Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

Agree with DFM there . Rather than throwing it away - a criticism that might fairly have been levelled at some players in the previous two games ? - I think it more correct to say they were simply unable to stand up to some really excellent bowling (and late first innings batting) from a very good Indian team.

So more outplayed than guilty of poor tactics , on this occasion. Indeed I suspect another fifty runs would have been enough ; but apart from dropping Jurel on the third morning they didn't do a lot wrong in the field. And while the bats won't be happy with their efforts here , it is probably worth remembering that (apart from Duckett whose average of 42 owes a lot to one innings of 190 against Ireland) only Root in this team averages north of 37. A lot of stronger lists have been done over in tricky conditions in India in recent years.

I am disappointed England couldn't force an unlikely win on that quite gripping final afternoon ; because I'd have loved to see a decider in a series in which 3-1 is perhaps just slightly misleading . India have certainly been the better team ; but not as overwhelmingly so as we might have expected at the beginning. As for England , I think they do need to both continue to play without fear , as has been their recent mantra (it has brought them a decent measure of success , after all) ; but also try to refine their game situation management. Can't be easy , in the heat of very intense play at this level ; but knowing when to adjust your tactics at crucial points is an important part of the game - and it is one in which they have a mixed record . (SA 2022 : very good. Lord's 2023 : rather bad. And others each way) The more times you get it right the better...

Won't see much of T5 as away for the Folk Festival at Port Fairy ; but I've enjoyed these four matches , despite the end result

alfie wrote:Agree with DFM there . Rather than throwing it away - a criticism that might fairly have been levelled at some players in the previous two games ? - I think it more correct to say they were simply unable to stand up to some really excellent bowling (and late first innings batting) from a very good Indian team.

So more outplayed than guilty of poor tactics , on this occasion. Indeed I suspect another fifty runs would have been enough ; but apart from dropping Jurel on the third morning they didn't do a lot wrong in the field. And while the bats won't be happy with their efforts here , it is probably worth remembering that (apart from Duckett whose average of 42 owes a lot to one innings of 190 against Ireland) only Root in this team averages north of 37. A lot of stronger lists have been done over in tricky conditions in India in recent years.

I am disappointed England couldn't force an unlikely win on that quite gripping final afternoon ; because I'd have loved to see a decider in a series in which 3-1 is perhaps just slightly misleading . India have certainly been the better team ; but not as overwhelmingly so as we might have expected at the beginning. As for England , I think they do need to both continue to play without fear , as has been their recent mantra (it has brought them a decent measure of success , after all) ; but also try to refine their game situation management. Can't be easy , in the heat of very intense play at this level ; but knowing when to adjust your tactics at crucial points is an important part of the game - and it is one in which they have a mixed record . (SA 2022 : very good. Lord's 2023 : rather bad. And others each way) The more times you get it right the better...

Won't see much of T5 as away for the Folk Festival at Port Fairy ; but I've enjoyed these four matches , despite the end result

This Indian team is not at all very good imo. The worst considering experience and form that has been selected/ fielded for high profile test series.


1.Key experienced players like Virat, Jasprit and Shami were not there. KL Rahul and Shreyas Iyer were also experienced but did not play. 5 players is almost half the team.

2. Yashasvi has played few tests and is inexperienced. Even Shubman was struggling in test format. Rajat Patidar made test debut this series and such has been his performance that he was lucky to be playing Ranchi test. Akash Deep also made debut. Sarfraz had experience of 1 test. Dhruv Jurel also had played just 1 test.

So 5 key players were missing and some who played had lot of inexperiemce and in poor form.

alfie wrote:Agree with DFM there . Rather than throwing it away - a criticism that might fairly have been levelled at some players in the previous two games ? - I think it more correct to say they were simply unable to stand up to some really excellent bowling (and late first innings batting) from a very good Indian team

We can break that down into two very distinct things, Alfie. I dont think that England threw it away in the sense that they were overcome with aggression, and just dogmatically went out to slog... we demanded more control, more grind, after the third test and the team seemed to have understood the same message. It nearly worked, as the 6th and 7th wicket partnerships in the first innings set England up to control the first half of the match, so credit where credit is due.... we got what we asked for.

If we wanted to be hyper-critical (and I am going to be mostly in the interests of discussion rather than any hard belief its justified) we could ask how does one setup to bat in conditions like this from a technical perspective??

