Ashes 5 test - The Oval

[rentaghost]

Yes but he won player of the series last year against India who were the World No 1 Team. He has never let England down and in my opinion should play.

That's subjective like - he was shite in the West Indies. Not his fault he was bowling on flat pitches and doesn't have the weaponry on pitches that don't give you something but thats the point. He's a horses for courses bowler who would have been great in the first innings at Headingley if we had only known Woakes was going to have a bit of a mare However I never fancied him at OT, I think he would have been no threat and expensive by bowling too full a length. I don't fancy him at the Oval either but time will tell. Hope he proves me wrong.

 

[Voice of fair play]

It is hindsight, no one could have foreseen how he would go, just so happens you were right and he couldn’t make the step up but there was every reason to think he could have made the transition from one day to Test and if things had gone slightly different he may have done, but he didn’t mainly due to him not wanting to or able to learn on the job, be that arrogance or lack of ability, whatever not cos he’s been shafted by Ed Smith.

The fact is we weren’t looking for a middle order batsman, we needed an opener and he was the only logical and obvious choice. Saying he’s been shafted etc is revisionist nonsense. He was given a great chance and couldn’t take it, unfortunately. I think we’ve got much better options in the middle order anyway and I’m a big fan of his as well.

I can’t believe you can’t see that somebody on their debut, in the a massive series like the ashes put in a position they have never batted before in red ball cricket, is not unfair on the lad?

In fact without sounding over dramatic can’t remember that ever happening before.

In test cricket nowadays in nearly every game you see openers are struggling, even very experienced openers, people who have never done it before have no chance.

Even great batsman like Ponting started at 6 and eventually moved up to 3.

Its because there wasn't a clear answer. My guess is that if we had taken your choice of Root opening he would have performed similarly or worse to how he did at 3 with 3 ducks being exposed to the new ball. We will of course never know.

Possibly, but surely nobody could disagree even in the slightest that Root has more patience and a better techinique than Roy to open the batting in test cricket.

The way Burns and Root batted in both they long partnerships with patience and application suggests strongly they were better suited to opening than anyone else.

 

[Salem Street South]

Curran has been treated really poorly like as far as I’m concerned, being in the squad then overlooked. It was a big mistake overlooking him at Old Trafford. His 80mph ‘farts’ were good enough to get all of the Indian top order bar Pujara out last summer, and his batting was excellent..so who knows how he’d have gone against the Aussie twats, I’d have thought he’d have done well. The selection of Overton who was ‘farting’ it down at 82mph this Test looks even worse now imo.

I can’t believe you can’t see that somebody on their debut, in the a massive series like the ashes put in a position they have never batted before in red ball cricket, is not unfair on the lad?

In fact without sounding over dramatic can’t remember that ever happening before.

In test cricket nowadays in nearly every game you see openers are struggling, even very experienced openers, people who have never done it before have no chance.

Even great batsman like Ponting started at 6 and eventually moved up to 3.


Possibly, but surely nobody could disagree even in the slightest that Root has more patience and a better techinique than Roy to open the batting in test cricket.

The way Burns and Root batted in both they long partnerships with patience and application suggests strongly they were better suited to opening than anyone else.

I don’t really think it’s unfair no, I think it was a great opportunity for him that unfortunately he couldn’t take. I blame him for that mostly though, as he just hasn’t learnt, not the selectors for giving him that chance. I do think it was a huge ask though, so I can see where you’re coming from, and there’s a very strong case to say he that should have been in long before this summer - Sri Lanka and the WI specifically - if the plan was always to open with him in the Ashes.

 

[rentaghost]

Curran has been treated really poorly like as far as I’m concerned, being in the squad then overlooked. It was a big mistake overlooking him at Old Trafford. His 80mph ‘farts’ were good enough to get all of the Indian top order bar Pujara out last summer, and his batting was excellent..so who knows how he’d have gone against the Aussie twats, I’d have thought he’d have done well. The selection of Overton who was ‘farting’ it down at 82mph this Test looks even worse now imo.


