Second Test: England v India at Lords, 9-13 August 2018.

[alfie]

Very much with Ian on this. You might get away with a ludicrously unbalanced order occasionally but it just isn't viable in the long term ; so I'm at a loss to see why you'd go out of your way to set up like this when it is fairly clear none of the fringe options have yet established anything like a strong case for permanency...

No problems with trying Pope - he has shown a lot of promise and if you're good enough you're old enough - as Sam Curran has shown. Though I'm not sure throwing him in at four is quite ideal - one of the problems with including Buttler as some sort of super pinch hitter who apparently can't bat higher than seven...

Rashid deserves another game . Not his fault he was used so sparingly ; he batted with intent and picked up important tail end wickets ...whether he can do a job against the real batsmen remains to be seen ; but we won't know until he's tried. And having picked him for Edgbaston it makes no sense to discard him without that trial.

Stokes can't really be replaced. Woakes can bowl - though he's closer in type to the other right arm pacemen than replicating Stokes' explosive if not altogether consistent variation. However I don't want him batting at six. Moeen might bat there ; but do we want two spinners against Indian batsmen with just Jimmy , Broad and Sam C to bowl seam ?

No perfect solution really. But I'd lean to packing the batting with an eye to avoiding defeat on what presumably will be a fairly lifeless deck at the home of cricket. Cook Jennings Root Pope Buttler Bairstow Woakes Curran Rashid Broad Anderson.
Which I suppose contradicts my own plan..."packing the batting " logically implies Moeen replacing Rashid...

Oh well...best leave it to the wise men on the selection panel

[alfie]

Personally I'd drop Buttler, give Foakes the gloves and play Bairstow as a specialist bat. But not at 3 or 4...

Given Malan had to go, who else is there? Joe Clarke has been in good form and bats 4 for Worcs. James Hildreth is a top order bat and consistent county performer for years, but I've come to the conclusion that he must have shagged Andrew Strauss' sister or something, as it doesn't seem to matter how bad England's batting is or how well Hildreth plays, he's consistently ignored.

Not sure if there's anyone else really banging on the door demanding selection from the CC, but I don't watch a lot of it, so there could be people I've missed.

I don't see the point in taking the gloves off Bairstow. He's turned into a pretty good keeper and brings a lot of energy to the position...and if he's not going to solve the top four problem I'd question what value having him as a specialist bat instead of a seventh - very good - run maker would bring. Foakes bats well for Surrey and might do a job but what if he didn't make the step up ? Engines in reverse ? I just don't think you mess with the parts of the team that are working well ...deal with the weak spots until you get it right.

If they can find a workable top four all other problems can be handled ...not perfectly , perhaps (90 mph bowlers and mystery spinners don't grow on trees) but to a reasonable degree. Enough to win regularly at home for sure ; and at least to compete away. If Pope is a first step towards that fix I will congratulate Smith & co....if not I'd expect the likes of Clarke to get a look in sooner rather than later.

[backfootpunch]

Nor can you pick two openers, Root, five number 6's, a spinner, Broad and Anderson and hope it will work!

Unfortunately when selecting my team for the next test they are what's in the squad that's been picked

[backfootpunch]

Personally I'd drop Buttler, give Foakes the gloves and play Bairstow as a specialist bat. But not at 3 or 4...

Given Malan had to go, who else is there? Joe Clarke has been in good form and bats 4 for Worcs. James Hildreth is a top order bat and consistent county performer for years, but I've come to the conclusion that he must have shagged Andrew Strauss' sister or something, as it doesn't seem to matter how bad England's batting is or how well Hildreth plays, he's consistently ignored.

Not sure if there's anyone else really banging on the door demanding selection from the CC, but I don't watch a lot of it, so there could be people I've missed.