Batting against spin on turning tracks, you have two options - you get forward to the pitch of the ball and smother the ball before it can turn, or you give yourself as much time as possible to read the turn by playing off the back foot and very late. England's batsman made a clear choice for the second option, but again established wisdom would tell you in situations where the ball bounces lower, and especially with unconsistent bounce, you are vulnerable playing backwards. Additionally, the classic playing spin theories of not cross batting shots or playing against the turn apply manyfold..... you have to run the ball with the spin or play straight bats.

What happened second innings...? I think Crawley's wicket summed it up.... attempting to boom a back foot drive to a ball keeping a little low on the pitch, and against the turn... ball missed, see you later. In a way it reminded me of that series where England under Fletcher went out with a plan to sweep everything, and 7-8 batters got out in one innings playing the shot. Its a valid tactic in specific conditions, but when the ball is unconsistently bouncing, you sweep at your peril.

England may have setup not to give it away, but their technical approach really did "give it away" in a sense.

alfie wrote:And while the bats won't be happy with their efforts here , it is probably worth remembering that (apart from Duckett whose average of 42 owes a lot to one innings of 190 against Ireland) only Root in this team averages north of 37. A lot of stronger lists have been done over in tricky conditions in India in recent years.

The last two series have given us a truer picture of Bazball England; they are a good side, but not a great one. It is going to be interesting to see what the management want to do in the next 1-2 years, because now the test focus will be the away Ashes (we have series away to NZ, home to ZIM, WI and SL, so we'd be expected to win all 4 as favourites, the three at home should be landslides really). I am not convinced this team can beat Australia in OZ, so I think we need to find a quality player or two.

Pope (another who scored 200 v Ireland) has scored 2 wonderful centuries and nothing else (literally no other 50) in 12 matches, so he is under fire. I am not sure with the current middle order if we have the luxury against a top side of fielding Foakes and Bairstow... Foakes is a better keeper, but clearly not a better batsman... although Bairstow's career long one year peak, long term drought, seems to have reached its El Nino period of him being useless, so he is a question mark. And while they won't drop the captain, but Stokes form is declining, and without the bowling having a bat average 35 ish isn't cutting it against teams who can consistently score big, like Australia tend to have done at home.

Anderson will probably not make it to OZ. Woakes can't play away. Wood can't play more than 1 test in a row. Robbo looked spent in this test bowling at half pace. We could really do with a seamer or two (I'd like to see Tongue have a go again, but I guess he is injured?).In the spin department, they also need to make a choice. Personally, I'd move on from Leach now. He isn't reliable in terms of fitness, and he's not a great test match spinner either.

If we could combine Hartley and Bashir, we'd have a hell of a spinner. Bashir has the control but doesn't turn it much, Hartley can rip it off the pitch but sprays it around... I'd personally go for Hartley, because I think being able to turn it big is such an asset for a spinner, and tighter, taller spinners like Bashir who rely on accuracy and bounce haven't tended to do well in England.

meninblue wrote:This Indian team is not at all very good imo. The worst considering experience and form that has been selected/ fielded for high profile test series

Murali is pretty widely appreciated as the greatest spin bowler of all time, and was especially tough to play on those SL pitches. If we could hypothetically clone three Murali's in a lab, then went and took peak Malcolm Marshall from the past in a time machine, you'd expect that such an attack throw into helpful pitches would be the worst case scenario type of attack to face....

India have fielded 4 spinners in this series, in packs of three, that all have better records in India than the greatest spinner ever had playing in his home conditions (note - when removing the matches SL played vs Zimbabwe's Z team in the mid-2000s)...... Oh, and Bumrah averages 6 runs less than Marshall did at home.... and has the best average of any bowler to have taken 100 wickets since before World War I....

In short, for much of this series India have in the context of home conditions, pretty much had the best attack in the history of the game.

A few middle order meh run scorers in the batting line might not be perfect, but when your bowling attack on averages bowls out a side for under 200, it hardly matters a lot.

This is a VERY good team at home.

sussexpob wrote:

meninblue wrote:This Indian team is not at all very good imo. The worst considering experience and form that has been selected/ fielded for high profile test series

Murali is pretty widely appreciated as the greatest spin bowler of all time, and was especially tough to play on those SL pitches. If we could hypothetically clone three Murali's in a lab, then went and took peak Malcolm Marshall from the past in a time machine, you'd expect that such an attack throw into helpful pitches would be the worst case scenario type of attack to face....

India have fielded 4 spinners in this series, in packs of three, that all have better records in India than the greatest spinner ever had playing in his home conditions (note - when removing the matches SL played vs Zimbabwe's Z team in the mid-2000s)...... Oh, and Bumrah averages 6 runs less than Marshall did at home.... and has the best average of any bowler to have taken 100 wickets since before World War I....

