• 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.

England v India - Third Test, 10/07


Crawley is a shocking opener only got 5 test hundred in over 50 tests and the last v Zimbabwe and their attack is awful.

But there are so many problems in the team at the moment if everyone was fit still think only maybe 7 of the 11 are worth their place.

Pope with his usual one big score in 5 test series then nothing.

The bowling looks very poor at the moment. Stokes form with the bat is another huge concern.

It’s also got to the point with Bashir & Crawley despite no improvement at all both seem certain to play despite neither being good enough.

I get backing your players but gone to far especially with Crawley.
 
I’m praying that we bat first

I’m concerned about the possibility of archer breaking down and Carse is already a worry with his foot

I’m surprised both are playing to be honest
—-


You must be logged on to see external links


Check the right side of that page. They’ve been into the groundsmen
—

He maybe tempted to bowl first only “if the expected heatwave doesn’t materialise “

Well it’s going to arrive so I can only assume we will bat first if the toss is won
 
Last edited:
Ghfd said:
I’m praying that we bat first

I’m concerned about the possibility of archer breaking down and Carse is already a worry with his foot

I’m surprised both are playing to be honest
—-


You must be logged on to see external links


Check the right side of that page. They’ve been into the groundsmen
—

He maybe tempted to bowl first only “if the expected heatwave doesn’t materialise “

Well it’s going to arrive so I can only assume we will bat first if the toss is won
Click to expand...
Don't mention the g-word 🫣
 
GordonMuchallNo1Fan said:
Just my opinion. I am at a loss to fathom out any other justifiable reason why Crawley would be in the side. It's concerning judgement these people think we have nothing better than Crawley. I hope he comes good but as it stands he's simply not good enough and it's concerning selectors believe he's our best option. Id be angry if he was opening for Durham. I'll not be the only one on here questioning it if people were honest and I'm sure a lot on here will agree the ECB is absolutely rife with cliques, always had been. I'd love to hear from a selector to justifiably explain why they think Crawley is the best option as opener for England currently in July 2025, would genuinely be interested to hear that view.
Click to expand...
They have picked Crawley initially because of form and his ability to play aggressively as per Bazball. He also had early successes. He has kept his place longer than he should have because they have always believed he will bat well in Australia being able to hit the ball on the top of the bounce. It’s a mistaken belief but I doubt there’s a conspiracy here. Also we have tried and failed with so many openers there’s barely any realistic options. I’m sure last year you were advocating Jennings getting yet another go with a worse record than Crawley.
 
rentaghost said:
They have picked Crawley initially because of form and his ability to play aggressively as per Bazball. He also had early successes. He has kept his place longer than he should have because they have always believed he will bat well in Australia being able to hit the ball on the top of the bounce. It’s a mistaken belief but I doubt there’s a conspiracy here. Also we have tried and failed with so many openers there’s barely any realistic options. I’m sure last year you were advocating Jennings getting yet another go with a worse record than Crawley.
Click to expand...
Also, don’t forget that Crawley is a survivor from the Root era. One of the few. Not by much, but he did tour the West Indies in 2022 and was a part of the Grenada debacle. They probably kept him for all the above reasons, and he has also benefited from the stated policy of not dropping people too readily, and on the basis that he has not been worse at least than what went before and keeps doing just enough. So you could argue he’s a lucky little tinker. But you don’t need to invent a grand conspiracy. I’m certain he will go to Australia.
 
Voice of fair play said:
Thats because there is massive difference between loyalty been stretched which is clearly a wider principle of this regime for a number of years and a ‘ECB clique’ something else your probably know despite your incredibly weak argument to link the two.

If you said loyalty was been too stretched in the first place that would have a fine and credible argument, but you didn’t you linked that with similar to clique which is nonsense
Click to expand...
You can't see the link between extended loyalty and a clique? Extended loyalty leads to a closed shop - That's what a clique is by definition.
 
Fleagle said:
Also, don’t forget that Crawley is a survivor from the Root era. One of the few. Not by much, but he did tour the West Indies in 2022 and was a part of the Grenada debacle. They probably kept him for all the above reasons, and he has also benefited from the stated policy of not dropping people too readily, and on the basis that he has not been worse at least than what went before and keeps doing just enough. So you could argue he’s a lucky little tinker. But you don’t need to invent a grand conspiracy. I’m certain he will go to Australia.
Click to expand...
Yeah nice balanced sensible view mate, I think Australian wickets will suit him better and at times him and Duckett have got England off to some cracking starts.

