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

From the Kensinton Oval, Bridgetown Barbados, former fortress of West Indian cricket. Come and get it, England's last test match for three weeks, which in this year of fixture congestion, feels as big a gap of infinite nothingness as the middle ages. Can England extend their slender lead? Can West Indies avoid coming apart like your tremulous date's paper handkerchief while watching The Notebook, at the end of a very difficult day, thank you.

England haven't given games yet to:

Bairstow
Lyth (the tour was all about him and his tour jacket remember)
Plunkett
Rashid
Wood.

For West Indies, Shai Hope remains on hand, and Jerome Taylor should be available.

For Cook and Moores, this is just the latest of a year of must win games. An invigorated morning in Grenada blew away some of the anxiety that was enveloping the team. But a defeat is unthinkable.

Next up, England v New Zealand at Lord's on 21 May. And the Aussies arrive in the West Indies.

Are you sure about the date Arthur?

Same team? Will England drop a player after a win?

Change it for us Aidan. I put the NZ game down. 1-5 May. I've been on nights...

Gingerfinch wrote:Same team? Will England drop a player after a win?

I don't think so.

Maybe as much of note will be the players returned to England before the match.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Change it for us Aidan. I put the NZ game down. 1-5 May. I've been on nights...

Done.

Moores seems to be hinting Rashid might play, but has the gall to suggest that even if he doesn't he'll be a better player for carrying drinks than he would be if he'd been playing for Yorkshire.

England have to, you feel, stick with Trott. Unfortunately we have two tough series at home so if he doesn't make it whoever comes in for him is going to have a rough time of it.

Aidan11 wrote:

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Change it for us Aidan. I put the NZ game down. 1-5 May. I've been on nights...

Done.

Cheers big fella.

There's no one in the squad who I feel has absolutely no chance of playing, but they certainly won't bring in both Plunkett and Wood, so one of those can head home. Tredwell feels unlikely to play, but his county might tell him to stay there and enjoy himself. Lyth can come home. Probably the rest will have to hang around, Bairstow if only in case Buttler slips on the soap on the morning of the game.

If England had any nouse they'd give the likes of Lyth a run out in the final test. We've two test series against two very good bowling attacks coming up and it wouldn't hurt to break players in on a dead wicket.

I'd like to see one of Wood or Plunkett play because our bowling attack feels very flat if Anderson isn't swinging it about.

Moores has more or less said Trott is playing.

Unless they experiment, which they won't, there's only Jordan's place in danger. And Plunkett, Wood and Rashid circling it. If England lose, Moores and Cook will lose their positions, so they will stick with what they went into the series believing was the best team (except with Moeen being available).

I'm a bit undecided about the team for this...both what they'll actually do and what I'd do if I had the choice.

Part of me says Trott is unlikely to make it through the summer Tests so they should look at Lyth now. The other side reasons that having gone to the trouble of bringing him back and trying him as an opener it would make the exercise a bit of a waste of time if they don't give him one more chance here : as I think they will.
I am not that bothered about throwing Lyth (presumably - despite Hales' excellent form for his county) in against NZ. If a player is good enough he will cope even against strong opponents - and form there would certainly mean more than runs against a limited attack on perhaps another flattish pitch.

As to the bowling - there is a case for trying Rashid if it looks to be one for the spinners (for either Stokes or Jordan - probably the latter). But one should consider that neither of the first two pitches have really deteriorated much at all , so they actually haven't been much more help to spinners than to the pace men. Similar conditions in this might make the selection of only three seamers , one of whom doesn't offer any guarantee of control , a bit of a risk. Fine to look at new talent ; but the first point of any Test Match is to try to win it.
To be honest , I'd think it more likely that Wood or Plunkett could replace Jordan , just for some fresh legs.

The cricinfo preview is suggesting that Stokes will be left out (maybe with a back injury), and Rashid will come in. A few reports are saying England have changed Rashid's bowling method (Farbrace has been quoted) during this trip. It really does seem that they picked him without knowing much about him.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:The cricinfo preview is suggesting that Stokes will be left out (maybe with a back injury), and Rashid will come in. A few reports are saying England have changed Rashid's bowling method (Farbrace has been quoted) during this trip. It really does seem that they picked him without knowing much about him.

Cricket Paper suggests Plunkett for Stokes. Yorkshire followers will be delighted to hear they've been interfering with Rashid' s action.

It's not a case of saying, just do what you do for your county. if the remodeling doesn't work, it does lay the coaching open to more criticism. If they're getting him to bowl flatter and faster as they say, they're really changing the bowler he is. And if they think that is necessary, why was he picked?