I don’t really think it’s unfair no, I think it was a great opportunity for him that unfortunately he couldn’t take. I blame him for that mostly though, as he just hasn’t learnt, not the selectors for giving him that chance. I do think it was a huge ask though, so I can see where you’re coming from, and there’s a very strong case to say he that should have been in long before this summer - Sri Lanka and the WI specifically - if the plan was always to open with him in the Ashes.

You are a good poster but if you think that flat pitch at OT that only tall 90mph seamers got anything out of was remotely like what Curran performed will on last summer I truly despair. Woakes should not have been dropped (now that it has been accepted he wasnt crocked) but Curran would have went to all parts pitching it up on that pitch.

 

[Voice of fair play]

Curran has been treated really poorly like as far as I’m concerned, being in the squad then overlooked. It was a big mistake overlooking him at Old Trafford. His 80mph ‘farts’ were good enough to get all of the Indian top order bar Pujara out last summer, and his batting was excellent..so who knows how he’d have gone against the Aussie twats, I’d have thought he’d have done well. The selection of Overton who was ‘farting’ it down at 82mph this Test looks even worse now imo.


I don’t really think it’s unfair no, I think it was a great opportunity for him that unfortunately he couldn’t take. I blame him for that mostly though, as he just hasn’t learnt, not the selectors for giving him that chance. I do think it was a huge ask though, so I can see where you’re coming from, and there’s a very strong case to say he that should have been in long before this summer - Sri Lanka and the WI specifically - if the plan was always to open with him in the Ashes.

Will have to agree to disagree on the unfair bit mate

 

[Salem Street South]

You are a good poster but if you think that flat pitch at OT that only tall 90mph seamers got anything out of was remotely like what Curran performed will on last summer I truly despair. Woakes should not have been dropped (now that it has been accepted he wasnt crocked) but Curran would have went to all parts pitching it up on that pitch.

I’m sorry but we aren’t going to agree. The pitches last summer were not that different and he got some very, very good players out.

Overton is not a Test match standard bowler as long as my arse points downwards.

The Australians were getting swing on day 5 when they managed to get the ball changed after 50 odd overs and given conditions on the first two days, I don’t think it’s outlandish or fanciful to think Curran would have got some joy. Again I’m not saying he’s Wasim mk2 but left arm seam may just be the something different that could have brought us some joy against Smith. Of course, we’ll never know now.
Woakes has been in poor form since the Ireland Test, he has been getting sent to all parts by Smith.

Will have to agree to disagree on the unfair bit mate

Fair enough.

 

[rentaghost]

I’m sorry but we aren’t going to agree. The pitches last summer were not that different and he got some very, very good players out.

Overton is not a Test match standard bowler as long as my arse points downwards.

The Australians were getting swing on day 5 when they managed to get the ball changed after 50 odd overs and given conditions on the first two days, I don’t think it’s outlandish or fanciful to think Curran would have got some joy. Again I’m not saying he’s Wasim mk2 but left arm seam may just be the something different that could have brought us some joy against Smith. Of course, we’ll never know now.
Woakes has been in poor form since the Ireland Test, he has been getting sent to all parts by Smith.

Fair enough.

It is a bit outlandish and fanciful and born out of trying to find a place for a good young cricketer who 'deserves' to play due to his performances last year. I would never have picked Overton ahead of Woakes but his overs went at 3 an over being by far our most economical bowler. If one or two of our other bowlers had been as economical perhaps Australia would not have been able to declare as early as they did giving us a better chance of surviving. All Curran would have done on that pitch was allow the Australians to score their runs more quickly. I'm not against Curran, The first innings at Headingley would have been perfect for him and he would have done OK at Edgbaston also but not at OT and if the Oval is anything like it has been there I doubt he will perform there either. However with Stokes carrying an injury I think he will play so it will be interesting to see.