In short, for much of this series India have in the context of home conditions, pretty much had the best attack in the history of the game.

A few middle order meh run scorers in the batting line might not be perfect, but when your bowling attack on averages bowls out a side for under 200, it hardly matters a lot.

This is a VERY good team at home.

Sussex, the spin attack was first choice and absolutely fine on experience as well as on form basis. But pace attack was second choice with Jasprit and Shami not there at Ranchi.

As for inexperience, i have already mentioned number of tests Yashasvi, Sarfarz, Rajat and Dhruv had played before Ranchi test.

Rohit was the only experienced batsman.Shubman was under pressure in test format to secure his place.

So apart from 4 ( Rohit, Ashwin, Jaddu and Kukdeep) others were almost debutants in this series and Shubman was totally out of form. The job of think tank and selectors is to select 11 proper players not just 4 experienced and inform players. So they shouldnt be happy that only spin attack and Rohit were proper selections. Succession planning has bewn a mess due to many aspects. Long story but certainly the headache that they should have tackled.

The combination of so many debutants and out of form Shubman makes this the worst playing 11 imo.

You have a fair point about the technical deficiencies in that second innings, Sussex. Though I'd say that (a) they aren't as a group all that accustomed to batting on this type of pitch so were always at risk of failing against those three quality spinners ; and (b) not sure it was a one size fits all approach in the second innings ? Root was playing forward but missed the ball ; although Crawley fell when playing back , he'd been getting forward whenever possible , as had Bairstow - who actually got out pushing forward to one that bounced more than he expected... The fact that those two were the only ones to get any runs probably does underline the advisability of not just sitting in your crease.
I think if anything it was that the batsmen were more than usually hesitant in their choices - largely because they weren't at all sure of the pitch - rather than a set plan to defend late. And of course the old scoreboard pressure amped up as the wickets fell : so we then saw Hartley taking the bowler on and caught at long on while Robinson perished passively...

Mainly technical weaknesses and misjudgements , I think.

By the way I love your combined Bashir/Hartley creature plan A fellow who bowls with both arms at a whim and also bats a bit would be very handy !

Think I will leave selection consideration for the time being. Another match to play here yet ; and need to see who is fit and available when the next bunch of Tests come round. Will need to have an eye to the next Ashes tour no doubt ; but I'm a believer in picking a team primarily to win the game in front of you .

sussexpob wrote:If we could combine Hartley and Bashir, we'd have a hell of a spinner. Bashir has the control but doesn't turn it much, Hartley can rip it off the pitch but sprays it around... I'd personally go for Hartley, because I think being able to turn it big is such an asset for a spinner, and tighter, taller spinners like Bashir who rely on accuracy and bounce haven't tended to do well in England.

I imagine that England will revert to Leach in home conditions and more worryingly throw the gloves to Bairstow to make space for Brook......... again

England have named their side for 5th test, with one change, Mark Wood in for Ollie robinson

Seems the sensible selection. Talk of three seamers was a bit of a stretch for India , I'd have thought. Though this one might be a bit of an exception ....... maybe. Got a feeling Stokes will bowl this week if required.

Hope Bashir's finger soreness doesn't hamper him too much : I understand he has bowled more over this couple of Tests than in his whole previous FC career !

Stokes calls correctly and chooses to bat.

Padikkal and Bumrah for Patidar and Deep for India. Weather fine for the start...

Roughly even first session , 100/2.

Very tough early against some excellent new ball bowling ; but Crawley has taken full advantage of some good fortune to be 60no. Same can't be said for the others : Duckett got out giving Kuldeep the charge and miscuing , to fall for 27 to a wonderful catch by Shubman Gill, running with the ball over his head at cover. Rather against the run of play ; but it was another fifty opening stand for these two so can't complain too much.
Pope's troubles against spin continue. Walked forward to Kuldeep , done like a kipper , easily stumped , right on lunch. Frustrating : he has so much promise ; but the good innings are spaced out a bit . Watching him at times facing the spinners you wonder how he ever made that 190 at Hyderabad !

Will want to build on that after lunch as looks a very good pitch.

Recovering well. England bats, other than Bairstow, have had good days, but overall been inconsistent and haven't produced at the same time. Though Stokes hasn't made a big contribution yet.

I thought this started tomorrow

I need to keep up

England middle order collapse

that almost never happens