I don't see the point in taking the gloves off Bairstow. He's turned into a pretty good keeper and brings a lot of energy to the position...and if he's not going to solve the top four problem I'd question what value having him as a specialist bat instead of a seventh - very good - run maker would bring. Foakes bats well for Surrey and might do a job but what if he didn't make the step up ? Engines in reverse ? I just don't think you mess with the parts of the team that are working well ...deal with the weak spots until you get it right.

If they can find a workable top four all other problems can be handled ...not perfectly , perhaps (90 mph bowlers and mystery spinners don't grow on trees) but to a reasonable degree. Enough to win regularly at home for sure ; and at least to compete away. If Pope is a first step towards that fix I will congratulate Smith & co....if not I'd expect the likes of Clarke to get a look in sooner rather than later.

The hope would be that since he isn't spending a lot of time working on his keeper the extra focus on his batting brings more runs

And let's be honest we need the extra runs more than his keeping which isn't any better than buttlers

If it doesn't improve his batting then yes it is pointless

But given the absolute disaster that is our batting line up it seems worth giving another go, it does though seem the adjustments he has made to radically improve his white ball game have negatively impacted his test batting

[alfie]

Personally I'd drop Buttler, give Foakes the gloves and play Bairstow as a specialist bat. But not at 3 or 4...

Given Malan had to go, who else is there? Joe Clarke has been in good form and bats 4 for Worcs. James Hildreth is a top order bat and consistent county performer for years, but I've come to the conclusion that he must have shagged Andrew Strauss' sister or something, as it doesn't seem to matter how bad England's batting is or how well Hildreth plays, he's consistently ignored.

Not sure if there's anyone else really banging on the door demanding selection from the CC, but I don't watch a lot of it, so there could be people I've missed.

I don't see the point in taking the gloves off Bairstow. He's turned into a pretty good keeper and brings a lot of energy to the position...and if he's not going to solve the top four problem I'd question what value having him as a specialist bat instead of a seventh - very good - run maker would bring. Foakes bats well for Surrey and might do a job but what if he didn't make the step up ? Engines in reverse ? I just don't think you mess with the parts of the team that are working well ...deal with the weak spots until you get it right.

If they can find a workable top four all other problems can be handled ...not perfectly , perhaps (90 mph bowlers and mystery spinners don't grow on trees) but to a reasonable degree. Enough to win regularly at home for sure ; and at least to compete away. If Pope is a first step towards that fix I will congratulate Smith & co....if not I'd expect the likes of Clarke to get a look in sooner rather than later.

The hope would be that since he isn't spending a lot of time working on his keeper the extra focus on his batting brings more runs

And let's be honest we need the extra runs more than his keeping which isn't any better than buttlers

If it doesn't improve his batting then yes it is pointless

But given the absolute disaster that is our batting line up it seems worth giving another go, it does though seem the adjustments he has made to radically improve his white ball game have negatively impacted his test batting

Has it though ? He was actually England's top scorer in the recently completed match with 70 and 28... Pretty handy in the context of a low scoring game. I do take note of the arguments that he has changed his technique and become more likely to chop on or edge to slip but I'd imagine he can work with the batting coach on this - and probably will.
I'd question the assertion that his keeping is no better than Buttler's ...I'd say it is , a little. But more to the point I'm still not sure that Buttler is good enough with the bat to command a place - even a protected one.
The "extra runs" are only potential. So far , Bairstow has looked a much better batsman with the gloves than he did before as a pure batsman. Who is to say taking them off him will automatically improve his scoring ? Much of this game is played in the head ; and returning him to batting duties only might actually have negative consequences.

Truth is we don't know. I for one would much rather see if we can't find a couple of bats fit for the future from among eighteen counties before fiddling around with one of the strengths of the team.

[bigfluffylemon]

Personally I'd drop Buttler, give Foakes the gloves and play Bairstow as a specialist bat. But not at 3 or 4...

Given Malan had to go, who else is there? Joe Clarke has been in good form and bats 4 for Worcs. James Hildreth is a top order bat and consistent county performer for years, but I've come to the conclusion that he must have shagged Andrew Strauss' sister or something, as it doesn't seem to matter how bad England's batting is or how well Hildreth plays, he's consistently ignored.