 

[Salem Street South]

It is a bit outlandish and fanciful and born out of trying to find a place for a good young cricketer who 'deserves' to play due to his performances last year. I would never have picked Overton ahead of Woakes but his overs went at 3 an over being by far our most economical bowler. If one or two of our other bowlers had been as economical perhaps Australia would not have been able to declare as early as they did giving us a better chance of surviving. All Curran would have done on that pitch was allow the Australians to score their runs more quickly. I'm not against Curran, The first innings at Headingley would have been perfect for him and he would have done OK at Edgbaston also but not at OT and if the Oval is anything like it has been there I doubt he will perform there either. However with Stokes carrying an injury I think he will play so it will be interesting to see.

He wasn’t by far our most economical bowler at all that’s just hyperbole, he was marginally cheaper than Broad and Archer in the first innings and did get Lasagne with rare good ball but he was more expensive than Archer second time round, when he went wicket less and with Leach managed to release the pressure Broad and Archer had built. I don’t think he ever looked threatening enough to say his inclusion was warranted or anything other than just more of the same which didn’t work. At least Curran would have been trying something different. It will be interesting to see how he goes at the Oval, if he does get a game. I’m like you, I don’t think the pitch there will suit, but hopefully he goes well, if he gets a go.

 

[rentaghost]

He wasn’t by far our most economical bowler at all that’s just hyperbole, he was marginally cheaper than Broad and Archer in the first innings and did get Lasagne with rare good ball but he was more expensive than Archer second time round, when he went wicket less and with Leach managed to release the pressure Broad and Archer had built. I don’t think he ever looked threatening enough to say his inclusion was warranted or anything other than just more of the same which didn’t work. At least Curran would have been trying something different. It will be interesting to see how he goes at the Oval, if he does get a game. I’m like you, I don’t think the pitch there will suit, but hopefully he goes well, if he gets a go.

It’s hardly hyperbole to say he was our most economical bowler. He either was or he wasn’t and he was and nobody was suggesting that this was a pitch where an 80 mph pitch it up seamer would have had success. I must admit I thought on day 1 when you saw the pitch you would have back tracked but you were too entrenched in your view because you were probably expecting it to be a bubbly seamer. Not to worry we move on

 

[Comeback_Kenwyne]

Foakes is not playing well, and he is way over rated, long term in the side? possibly but he needs more runs behind him

I have nout against him butjust sick of hearing his name, its canny mad how rated he is, like the second coming

Heard this for years about Leach, must player over Ali etc, then when he comes in, he is mo more than steady.

Jennings got a 100 in Sri Lanka too, its not much of a marker for scoring runs in England

Bairstow isn't a top 5 player, he is a number 7, and again said this a million times, people try and blame the lower order when its the top 5 that are the issue.


We have lost our 2nd home series (well we haven't lost actually) in 7 years, no need to change the whole side
They have 100% done the right thing keeping the squad, Roy has been shafted by Ed Smith and probs can't recover, but you give him another game in the middle order, we shouldn't panic, we have missed our best bowler, and Smith and a world class bowling unit have won it.

I'd appoint a new selector, new coach, then lets see how we want to play first and have a clear plan, not just pick names from a list of averages and say pick him, him, him


I do talk a lot of shite, but I have always been very consistent over the last 3 or 4 years about how I see England

The strength is our lower order, Root has to play 4, then You have Stokes at 6, Bairstow at 7, Ali (if he is in form, he was rightly dropped for a break) at 8.

I think Buttler won't score enough runs as a batsman, but he should be in and around the squad.

Teh issues are simpe, find a top 3 who can bat time, and set the game up for the middle order from Root downwards who can play their natural way, don't shoe horn players out of position, look at whats happened to Root

We have found one in Burns who has done OK, Denly shows he can bat time, but needs replacing long term

Then we could maybe move Stokes to 5 and try someone like Pope at 6 before slowly moving him up the order
Sorry for the rambling length of the post
England lost their way over last 18 months under Ed Smith when Root was moved to 3, we had Stokes at 3 one time, Ali at 3 and 5, Bairstow at 3,4,5

Yet these are the ones who get criticised, leave them in their best positions and then lets find some top order players, we found Burns, why can't we find some more?


