• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

England v India (Third Test) Headingley

smoker said:
Optimistic. Other than Stokes and the mercurial Archer this is our first choice XI.
Click to expand...
Stokes - Woakes
Archer - Wood
Anderson - Robinson
Broad - Stone

You could switch Broad and Robinson around maybe, but that would be our first and second choice seam attacks.

2 out of 8 are available.

And the batting line-up is a mess, after Root and Buttler do we really have a first choice?
 

The Rat said:
If we had our first choice XI we would win.
Click to expand...
Debateable as India are a very good side, but at least there would be some competition with Stokes, Woakes and maybe Folkes in the side.

Edit: And obviously Archer would bring some aggression into the bowling attack as well...
 
Last edited:
Jack Torrance said:
Not for me, I’m not sure we need him at home.
Jimmy, Broad, Woakes, Stokes and Leach would be my attack at home. Guess you could make room for Archer if Jimmy and Broad are rotated although I wouldn’t be surprised if Robinson is now ahead of him
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Jimmy is obvious, stokes your 4th seamer and there’s good arguments for Broad, Archer, Wood and Robinson for the other two spots. If I be was choosing between Robinson and Broad at the moment I would choose the former.
 
rentaghost said:
Fair enough. Jimmy is obvious, stokes your 4th seamer and there’s good arguments for Broad, Archer, Wood and Robinson for the other two spots. If I be was choosing between Robinson and Broad at the moment I would choose the former.
Click to expand...
I think if Woakes is available he has to play at home, his numbers with both bat and ball are very impressive. Probably goes under the radar a bit
 
rentaghost said:
I said in the winter they would beat us over here whatever surfaces we prepare. We will never know if we had Stokes etc in but they are much better now against the moving ball and are a top class side.

I agree. We did though lose that game despite having brilliant conditions to bowl in first up and the best of the conditions throughout. It could be argued if we can’t beat them when things are so strongly in our favour when can we? Anyway a new day a new opportunity. Haway England.
Click to expand...

We'd win with our first XI like, look at the attack we had out man in the last game and we nearly won.
smoker said:
Optimistic. Other than Stokes and the mercurial Archer this is our first choice XI.
Click to expand...

Its not

Stokes is also our best player, and Broad and Woakes

we;d have won that 2nd test comfortably with all 3

IIndia are a good side but we'd have been too much for them
 
Last edited:
The Rat said:
We'd win with our first XI like, look at the attack we had out man in the last game and we nearly won.
Click to expand...
With everything in our favour conditions wise. Them batting under cloudy skies, us batting in great conditions and we still lost. However if the argument is us having our strongest side, them batting under dark cloudy skies and us batting when the suns out then we would probably have the edge. At full strength you have two very good bowling attacks but they have the better batting.I guess we will never know, all we do know is they hammered us in their conditions and will beat the current team in English conditions.
 
Last edited:
rentaghost said:
With everything in our favour conditions wise. Them batting under cloudy skies, us batting in great conditions and we still lost. However if the argument is us having our strongest side, them batting under dark cloudy skies and us batting when the suns out then we would probably have the edge. At full strength you have two very good bowling attacks but they have the better batting.
Click to expand...

Didnt have everything in our favour like,

Sorry but just my view, that wasnt even a 2nd string attack we had out,

Imagine taking out Bumrah, Sharma and Sham

they wouldnt win

I dont know why that cant just be admitted.
 
The Rat said:
Didnt have everything in our favour like,

Sorry but just my view, that wasnt even a 2nd string attack we had out,

Imagine taking out Bumrah, Sharma and Sham

they wouldnt win

I dont know why that cant just be admitted.
Click to expand...
They did win the 4th test in Australia without those 3 like, not even sure Sharma and Shami played a test that series.

