I'm gutted after that. I thought we should have wrapped it up. Debating points after that first test... 1) Do we really need to be declaring on the first day against the best side in the world with less than 400 runs? 2) Wicketkeeper. What do we do about Bairstow? The amount of missed catches and stumpings by him potentially cost us the game. 3) Is this finally a series too far for Jimmy Anderson? 4) Assuming Mooen is unfit for Lords, do we go with an all seam attack and use Root as our spin bowler? Or, do we call up Ahmed or Jacks and give one of them a go? 5) We dont need to play Bazball every ball do we? In the second innings Root chucked his wicket away when we were in a strong position to kick on. Surely it's okay to go through a session going at 2 or 3 an over. I think we need balance.
Interesting points and certainly a debate to be had imo. 1. I can see the logic behind the declaration, if we had snagged Warner and 1 other in those 4 overs it would have been genius. 2. Barstow is not being dropped, can we fit Foakes in and who do you drop? A proper keeper saves us about 100 runs in that game 3. Anderson himself said he feels off his rhythm, lack of cricket isn't helping him, rumours of an injury as well 4. With stokes looking broken bowling wise, we may as well go 4 Seamers and Root. Lords isn't usually spin friendly I think? 5. I agree with being positive, letting players play, the unusual fields etc, but agree there has to be a bit of balance, our second innings was a prime example of going a bit too far, with a bit of restraint early doors we could have smashed it around later on, left the bowlers in the dressing room and still got the same amount of runs / time used
1) I think conditions need to be took into consideration. It was a perfect batting track, was 4 overs really enough to take this risk? I didn't think so at the time. 2) If we were to keep Bairstow in realistically it would need to be Crawley or Duckett that is dropped. Another option is drop the spin bowler and use Root as our full time spinner. 3) I can't add much. I think this is Jimmy's last series. Time to look to the future. 4) I think a good spin bowler will turn the ball on any wicket. Shane Warne averaged about 5 wickets a match at Lords. Raheen Ahmed for me, I'm a huge fan and think the lad is special. He's got a lot in his armoury. He's not economical but he is a wicket taker. 5) Agreed.
I think we will see Woods, Potts or Tongue at Lords, maybe even all 3 depending on how Stokes feels his knee is. He clearly hampered by it and was limping a bit today, I'm not sure he can bowl more than a few overs so that puts pressure on the spinner and the 3 Seamers. Maybe we do go with 4 Seamers and Root as spinner then there is less pressure on Stokes to have to bowl? As I said earlier in the thread, can Root manage a big bowling workload without it either affecting his batting or having finger issues like Moeen? They have already said to expect the rest of the pitches to be like this one, so the bowling unit need to fire. Going to be a fascinating summer of cricket though and England have put a marker down now that will be making Australia think long and hard about
Not sure Potts is top level. Might be fine in a home series against Sri Lanka or Bangladesh but not against the top nations Wood should be a shoe-in for Lords, assuming the surface as some pace in it. I'd drop Anderson for Wood If Moeen can't play, I'd bring in Rehan Ahmed Crawley, Duckett, Pope, Root, Brook, Stokes, Bairstow, Broad, Ahmed, Wood, Robinson
All fair points, but I have a nagging doubt about Stokes' ability to bowl more than a handful of overs, so I'd like the comfort of a 4th seamer, especially as Wood should be short speedy bursts. If Moeen isn't fit I think Root will take up spinning duties and another seamer will come in, which as I've said could be a risk. It's a dilemma and only a week and a bit to rest / heal up. Going to interesting which way they decide to jump
Attack is too samey which is fine when the pitch/conditions mean the ball will move. Wonder if Sam Curran is in the discussions at all? Love him as a cricketer, but lacks the pace to be a top level bowler
Agree - point 5 the two openers got beastie conditions to bat in - even today we didn't get the cloud cover hoped for early on - who knows if our two openers had not had those twenty minutes they may have contributed those 40-50 extra runs. Ifs and buts but we are not that far from these - a little luck that went there way, had it gone our way and we win. But its great Test cricket
Gutted we didn't see this through, but a great effort. Couple of things for me...the declaration in the first innings, big mistake and not taking the new ball earlier . However, the team have had a good look at this Aussie side and I am betting they feel confident we can get on top in the rest of the series.
Can't play Ahmed I don't think. He's hardly bowled this season. Think they might go four steamers, plus Stokes, plus Root for Lords, where it doesn't normally spin that much. Mind I've never seen Edgbadton like that so what do I know? I think it would be Dawson if they pick a different spinner.
All to play for. My feeling before the match was that Australia's bowling was better, and that would win the series. Its won them this match, with Lyon and Cummins being excellent. But only just, a very tight game just going their way. Think we need a bit of pace, probably Wood, maybe no spin at Lords.
I'd be tempted to go with Chris Woakes for Jimmy next test depending on conditions - he is virtually unplayable in English conditions with a swinging ball and has a better batting average than Crawley- at one point there was even talk of him opening. If Moeen is unfit we pretty much have to go all seam and I would have Woody coming in for him. Stokes not bowling is a massive blow but given that the entire team revolves around him he must stay in. Bairstow stays for the next test on the basis of his run scoring and hopefully he was just a bit rusty and has now got that out of his system.