Yeah he has been just about the best run scorer when fit in CC for as long as I can remember, just a run getter, surprised never even been talked about.

Our top 3 needs to be picked on charachter and players who can churn it out, our 4 to 7 will score runs if that happens, and we have the freedom of the best young talent like Pope at 6

Its a shame Roy never got the chance to have a series at 6, cant believe Ed Smith and James Taylor, they let him down

Disagree on Foakes v Bairstow, but I'm not zealous about it. The rest makes sense. Where we find the other opener from and a long-term replacement for Denly at three remains a mystery.

Really not sure why Woakes has been jettisoned either. I know he had a dodgy spell at Headingly, but you've got to have one pitch it up swing bowler in England and with Anderson out surely he is the best.

Who captains the side is another mystery. Root is poor, but who else. Was debating this with a colleague who was pushing Broad and the only other fast bowler - rather than bowling all-rounder - we could think of who'd captained a side was Courtney Walsh. Why is that? He's never mentioned as a candidate.

I think that will be the team. i have said before I don't really fancy Curran on flat pitches and the Oval usually is. Be interesting to see how he goes.

I know, but it is his home ground and his country record is excellent.

 

[The Rat]

Disagree on Foakes v Bairstow, but I'm not zealous about it. The rest makes sense. Where we find the other opener from and a long-term replacement for Denly at three remains a mystery.

Really not sure why Woakes has been jettisoned either. I know he had a dodgy spell at Headingly, but you've got to have one pitch it up swing bowler in England and with Anderson out surely he is the best.

Who captains the side is another mystery. Root is poor, but who else. Was debating this with a colleague who was pushing Broad and the only other fast bowler - rather than bowling all-rounder - we could think of who'd captained a side was Courtney Walsh. Why is that? He's never mentioned as a candidate.

I think the root captaincy is over played

Captaincy in general is way over played

Look at Paine, he had nothing to do with that series win just a steady hand. Saying that, wouldn’t be against a change

But need to wait and see what Giles does

Why hasn’t he found a coach yet? What’s he been doing?

I actually don’t agree on woakes but to be fair seems I’m in the minority, including fans, journos and media

Been at a lot of the test so haven’t been listening to commentary much but I thought he has been really poor lately, then got found out by short ball and was bowling slower and slower

Looked drained

Thought it was a no brainer, not saying I agree with the replacement

But I must have been being harsh as I’ve not seen anyone else say it

 

[mackembhoy]

Seen a stat from Dobell yesterday that Roy has never batted two sessions in a first class match.

Even in the middle order how the fuck can anyone think he makes it as test player. Selectors shouldn't have put him in the firing line for such an important series.

His SR at first class is 80, pretty easy with dibbly dobbler bowlers with an old ball coming at 5 or 6.

Curran has been treated really poorly like as far as I’m concerned, being in the squad then overlooked. It was a big mistake overlooking him at Old Trafford. His 80mph ‘farts’ were good enough to get all of the Indian top order bar Pujara out last summer, and his batting was excellent..so who knows how he’d have gone against the Aussie twats, I’d have thought he’d have done well. The selection of Overton who was ‘farting’ it down at 82mph this Test looks even worse now imo.


I don’t really think it’s unfair no, I think it was a great opportunity for him that unfortunately he couldn’t take. I blame him for that mostly though, as he just hasn’t learnt, not the selectors for giving him that chance. I do think it was a huge ask though, so I can see where you’re coming from, and there’s a very strong case to say he that should have been in long before this summer - Sri Lanka and the WI specifically - if the plan was always to open with him in the Ashes.

Nonsense

You hope people thrive and take their chance at international sport. But it's like playing Jermain Defoe at CB.

