Fourth Test: India v England, 8-12 Dec.

[Arthur Crabtree]

If Cook is scoring runs, and he wants to carry on, of course he can carry on, whether he stops being captain now or after the Ashes.

Personally, I think he's declining as a batter. Maybe that will be halted if he's just in as a player though. He should be at his peak. Cook's neither a genius nor a technician though. If he doesn't want it enough, if his hunger is sated, he won't be nearly as effective.

[Aidan11]

Strauss should go as well.

[Dr Cricket]

Strauss should go as well.

He doesn't do anything anyway apart from put pressure on the wrong people.
His official Job is to make sure in the ecb board discussion cricket stuff get talked about but in reality in ecb board cricket is the last thing they care about.

Look at this tour he was in charge of preparation but had no role in it because people higher up signed deals on money.

[Arthur Crabtree]

If you use Pakistan losing in Australia as a reason to downrate England then you can use everyone elses defeats in india to put England's into context. England weren't a great side before the India series, though the Ashes and SA wins were decent achievements. They're not good enough to win in India. They're just a middle range Test side, hard to beat at home, inconsistent away. Nowhere near good enough for the ultimate challenge.This series hasn't really shown anyone up but the odd disinterested patriot with a twitter account.

[rich1uk]

[Dr Cricket]

Well you can argue they are inconsistent at home.
Every test side apart from wi won in England lately.
That awful at this time considering teams are winning 70-90% at home.
Top of that wouldntbe so sure of England winning at home anyway I really can't see them taking wickets when the ball not doing anything even at home.
They really going to miss Anderson and broad when they go considering woakes,ball not in the same class as them.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Strauss should go as well.

He doesn't do anything anyway apart from put pressure on the wrong people.
His official Job is to make sure in the ecb board discussion cricket stuff get talked about but in reality in ecb board cricket is the last thing they care about.

Look at this tour he was in charge of preparation but had no role in it because people higher up signed deals on money.

Ever since Downton etc, it feels like Strauss' job is to get England not talked about, because as soon as anyone opens their mouths at the ECB they end up looking stupid. What Strauss has done effectively, is getting everyone to shut up (when the ECB has been visible, as with Durham, they still haven't done themselves any favours). maybe that effects the profile of the game though.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Not unbeatable at home, like India, but still strong at home.

[Dr Cricket]

Not unbeatable at home, like India, but still strong at home.

True but to be a top side you need to win at home most of the time.
Can't struggle at home and then be confident in winning away from home.
At the moment I find the biggest issue is that England are one dimensional, that probably the reason they often lose crucial session and periods.
England need to be able to win on good docile wicket and they can't at the moment either home or away.

TBH that what been good about India this series you sense with shami and the pace men they do ok overseas if they contributing in India.

[Aidan11]

[

image | +

]

I'll never get all of them on the Outrage Bus.

[rich1uk]

I'll never get all of them on the Outrage Bus.

[Dr Cricket]

Really the key to it is that England don't have a good bowling attack that can take wickets in most conditions because the bowling one dimensional the results become one dimensional and then you add the fact England are an poor team in the batting.
Really you not winning too many games if the bowler struggle to create more than 25-30 chances a game.

[Aidan11]

I'll see if I can hire a fleet of coaches from Tantrum Transport.

[Dr Cricket]

If you use Pakistan losing in Australia as a reason to downrate England then you can use everyone elses defeats in india to put England's into context. England weren't a great side before the India series, though the Ashes and SA wins were decent achievements. They're not good enough to win in India. They're just a middle range Test side, hard to beat at home, inconsistent away. Nowhere near good enough for the ultimate challenge.This series hasn't really shown anyone up but the odd disinterested patriot with a twitter account.

not really sure what you talking about.
Pakistan getting thrashed in NZ, Australia probably and not being able to score runs or take wicket yet win 2 test in England and should have won in england is a poor result for england especially when England and Anderson were so arrogant in the UAE saying watch when you come to england misbah and pakistan would struggle bit awkard that.
really the same thing happened yesterday.
I really can't see England dominating at home or being confident of them destroying kohli or any of the indian batsman so they average 13 in england, england just don't have the bowler that accurate enough or good enough for batsman to struggle against them in good batting decks.

if pakistan struggle against the bounce, Seam, Swing and generally out of their depth in NZ, Australia etc surely questions needs to be asked of how pakistan scored runs in england or they actually won 2 games.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Not unbeatable at home, like India, but still strong at home.

True but to be a top side you need to win at home most of the time.
Can't struggle at home and then be confident in winning away from home.

I think 'struggle at home' is a little of an overstatement. Though I agree they are one dimensional (as evidenced by their search for a perfect pitch for their players, a little different depending on the tourists). 5-2-1 in the last eight. Not dominant, or intimidating, but not a struggle exactly. And it is 'winning most of the time'. Not so good away, in spite of a rare home defeat for SA last winter.