I expect it's all down to the conditions in Grenada but its likely to be a similar track to the previous 2 ...I'd bring in Robinson for Fisher and play parky instead of Leach.
If I really wanted to be positive I'd drop Woakes and keep Leach ...especially as Stokes is now able to bowl 20 overs in an innings..and bearing in mind we have to take 20 wickets
Yes I know that might give us a long tail
Particularly impressed with Mahmood and we look a whole lot better in the field with a proper wicketkeeper behind the stumps
Would like to see that but I still think that they are going to be mindful of the fitness of Robinson and Stokes - and if one does break down and the Windies do get after Parkinson then that would leave us with a bowling attack of Stokes/Robinson, the inexperienced Mahmood plus Leach. We will see if they are brave enough to do that to win the series
The main problem with this England team's bowling - and I hate to say it - is Leach. He is simply not good enough as a test-class spinner. He might have held one end up when Stokes won the game at Headingley., and he may have got 90 as a nightwatchman at Lords, but how many times are we going to allow him not to be much of a threat on a fifth day pitch when it's turning square? He is just nowhere near what England need. We need players that can win test matches - Root, Stokes, Woakes, Robinson, Bairstow, and even Crawley can do that on their own - Leach has had ample opportunities and hasn't done so. A poor return.
We must pick a spinner who can keep it tight in the first innings, and then take wickets in the second. Step up Parky!
Parkinson deserves his chance because we do need a wicket taking spinner. The irony is that he might have a better chance of playing on a wicket that is less spin friendly as a replacement for Leach because of the worries of having to go in with two of three potentially less than fully fit fast bowlers with either Robinson or Stokes then having to contribute to the overs the other one can't bowl. And of course the third seamer is a rookie with one Test and only 26 First Class games to his name.
The major difference here is, of course, that, had we been at home, someone like Robinson could have built his match fitness up by playing a couple of games in the CC. The expectation is that we are going to ask him to bowl 30 overs plus having only had one opportunity to deliver a ball in anger since January and that was at the start of the tour in the game in which he went off injured having bowled less than 10 overs. If previous messages from the England camp are correct then Robinson isn't prone to getting fit off his own back with the criticism from the bowling coach that “he has to get used to understanding what it takes to be an international cricketer all year round and play that extra day, five days of test cricket.” And we really do not know what reaction Stokes' body is to having bowled almost 80 overs in a relatively short period of time and then going out and doing it again within a week.
The main problem with this England team's bowling - and I hate to say it - is Leach. He is simply not good enough as a test-class spinner. He might have held one end up when Stokes won the game at Headingley., and he may have got 90 as a nightwatchman at Lords, but how many times are we going to allow him not to be much of a threat on a fifth day pitch when it's turning square? He is just nowhere near what England need. We need players that can win test matches - Root, Stokes, Woakes, Robinson, Bairstow, and even Crawley can do that on their own - Leach has had ample opportunities and hasn't done so. A poor return.
We must pick a spinner who can keep it tight in the first innings, and then take wickets in the second. Step up Parky!
Parkinson deserves his chance because we do need a wicket taking spinner. The irony is that he might have a better chance of playing on a wicket that is less spin friendly as a replacement for Leach because of the worries of having to go in with two of three potentially less than fully fit fast bowlers with either Robinson or Stokes then having to contribute to the overs the other one can't bowl. And of course the third seamer is a rookie with one Test and only 26 First Class games to his name.
The major difference here is, of course, that, had we been at home, someone like Robinson could have built his match fitness up by playing a couple of games in the CC. The expectation is that we are going to ask him to bowl 30 overs plus having only had one opportunity to deliver a ball in anger since January and that was at the start of the tour in the game in which he went off injured having bowled less than 10 overs. If previous messages from the England camp are correct then Robinson isn't prone to getting fit off his own back with the criticism from the bowling coach that “he has to get used to understanding what it takes to be an international cricketer all year round and play that extra day, five days of test cricket.” And we really do not know what reaction Stokes' body is to having bowled almost 80 overs in a relatively short period of time and then going out and doing it again within a week.
Yes, it's England in a pickle of their own making yet again! Too many recent spinners get into the squad and then just fade away without getting a decent chance - Riley, Crane, and now maybe Parkinson....plenty of others too!
It would be great to have that spare medium pace capacity (oh for a Bob Woolmer!) but I don't mind Root (or Lawrence) being (pretty good) occasional bowlers when the conditions suit.
It's occurred to me that one thing that has regularly counted against England playing 2 spinners, is the number of part time spinners in the batting line up. Root and Lawrence at the moment, but also the likes of Malan and Denly recently.
With Bairstow (and Pope) being keepers, what we don't have is a decent part time medium pacer, someone who can fill in if one of the seamers breaks down, which is the risk if you only play 3.
Going back, Collingwood's bowling gave a lot of flexibility, but before then I remember the likes of Gooch and Gatting being decent medium pace 6th bowlers, and even Boycott bowling a few overs.
It is the advent of the batsman/keeper rather than the old style keeper/batsman that has and does cause issues - we actually had four keepers in our top 7 at one point because Burns used to keep too. Kent have a similar issue with Billings, Robinson and Cox and as I've said previously that doesn't necessarily help someone like Robinson who should be batting higher than 6 at Kent but who might not even have a place in the side once Billings returns.