 

[Salem Street South]

It’s hardly hyperbole to say he was our most economical bowler. He either was or he wasn’t and he was and nobody was suggesting that this was a pitch where an 80 mph pitch it up seamer would have had success. I must admit I thought on day 1 when you saw the pitch you would have back tracked but you were too entrenched in your view because you were probably expecting it to be a bubbly seamer. Not to worry we move on

You said he was our most economical bowler ‘by far’. (If we want to be pedantic about it Denly was our most economical bowler)

The rates over both innings for the four main bowlers were

Broad 3.87
Archer 3.46
Leach 4.01
Overton 3.16

So yes he was the cheapest, but there’s not a lot in it, perhaps if he gone ~1.7 like the Aussie quirks you’d have a point, but he didn’t which makes your ‘by far’ comment hyperbole in my book.

However, if what you’re saying is correct, he was also the least successful wicket taker ‘by far’ in the match

Broad 5
Archer 3
Leach 3
Overton 2

and he bowled the fewest overs ‘by far’

Broad 39
Archer 41
Leach 35.1
Overton 33.5

I wonder if the reason for that is that he’s just not that good.

I think you’ve got too entrenched in your view that Overton ‘farting’ it down at 82mph was the way to go on that pitch when the evidence suggests not and that Curran’s 80mph ‘farts’ would have been fodder means you aren’t capable of seeing any other point of view.

I’m not looking to crucify him here by the way, he came in to do a difficult job in testing conditions and tried his best. I just think it was the wrong selection and Curran would have been a better call, particularly when he’s been in every squad yet they bring Overton in out of nowhere.

As a horses for courses type selection I don’t think you can justifiably say it worked, which reaffirms my belief that you’re overstating the nature of the pitch. It may not have been the type of green seamer of which we’ve seen several at Lords over the last few years, but neither was it, or conditions ie hot & sunny, like the ones he struggled with in the Caribbean over the winter. As I’ve already said, the Aussies got swing and as I’ve also several times, he had a lot of success last year on similar decks against very very good batsmen.

As you say though, not to worry we move on.

Seen a stat from Dobell yesterday that Roy has never batted two sessions in a first class match.

Even in the middle order how the fuck can anyone think he makes it as test player. Selectors shouldn't have put him in the firing line for such an important series.

His SR at first class is 80, pretty easy with dibbly dobbler bowlers with an old ball coming at 5 or 6.


Nonsense

You hope people thrive and take their chance at international sport. But it's like playing Jermain Defoe at CB.

It’s not nonsense and it’s nothing like Defoe at centre back. He was an opener for the one day side, a very successful one and the Test side were in desperate need of an opener. Just about every man and his dog wanted Roy to open. It was the obvious option and only one really.

 

[rentaghost]

You said he was our most economical bowler ‘by far’. (If we want to be pedantic about it Denly was our most economical bowler)

The rates over both innings for the four main bowlers were

Broad 3.87
Archer 3.46
Leach 4.01
Overton 3.16

So yes he was the cheapest, but there’s not a lot in it, perhaps if he gone ~1.7 like the Aussie quirks you’d have a point, but he didn’t which makes your ‘by far’ comment hyperbole in my book.

However, if what you’re saying is correct, he was also the least successful wicket taker ‘by far’ in the match

Broad 5
Archer 3
Leach 3
Overton 2

and he bowled the fewest overs ‘by far’

Broad 39
Archer 41
Leach 35.1
Overton 33.5

I wonder if the reason for that is that he’s just not that good.

I think you’ve got too entrenched in your view that Overton ‘farting’ it down at 82mph was the way to go on that pitch when the evidence suggests not and that Curran’s 80mph ‘farts’ would have been fodder means you aren’t capable of seeing any other point of view.

I’m not looking to crucify him here by the way, he came in to do a difficult job in testing conditions and tried his best. I just think it was the wrong selection and Curran would have been a better call, particularly when he’s been in every squad yet they bring Overton in out of nowhere.

