England v Pakistan A Warm Ups.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Problem is the spinners are so unproven. My guess is Rashid will be a second innings bowler or useful against the tail, but will go for runs. Moeen seems to be an untidy bowler. Among the all rounder-spinners, who is going to bowl a lot of overs and keep Pakistan from scoring too quickly. Maybe even Tredwell could have been an option. Can Ansari do this?

My team would be like Alfie's speculative eleven. Maybe Hales for Bell as a progressive choice. Stokes has to get in as the best bat, rather than for his bowling.

[rich1uk]

Problem is the spinners are so unproven. My guess is Rashid will be a second innings bowler or useful against the tail, but will go for runs. Moeen seems to be an untidy bowler. Among the all rounder-spinners, who is going to bowl a lot of overs and keep Pakistan from scoring too quickly. Maybe even Tredwell could have been an option. Can Ansari do this?

My team would be like Alfie's speculative eleven. Maybe Hales for Bell as a progressive choice. Stokes has to get in as the best bat, rather than for his bowling.

that's why I think it would be a ridiculous selection

you cant go into a test match with just 2 bowlers you are confident about and both of them seamers in conditions that are unlikely to help seam

ali has been effective when the batsmen have been attacking him , not sure the Pakistan batsmen will do that to the same degree

[Arthur Crabtree]

England only have two bowlers in the squad who are bowlers you can be confident about, in conditions that won't suit them. Any third seamer will only be a pretty ordinary bowler. Broad and Anderson are only good.

[rich1uk]

England only have two bowlers in the squad who are bowlers you can be confident about, in conditions that won't suit them. Any third seamer will only be a pretty ordinary bowler. Broad and Anderson are only good.

finn ?

[rich1uk]

I would much rather see us go in with 4 frontline bowlers in rashid, finn, broad and Anderson with ali and root as backups than play stokes for his batting and as a 6th bowler

[Arthur Crabtree]

If he's better than Broad or Anderson he should play. I'm not sure a three will bowl enough overs. I'm not sure Finn taking wickets on a very helpful surface at Edgbaston is a big signifier for this series. I'm not sure (finally) he's really what he was, around the time of the last India tour. Certainly, he won't frighten anyone with pace just now. Even less so in UAE.

[rich1uk]

If he's better than Broad or Anderson he should play. I'm not sure a three will bowl enough overs. I'm not sure Finn taking wickets on a very helpful surface at Edgbaston is a big signifier for this series. I'm not sure (finally) he's really what he was, around the time of the last India tour. Certainly, he won't frighten anyone with pace just now. Even less so in UAE.

but having the third seamer allows you to manage their overs better and I don't think we really need a team where we have 8 batsmen or batting all-rounders and just three frontline bowlers, especially when one of those three bowlers is untested

[Arthur Crabtree]

I would much rather see us go in with 4 frontline bowlers in rashid, finn, broad and Anderson with ali and root as backups than play stokes for his batting and as a 6th bowler

If the spinners do most of the bowling, a four man attack can be the best option. But doesn't justify three specialist seamers, in my opinion. Even so Stokes does stand as a pick for batting alone, so may get in anyway.

I'm being extremely repetitive, so I'll shut up.

[rich1uk]

i'm not going to agree stokes gets in on his batting alone , especially when the most effective innings he has played have been in conditions very different to the UAE

[rich1uk]

I just think a team along these lines gives us far better balance without compromising bowling options or batting depth

cook
hales
taylor
root
bell/bairstow
ali
buttler
rashid
broad
finn
Anderson

[hopeforthebest]

I believe Plunkett would be a better bet than Finn. I habour doubts that Finn's success at Edgbaston wasn't a flash in the pan and his continued selection isn't due to guilt about the way he was handled by England in Oz.

[rich1uk]

I believe Plunkett would be a better bet than Finn. I habour doubts that Finn's success at Edgbaston wasn't a flash in the pan and his continued selection isn't due to guilt about the way he was handled by England in Oz.

i'm happy giving the benefit of the doubt to the guy who has 102 wickets at a s/r of 47 , we happily persist with batsmen with mediocre records so why not give a chance to the guy with a record that stands up to anyone to see if he can get back to his best

[hopeforthebest]

I believe Plunkett would be a better bet than Finn. I habour doubts that Finn's success at Edgbaston wasn't a flash in the pan and his continued selection isn't due to guilt about the way he was handled by England in Oz.

i'm happy giving the benefit of the doubt to the guy who has 102 wickets at a s/r of 47 , we happily persist with batsmen with mediocre records so why not give a chance to the guy with a record that stands up to anyone to see if he can get back to his best

I see you never miss any opportunity to have a sideswipe at Bell's inclusion in the team, you really need to consider therapy to overcome your problem.

[rich1uk]

I believe Plunkett would be a better bet than Finn. I habour doubts that Finn's success at Edgbaston wasn't a flash in the pan and his continued selection isn't due to guilt about the way he was handled by England in Oz.

i'm happy giving the benefit of the doubt to the guy who has 102 wickets at a s/r of 47 , we happily persist with batsmen with mediocre records so why not give a chance to the guy with a record that stands up to anyone to see if he can get back to his best

I see you never miss any opportunity to have a sideswipe at Bell's inclusion in the team, you really need to consider therapy to overcome your problem.

I see you never miss the opportunity to assume every comment is about bell

you really are a *modded* asshole btw making comments like that

[Arthur Crabtree]

I believe Plunkett would be a better bet than Finn. I habour doubts that Finn's success at Edgbaston wasn't a flash in the pan and his continued selection isn't due to guilt about the way he was handled by England in Oz.

i'm happy giving the benefit of the doubt to the guy who has 102 wickets at a s/r of 47 , we happily persist with batsmen with mediocre records so why not give a chance to the guy with a record that stands up to anyone to see if he can get back to his best

If he's still that bowler. Might be more useful in SA. See how he goes in the warm ups in UAE. Maybe he is back, but I wonder a bit why he isn't such a monster in CC. He was averaging about 30 this season before a decent game before his recall.