There aren't many that do bowl and bat at the highest level. I believe it's because players are told to/want to concentrate on one discipline only. Let's not forget KP used to be a spinner who batted a bit even to the extent that he played for Natal against the England tourists in a warm up game batting at 8. In the same way as KP should have been encouraged to carry on with his off spin (though he would have resisted) so should Root. We now have the situation, with the advent of T20 and the value afforded to those batsman that can bowl that they become even more desirable in white ball which has helped Livingstone to command the sort of money he has in the IPL - especially as he bowls off spin and leg spin.
Medium pacers/fast bowlers are a bit more problematic to find simply because of the workload and the fact that they mainly start as bowlers and try to add batting to their game. You also can't have someone in your side who is OK with the bat and equally proficient with the ball - they have to be very good at one of those which Gatting and Gooch were. Dare I also say that Gatting, especially, would not have committed to the sort of work required nowadays to do both - he probably spent ten times as much in the canteen as Stokes does in the nets! An exception in my day growing up was probably Bob Woolmer who could open both the batting and the bowling.
It's occurred to me that one thing that has regularly counted against England playing 2 spinners, is the number of part time spinners in the batting line up. Root and Lawrence at the moment, but also the likes of Malan and Denly recently.
With Bairstow (and Pope) being keepers, what we don't have is a decent part time medium pacer, someone who can fill in if one of the seamers breaks down, which is the risk if you only play 3.
Going back, Collingwood's bowling gave a lot of flexibility, but before then I remember the likes of Gooch and Gatting being decent medium pace 6th bowlers, and even Boycott bowling a few overs.
It is the advent of the batsman/keeper rather than the old style keeper/batsman that has and does cause issues - we actually had four keepers in our top 7 at one point because Burns used to keep too. Kent have a similar issue with Billings, Robinson and Cox and as I've said previously that doesn't necessarily help someone like Robinson who should be batting higher than 6 at Kent but who might not even have a place in the side once Billings returns.
There aren't many that do bowl and bat at the highest level. I believe it's because players are told to/want to concentrate on one discipline only. Let's not forget KP used to be a spinner who batted a bit even to the extent that he played for Natal against the England tourists in a warm up game batting at 8. In the same way as KP should have been encouraged to carry on with his off spin (though he would have resisted) so should Root. We now have the situation, with the advent of T20 and the value afforded to those batsman that can bowl that they become even more desirable in white ball which has helped Livingstone to command the sort of money he has in the IPL - especially as he bowls off spin and leg spin.
Medium pacers/fast bowlers are a bit more problematic to find simply because of the workload and the fact that they mainly start as bowlers and try to add batting to their game. You also can't have someone in your side who is OK with the bat and equally proficient with the ball - they have to be very good at one of those which Gatting and Gooch were. Dare I also say that Gatting, especially, would not have committed to the sort of work required nowadays to do both - he probably spent ten times as much in the canteen as Stokes does in the nets! An exception in my day growing up was probably Bob Woolmer who could open both the batting and the bowling.
I think the IPL and T20 has affected things, as spinners in white ball cricket are now a really useful asset, more so than medium paced dobbers.
Denly for example wouldn't have got franchise gigs without his leggies, while Alex Blake now seems to bowl a bit of offspin. DBD is the only one who'd developed himself as a medium pacer, and I imagine his bowling has helped keep him in the team, as it's a useful option for the side.
I wasn't comparing Gatting with Stokes, as he was never an all rounder (well he was very round actually ), but a quality batsman who can also bowl a bit, a 6th bowler for a side which is really useful when you pick 2 spinners and he can be the 4th seamer. 158 first class wickets at 29.76 isn't bad.
It's occurred to me that one thing that has regularly counted against England playing 2 spinners, is the number of part time spinners in the batting line up. Root and Lawrence at the moment, but also the likes of Malan and Denly recently.
With Bairstow (and Pope) being keepers, what we don't have is a decent part time medium pacer, someone who can fill in if one of the seamers breaks down, which is the risk if you only play 3.
Going back, Collingwood's bowling gave a lot of flexibility, but before then I remember the likes of Gooch and Gatting being decent medium pace 6th bowlers, and even Boycott bowling a few overs.
It is the advent of the batsman/keeper rather than the old style keeper/batsman that has and does cause issues - we actually had four keepers in our top 7 at one point because Burns used to keep too. Kent have a similar issue with Billings, Robinson and Cox and as I've said previously that doesn't necessarily help someone like Robinson who should be batting higher than 6 at Kent but who might not even have a place in the side once Billings returns.
There aren't many that do bowl and bat at the highest level. I believe it's because players are told to/want to concentrate on one discipline only. Let's not forget KP used to be a spinner who batted a bit even to the extent that he played for Natal against the England tourists in a warm up game batting at 8. In the same way as KP should have been encouraged to carry on with his off spin (though he would have resisted) so should Root. We now have the situation, with the advent of T20 and the value afforded to those batsman that can bowl that they become even more desirable in white ball which has helped Livingstone to command the sort of money he has in the IPL - especially as he bowls off spin and leg spin.
Medium pacers/fast bowlers are a bit more problematic to find simply because of the workload and the fact that they mainly start as bowlers and try to add batting to their game. You also can't have someone in your side who is OK with the bat and equally proficient with the ball - they have to be very good at one of those which Gatting and Gooch were. Dare I also say that Gatting, especially, would not have committed to the sort of work required nowadays to do both - he probably spent ten times as much in the canteen as Stokes does in the nets! An exception in my day growing up was probably Bob Woolmer who could open both the batting and the bowling.