Not sure if there's anyone else really banging on the door demanding selection from the CC, but I don't watch a lot of it, so there could be people I've missed.

I don't see the point in taking the gloves off Bairstow. He's turned into a pretty good keeper and brings a lot of energy to the position...and if he's not going to solve the top four problem I'd question what value having him as a specialist bat instead of a seventh - very good - run maker would bring. Foakes bats well for Surrey and might do a job but what if he didn't make the step up ? Engines in reverse ? I just don't think you mess with the parts of the team that are working well ...deal with the weak spots until you get it right.

If they can find a workable top four all other problems can be handled ...not perfectly , perhaps (90 mph bowlers and mystery spinners don't grow on trees) but to a reasonable degree. Enough to win regularly at home for sure ; and at least to compete away. If Pope is a first step towards that fix I will congratulate Smith & co....if not I'd expect the likes of Clarke to get a look in sooner rather than later.

The hope would be that since he isn't spending a lot of time working on his keeper the extra focus on his batting brings more runs

And let's be honest we need the extra runs more than his keeping which isn't any better than buttlers

If it doesn't improve his batting then yes it is pointless

But given the absolute disaster that is our batting line up it seems worth giving another go, it does though seem the adjustments he has made to radically improve his white ball game have negatively impacted his test batting

Has it though ? He was actually England's top scorer in the recently completed match with 70 and 28... Pretty handy in the context of a low scoring game. I do take note of the arguments that he has changed his technique and become more likely to chop on or edge to slip but I'd imagine he can work with the batting coach on this - and probably will.
I'd question the assertion that his keeping is no better than Buttler's ...I'd say it is , a little. But more to the point I'm still not sure that Buttler is good enough with the bat to command a place - even a protected one.
The "extra runs" are only potential. So far , Bairstow has looked a much better batsman with the gloves than he did before as a pure batsman. Who is to say taking them off him will automatically improve his scoring ? Much of this game is played in the head ; and returning him to batting duties only might actually have negative consequences.

Truth is we don't know. I for one would much rather see if we can't find a couple of bats fit for the future from among eighteen counties before fiddling around with one of the strengths of the team.

Bairstow's batting better in ODIs (without the gloves) than he is in tests (where he's keeper).

Agree about Buttler, and if he's got to go and your WK bats at 6 or 7, your options are either Foakes at 7, Bairstow without gloves at 5/6, or Bairstow and 6/7 with gloves, and find a top order bat.

Who is that top order bat? We've been looking for one for years, and we really need at least three - an opener (is Jennings for the long haul? And even if he is, we need a replacement for Cook soon), a number three and a number five. We could at least make Bairstow the number 5 and hope that his return without the gloves is better than with. Statistically most WK/batsmen who also play as specialist bats have a higher average when they don't keep.

[bigfluffylemon]

Presume England aren't going to start rotating A&B. Resting Broad might though look uncomfortably like the axe.

Not sure I follow why that should be.

In 6 tests this year Broad's taken 21 wickets at 26 and an SR of 54. He's bowling as well as he ever has game-to-game ('those' spells notwithstanding). Why would anyone assume he'd been axed rather than rested, if England says they're rotating bowlers?

[Arthur Crabtree]

A lot of changes could be possible for India. Or alternatively, they might just give them another go. Their batting was really very poor again just good bowling.


Dhawan/Vijay/Rahul
Kohli/Karun Nair/Pant/Pujara/Rahana
Karthik
Ashwin/Jadeja/Kuldeep
Bumrah/Shami/Sharma/Pandya/Thakur/Umesh

Pujara might be a possible. Introducing Nair would be a gamble (this is why you need practice games). Alternatively, they might look to address the awful batting by changing the bowling. I've got a feeling Kuldeep will play and Umesh make way.

