4th Test Teams

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
D

duckmachine

New Member
Jul 15, 2011
18
0
1
NULL
The 4th Test starts on Thursday, but all the important issues are already decided, namely England have won the series, and have grabbed the number one slot in the rankings.

Consequently, for both sides, there's an opportunity to blood some new players. They say one should never change a winning side, but it will be interesting to see if England decide to.

There are 2 issues England need to resolve:

1. The middle order: which new players should tour in the winter
2. The second spinner - England will need one.

So

- should England think the unthinkable and rest Swann to give an alternative spinner a go? Swann is actually injured, so this might be more reasonable than it sounds ...

- should England pick someone else in the middle order? that'd mean thinking the unthinkable, and 'resting' Bell, Morgan or Trott/Bopara (or even Pietersen ...!)

and who should the Indians bring in to their team? Raina's toast IMHO, but should they also consider, say, leaving out someone else in their top order in favour of youth? (I'm not sure there are many options here, infact: Kohli will come in for Raina, and Mukund didnt exactly cover himself with glory in the first 2 tests.)
 
The team has been left unchanged - i'm guessing we're going for maximum impact and are going for the white wash.

Perhaps a chance to blood youngsters should be against a lower ranked test team, maybe Australia!
 
Ah yes - only just noticed thee 'unchanged' annoucement. Opportunity missed.

We need to learn from previous experiences of other teams: e.g. West Indies after Walsh and Ambrose, Australia after Warne, McGrath & co., and now India.
 
I agree that I would have given Swann a rest due to the injury, but we shouldn't throw caps around like confetti.

Unlike the Windies, OZ and India, our future can already be fairly well mapped out. We have more good young batsmen than you can shake a stick at (though imo all need to develop a bit more) and when it comes to bowling, Finn, Woakes, Harris and Briggs (and probably some others) wouldn't look too far out of place in some other test sides even now, and the oldest of them is 22.
 
dks said:
Unlike the Windies, OZ and India, our future can already be fairly well mapped out. We have more good young batsmen than you can shake a stick at (though imo all need to develop a bit more) and when it comes to bowling, Finn, Woakes, Harris and Briggs (and probably some others) wouldn't look too far out of place in some other test sides even now, and the oldest of them is 22.
Click to expand...

I totally agree about the strength in depth, but the trouble is that quality players need to be playing against the very best players, which they wont get at County level (or meaningfully playing for England A). It is brilliant that our current squad are nearly all in their mid-late 20s but the drawback is that our promising young players wont get a look in with the first XI for years, unless we use opportunities to play them.

There are two schools of thought regarding how a test side can stay at the top for years on end-
1) you don't just need to win series, you need to obliterate the opposition, so you should play your best squad in every match and grab every ranking point available.
2) you need to plan for the future, which means giving young players a chance when possible so they aren't thrown in at the deep age when a number of players reach the end of their careers simultaneously. In the batting line-up Bell, Prior, Trott, Pieterson are all likely to reach the end of their careers within about a year of each other, similarly Anderson and Tremlett are very nearly the same age and might well retire together.

I agree with DuckMachine and believe that we should take every opportunity to blood good young players (1 or 2 brought into the squad once we've got a series sown up and youth picked over experience to cover injury). The selectors obviously think differently (Bopara not Taylor in third test to replace Trott/ waiting to play Anderson if he's fit and playing Swann despite his injury in the fourth test) To be fair they haven't got much wrong recently so I'm not going to complain too loudly!
 
I disagree that County level is not a good preparation for our test players. When you look at the recent successes in selection, Swann, Sidebottom, Prior, Trott, Tremlett and Bresnan all had a long period in the county game before breaking into the test side (bar the odd appearance hear and there), which gave them experience of many conditions and plenty of time to learn their game and mature physically. The result was that all came in and produced prety much immediately. Players like Anderson, Broad, Bell and Cook, who were picked younger, only really found their game a few years after selection (some may say Broad is still looking for it).

Early selection has also damaged the international careers of many youngsters, some never to be seen again at that level again. Names like Key, Read, Foster, Schofield, Plunkett and, of course, Bopara, spring to mind. Even Flintoff may have joined the ranks of the not quites and never wases. After 5 years in the side his batting average was 25 and bowling was 45 and almost wasn't selected for the 04 tour of the Windies.

Imo a couple more years in county would have matured them a bit quicker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back