As a horses for courses type selection I don’t think you can justifiably say it worked, which reaffirms my belief that you’re overstating the nature of the pitch. It may not have been the type of green seamer of which we’ve seen several at Lords over the last few years, but neither was it, or conditions ie hot & sunny, like the ones he struggled with in the Caribbean over the winter. As I’ve already said, the Aussies got swing and as I’ve also several times, he had a lot of success last year on similar decks against very very good batsmen.

As you say though, not to worry we move on.

It’s not nonsense and it’s nothing like Defoe at centre back. He was an opener for the one day side, a very successful one and the Test side were in desperate need of an opener. Just about every man and his dog wanted Roy to open. It was the obvious option and only one really.

82 is pushing it mind
Not similar decks at all. Every single pundit described that as a flat deck which was excellent for batting. Not one pundit would have described that pitch as anything like what we played on last summer. It had more in common with Australian drop in pitches than it did on the surfaces we played on last year. Of course Overton bowled less overs than Broad, Archer etc and of course it was because he 'isn't as good' which is also true of Curran and is why he wasn't selected. The fact that he clearly isnt in their bracket and still was more economical than all of them makes it more of a plus point if anything. Seems you have left Stokes out of the equation also as he was far more economical than him also. Overton shouldn't have been selected ahead of Woakes but no side would select a pitch it up 80mph bowler on that surface and none did - he wouldn't have taken wickets and would have been expensive. In short you expected the pitch to be different to what it was and don't have the guts to hold your hand up and admit Curran would have found it incredibly difficult on that surface. As I said earlier he would have been a cracking selection at headingley.

 

[mackembhoy]

It’s not nonsense and it’s nothing like Defoe at centre back. He was an opener for the one day side, a very successful one and the Test side were in desperate need of an opener. Just about every man and his dog wanted Roy to open. It was the obvious option and only one really.

I must have missed the part where being good at ODI cricket makes someone a good test player. Opening in red ball to white ball is like another sport

Durham doing the right thing after Scott Steel has opened brilliantly in the 50 and 20 over competitions. Put him in at 6 for his FC debut, where his attacking nature will be better suited to a red ball game.

The position where we should have tried Jason Roy.

 

[Salem Street South]

82 is pushing it mind
Not similar decks at all. Every single pundit described that as a flat deck which was excellent for batting. Not one pundit would have described that pitch as anything like what we played on last summer. It had more in common with Australian drop in pitches than it did on the surfaces we played on last year. Of course Overton bowled less overs than Broad, Archer etc and of course it was because he 'isn't as good' which is also true of Curran and is why he wasn't selected. The fact that he clearly isnt in their bracket and still was more economical than all of them makes it more of a plus point if anything. Seems you have left Stokes out of the equation also as he was far more economical than him also. Overton shouldn't have been selected ahead of Woakes but no side would select a pitch it up 80mph bowler on that surface and none did - he wouldn't have taken wickets and would have been expensive. In short you expected the pitch to be different to what it was and don't have the guts to hold your hand up and admit Curran would have found it incredibly difficult on that surface. As I said earlier he would have been a cracking selection at headingley.

82 is not pushing it, he was bowling in the mid 70s at one point on the first day.
It’s nothing to do with having guts ffs, it’s a debate on a message board nothing more.

Not one pundit hey? Didn’t realise you spoke for them all. It was a poor surface overall, the scores decreased innings by innings which is generally an indicator the pitch is worsening. As opposed to Headingley where the scores increased by innings and days 3 & 4 were the best for batting. Something Ricky Ponting also remarked on. So your point there is completely null and void

You have got bogged down in your insistence that pitch was totally different to last summer and that Curran wouldn’t have succeeded on it and you seem to be passing off your opinion that Curran wouldn’t have taken wickets at OT and would have been expensive as fact, when that’s all it is, opinion, and no more or less valid than mine that he would have done well and better than Overton.