However there has to be a point where they say enough is enough surely he can’t keep performing this badly and keep getting picked?

I do think he very very lucky boy the current openers in this country don’t look much better very lucky indeed.

What I am convinced with at top level sport whether it football, Rugby, cricket or whatever is that people at the top are under immense scrutiny and pressure to get results so of course they simply pick sides to help them get them results based of the talent and capability.

So suggest top level international teams are picked of the basis of anything else is complete nonsense imo
Parkside said:
You can't see the link between extended loyalty and a clique? Extended loyalty leads to a closed shop - That's what a clique is by definition.
Click to expand...
No!

You first came on this thread to make a argument to defend a poster who said he was ‘100% convinced England players are picked from a ECB clique/circle’

Personally I think that nonsense and very different from McCullum and Stokes have a wider principle of been loyal and trusting to players?
They not the ECB for a start they both very strong characters, the notion they told who to pick is ludicrous
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
Yeah nice balanced sensible view mate, I think Australian wickets will suit him better and at times him and Duckett have got England off to some cracking starts.

However there has to be a point where they say enough is enough surely he can’t keep performing this badly and keep getting picked?

I do think he very very lucky boy the current openers in this country don’t look much better very lucky indeed.

What I am convinced wewith at top level sport whether it football, Rugby, cricket or whatever is that people at the top are under immense scrutiny and pressure to get results so of course they simply pick sides to help them get them results based of the talent and capability.

So suggest top level international teams are picked of the basis of anything else is complete nonsense imo

No!

You first came on this thread to make a argument to defend a poster who said he was ‘100% convinced England players are picked from a ECB clique/circle’

Personally I think that nonsense and very different from McCullum and Stokes have a wider principle of been loyal and trusting to players?
Click to expand...
Team spirit and bonding are clearly paramount in the current set up and that's commendable. However That leads to a bubble,which tends to make it more difficult to step completely out of the bubble and be wholly objective on selection issues. Any bias will I' m sure be unintentional. That's neither conspiracy theory nor is it utter nonsense.
 
Voice of fair play said:
Yeah nice balanced sensible view mate, I think Australian wickets will suit him better and at times him and Duckett have got England off to some cracking starts.

However there has to be a point where they say enough is enough surely he can’t keep performing this badly and keep getting picked?

I do think he very very lucky boy the current openers in this country don’t look much better very lucky indeed.

What I am convinced with at top level sport whether it football, Rugby, cricket or whatever is that people at the top are under immense scrutiny and pressure to get results so of course they simply pick sides to help them get them results based of the talent and capability.

So suggest top level international teams are picked of the basis of anything else is complete nonsense imo

No!

You first came on this thread to make a argument to defend a poster who said he was ‘100% convinced England players are picked from a ECB clique/circle’

Personally I think that nonsense and very different from McCullum and Stokes have a wider principle of been loyal and trusting to players?
They not the ECB for a start they both very strong characters, the notion they told who to pick is ludicrous
Click to expand...
Wholly agree with much of what you say but selectors are not wholly without fault.
Ref#131
 
rentaghost said:
They have picked Crawley initially because of form and his ability to play aggressively as per Bazball. He also had early successes. He has kept his place longer than he should have because they have always believed he will bat well in Australia being able to hit the ball on the top of the bounce. It’s a mistaken belief but I doubt there’s a conspiracy here. Also we have tried and failed with so many openers there’s barely any realistic options. I’m sure last year you were advocating Jennings getting yet another go with a worse record than Crawley.
Click to expand...
"Because of form"?
 
This is an interesting article talking about the stats involved in the Duckett/Crawley opening partnership both as a pair and then some of Crawley’s improved individual stats batting with Duckett at the top of the order since Pakistan ‘22.

You must be logged on to see external links

I do think that Crawley is still opening the batting because there isn’t an immediate candidate knocking the door down - the County calendar doesn’t help this with scattered red ball games to show consistent red ball ‘form’ to be that better alternative.

On no real evidence I think Ben McKinney will be next to have a go at opening but I don’t want to see him thrown in so young in his career and then dismissed if doesn’t work. He’s been in and around the England set up for a while with Lions tours etc so hopefully soon.
 
Voice of fair play said:
Well of course they not, hell of a argument to drop Crawley.

But whether they do or not will be solely cricketing reasons
Click to expand...
He needs to be dropped imo I’d give Sibley another chance personally he’s around 40 average first class and their test average is similar but Sibley has worked on his game a lot more recently.

Glad it’s not my headache to have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top