*Official* West Indies Tour of England 2020

[GoodAreasShane]

Clearly it was the time Bess spent in Adelaide grade cricket that helped him become the bowler he is now

 

[mackembhoy]

Foakes is the go. Solid keeper from what little I saw and a better batsman too than half the specialist bats England have picked.

He had a poor county season and unfortunately Ed Smith keeps trying to make Buttler happen as a red ball player.

The funniest thing about our keeper situation is they should have left Bairstow at 7 this whole time and he'd probably still be there. He's completely lost his technique due to being moved around and his superb rise in ODI cricket.

I don't want Buttler to fail, but I know he will. So hope Foakes is in by Pakistan, so he gets some test cricket under his belt ready for a potential India series in the winter. We need a proper keeper for that one.

 

[mackembhoy]

What was the reasoning behind this? I've seen plenty talking about how bad the decision was, but very little on what the team management has given as a reason.

Extra pace on a flat pitch. Which that ground usually is.

I think they had their team picked without factoring in the conditions. Which was silly.

As we chose to bat first it didn't make a difference our batting cost us the game.

 

[Flem274*]

i don't hate buttler as a red ball player as long as he's keeping but it's getting to the point where foakes minimum performance required to be better than buttler is getting quite low.

broad gotta come in for the next game.

 

[grecian]

I do think Broad was dropped over the poor practice match as much as anything. It's a bit odd, Stuey has basically used all warm-ups (including Country cricket at times) just to get fit and not put too much strain on his body. It is always the case that someone not picked becomes an immortal, yet I'm afraid I will fall into that trap, if he had been in I feel he'd have helped us massively in the first innings, and Windies wouldn't have had the decisive lead. Yet of course we'll never know.

Archer and Wood are ***eh though, so I get the temptation.

 

[Daemon]

Buttler's glovework was quite shoddy I thought. I saw at least 5 that went through to the keeper that he didn't gather cleanly, in addition to the drop, and I didn't even watch most of WIs innings.

 

[Flem274*]

I think I'm still confident of England winning in Manchester but they're going to have to bat convincingly better.

I think a lot of people will point to the missed chances this afternoon but it was always an uphill battle after how the first two and a half days went.

yea root's return really makes a big difference. west indies don't have a similar card to play at all and will need to pull their socks up with the bat to counter.

 

[weldone]

Archer and Wood are ***eh though, so I get the temptation.

Archer maybe, Wood is definitely not '***eh'. Just speed doesn't make a bowler good to look at. Did you ever find Shaun Tait '***eh'? I didn't. Terrible action, looks filthy in the run-up and follow-through (even when he doesn't fall) tbh.

 

[theegyptian]

I certainly wouldn't have minded Woakes playing instead of Broad. With Root absent the batting was so weak, that the added insurance that Woakes would have offered at 8 would have been helpful, and his bowling record in England is superior to Broad.

I also didn't have any issue with Wood playing (although wouldn't have played both archer and wood). I know people bring up his home record which is fair enough, but it's not like he'd done anything away from home either until 4 tests ago.

I know Broad and the ECB drew praise for his interview during the game, and it certainly was good for press and tv, but personally I thought it was misjudged. It was an uneccesary distraction for the team whilst the game was going on, potentially putting more pressure upon Stokes and the bowlers. Focus should be on the team and the match going on.

Had sympathy with all the players and umpires this game. Going in with no match practice must have been tough, it's hard to be too critical of anyone's performance in this game. That being said, Buttler and Denly's overall records don't stand up to scrutiny so they will inevitably will come under pressure for their places.

I think Denly has actually done a pretty good job for England in a spot where there are few alternatives. However he is 34, and clearly isn't good enough to be a test batsman. The stats tend to suggest he's been lucky to average as much as he has.

With Buttler I've said throughout his career that he's never really shown the quality in fc cricket to warrant selection. It's always been a pick based on his short format exploits and potential. He's had 42 tests to improve but it hasn't happened. He averages 27 as wk, and 35 as batsman and neither are really good enough. I just don't see anything in his game that makes me think that he will break through and improve enough to warrant long term selection.

 

[Beamer]

For me Butler and Hope are in a similar conundrum. Outstanding ODI records and form just not being replicated at test level, whether that is for mental or technical reasons. Personally, I would drop them both but I suspect both will be given until the end of this series.

 

[Xuhaib]

Windies might be just couple of 40-45 averaging batsmen away from being a top 4 if not top 3 test team in the world.

 

[grecian]

Archer maybe, Wood is definitely not '***eh'. Just speed doesn't make a bowler good to look at. Did you ever find Shaun Tait '***eh'? I didn't. Terrible action, looks filthy in the run-up and follow-through (even when he doesn't fall) tbh.