[Dr Cricket]

You also need strong touring teams if they don’t provide it you cancel the games and hurt them most where it hurts.
TBH it did work India got the pitch they wanted green seamer.
Didn’t have the strength of the team though.

[meninblue]

Drop Sam Curran, replace him.

We will drop him if you drop kohli

Deal or no deal?

No deal

[meninblue]

A lot of changes could be possible for India. Or alternatively, they might just give them another go. Their batting was really very poor again just good bowling.


Dhawan/Vijay/Rahul
Kohli/Karun Nair/Pant/Pujara/Rahana
Karthik
Ashwin/Jadeja/Kuldeep
Bumrah/Shami/Sharma/Pandya/Thakur/Umesh

Pujara might be a possible. Introducing Nair would be a gamble (this is why you need practice games). Alternatively, they might look to address the awful batting by changing the bowling. I've got a feeling Kuldeep will play and Umesh make way.

This team is filled with batsmen who can flourish in batting friendly wickets and conditions. A revamp is required.

[andy]

For me India's side at Lords should be

Vijay
Dhawan
Pujara
Kohli
Rahane
Karthik
Ashwin
Kuldeep/Jadeja
Ishant
Bumrah
Umesh

[ianp1970]

A lot of changes could be possible for India. Or alternatively, they might just give them another go. Their batting was really very poor again just good bowling.


Dhawan/Vijay/Rahul
Kohli/Karun Nair/Pant/Pujara/Rahana
Karthik
Ashwin/Jadeja/Kuldeep
Bumrah/Shami/Sharma/Pandya/Thakur/Umesh

Pujara might be a possible. Introducing Nair would be a gamble (this is why you need practice games). Alternatively, they might look to address the awful batting by changing the bowling. I've got a feeling Kuldeep will play and Umesh make way.

Bringing in Jadeja might help both causes: 2nd spinner plus a 7/8/9 of Hardik/Jadeja/Ashwin.

[sussexpob]

Regarding the above discussion, I would ask quite seriously how many of our current batting line up can honestly be considered in the top 6 batters in the country. Root, yes. Cook, yes only if hes Cook from a few years back, which he is ever proving not to be. Jennings, not a chance, there is no doubt plenty of openers out there with better averages than 33 in First Class cricket. Bairstow, yes, but is keeping holding his development back. Stokes, no, regardless of what he offers with the ball. Malan, no.

The batting is failing, so regardless if our top six batters bowl like Murali at top form, or keep like Alan Knott, if they arent the best 6 batters in the game to be picked, then they need to be dropped. If they do other things, let their batting supplement the team, not come to justify their position.

Case in point is Stokes. Great he bowls, averages 34. Sorry, but how many consistently great teams had a top 6 bat who batted like that. If there are some, then how many relied on great players at 1-5? Having a luxury allrounder in the team might be great, look at Freddie Flintoff, he added a lot. But he had how many players above him averaging over 40-45? Maybe even in his day, Trott/KP had averages in the 50 plus zone. Do we have that? Openers averaging 20, a double drop averaging 27. A 5 that has one 6 month period of his career when he averaged over 32, the rest is very bleak. Batting at 6 is a specialist position. If you bowl brilliantly, then 7 or 8 is for you if you cant average 40-45.

Bairstow.... they need to make their minds up. If he's a keeper, he bats at 7. Averaging low 30s consistently is great there, its useful. If he cant live up to his county ability with gloves in hand, it matters less. If hes at 5, he's judged as a batsman. So as a five, he needs dropping. 2 x 100s in 25 tests isnt it. Not good enough. The gloves cant hide that, no matter how hard you try. And its not like hes an exceptional glove man. And Buttler serves no purpose whatsoever. A subpar specialist bat not batting in the business slots? I mean come on, this is rubbish stuff.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Freddie batted at seven behind Stewart in his early years, and later on had Prior after him. In between, he actually averaged about 44. I think he would have been a number six, had he not been injured all the time and unable to spend time in the middle working on his batting.