Third Test: England v South Africa, The Oval, July 27-31

[captaincolly]

Cheeky comment by Dobell on Dawson's selection who's there it's rumoured because he's "a good guy"" . On that logic , reasons Dobell, Nelson Mandela would have been opening the batting for S. Africa for the last 50 years.

He has a great way with words!

[Arthur Crabtree]

Looks like ZBGB is officially out.

[alfie]

Whether they wish to play two spinners or not , the six bowler plan has to go.

It isn't needed ; it doesn't work (see India tour as well) and it confers no real advantage...

Yet England bat down to eight (nine when Woakes returns) and of the least batters in the team, ZBGB, KJ and Dawson, two are specialist bats who could be improved without going near this argument. There's no one waiting in the wings who is probably better than the key all rounders, YJB, Mo and Stokes. I agree Dawson could be usefully replaced, but just as advantageously by a better spinner than batter.

They don't have a plan to play six bowlers, it's just that they see that as a way to get the best players in the side.

What , like Dawson ? They clearly do have a plan to play six bowlers - a bad one.

If they want a second spinner , drop a pacer. Easy. Has no impact on YJB , Mo or Stokes - except they can all bat a little later in the order. Even if there isn't anyone better than those allrounders with the bat , there must surely be someone who could do a job ...ie make more runs than Wood or Dawson , and take some pressure off Bairstow at least (he is too high at five while keeping - at least when the first three wickets are going down so fast).
What is wrong with :

Cook
Stoneman
Jennings...................(or Westley if you like)
Root
Malan ? ( I am sure there would be other suggestions - could still be Ballance if he were not injured)
Stokes
Bairstow
Moeen
Dawson or Rashid ....or Roland-Jones .....Woakes when fit (I assume Wood is injured)
Broad
Anderson

Looks a bit more solid , no ? And hardly less threatening with the ball... If they don't include the second spinner Root (who is no mug) can bowl a few overs.

I'd be a damn sight happier with that sort of structure going to Australia than the current nonsense.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Dawson is a bad selection, picked as their lead spinner. Moeen is now a part time bowler. It doesn't look like an attempt to field six bowlers just a bad attempt to pick a spinner.

OK, Moeen is now taking more wickets as a part time bowler...

[westoelad]

Ballance definately ruled out of 3rd test after consultation with hand specialist. Westley gaining preference over Stoneman to avoid an all LHB top 3.

[sussexpob]

So wood and ballance are injured. Odds on Dawson being injured at some point?

Sounds injured is the new word for "not good enough, we made a mistake"

[alfie]

Dawson is a bad selection, picked as their lead spinner. Moeen is now a part time bowler. It doesn't look like an attempt to field six bowlers just a bad attempt to pick a spinner.

OK, Moeen is now taking more wickets as a part time bowler...

So your theory is they just wanted a spinner , while keeping Moeen in the team as well ? But surely this whole six bowler idea started on the India trip as a means to fit three spinners in the team - almost (though ultimately unsuccessful) an understandable move. I doubt many people expected it to continue in a home series.
However : Dawson had played the last Test. He made some useful runs and bowled tidily. They kept him for the first home match , presumably because (a) they expected a dry , spinning , pitch at Lord's - correctly as it happened ; and (b) due to concerns over the fitness of all four of the pace bowlers selected. Otherwise they would have been more likely to dispense with the fourth seamer as they have done in every recent case where a second spinner has been selected for a home Test.
I don't think this was a great idea ; but you could argue it worked quite well at Lord's.

Keeping the same team for Trent Bridge , however , made no sense. It was obvious that pitch was not one that called for two spinners. And likely to be one on which the more batsmen the better...but still they wouldn't make a change.

So it seems to me the ongoing selection is one of two things : an addiction to the six bowler plan or an unwillingness to make a choice between Dawson and Wood. Either one unsatisfactory . And they don't have that much time to sort out a fit for purpose team to send on an Ashes quest...