I think the IPL and T20 has affected things, as spinners in white ball cricket are now a really useful asset, more so than medium paced dobbers.
Denly for example wouldn't have got franchise gigs without his leggies, while Alex Blake now seems to bowl a bit of offspin. DBD is the only one who'd developed himself as a medium pacer, and I imagine his bowling has helped keep him in the team, as it's a useful option for the side.
I wasn't comparing Gatting with Stokes, as he was never an all rounder (well he was very round actually ), but a quality batsman who can also bowl a bit, a 6th bowler for a side which is really useful when you pick 2 spinners and he can be the 4th seamer. 158 first class wickets at 29.76 isn't bad.
DBD used to be a proper all rounder who could bowl a "heavy ball" in county age group cricket but I believe a serious back injury prevented him from doing so up until the last couple of years. Although, as you say, the fear of being left out of the side probably caused him to re-visit that discipline as much as anything else!
Roy turned down the IPL and £200K for a "short, indefinite break from the game", is currently on holiday in the Maldives and will not be available for Surrey's early season CC matches. He cited "bubble fatigue" as the reason.
Roy has admitted a charge "of conducting himself in a manner which may be prejudicial to the interests of cricket or which may bring the game of cricket, the ECB and himself into disrepute".
Regulations were changed in 2020, stipulating that written reasons for a disciplinary panel's findings should be published in full on the ECB's website "unless [the panel] determines for any reason that it is appropriate that they should only be published in part or not published at all."
It's occurred to me that one thing that has regularly counted against England playing 2 spinners, is the number of part time spinners in the batting line up. Root and Lawrence at the moment, but also the likes of Malan and Denly recently.
With Bairstow (and Pope) being keepers, what we don't have is a decent part time medium pacer, someone who can fill in if one of the seamers breaks down, which is the risk if you only play 3.
Going back, Collingwood's bowling gave a lot of flexibility, but before then I remember the likes of Gooch and Gatting being decent medium pace 6th bowlers, and even Boycott bowling a few overs.
It is the advent of the batsman/keeper rather than the old style keeper/batsman that has and does cause issues - we actually had four keepers in our top 7 at one point because Burns used to keep too. Kent have a similar issue with Billings, Robinson and Cox and as I've said previously that doesn't necessarily help someone like Robinson who should be batting higher than 6 at Kent but who might not even have a place in the side once Billings returns.
There aren't many that do bowl and bat at the highest level. I believe it's because players are told to/want to concentrate on one discipline only. Let's not forget KP used to be a spinner who batted a bit even to the extent that he played for Natal against the England tourists in a warm up game batting at 8. In the same way as KP should have been encouraged to carry on with his off spin (though he would have resisted) so should Root. We now have the situation, with the advent of T20 and the value afforded to those batsman that can bowl that they become even more desirable in white ball which has helped Livingstone to command the sort of money he has in the IPL - especially as he bowls off spin and leg spin.
Medium pacers/fast bowlers are a bit more problematic to find simply because of the workload and the fact that they mainly start as bowlers and try to add batting to their game. You also can't have someone in your side who is OK with the bat and equally proficient with the ball - they have to be very good at one of those which Gatting and Gooch were. Dare I also say that Gatting, especially, would not have committed to the sort of work required nowadays to do both - he probably spent ten times as much in the canteen as Stokes does in the nets! An exception in my day growing up was probably Bob Woolmer who could open both the batting and the bowling.
Butcher used to be able to chip in with some useful overs and wickets.
Annoying that Jennings or Vince never managed to nail down a spot as both are genuine seam options. Both have even been used as 4th seamer in county cricket. Considerably better than say Trott who used to chip in with a few overs when we only used 4 bowlers.
It's occurred to me that one thing that has regularly counted against England playing 2 spinners, is the number of part time spinners in the batting line up. Root and Lawrence at the moment, but also the likes of Malan and Denly recently.
With Bairstow (and Pope) being keepers, what we don't have is a decent part time medium pacer, someone who can fill in if one of the seamers breaks down, which is the risk if you only play 3.
Going back, Collingwood's bowling gave a lot of flexibility, but before then I remember the likes of Gooch and Gatting being decent medium pace 6th bowlers, and even Boycott bowling a few overs.
It is the advent of the batsman/keeper rather than the old style keeper/batsman that has and does cause issues - we actually had four keepers in our top 7 at one point because Burns used to keep too. Kent have a similar issue with Billings, Robinson and Cox and as I've said previously that doesn't necessarily help someone like Robinson who should be batting higher than 6 at Kent but who might not even have a place in the side once Billings returns.
There aren't many that do bowl and bat at the highest level. I believe it's because players are told to/want to concentrate on one discipline only. Let's not forget KP used to be a spinner who batted a bit even to the extent that he played for Natal against the England tourists in a warm up game batting at 8. In the same way as KP should have been encouraged to carry on with his off spin (though he would have resisted) so should Root. We now have the situation, with the advent of T20 and the value afforded to those batsman that can bowl that they become even more desirable in white ball which has helped Livingstone to command the sort of money he has in the IPL - especially as he bowls off spin and leg spin.
Medium pacers/fast bowlers are a bit more problematic to find simply because of the workload and the fact that they mainly start as bowlers and try to add batting to their game. You also can't have someone in your side who is OK with the bat and equally proficient with the ball - they have to be very good at one of those which Gatting and Gooch were. Dare I also say that Gatting, especially, would not have committed to the sort of work required nowadays to do both - he probably spent ten times as much in the canteen as Stokes does in the nets! An exception in my day growing up was probably Bob Woolmer who could open both the batting and the bowling.