I didn’t include Stokes, no, as I clearly said it was the four main bowlers, Stokes only bowled 10 overs in the first innings and then picked up an injury and didn’t bowl second time round so was pointless including his analysis. But yes he was expensive at over 6 an over.

I must have missed the part where being good at ODI cricket makes someone a good test player. Opening in red ball to white ball is like another sport

Durham doing the right thing after Scott Steel has opened brilliantly in the 50 and 20 over competitions. Put him in at 6 for his FC debut, where his attacking nature will be better suited to a red ball game.

The position where we should have tried Jason Roy.

No, it’s never happened before like. Ever.
We didn’t need Roy in the middle order, we needed him at the top. It hasn’t come off. End of story really.

 

[Comeback_Kenwyne]

I think the root captaincy is over played

Captaincy in general is way over played

Look at Paine, he had nothing to do with that series win just a steady hand. Saying that, wouldn’t be against a change

But need to wait and see what Giles does

Why hasn’t he found a coach yet? What’s he been doing?

I actually don’t agree on woakes but to be fair seems I’m in the minority, including fans, journos and media

Been at a lot of the test so haven’t been listening to commentary much but I thought he has been really poor lately, then got found out by short ball and was bowling slower and slower

Looked drained

Thought it was a no brainer, not saying I agree with the replacement

But I must have been being harsh as I’ve not seen anyone else say it

He hasn't bowled well, it's true. But they should have been looking for a like to like, they unbalanced the attack. Maybe he just needed a rest and will be back at the Oval.

 

[rentaghost]

82 is not pushing it, he was bowling in the mid 70s at one point on the first day.
It’s nothing to do with having guts ffs, it’s a debate on a message board nothing more.

Not one pundit hey? Didn’t realise you spoke for them all. It was a poor surface overall, the scores decreased innings by innings which is generally an indicator the pitch is worsening. As opposed to Headingley where the scores increased by innings and days 3 & 4 were the best for batting. Something Ricky Ponting also remarked on. So your point there is completely null and void

You have got bogged down in your insistence that pitch was totally different to last summer and that Curran wouldn’t have succeeded on it and you seem to be passing off your opinion that Curran wouldn’t have taken wickets at OT and would have been expensive as fact, when that’s all it is, opinion, and no more or less valid than mine that he would have done well and better than Overton.

I didn’t include Stokes, no, as I clearly said it was the four main bowlers, Stokes only bowled 10 overs in the first innings and then picked up an injury and didn’t bowl second time round so was pointless including his analysis. But yes he was expensive at over 6 an over.

No, it’s never happened before like. Ever.
We didn’t need Roy in the middle order, we needed him at the top. It hasn’t come off. End of story really.

Ah the 82 I thought you were referring to Curran hence the Overton fair enough - that's his pace and like Curran it isnt really quick enough to get good players out on good pitches. OT was a good test match surface, it did exactly what its supposed to do. It was easy paced and comfortable for batting and as it got into days 4 and 5 helped tall quick bowlers with uneven bounce and started to spin a lot. There was nothing in it day 1-5 for an 80mph bowler that pitches it up thats for sure. That's why he wasn't picked and they went to the extent of bringing someone in from the cold rather than select him on that pitch in those conditions. You are right about Headingley - when I said Curran would have bowled well there i was being slightly generous, I should have specified on days one and two when it was seaming and swinging before flattening out.

I’m sorry but we aren’t going to agree. The pitches last summer were not that different and he got some very, very good players out.

Overton is not a Test match standard bowler as long as my arse points downwards.

The Australians were getting swing on day 5 when they managed to get the ball changed after 50 odd overs and given conditions on the first two days, I don’t think it’s outlandish or fanciful to think Curran would have got some joy. Again I’m not saying he’s Wasim mk2 but left arm seam may just be the something different that could have brought us some joy against Smith. Of course, we’ll never know now.
Woakes has been in poor form since the Ireland Test, he has been getting sent to all parts by Smith.