If you need six bowlers to get the other team out you're picking the wrong bowlers. Tell me the last time England - or anyone else - employed so many ?

I wouldn't make such a fuss about this if it weren't for my fear that they are just indecisive enough ( or stubborn enough - take your pick) to continue like this at The Oval !

[Arthur Crabtree]

Dawson is a bad selection, picked as their lead spinner. Moeen is now a part time bowler. It doesn't look like an attempt to field six bowlers just a bad attempt to pick a spinner.

OK, Moeen is now taking more wickets as a part time bowler...

Or put it another way. England pick their six best bats and a keeper. So they have:

Cook
?
?
Root
Moeen
Stokes
Bairstow.

Quite plausibly, their six best bats and a keeper include all rounders who get in for their batting alone and the queries are regarding the specialist bats at 2&3.

England pick their four best bowlers including three seamers and a spinner:

Woakes
?
Broad
Anderson.

There's an all rounder there who gets in for his bowling alone. The query is just over whether the spinner is good enough to get in on that discipline.

People say, England don't need six bowlers, but just as reasonably they don't need eight batters. The fact that the players are multi-faceted is being allowed to complicate things too much.

[sussexpob]

Average of 32 at 6 isn't good enough. Neither is Alis current average. Ali needs to step up to 5-6, Stokes drop to 7. If not good enough to average consistently above 40, one needs to go. Team needs 6 specialists and one all rounder in top 7.

[sussexpob]

At the moment we feel like a football side playing 2-7-1 formation. You can't accommodate your best players if they aren't suited to the roles, regardless of their all round quality.

England should in theory have an easier job as the keeper occupies a top 6 slot, leaving room for a 7 who is all-round. Wakes is probably the perfect 8 for modern day.

Pick 6 bats, 4 bowls, and Stokes or ali

[Arthur Crabtree]

Since the start of the away SA series in 2015, Bairstow averages 55, Stokes 39 and Moeen 43. You can easily make a 5-6-7 out of that. And they are the best averaging players in the side apart from Root (and Hameed who hasn't played a significant number of games). Cook is on 39 and everyone else is below 30.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Pick 6 bats, 4 bowls, and Stokes or ali

You're leaving out a batter with one of the better form records, better than the specialists.

[sussexpob]

If these players maintain that form, then Ali slots in to top 6. I'd he can't then he needs to go. Ditto Stokes. Too many all rounders in a team with a shaky batting all over.

A team with 5 set bats all performing can accommodate 32 @ 6. One with no top 3 cannot.

[rich1uk]

Dawson is a bad selection, picked as their lead spinner. Moeen is now a part time bowler. It doesn't look like an attempt to field six bowlers just a bad attempt to pick a spinner.

OK, Moeen is now taking more wickets as a part time bowler...

Or put it another way. England pick their six best bats and a keeper. So they have:

Cook
?
?
Root
Moeen
Stokes
Bairstow.

Quite plausibly, their six best bats and a keeper include all rounders who get in for their batting alone and the queries are regarding the specialist bats at 2&3.

England pick their four best bowlers including three seamers and a spinner:

Woakes
?
Broad
Anderson.

There's an all rounder there who gets in for his bowling alone. The query is just over whether the spinner is good enough to get in on that discipline.

People say, England don't need six bowlers, but just as reasonably they don't need eight batters. The fact that the players are multi-faceted is being allowed to complicate things too much.

sorry AC but that last line is ******* and you know it

if you can have 8 batsmen without gimping your bowling then there isn't a team in the world that wouldn't do it

a team doesn't need 6 bowlers as there is only a finite amount of overs that need to be bowled and 150+ years of test history has shown us that 4 or 5 bowlers are all thats needed to do that

having a capable batter at #8 is almost always going to be of value

you can argue that if the top 7 are good enough an 8th batsman shouldn't be needed but thats a completely different point from whether a team will ever need 6 bowlers

[rich1uk]

just to add, especially when the guy thats being picked as the 6th bowler is someone that isn't really even being picked because of his bowling but because of his value as a batsman in the lower order