Butcher used to be able to chip in with some useful overs and wickets.
Annoying that Jennings or Vince never managed to nail down a spot as both are genuine seam options. Both have even been used as 4th seamer in county cricket. Considerably better than say Trott who used to chip in with a few overs when we only used 4 bowlers.
I maybe on my own here, but I think Sam Curran could still do an all rounders job for England
It's occurred to me that one thing that has regularly counted against England playing 2 spinners, is the number of part time spinners in the batting line up. Root and Lawrence at the moment, but also the likes of Malan and Denly recently.
With Bairstow (and Pope) being keepers, what we don't have is a decent part time medium pacer, someone who can fill in if one of the seamers breaks down, which is the risk if you only play 3.
Going back, Collingwood's bowling gave a lot of flexibility, but before then I remember the likes of Gooch and Gatting being decent medium pace 6th bowlers, and even Boycott bowling a few overs.
It is the advent of the batsman/keeper rather than the old style keeper/batsman that has and does cause issues - we actually had four keepers in our top 7 at one point because Burns used to keep too. Kent have a similar issue with Billings, Robinson and Cox and as I've said previously that doesn't necessarily help someone like Robinson who should be batting higher than 6 at Kent but who might not even have a place in the side once Billings returns.
There aren't many that do bowl and bat at the highest level. I believe it's because players are told to/want to concentrate on one discipline only. Let's not forget KP used to be a spinner who batted a bit even to the extent that he played for Natal against the England tourists in a warm up game batting at 8. In the same way as KP should have been encouraged to carry on with his off spin (though he would have resisted) so should Root. We now have the situation, with the advent of T20 and the value afforded to those batsman that can bowl that they become even more desirable in white ball which has helped Livingstone to command the sort of money he has in the IPL - especially as he bowls off spin and leg spin.
Medium pacers/fast bowlers are a bit more problematic to find simply because of the workload and the fact that they mainly start as bowlers and try to add batting to their game. You also can't have someone in your side who is OK with the bat and equally proficient with the ball - they have to be very good at one of those which Gatting and Gooch were. Dare I also say that Gatting, especially, would not have committed to the sort of work required nowadays to do both - he probably spent ten times as much in the canteen as Stokes does in the nets! An exception in my day growing up was probably Bob Woolmer who could open both the batting and the bowling.
Butcher used to be able to chip in with some useful overs and wickets.
Annoying that Jennings or Vince never managed to nail down a spot as both are genuine seam options. Both have even been used as 4th seamer in county cricket. Considerably better than say Trott who used to chip in with a few overs when we only used 4 bowlers.
I maybe on my own here, but I think Sam Curran could still do an all rounders job for England
Trouble is that he isn't quite good enough in either discipline and certainly not in less than friendly conditions - he averages less than 25 with the bat and costs more than 35 with the ball. He doesn't even compare to Woakes who averages 28 with the bat and under 31 with the ball so, at the very best, he is currently a rival for that number 8 spot. Curran is only 23 and might well improve over time so certainly shouldn't be written off and if, for example, he could get his batting average up to say the mid 30s (it's 27 at the moment) then he could find himself as a viable number six which would then give us that extra bowling option.
The difference between those two and Stokes is that he can take the game away from the opposition with the bat and trouble batsmen with pace even when the wicket doesn't suit.
It's occurred to me that one thing that has regularly counted against England playing 2 spinners, is the number of part time spinners in the batting line up. Root and Lawrence at the moment, but also the likes of Malan and Denly recently.
With Bairstow (and Pope) being keepers, what we don't have is a decent part time medium pacer, someone who can fill in if one of the seamers breaks down, which is the risk if you only play 3.
Going back, Collingwood's bowling gave a lot of flexibility, but before then I remember the likes of Gooch and Gatting being decent medium pace 6th bowlers, and even Boycott bowling a few overs.
It is the advent of the batsman/keeper rather than the old style keeper/batsman that has and does cause issues - we actually had four keepers in our top 7 at one point because Burns used to keep too. Kent have a similar issue with Billings, Robinson and Cox and as I've said previously that doesn't necessarily help someone like Robinson who should be batting higher than 6 at Kent but who might not even have a place in the side once Billings returns.
There aren't many that do bowl and bat at the highest level. I believe it's because players are told to/want to concentrate on one discipline only. Let's not forget KP used to be a spinner who batted a bit even to the extent that he played for Natal against the England tourists in a warm up game batting at 8. In the same way as KP should have been encouraged to carry on with his off spin (though he would have resisted) so should Root. We now have the situation, with the advent of T20 and the value afforded to those batsman that can bowl that they become even more desirable in white ball which has helped Livingstone to command the sort of money he has in the IPL - especially as he bowls off spin and leg spin.
Medium pacers/fast bowlers are a bit more problematic to find simply because of the workload and the fact that they mainly start as bowlers and try to add batting to their game. You also can't have someone in your side who is OK with the bat and equally proficient with the ball - they have to be very good at one of those which Gatting and Gooch were. Dare I also say that Gatting, especially, would not have committed to the sort of work required nowadays to do both - he probably spent ten times as much in the canteen as Stokes does in the nets! An exception in my day growing up was probably Bob Woolmer who could open both the batting and the bowling.