Kind of agree with your point but they do have pretty amazing depth
 
The Rat said:
Didnt have everything in our favour like,

Sorry but just my view, that wasnt even a 2nd string attack we had out,

Imagine taking out Bumrah, Sharma and Sham

they wouldnt win

I dont know why that cant just be admitted.
Click to expand...
Its all opinion. Injuries happen and we are fortunate enough to have good depth in fast bowling anyway. We are losing because they are better than us primarily in the batting. Anderson is clearly our best seamer and played in both games and I reckon Robinson will now be part of our best seam attack moving forward and he has played both games. It’s obvious having Woakes instead of Curran makes us stronger. It’s true that we would beat them if they weren’t allowed to play their best bowlers that much is certainly true but I always fancied them if both teams were full strength but we will never know.
 
Jack Torrance said:
They did win the 4th test in Australia without those 3 like, not even sure Sharma and Shami played a test that series.

Kind of agree with your point but they do have pretty amazing depth
Click to expand...

they did but they wouldn’t have beat us with our first choice attack, all I’m saying
rentaghost said:
Its all opinion. Injuries happen and we are fortunate enough to have good depth in fast bowling anyway. We are losing because they are better than us primarily in the batting. Anderson is clearly our best seamer and played in both games and I reckon Robinson will now be part of our best seam attack moving forward and he has played both games. It’s obvious having Woakes instead of Curran makes us stronger. It’s true that we would beat them if they weren’t allowed to play their best bowlers that much is certainly true but I always fancied them if both teams were full strength but we will never know.
Click to expand...

we’d have beat them with our best choice XI

we should have beat them with our 2nd string attack

so you put in our first choice attack and the world’s best cricketer than its fairly obvious we win
 
Last edited:
The Rat said:
they did but they wouldn’t have beat us with our first choice attack, all I’m saying
Click to expand...
Who knows maybe you are right. According to many they only won in the winter because of pitches and umpires. Just wait til we get them over here etc. Now they are only winning because we have injuries to fast bowlers. Maybe you are right, maybe in our conditions with our strongest team we would win but it seems to me that whenever England don’t win there is an excuse. For me at full strength both teams have very good bowling attacks but their batting is a different class to ours. I think they are a simply better cricket team.
The Rat said:
they did but they wouldn’t have beat us with our first choice attack, all I’m saying


we’d have beat them with our best choice XI

we should have beat them with our 2nd string attack

so you put in our first choice attack and the world’s best cricketer than its fairly obvious we win
Click to expand...
I don’t think so. They beat us over there in their conditions easily enough. They beat Australia in Australia when they miss key players. They are ranked above us easily because of results over time. Our batting is utter shite. Only the most biased would argue that we ate better than them. All about opinions though.
 
Last edited:
rentaghost said:
Who knows maybe you are right. According to many they only won in the winter because of pitches and umpires. Just wait til we get them over here etc. Now they are only winning because we have injuries to fast bowlers. Maybe you are right, maybe in our conditions with our strongest team we would win but it seems to me that whenever England don’t win there is an excuse. For me at full strength both teams have very good bowling attacks but their batting is a different class to ours. I think they are a simply better cricket team.

I don’t think so. They beat us over there in their conditions easily enough. They beat Australia in Australia when they miss key players. They are ranked above us easily because of results over time. Our batting is utter shite. Only the most biased would argue that we ate better than them. All about opinions though.
Click to expand...
I think both teams at full strength in English conditions would be a very tight call and series that could go either way.
 
Also our piss weak batting has impacted on the selection of our bowlers. In the first test we could have selected one of the best opening bowling attacks in the history of the game, a 95mph point of difference bowler and Ollie Robinson who is proving a terrific bowler. We didn’t because we are making selections such as Curran to fill out the batting. India were happy to choose their best pace attack because they had more confidence in their bowlers. Even with our injuries we can put out an excellent bowling attack. It’s the batting that they completely outclass us in.
 
rentaghost said:
Also our piss weak batting has impacted on the selection of our bowlers. In the first test we could have selected one of the best opening bowling attacks in the history of the game, a 95mph point of difference bowler and Ollie Robinson who is proving a terrific bowler. We didn’t because we are making selections such as Curran to fill out the batting. India were happy to choose their best pace attack because they had more confidence in their bowlers. Even with our injuries we can put out an excellent bowling attack. It’s the batting that they completely outclass us in.
Click to expand...

Root aside not one of the first 6/7 makes it into any top 3/4 test teams nevermind the Indian one....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top