This entry is now closed for comments.
Bayliss needs to go. Jury is out on Strauss.
For 1 decade or so England have persevered with the same bawling duo both on Home & abroad. Yes, they are okay on Home soil but when looked at their record abroad; not plausible at all. Cant think of how many bawling pairs did Australia have in the last 10 years. Many. It doesn’t mean they were all bad but they’re spoiled for choices and not afraid of change. It certainly looks to me ECB is.
dump central contracts, start bringing youngsters through quicker, picking same old same old breeds complacancy. But change from top down
Nothing will change it has always been harder to get out of this side than it is to get in it!
Andy G @193Popular opinion - including his own - is that he bats as well as he does BECAUSE he is batting at 7, & BECAUSE he's keeping wicket.Batting is about confidence, & that comes when everything feels "right".He delivers huge value in his current role, maybe worth a try higher up the order, but IMO he's not tight enough for 4. If anything he's a 6 - but where to put Stokes?
J F-L @191As you say, I think we have the same opinions in most cases. My reserve - a bit harsh, I admit - about Robson's & Westley's ages is that at 28/29 to be just establishing themselves in the team, they are an interim fix not a long term solution.On reflection, it might be what the team needs to give the next generation (wherever the hell they come from) time to develop.
An example of the very muddled thinking is that JB, who is clearly our 2nd best batsman comes in at 7. For me he’s in at 4 and if the wisdom is that he can’t do that and keep wicket then he doesn’t keep wicket. We have any number of keepers but it’s the batting that’s in crisis.
There will be chances to play for ENG if:1) You play for a Division 1 team and/or 2) You play for a Test-match staging county.Hate to say it but that means Derbyshire, Gloucestershire, Kent, Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Sussex players will have no realistic chance. Shame, as all good honest clubs.Wake up ECB & cast the net a bit further to find good possible ENG players.
Boating-voter @189 & 190Wouldn’t disagree with any of your points - all perfectly sensible, although I don’t think 28/29 is too long in the tooth to learn.
J F-L @187As per my @189, for those with significant technical flaws I can't see any appeal to giving them another go UNLESS they have demonstrated they have resolved those flaws.I hope Haseeb Hameed does find form & returns to the fold - lots of guts, patience & application, just what we need to open.Westley and Robson are 28/29 - do they really have a lot to offer?
JF-L @181Just playing more Tests wouldn't make Jennings & co (is it just me, or does anyone else get flashbacks to the books?) better batsmen - hard work in the nets & county games might do.We saw enough of Jennings & Ballance (thank God nobody's suggested HIS return) to observe their technical flaws. If they've worked on their technique, they may be worth another look, but not otherwise.
Been the same for quite a while - it's a darn sight easier to get into the England system than out of it, which is why the same old faces turn up time after time. And it's a very conservative set-up, whereby those in charge appear to be extremely reluctant to take a punt on a form player. TBC
JDHCOYS @183Agreed. Better application = better players. Each time Vince goes into bat I desperately want him to succeed. I do think some of the others merit similar chances/returns to the team before being cast into Test oblivion.
One place that should be up for grabs is that of coach!Cook's time seems to be up but, given his overall record, I would offer him the two Tests against Pakistan and then retire - he deserves a degree of sentiment. Thorpe was given the same in 2005 before Pietersen came in. One thing they can't do is keep playing him without an end point in the hope he will come good.
@172. efc forever - I like Rashid but the problem with him is that decent batsmen know they can wait for the bad ball that comes once or twice every over, and at that level it is not good enough. I think Leach looked good, certainly one to keep and help him develop.
Bayliss hardly sends out a strong message to the under-performers ie 'There are chances but no-one is putting their hands up'.Has he noticed it is the winter in England ? Get rid and get someone in who has a more ruthless streak.
@181. J Felix-Languar - Players with better application, that is the key. Vince has everything needed to be a top player, has all the shots, looks a million dollars, however it's what's between his ears that is the problem, he cannot apply himself to build a big innings. People were saying the same thing about Ian Bell at the start, he at least solved the mental side until it returned sadly.
@168. davidjm - May I ask you if you were a selector and the decision was made to drop these players, who would you put in their place? For most people Stokes would be first name on the sheet because of his potential match winning qualities as a batsman, he also bowls a few handy spells when fit and is one of if not the best fielder in the side. Interested to hear your suggestions.
Boating Voter @158The Jennings I have seen after 6 Tests is a walking wicket as you correctly identify. The Jennings & co I was alluding to are the future versions of themselves having been afforded a similar number of Tests to James Vince (another walking wicket). I suspect you and I are not far apart in our views but coming from different perspectives here. We just need better players.
We're having some problems displaying the comments at the moment. Sorry. We're doing our best to fix it.
You must sign in to rate comments