Butcher used to be able to chip in with some useful overs and wickets.
Annoying that Jennings or Vince never managed to nail down a spot as both are genuine seam options. Both have even been used as 4th seamer in county cricket. Considerably better than say Trott who used to chip in with a few overs when we only used 4 bowlers.
I maybe on my own here, but I think Sam Curran could still do an all rounders job for England
Trouble is that he isn't quite good enough in either discipline and certainly not in less than friendly conditions - he averages less than 25 with the bat and costs more than 35 with the ball. He doesn't even compare to Woakes who averages 28 with the bat and under 31 with the ball so, at the very best, he is currently a rival for that number 8 spot. Curran is only 23 and might well improve over time so certainly shouldn't be written off and if, for example, he could get his batting average up to say the mid 30s (it's 27 at the moment) then he could find himself as a viable number six which would then give us that extra bowling option.
The difference between those two and Stokes is that he can take the game away from the opposition with the bat and trouble batsmen with pace even when the wicket doesn't suit.
Stokes when fully fit is the best all rounder in the world in my opinion and I would never compare Sam with him, I would like to see Sam get some big scores in county cricket,, as if he is to become a regular in test cricket, it has to be as a batsman who bowls
I was surprised that Sam Curran has no centuries to his name in any format (a couple of 90s only), suggesting that in red ball cricket he's no better than a 7 or 8 at the moment, meaning that he has to justify his place in the team as a front line bowler.
It's occurred to me that one thing that has regularly counted against England playing 2 spinners, is the number of part time spinners in the batting line up. Root and Lawrence at the moment, but also the likes of Malan and Denly recently.
With Bairstow (and Pope) being keepers, what we don't have is a decent part time medium pacer, someone who can fill in if one of the seamers breaks down, which is the risk if you only play 3.
Going back, Collingwood's bowling gave a lot of flexibility, but before then I remember the likes of Gooch and Gatting being decent medium pace 6th bowlers, and even Boycott bowling a few overs.
It is the advent of the batsman/keeper rather than the old style keeper/batsman that has and does cause issues - we actually had four keepers in our top 7 at one point because Burns used to keep too. Kent have a similar issue with Billings, Robinson and Cox and as I've said previously that doesn't necessarily help someone like Robinson who should be batting higher than 6 at Kent but who might not even have a place in the side once Billings returns.
There aren't many that do bowl and bat at the highest level. I believe it's because players are told to/want to concentrate on one discipline only. Let's not forget KP used to be a spinner who batted a bit even to the extent that he played for Natal against the England tourists in a warm up game batting at 8. In the same way as KP should have been encouraged to carry on with his off spin (though he would have resisted) so should Root. We now have the situation, with the advent of T20 and the value afforded to those batsman that can bowl that they become even more desirable in white ball which has helped Livingstone to command the sort of money he has in the IPL - especially as he bowls off spin and leg spin.
Medium pacers/fast bowlers are a bit more problematic to find simply because of the workload and the fact that they mainly start as bowlers and try to add batting to their game. You also can't have someone in your side who is OK with the bat and equally proficient with the ball - they have to be very good at one of those which Gatting and Gooch were. Dare I also say that Gatting, especially, would not have committed to the sort of work required nowadays to do both - he probably spent ten times as much in the canteen as Stokes does in the nets! An exception in my day growing up was probably Bob Woolmer who could open both the batting and the bowling.
Butcher used to be able to chip in with some useful overs and wickets.
Annoying that Jennings or Vince never managed to nail down a spot as both are genuine seam options. Both have even been used as 4th seamer in county cricket. Considerably better than say Trott who used to chip in with a few overs when we only used 4 bowlers.
I maybe on my own here, but I think Sam Curran could still do an all rounders job for England
Trouble is that he isn't quite good enough in either discipline and certainly not in less than friendly conditions - he averages less than 25 with the bat and costs more than 35 with the ball. He doesn't even compare to Woakes who averages 28 with the bat and under 31 with the ball so, at the very best, he is currently a rival for that number 8 spot. Curran is only 23 and might well improve over time so certainly shouldn't be written off and if, for example, he could get his batting average up to say the mid 30s (it's 27 at the moment) then he could find himself as a viable number six which would then give us that extra bowling option.
The difference between those two and Stokes is that he can take the game away from the opposition with the bat and trouble batsmen with pace even when the wicket doesn't suit.
Stokes when fully fit is the best all rounder in the world in my opinion and I would never compare Sam with him, I would like to see Sam get some big scores in county cricket,, as if he is to become a regular in test cricket, it has to be as a batsman who bowls
Which is exactly what I tried to say but probably didn't make it clear. Curran (batting at 6) would be in addition to Stokes (batting at 5) but, in order to do that, he has to be getting somewhere near Bairstow as a batsman. Foakes could, also, in time move to 6 and Curran come in at 7 but a lower order/tail, for example in a situation such as the next Test match where we might need two spinners, with a top 5 followed by Foakes, Curran, Robinson, Leach, Mahmood and Parkinson simply won't work at this moment in time. Effectively, we would be sacrificing an in form Bairstow for the extra bowling that Curran might bring.
Only advantage Curran has is he is left arm, so can help the balance of the team, but personally, I don't this he is up to it.. He will get another go, maybe in the summer or next tour, but it has to make or break for him.
