• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Any changes for the 4th Test

I wouldn’t drop Brook, his record is still very good.

But he needs to work out how he’s going to play, he has no sense at all of playing the situation.

Got a hundred here, and then threw it away. The greats don’t do that

Result
India vs England, 5th Test
India tour of England

IND 224 & 396
ENG 247 & 367
India won by 6 runs

Click here to view more @espncricinfo :
You must be logged on to see external links
 

Voice of fair play said:
The basis on any selection for any side at any level is you have to consider the capability of the alternatives and whether they good enough to replace the current team.

You don’t just drop them all just because you angry!!
Click to expand...
He'd rather someone averaging 15 less who played sensible all the time
 
Parkside said:
It's a fatuous argument to state that the replacements won't be as good. How can that be logical when they've never been given the opportunity. Many of the current squad are underachieving, probably through staleness and complacency. I
Click to expand...
Well that depends on the individuals involved and the expertise and experience of the selectors to make that judgement call.

Whether they think the replacements will be better surely has to be a consideration rather than just dropping the current players, before taking that into consideration.

And you don’t have to be anything close to an expert to have a opinion that Harry Brook is a better batsman than anybody out of the side?
 
These are the best players we’ve got. Joe Root our highest ever run scorer can only manage 1 century and average 37 in Australia. What chance do lesser players than him have? It says:
1) English techniques don’t work in Australia
2) English batters have a mentality issue in Australia
3) Australia have a world class attack.

I lean towards 2 and 3 more. The preparation for alien conditions against world class operators was horrific. We always build this series up as some kind of holy grail which just ramps up the pressure too.

Maybe once every 30 years we will have a world class collection of batters and they have an average collection of bowlers. Until then. We’ll never ever ever win there. We’re much better off focusing on how we can beat them at home, not just beat them but how we can annihilate them at home.
 
Voice of fair play said:
Well that depends on the individuals involved and the expertise and experience of the selectors to make that judgement call.

Whether they think the replacements will be better surely has to be a consideration rather than just dropping the current players, before taking that into consideration.

And you don’t have to be anything close to an expert to have a opinion that Harry Brook is a better batsman than anybody out of the side?
Click to expand...
You require selectors to possess experience and expertise and that appears to be sadly lacking in the current set up. Regardless of that,however,replacements have to be given the opportunity. Brook is consistently batting irresponsibly, the end product isn't matching the innate ability - you're not much of an expert if you believe that should be tolerated and accepted. And that coming from one who labelled those who questioned bazball as negative and whingers 😀 .Your history doesn't suggest that you're the shrewdest of judges.
 
Parkside said:
It's a fatuous argument to state that the replacements won't be as good. How can that be logical when they've never been given the opportunity? Many of the current squad are underachieving, probably through staleness and complacency.
Click to expand...
Spot on. Far too comfortable this setup and it shows. 6 days on the piss some of them recently. Far too easy and they know it.
 
Parkside said:
It's a fatuous argument to state that the replacements won't be as good. How can that be logical when they've never been given the opportunity? Many of the current squad are underachieving, probably through staleness and complacency.
Click to expand...
I can’t sit here and name batters that aren’t here that are definitely better than who have been selected. I think it’s a typical sports fan thing to do to assume that someone else who isn’t in the team must be better and would do better. But if they were better, they’d be here.

They’ve done the right thing identifying 7 batters they think are best equipped for Australia. The issue is that for whatever reason, they haven’t performed.
 
Safc98 said:
I can’t sit here and name batters that aren’t here that are definitely better than who have been selected. I think it’s a typical sports fan thing to do to assume that someone else who isn’t in the team must be better and would do better. But if they were better, they’d be here.

They’ve done the right thing identifying 7 batters they think are best equipped for Australia. The issue is that for whatever reason, they haven’t performed.
Click to expand...
I'm not making that assumption. But equally,unless replacements are given opportunities how are you to seek improvement?
And why have a Lions set up if it's not to be utilised?
 
Last edited:
Parkside said:
I'm not making that assumption. But equally,unless replacements are given opportunities how are you to seek improvement?
And why have a Lions set up if it's not to be utilised?
Click to expand...
Because none of them have shown on this tour they’re good enough have they? You pick who you think is best and back them. Otherwise we just go back to the 90s set up of chopping every test hoping something will stick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top