that, they should both benefit from spending some time in the middle building a reasonably substantial innings. We'll see at Southampton, I suppose. But we should at least be willing to credit him for an innings well played.

 

[the big bambino]

I wonder how Buttler batting for the team would have looked any different? Top scores in both innings and he's accused of being selfish or scoring meaningless runs. Its the sort of criticism designed to make it impossible for him to win any credit and reinforce prejudices of him. The game was still India's to win so I don't see how runs against a team playing hard to get back into a series are meaningless. Were Bumrah's wickets meaningless? Buttler came in at 4-62 (not 2-400) and scored against a team amped in the pursuit of victory. One thing is for sure. If Buttler failed he would have been blasted for not showing ticker and having no pride in his shirt. But he succeeded and instead of congratulating him he's accused of scoring meaningless runs for himself. Some people are determined to critical come what may.

 

[TestMatch]

Does anyone see Moeen Ali being re-selected?

 

[vcs]

Buttler's knock not meaningless at all. The confidence gained from a long stint facing these same bowlers he'll be up against for the rest of the series could be very valuable.

 

[Gremlin]

Does anyone see Moeen Ali being re-selected?

Yes, but not necessarily at the expense of Rashid

 

[Daemon]

Disagree that Butler/Stokes knocks were inconsequential. In the context of the series, they've shown that India still have a way to go in terms of bowling quality when conditions are favourable for batting. It was only when the new ball was made available that we managed to dislodge that partnership.

 

[R!TTER]

Disagree that Butler/Stokes knocks were inconsequential. In the context of the series, they've shown that India still have a way to go in terms of bowling quality when conditions are favourable for batting. It was only when the new ball was made available that we managed to dislodge that partnership.

Yeah, in fact I'd go so far as to say that the Pant drop could be the turning point of the series. Stokes & Buttler getting time in the middle was the worst possible scenario for India, given that England win was out of question.

People are forgetting what happened at Lords on a sunny day, it can easily happen in the next 2 tests.

 

[R!TTER]

It tells me that he values Test cricket over ODIs.

Besides that, in what circumstance does batting for yourself not benefit the team, especially in the situation he came in?

I remember this argument being used frequently against a certain someone, who retired 5 years back, or Lara for that matter.

 

[Shri]

Did anyone else see Kohli givinng the champagne to Ravi Shastri?

 

[Jack1]

I remember this argument being used frequently against a certain someone, who retired 5 years back, or Lara for that matter.

I'm talking about mindset. If you bat for yourself you are putting yourself under enormous pressure in pressure situations, compared to a player that bats for the team. I believe that's why Ashwin earlier in the series batted so well when India were batting like garbage, he bats for the team rather than himself (inside his head. As he is a thinker of the game). Players like Ramprakash (extreme examples) and Hick seemed to be very self and individually focused, hence flopped in test cricket. I believe this is Buttler's problem and he needs to get out of it. In limited overs you have to bat for the team, or lose your place. Test cricket is more about individual contributions, but I believe if you get into an individual focus you are going to fail. When Broad goes on a hot streak he looks like he's focused on steaming in for the team, rather than his own stats. I think this goes for all players from 1-11 with bat and ball in teams. Confidence/inconsistent players I believe have more erratic and inconsistent personalities. Steady players are generally more steady upstairs. Just my thoughts on the matter.

As for his comment, in any innings of the game you have to bat the match situation and the role of your position in the side. Same goes for bowling your role. There are loads of permutations and in all cases trying to bat/ball for yourself is just going to heap pressure on you as an individual compared to trying your best for the team. That's my view on it from a mental point of view.

 

[Jack1]

I wonder how Buttler batting for the team would have looked any different? Top scores in both innings and he's accused of being selfish or scoring meaningless runs. Its the sort of criticism designed to make it impossible for him to win any credit and reinforce prejudices of him. The game was still India's to win so I don't see how runs against a team playing hard to get back into a series are meaningless. Were Bumrah's wickets meaningless? Buttler came in at 4-62 (not 2-400) and scored against a team amped in the pursuit of victory. One thing is for sure. If Buttler failed he would have been blasted for not showing ticker and having no pride in his shirt. But he succeeded and instead of congratulating him he's accused of scoring meaningless runs for himself. Some people are determined to critical come what may.

No. What I'm saying is when he had to bat for the team in the series with the game in the balance he has failed. The one time he's batted with no pressure he has succeeded. This is worrying to me for his long term longevity as a test match bat. If he wants to be as good in test cricket as limited overs he needs a change of mindset. He can't deliver with the bat, or in the field, right now when the pressure is on in red ball cricket.

The game was dead when England came to bat. We didn't have a hope in hell of chasing it down or surviving, not even a sniff. It was a good innings as an isolated case, but in the grand scheme of things irrelevant. He needs to make runs when it matters. It could be a confidence builder, but it may not be because of the context of the game (it was a in reality a century made in dead game). The fact he values it as his proudest moment for England in a game England got shown up badly is an even bigger worry and suggests he's self-orientated.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Overall I reckon that's one of the best overseas performances I've ever seen from India. Strange to see such a clinical performance from beginning to end, good solid batting in both innings with wickets never falling in clumps, excellent bowling all test, and most shockingly, some great catching.

I think the break is ideal too, since it'll give Ashwin a chance to recover and hopefully get back to 100% before the next game.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Genuinely surprised with the conditioning of Bumrah and Shami. Ishant began flagging towards the end there, but the other two had their tails up right till the end.

 

[SeamUp]

PS above has forgotten to include Pujara

So what are the changes

Shaw for Vijay
Vihari for Kuldeep

 

[Arachnodouche]

Is Harmison taking the piss when he canvasses for Ian Bell's recall?