Only reason Curran has actually been given ago, is because he has come through at Surrey, pretty sure if come out of another county, he wouldn't have a test match cap
It's occurred to me that one thing that has regularly counted against England playing 2 spinners, is the number of part time spinners in the batting line up. Root and Lawrence at the moment, but also the likes of Malan and Denly recently.
With Bairstow (and Pope) being keepers, what we don't have is a decent part time medium pacer, someone who can fill in if one of the seamers breaks down, which is the risk if you only play 3.
Going back, Collingwood's bowling gave a lot of flexibility, but before then I remember the likes of Gooch and Gatting being decent medium pace 6th bowlers, and even Boycott bowling a few overs.
It is the advent of the batsman/keeper rather than the old style keeper/batsman that has and does cause issues - we actually had four keepers in our top 7 at one point because Burns used to keep too. Kent have a similar issue with Billings, Robinson and Cox and as I've said previously that doesn't necessarily help someone like Robinson who should be batting higher than 6 at Kent but who might not even have a place in the side once Billings returns.
There aren't many that do bowl and bat at the highest level. I believe it's because players are told to/want to concentrate on one discipline only. Let's not forget KP used to be a spinner who batted a bit even to the extent that he played for Natal against the England tourists in a warm up game batting at 8. In the same way as KP should have been encouraged to carry on with his off spin (though he would have resisted) so should Root. We now have the situation, with the advent of T20 and the value afforded to those batsman that can bowl that they become even more desirable in white ball which has helped Livingstone to command the sort of money he has in the IPL - especially as he bowls off spin and leg spin.
Medium pacers/fast bowlers are a bit more problematic to find simply because of the workload and the fact that they mainly start as bowlers and try to add batting to their game. You also can't have someone in your side who is OK with the bat and equally proficient with the ball - they have to be very good at one of those which Gatting and Gooch were. Dare I also say that Gatting, especially, would not have committed to the sort of work required nowadays to do both - he probably spent ten times as much in the canteen as Stokes does in the nets! An exception in my day growing up was probably Bob Woolmer who could open both the batting and the bowling.
Butcher used to be able to chip in with some useful overs and wickets.
Annoying that Jennings or Vince never managed to nail down a spot as both are genuine seam options. Both have even been used as 4th seamer in county cricket. Considerably better than say Trott who used to chip in with a few overs when we only used 4 bowlers.
I maybe on my own here, but I think Sam Curran could still do an all rounders job for England
Trouble is that he isn't quite good enough in either discipline and certainly not in less than friendly conditions - he averages less than 25 with the bat and costs more than 35 with the ball. He doesn't even compare to Woakes who averages 28 with the bat and under 31 with the ball so, at the very best, he is currently a rival for that number 8 spot. Curran is only 23 and might well improve over time so certainly shouldn't be written off and if, for example, he could get his batting average up to say the mid 30s (it's 27 at the moment) then he could find himself as a viable number six which would then give us that extra bowling option.
The difference between those two and Stokes is that he can take the game away from the opposition with the bat and trouble batsmen with pace even when the wicket doesn't suit.
Stokes when fully fit is the best all rounder in the world in my opinion and I would never compare Sam with him, I would like to see Sam get some big scores in county cricket,, as if he is to become a regular in test cricket, it has to be as a batsman who bowls
Which is exactly what I tried to say but probably didn't make it clear. Curran (batting at 6) would be in addition to Stokes (batting at 5) but, in order to do that, he has to be getting somewhere near Bairstow as a batsman. Foakes could, also, in time move to 6 and Curran come in at 7 but a lower order/tail, for example in a situation such as the next Test match where we might need two spinners, with a top 5 followed by Foakes, Curran, Robinson, Leach, Mahmood and Parkinson simply won't work at this moment in time. Effectively, we would be sacrificing an in form Bairstow for the extra bowling that Curran might bring.
Which is why (and I'm not necessarily agreeing with this) the England management keep coming back to giving Bairstow or Buttler the gloves.
Bairstow at 6 with the gloves, meaning that an all rounder like Curran can play at 7. Bairstow isn't as good with the gloves, especially to spinners, but at home that's less of an issue anyway
I was surprised that Sam Curran has no centuries to his name in any format (a couple of 90s only), suggesting that in red ball cricket he's no better than a 7 or 8 at the moment, meaning that he has to justify his place in the team as a front line bowler.
To be fair, I believe that a lot of Curran's innings have been batting at 7 and below. To improve he needs to move up the order - Canters will be able to tell us whether he is good enough to bat at 5 where he will get more of an opportunity to boost his average. As we saw last season, The Oval saw record scores which benefited those in the top 5, principally Pope, Amla, Burns and Smith. The other thing I'm absolutely staggered to discover is that I cannot see that either of the Currans played a single CC game last season. How is Sam going to improve with the bat in red ball if all he plays is white ball?
I was surprised that Sam Curran has no centuries to his name in any format (a couple of 90s only), suggesting that in red ball cricket he's no better than a 7 or 8 at the moment, meaning that he has to justify his place in the team as a front line bowler.
To be fair, I believe that a lot of Curran's innings have been batting at 7 and below. To improve he needs to move up the order - Canters will be able to tell us whether he is good enough to bat at 5 where he will get more of an opportunity to boost his average. As we saw last season, The Oval saw record scores which benefited those in the top 5, principally Pope, Amla, Burns and Smith. The other thing I'm absolutely staggered to discover is that I cannot see that either of the Currans played a single CC game last season. How is Sam going to improve with the bat in red ball if all he plays is white ball?
