First Test: England v South Africa, Lord's, July 6-10.

[budgetmeansbudget]

England are always searching for all rounders like Botham, Flintoff and Stokes who are in your face, brash and unorthodox, very un English like in character.

Woakes is your more typical English clean cut orthodox all rounder, no less talented, but doesn't get the same opportunities as a result.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Quick wickets for SA this morning. Still a good score. Have to balance their provisional looking batting line up against the flatness of a Lord's pitch on days two or three in view of where the match is at.

[rich1uk]

on the Woakes issue, being devil's advocate, Woakes himself said that it was not getting picked for England that led him to work on his game, get stronger, get fitter and put the extra pace into his bowling. that improvement has made him the bowler he now is. Would he have made the same improvements from within the England team?

A guy who at one point averaged something like 40 with bat, and 22/23 with ball in county cricket, ignored for years on end, is not going to be the type of person who says "yeah, the management of this team are all tossers".

not really sure what that has to do with the point i made

the player himself has said he is a better bowler now because he was forced to work on his game to get into the side

if he was already in the side would he have had the same incentive to make the changes he has

[Arthur Crabtree]

on the Woakes issue, being devil's advocate, Woakes himself said that it was not getting picked for England that led him to work on his game, get stronger, get fitter and put the extra pace into his bowling. that improvement has made him the bowler he now is. Would he have made the same improvements from within the England team?

A guy who at one point averaged something like 40 with bat, and 22/23 with ball in county cricket, ignored for years on end, is not going to be the type of person who says "yeah, the management of this team are all tossers".

But it's also true that while Woakes was doing that, Stokes was developing into an all rounder from within the side. My view is that Stokes was still a player in development when he was picked- and that's backed up by his results.

[Arthur Crabtree]

lets say we go with the middle order of moeen/root/bairstow/stoke at #3/#4/#5/#6

we then have the issue of who you bat at #7

Agree. England should find a specialist bat at three and five (perhaps Mo could justify being one of these, depending on how he deals with the perception he doesn't fancy hostile bowling).

[sussexpob]

not really sure what that has to do with the point i made

the player himself has said he is a better bowler now because he was forced to work on his game to get into the side

if he was already in the side would he have had the same incentive to make the changes he has

Well, in short Rich, a player who has been ignored for so long as he probably still feels he is therefore holding onto his position in the side more tentatively, is not going to answer questions that can be seen as having a bad attitude to his peers. Essentially, what he says matters little, he might consider himself a better player, but virtually all test players who are younger are picked (As AC mentions) nowadays to finish their development. Who is to say working with better coaches and given a label of "next England great" that he wouldnt find a better level with the extra comfort and investment?

[rich1uk]

again being devil's advocate we always see the argument about not moving players who have had success at a certain spot, Moeen averages 99 batting at #7

[Aidan11]

Ali gone 13 short of his century.

[sussexpob]

MO goes....

[Aidan11]

I find that Simon Hughes advert very annoying.

[Arthur Crabtree]

YJB averages well at seven too.

So markedly has Broad's batting tailed off that it now seems surprising he is averaging over 20 (21.5). Good to see him making a few runs again.

[rich1uk]

not really sure what that has to do with the point i made

the player himself has said he is a better bowler now because he was forced to work on his game to get into the side

if he was already in the side would he have had the same incentive to make the changes he has

Well, in short Rich, a player who has been ignored for so long as he probably still feels he is therefore holding onto his position in the side more tentatively, is not going to answer questions that can be seen as having a bad attitude to his peers. Essentially, what he says matters little, he might consider himself a better player, but virtually all test players who are younger are picked (As AC mentions) nowadays to finish their development. Who is to say working with better coaches and given a label of "next England great" that he wouldnt find a better level with the extra comfort and investment?

he might have, alternatively he might have thought bowling at 80-82mph was what got him into the side and that he didn't need to add 5mph+ onto his bowling and got clattered all over the park by the better standard of player and playing on better pitches as he didn't have the basic pace to fall back on

[sussexpob]

To extend the point, one has to ask why Woakes was not included in the setup and nurtured like Broad/Anderson or Stokes, ie long term projects? His dual record in county crickets top level speaks for itself, and if true, his attitude to continue to strive for international cricket shows mental toughness and dedication that is expected from a higher level of player.

So why are others fast tracked and glorified, and others potential questioned? Woakes is a perfect of example of what happens when you add invisible qualities into selection, we essentially seem to have wasted a potentially great player for 9 years of his career.

[Arthur Crabtree]

MO goes....

Damn.

[Aidan11]

Looks like we don't want to keep SA for much longer.