I did, pace is fun, I found Andre van Troost ***eh, but he was a good-looking man. Obviously Simon Jones is the benchmark.

 

[Beamer]

Windies might be just couple of 40-45 averaging batsmen away from being a top 4 if not top 3 test team in the world.

Completely agree, though quite how we do that I just don't know. I'd get Pooran playing FC and Test cricket but there's no guarantee he would do better than other excellent ODI players like Hope.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

I did, pace is fun, I found Andre van Troost ***eh, but he was a good-looking man. Obviously Simon Jones is the benchmark.

I would literally kill a man to see footage of Andre van Troost in full flight

 

[Teja.]

I was watching the highlights for Day 2 and 3 and 5 wrong decisions so far by Kettle all against WI which were overturned. So weird.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I think Denly has actually done a pretty good job for England in a spot where there are few alternatives. However he is 34, and clearly isn't good enough to be a test batsman. The stats tend to suggest he's been lucky to average as much as he has.

Interestingly (or perhaps not, but we're here to talk about cricket, so that's what I'm going to do) Ben Gardner made the case for Denly's retention on the Wisden site yesterday.

Not entirely convincingly, in my estimation; the passage I really disagree with is this one:

In the first innings, after coming in inside the second over, he (Denly) ensured Crawley didn?t have to come in until the 24th, weathering a testing period on the first day. In the second, it was 51.3 overs until Crawley entered, against part-time spinners, tiring quicks and a wearing ball. Sure, it was the younger man who top-scored with 76, but the England management will view some of those runs as effectively earned by Denly.

In a way, while Denly did his job, of blunting the new ball and laying the platform, Crawley didn?t do his, falling when he could have put the game out of sight and laid down an unanswerable marker. As it is, Denly may well keep his place when Root returns. And it might not be the worst decision either.

I mean, sure, balls faced is one of the metrics one looks at when assessing a batter's worth, but going one stage further and saying Denly earned Crawley's runs is a step too far, surely?

One could equally argue Joe had done the hard work by playing himself in and then (once again) failed to convert a set start to a significant innings.

Every batsman starts at 0 and, yes, there are better times to come in than not, but Crawley's 76 was hardly downhill skiing from 500/2 was it?

 

[Howe_zat]

Interestingly (or perhaps not, but we're here to talk about cricket, so that's what I'm going to do) Ben Gardner made the case for Denly's retention on the Wisden site yesterday.

Not entirely convincingly, in my estimation; the passage I really disagree with is this one:



I mean, sure, balls faced is one of the metrics one looks at when assessing a batter's worth, but going one stage further and saying Denly earned Crawley's runs is a step too far, surely?

One could equally argue Joe had done the hard work by playing himself in and then (once again) failed to convert a set start to a significant innings.

Every batsman starts at 0 and, yes, there are better times to come in than not, but Crawley's 76 was hardly downhill skiing from 500/2 was it?

Yeah some textbook overthinking it there. The top three in that innings and in SA collectively did a good job despite not scoring all that many runs, and attempting to personify that into Denly is assigning him rather too much influence.

If anything the thing to point to is the value of a good opening stand. 72 without loss after 36 overs in England's second innings compared to nothing in the first.

 

[Jack1]

I?d pick Crawley over Denly.

I?d also be dropping Buttler for Foakes. I would have picked Foakes for the last ten tests or so anyway so for me that isn?t a big step. Buttler has had too many chances for me.

And for me Broad plays over Wood next game. I?d also be tentative with Archer since he?s injury prone. Woakes could be a potential rotation option for him. Wood is injury prone too of course. Woakes and Broad have been very good in England so both strong options

 

[grecian]

I?d pick Crawley over Denly.

I?d also be dropping Buttler for Foakes. I would have picked Foakes for the last ten tests or so anyway so for me that isn?t a big step. Buttler has had too many chances for me.

And for me Broad plays over Wood next game. I?d also be tentative with Archer since he?s injury prone. Woakes could be a potential rotation option for him. Wood is injury prone too of course. Woakes and Broad have been very good in England so both strong options

Archer plays at Old Trafford though, but yeah, wouldn't be shocked if Woakes plays for him later on. There is just an huge problem with all this talk of change though, that in the end, no-one has match practice, so dropping people means you put in someone with less. Hence I fully expect Buttler to rock up, shouldn't have been picked in the first place, but possibly not good for Foakes to be thrown in now.

Wood generally breaks after 2 matches in a row, so pretty easy decision to drop him.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Hopefully Archie will turn up ready at Old Trafford this year. His lazy performance on day one last year lost England the momentum we gained from Headingley.