I can help out, with regards to whether Curran is good enough to bat in the top five in Tests.
I was surprised that Sam Curran has no centuries to his name in any format (a couple of 90s only), suggesting that in red ball cricket he's no better than a 7 or 8 at the moment, meaning that he has to justify his place in the team as a front line bowler.
To be fair, I believe that a lot of Curran's innings have been batting at 7 and below. To improve he needs to move up the order - Canters will be able to tell us whether he is good enough to bat at 5 where he will get more of an opportunity to boost his average. As we saw last season, The Oval saw record scores which benefited those in the top 5, principally Pope, Amla, Burns and Smith. The other thing I'm absolutely staggered to discover is that I cannot see that either of the Currans played a single CC game last season. How is Sam going to improve with the bat in red ball if all he plays is white ball?
I can help out, with regards to whether Curran is good enough to bat in the top five in Tests.
I did mean for Surrey right now not England. But thanks for your help anyway
I was surprised that Sam Curran has no centuries to his name in any format (a couple of 90s only), suggesting that in red ball cricket he's no better than a 7 or 8 at the moment, meaning that he has to justify his place in the team as a front line bowler.
To be fair, I believe that a lot of Curran's innings have been batting at 7 and below. To improve he needs to move up the order - Canters will be able to tell us whether he is good enough to bat at 5 where he will get more of an opportunity to boost his average. As we saw last season, The Oval saw record scores which benefited those in the top 5, principally Pope, Amla, Burns and Smith. The other thing I'm absolutely staggered to discover is that I cannot see that either of the Currans played a single CC game last season. How is Sam going to improve with the bat in red ball if all he plays is white ball?
The classic problem, especially with bubbles, of players being called up to franchise cricket and England white ball squads, and as a result not getting the regular mix of county games players used to get, especially with the lack of red ball cricket in the middle of the summer.
Looking at Sam's record last summer, he was in the England white ball squad vs Sri Lanka in July, played a couple of 100 games, then played 3 Tests against India in August, before a couple of ineffective IPL games in September
I was surprised that Sam Curran has no centuries to his name in any format (a couple of 90s only), suggesting that in red ball cricket he's no better than a 7 or 8 at the moment, meaning that he has to justify his place in the team as a front line bowler.
To be fair, I believe that a lot of Curran's innings have been batting at 7 and below. To improve he needs to move up the order - Canters will be able to tell us whether he is good enough to bat at 5 where he will get more of an opportunity to boost his average. As we saw last season, The Oval saw record scores which benefited those in the top 5, principally Pope, Amla, Burns and Smith. The other thing I'm absolutely staggered to discover is that I cannot see that either of the Currans played a single CC game last season. How is Sam going to improve with the bat in red ball if all he plays is white ball?
I can help out, with regards to whether Curran is good enough to bat in the top five in Tests.
I did mean for Surrey right now not England. But thanks for your help anyway
You're welcome!
He's nowhere near good enough to hold down a place in the top six in Tests. I hope he continues to develop, but he's got a long, long way to go before he gets there.
So Ollie Robinson is out of the 3rd Test following another injury set back. Not sure whether I should hide this under a "spoiler alert" for @Leuth but the rumour is that Overton will be called up instead. I've not because it is only a rumour.
So Ollie Robinson is out of the 3rd Test following another injury set back. Not sure whether I should hide this under a "spoiler alert" for @Leuth but the rumour is that Overton will be called up instead. I've not because it is only a rumour.
Robinson needs to sort himself physically. The pies and pints diet doesn't cut it these days for a pace bowler
I was surprised that Sam Curran has no centuries to his name in any format (a couple of 90s only), suggesting that in red ball cricket he's no better than a 7 or 8 at the moment, meaning that he has to justify his place in the team as a front line bowler.
To be fair, I believe that a lot of Curran's innings have been batting at 7 and below. To improve he needs to move up the order - Canters will be able to tell us whether he is good enough to bat at 5 where he will get more of an opportunity to boost his average. As we saw last season, The Oval saw record scores which benefited those in the top 5, principally Pope, Amla, Burns and Smith. The other thing I'm absolutely staggered to discover is that I cannot see that either of the Currans played a single CC game last season. How is Sam going to improve with the bat in red ball if all he plays is white ball?
The classic problem, especially with bubbles, of players being called up to franchise cricket and England white ball squads, and as a result not getting the regular mix of county games players used to get, especially with the lack of red ball cricket in the middle of the summer.
Looking at Sam's record last summer, he was in the England white ball squad vs Sri Lanka in July, played a couple of 100 games, then played 3 Tests against India in August, before a couple of ineffective IPL games in September
Sam Curran is playing for Surrey in the current warm up game against Sussex. Surrey have used seven bowlers to date but Curran must still be injured because he isn't one of them. It will be interesting to see what number he comes in to bat
So Ollie Robinson is out of the 3rd Test following another injury set back. Not sure whether I should hide this under a "spoiler alert" for @Leuth but the rumour is that Overton will be called up instead. I've not because it is only a rumour.
So Ollie Robinson is out of the 3rd Test following another injury set back. Not sure whether I should hide this under a "spoiler alert" for @Leuth but the rumour is that Overton will be called up instead. I've not because it is only a rumour.
Confirmed Overton for Fisher the only change.
