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

30 Sept: England arrive

5-6 Oct: Two-day game v Pakistan A (Sharjah CC)

8-9 Oct: Two-day game v Pakistan A (Sharjah CC)

Some press that Mo Amir will not be playing in these games. This is the Pakistan A for the two pre-series games:

Pakistan A squad Junaid Khan (capt), S Asalm, K Manzoor, F Alam, U Amin, A Asad, I Ahmed, U Salahuddin, A Akmal (wkt), M Asghar, Z Gohar, E Adil, Z Haq, M Hamza.

And the Pakistan squad for the First Test, though another spinner will be added:

Misbah-ul-Haq (capt), A Shehzad, S Masood, A Ali, M Hafeez, F Alam, A Shafiq, Y Khan, S Ahmed (wkt), Y Shah, Z Babar, Wahab Riaz, Imran Khan, R Ali, Junaid Khan.

Weather in Sharjah is currently over 100 degrees F, and you can bet on there being no rain or cloud cover.

This is record of touring team bowlers who have won or drawn in UAE. Some pace bowlers have done well there, like McGrath and Steyn, all time greats, though some SL seamers have success in those conditions. Even average spinners have tended to take the wickets: Tahir, Harris, Craig, Duminy , Harris, Botha, or at least hold their own in the attack. Obviously records are limited, as few win or draw in UAE, apart from Pakistan.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... pe=bowling

With two 2-day games, at best England will have 3 innings to decide on their opening pair. Cook & Hales; Cook & Ali; or Cook & Ansari. (Though the third option is very unlikely).

Judging by the media, England are flip-flopping a bit between Hales and Ali, but sounds like Hales will open and Ali presumably move up to #5. Also sounds like both Taylor and Ali have leapfrogged Bairstow for that #5 position.

And it's still a possibility that England play Hales, Taylor and Ali, with Rashid replacing a seamer and England using a 3+2 attack rather than 4+2.

Hope they do the latter.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Hope they do the latter.

Given the amount of bowling that Moeen and Rashid will do, I'm not sure of the value of having four fast bowlers. But it is asking a lot of those two and also Stokes who would be the third seamer. But England under Bayliss are more trusting of players than before.

I know I'm banging on, but I think they'd get more out of a third spinner than a third seamer. But Stokes will get in as a batter anyway.

Why do you think the spinners will be doing all the work? Last time 4 bowlers

Swann 114.5 overs
Broad 116.4 overs
Anderson 107.5 overs
Panesar 141.0 overs

Monty bowled those overs in two games, rather than the three of the others. That's lot more overs in two games than the rest of the attack. England went in with three seamers and a spinner in the first game, and took a journey towards spin as the series went on, as NZ did in UAE. As England did in India last time (when at most points during the series, a third spinner felt much more desirable than even a second seamer. I get the impression England are going to make the journey from the same starting point again. Lots of the press are talking about four seamers, without even registering that this would be odd or pointless.

Slipstream wrote:Why do you think the spinners will be doing all the work? Last time 4 bowlers

Swann 114.5 overs
Broad 116.4 overs
Anderson 107.5 overs
Panesar 141.0 overs

didn't panesar only play 2 of the 3 games so his overs would have been higher and broad's and Anderson's lower if he had played all three

this time we will also have root as a 3rd spinner so that's even less work that you would expect your main seamers to be doing

personally I wouldn't play stokes in the UAE , not sure his batting is quite good enough when he isn't needed as a bowler so for me we would use the same balance as we had through the home summer but with rashid coming in for stokes , the other possible changes just being like for likes

England were too inflexible and lacking in street smarts in that series. They had a formula they barely strayed from. Compare that with how radically NZ adapted. England hardly considered leaving out players who were way out of their depth, or promoting Prior who looked like he had a chance. Turning up to the first game with Tremlett, Broad and Anderson felt like taking a pair of swimming trunks to the south pole. Same in Ahmedabad. Pakistan might prepare pitches in UAE with something for the seamers if SL are in town, but hardly when England are visiting.

Oh I forgot about Panesar only playing 2 games.

But they haven't got a Panesar this time. No one who will bowl 35 overs for 85 runs. Again, they will rely on their seamers to bowl these overs. Whereas their third seamer role ideally would be performed by a Monty style spinner, in my view.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:But they haven't got a Panesar this time. No one who will bowl 35 overs for 85 runs. Again, they will rely on their seamers to bowl these overs. Whereas their third seamer role ideally would be performed by a Monty style spinner, in my view.

because of ali being in the team now we can play 3 frontline seamers and still have 2 spinners which was something we couldn't do last time

not without gimping the batting anyway

If Ansari recovers in time , it is of course possible to play three seamers and three spinners (not counting Root)

Unlikely , perhaps . But : Cook/ Ali /Bell /Root/ Bairstow or Taylor/ Stokes/ Buttler/ Ansari/Rashid /Broad /Anderson wouldn't be ridiculous as a lineup.

I think the problem last time was the batting above all else : it didn't matter who bowled they weren't going to win with the scores they were putting up. Certainly another spinner may have helped in game one ; and at the same time the lack of a third fast bowler probably cost them in the first innings in the third Test , where they might conceivably have had Pakistan out for fifty.

The all rounder situation this time gives a lot more flexibility. Whether the class is there to do the job is another question. But it will still come down to the ability - and temperament - of the batsmen. If they can bat long they are in the game...

alfie wrote:If Ansari recovers in time , it is of course possible to play three seamers and three spinners (not counting Root)

Unlikely , perhaps . But : Cook/ Ali /Bell /Root/ Bairstow or Taylor/ Stokes/ Buttler/ Ansari/Rashid /Broad /Anderson wouldn't be ridiculous as a lineup.

I think the problem last time was the batting above all else : it didn't matter who bowled they weren't going to win with the scores they were putting up. Certainly another spinner may have helped in game one ; and at the same time the lack of a third fast bowler probably cost them in the first innings in the third Test , where they might conceivably have had Pakistan out for fifty.

The all rounder situation this time gives a lot more flexibility. Whether the class is there to do the job is another question. But it will still come down to the ability - and temperament - of the batsmen. If they can bat long they are in the game...

it really would

we don't need all those bowling options especially with root capable as a 3rd spin option