Fair enough.

Well Jimmy Anderson completely disagrees with you. Last year the pitches suited us more than India says Jimmy. This year the pitches suited Australia more than us says Jimmy. I would like to have seen more grass on them etc, etc. Good pitches for us against India last year, not this year. Good pitches for pitch it up English seamers such as Curran last year, not this year. Your thoughts?

You must be logged on to see external links

 

[Salem Street South]

Ah the 82 I thought you were referring to Curran hence the Overton fair enough - that's his pace and like Curran it isnt really quick enough to get good players out on good pitches. OT was a good test match surface, it did exactly what its supposed to do. It was easy paced and comfortable for batting and as it got into days 4 and 5 helped tall quick bowlers with uneven bounce and started to spin a lot. There was nothing in it day 1-5 for an 80mph bowler that pitches it up thats for sure. That's why he wasn't picked and they went to the extent of bringing someone in from the cold rather than select him on that pitch in those conditions. You are right about Headingley - when I said Curran would have bowled well there i was being slightly generous, I should have specified on days one and two when it was seaming and swinging before flattening out.


Well Jimmy Anderson completely disagrees with you. Last year the pitches suited us more than India says Jimmy. This year the pitches suited Australia more than us says Jimmy. I would like to have seen more grass on them etc, etc. Good pitches for us against India last year, not this year. Good pitches for pitch it up English seamers such as Curran last year, not this year. Your thoughts?

You must be logged on to see external links

Yes fair enough. The pitches have not been what we’d want at all. It’s not helped us at all which is infuriating, really. It would have been nice to see more green wickets, but then with our batting, it could have been carnage, and Jimmy’s hardly played so tough call I guess. It’s not made much difference to Broad either who has been excellent.

I think Jimmy makes a good point about Lancs having sold out 5 days, hardly going to want a bowlers paradise and Test match over in 3 days.

I still think Curran would have been the right way to go however, even taking the pitch out of the equation.

 

[The Rat]

Seen a stat from Dobell yesterday that Roy has never batted two sessions in a first class match.

Even in the middle order how the fuck can anyone think he makes it as test player. Selectors shouldn't have put him in the firing line for such an important series.

His SR at first class is 80, pretty easy with dibbly dobbler bowlers with an old ball coming at 5 or 6.


Nonsense

You hope people thrive and take their chance at international sport. But it's like playing Jermain Defoe at CB.

He has a decent record, avearging 40s over last few seasons

Theres no need to be so disrpectful to county cricket, its not just "dibbly dobbler bowlers" with an old ball

Ben Stokes came into international cricket batting 5 for Durham by the way

Ah the 82 I thought you were referring to Curran hence the Overton fair enough - that's his pace and like Curran it isnt really quick enough to get good players out on good pitches. OT was a good test match surface, it did exactly what its supposed to do. It was easy paced and comfortable for batting and as it got into days 4 and 5 helped tall quick bowlers with uneven bounce and started to spin a lot. There was nothing in it day 1-5 for an 80mph bowler that pitches it up thats for sure. That's why he wasn't picked and they went to the extent of bringing someone in from the cold rather than select him on that pitch in those conditions. You are right about Headingley - when I said Curran would have bowled well there i was being slightly generous, I should have specified on days one and two when it was seaming and swinging before flattening out.


Well Jimmy Anderson completely disagrees with you. Last year the pitches suited us more than India says Jimmy. This year the pitches suited Australia more than us says Jimmy. I would like to have seen more grass on them etc, etc. Good pitches for us against India last year, not this year. Good pitches for pitch it up English seamers such as Curran last year, not this year. Your thoughts?

You must be logged on to see external links

The pitches have been bizarre

Why can't we just produce normal English pitches

Its only England that we prepare pitches more suited to other teams, doesn't happen anywhere else in the world, he is right.

Saying all this, if he had been fit for 5 tests we'd have won, simple.