I hope Matt Parkinson has enjoyed the sightseeing on this tour
I was surprised that Sam Curran has no centuries to his name in any format (a couple of 90s only), suggesting that in red ball cricket he's no better than a 7 or 8 at the moment, meaning that he has to justify his place in the team as a front line bowler.
To be fair, I believe that a lot of Curran's innings have been batting at 7 and below. To improve he needs to move up the order - Canters will be able to tell us whether he is good enough to bat at 5 where he will get more of an opportunity to boost his average. As we saw last season, The Oval saw record scores which benefited those in the top 5, principally Pope, Amla, Burns and Smith. The other thing I'm absolutely staggered to discover is that I cannot see that either of the Currans played a single CC game last season. How is Sam going to improve with the bat in red ball if all he plays is white ball?
They certainly have intentions of him batting at 4. But as you say he's not been available enough the last few years to be given a go. I can't actually remember the last time either Curran played a cc game for us. I'd wager it might even be before COVID. not all their fault, partly England bubbles and they've both had significant injuries. I'm hoping with the direction England are going we might actually see a decent amount of them and Roy for Surrey this year.
Overton is pointless imo. Just another woakes away from home. Could see thr argument for Robbo but given he is out it dhould have been Parky.
As I said at the time, when Butch asked Root the question straight after the last game, as to whether we might play Parkinson, his response (and more to the point the look) of "we'll have to have a look at the wicket first" rather said it all. There was no intimation that "we might do".
Comments
The major difference here is, of course, that, had we been at home, someone like Robinson could have built his match fitness up by playing a couple of games in the CC. The expectation is that we are going to ask him to bowl 30 overs plus having only had one opportunity to deliver a ball in anger since January and that was at the start of the tour in the game in which he went off injured having bowled less than 10 overs. If previous messages from the England camp are correct then Robinson isn't prone to getting fit off his own back with the criticism from the bowling coach that “he has to get used to understanding what it takes to be an international cricketer all year round and play that extra day, five days of test cricket.” And we really do not know what reaction Stokes' body is to having bowled almost 80 overs in a relatively short period of time and then going out and doing it again within a week.
It would be great to have that spare medium pace capacity (oh for a Bob Woolmer!) but I don't mind Root (or Lawrence) being (pretty good) occasional bowlers when the conditions suit.
There aren't many that do bowl and bat at the highest level. I believe it's because players are told to/want to concentrate on one discipline only. Let's not forget KP used to be a spinner who batted a bit even to the extent that he played for Natal against the England tourists in a warm up game batting at 8. In the same way as KP should have been encouraged to carry on with his off spin (though he would have resisted) so should Root. We now have the situation, with the advent of T20 and the value afforded to those batsman that can bowl that they become even more desirable in white ball which has helped Livingstone to command the sort of money he has in the IPL - especially as he bowls off spin and leg spin.
Medium pacers/fast bowlers are a bit more problematic to find simply because of the workload and the fact that they mainly start as bowlers and try to add batting to their game. You also can't have someone in your side who is OK with the bat and equally proficient with the ball - they have to be very good at one of those which Gatting and Gooch were. Dare I also say that Gatting, especially, would not have committed to the sort of work required nowadays to do both - he probably spent ten times as much in the canteen as Stokes does in the nets! An exception in my day growing up was probably Bob Woolmer who could open both the batting and the bowling.
Denly for example wouldn't have got franchise gigs without his leggies, while Alex Blake now seems to bowl a bit of offspin. DBD is the only one who'd developed himself as a medium pacer, and I imagine his bowling has helped keep him in the team, as it's a useful option for the side.
I wasn't comparing Gatting with Stokes, as he was never an all rounder (well he was very round actually
Roy has admitted a charge "of conducting himself in a manner which may be prejudicial to the interests of cricket or which may bring the game of cricket, the ECB and himself into disrepute".
Regulations were changed in 2020, stipulating that written reasons for a disciplinary panel's findings should be published in full on the ECB's website "unless [the panel] determines for any reason that it is appropriate that they should only be published in part or not published at all."
Annoying that Jennings or Vince never managed to nail down a spot as both are genuine seam options. Both have even been used as 4th seamer in county cricket. Considerably better than say Trott who used to chip in with a few overs when we only used 4 bowlers.
The difference between those two and Stokes is that he can take the game away from the opposition with the bat and trouble batsmen with pace even when the wicket doesn't suit.
Only reason Curran has actually been given ago, is because he has come through at Surrey, pretty sure if come out of another county, he wouldn't have a test match cap
Bairstow at 6 with the gloves, meaning that an all rounder like Curran can play at 7. Bairstow isn't as good with the gloves, especially to spinners, but at home that's less of an issue anyway
To be fair, I believe that a lot of Curran's innings have been batting at 7 and below. To improve he needs to move up the order - Canters will be able to tell us whether he is good enough to bat at 5 where he will get more of an opportunity to boost his average. As we saw last season, The Oval saw record scores which benefited those in the top 5, principally Pope, Amla, Burns and Smith. The other thing I'm absolutely staggered to discover is that I cannot see that either of the Currans played a single CC game last season. How is Sam going to improve with the bat in red ball if all he plays is white ball?
Looking at Sam's record last summer, he was in the England white ball squad vs Sri Lanka in July, played a couple of 100 games, then played 3 Tests against India in August, before a couple of ineffective IPL games in September
He's nowhere near good enough to hold down a place in the top six in Tests. I hope he continues to develop, but he's got a long, long way to go before he gets there.