Buttler has to have the captaincy taken from him but Brook is not the answer for his replacement either. Not yet anyway . The only player in that team who can do the job is Root but he doesn't play T20 for England ( perhaps he should) and it's a bit of a backwards step.
This kamikaze cricket we are seeing in all formats is beginning to fail miserably and there has to be a more sensible attitude.
Salt is not a fifty over player and i feel a little sorry for Livingstone coming is so far down the order and being expected to get us out the shit alongside the bowlers.
The only players to come out of this tournament with any credit are Duckett , Root and Rashid . All of which are 30 , 34 and 37 receptively . Perhaps it's time to bring back Bairstow , Hales and Roy ! ( Joke)
The whole Bazball thing has become Embarrassing .
I totally agree with @North Lower Neil that The 100 is to blame. I love Cricket , even more than football but i hate that format.
We really don't have shit players but for some reason in recent times shite for brains has taken over. There are some really bad decisions being made by talented cricketers like Brook, Smith, Buttler,etc in the white ball game. Salt goes hell for leather in 20 and 50 over matches and he is being found out. Limited overs is always a game of Jeopardy but Smith going after the 1st ball of a new spinners spell seems thick. Overton was doing a fine cameo before being caught in two minds as well as by the fielder with a half shot and Brook 🤦🏻♂️ was another brain freeze.
Afghanistan didn't panic after being 89/3 after 20 overs and increased the run rate against the erratic bowling of England.
How much of that is down to the coaching or indeed lack of it?
If players lack experience in the 50 over game, then rather than just "letting them play their natural game" they have to be taught how to pace a 50 over innings, especially when you are in situations where you can't afford to lose wickets. As the likes of Brook and Smith aren't going to learn/practice that playing 50 over domestic games, then it had to be learnt in ODIs.
England's tour of India, especially the 50 over part seemed quite casual, a chore to be got over before the Champions Trophy started, when that was the chance for players to bat themselves into rhythm.
Time for a total overhaul of this aging, overpaid, under performing, badly selected England squad .. central contracts means jobs for mates and complacency
The lack of nous in the ODI games. Is that many of the team have not played in domestic games for years and some young players have never played domestic 50 over games for their clubs This season coming highlightes this. There is no official 2nd eleven 50 over competition, there is the Metro Bank one day cup. Teams such as Surrey who will have 14 to 15 players playing for the hundred teams will field a 2nd eleven squad mainly. So most of the senior players will not play a 50 over game this season.
So 2 games we score over 300 and lose. I watched Archer come back for a second spell when we needed his pace to get a wicket. He bowled 4 balls in the low 70 miles an hour in his first over. What is the point, it just seems players are in their own world and do what they want, this is not giving the captain your best effort. Time for a shake up.
Since the start of the
last World Cup, England have lost 17/25 ODIs. We've been beaten by India
(4/4), Australia (5/7), West Indies (3/6), Afghanistan (2/2) and
on the sole occasions we’ve played South Africa, Sri Lankan and New Zealand. In
addition to those two victories against Australia and three against West Indies,
we've succeeded in beating, once each, Bangladesh, Netherlands and Pakistan. We've lost six ODIs on the bounce and 11 of our last 12 white ball matches. We've been knocked out in the group stages of our last two 50 over ICC comps and were anything but impressive in the T20 WC.
Yet we have the best
infrastructure and facilities of any of those countries and our players are at
the very top so far as guaranteed income is concerned. We have next to no domestic competition for a lot of our England players despite all of that - they are centrally contracted and the ECB controls
where and who they play for domestically and as a result they are prevented
from playing in our very own 50 over comp. So how do we know that we have the
best players if they don't play against each other? How do they get better in
the 50 over game and specifically in pacing an innings? A lot of them are very
good at hitting 20 balls for 30 on a road in a team innings of 100 ball
duration but can they consistently face 100 balls themselves in an innings that
lasts 300 balls? That same argument holds for the red ball game too because
those same players play next to zero CC matches compared to all the 120/100
ball matches that they play in the year.
One positive
aspect that McCullum has, undoubtedly, brought to the team is the removal of
that "fear factor" which can and does inhibit players. In some
respects, though, this seems to have become somewhat overdone to the extent
that we see players laughing in the field when there is a misfield or on the
balcony when they've just got out. We don't want players beating
themselves up, but perception is everything and it looks as if they don't care
when, perhaps, they really don’t? The only time we actually see they care is
when they lose but, even then, we hear from the players “what does it matter if
we lose 3-0 here if we end up meeting India in the Champions Trophy final?”. The
bad news for England is that, in the same way as winning can be habit forming,
so can losing.
Then we hear in post-match interviews about all the "positives" and
excuses such as a so called "impact" sub cost us the game. But then
those same errors rear their ugly head, the players have a laugh and the excuse
book comes out again. Anyone questioning McCullum, Stokes or Buttler is bluntly
told that this is the brand of positive cricket we play now. Well there is
absolutely nothing positive about losing 24 matches of the last 46 games in all forms of the game.
The Women have a fundamental issue and that is that they aren't good enough -
perhaps because many of the old guard have retired, some are coming to the end
of their careers and others are just starting theirs. Are we getting to the
stage where the same argument holds for the men? There are fundamentals that
are wrong and specifically the balance of the side and lack of a second spinner
in white ball let alone a first spinner in Test cricket.
Equally, being
mentally tired won't wash given how much time most of then spend away chasing
the dollar and playing for England shouldn't be a stepping stone to franchise
cricket especially when the largest slice of their cake is that "comfort
zone" of a central contract. It's also quite
well known that this group, under McCullum, love to play hard off the pitch and
not just on the golf course. They must start doing the same on the pitch too
and perhaps be seen to be giving supporters their all. Actions, words and all
that.
I expressed reservations
about Buttler getting the job in the first place, as much because of having to skipper, be the main man with the bat and keeping is too much. Nothing has changed in that respect even less taking the gloves off him. He's reactive to anything and seems to utilise a rulebook that dictates fields and bowling
changes. It was one of Morgan’s great strengths to keep the batter guessing
but, under Buttler, everything has been so predictable. It's passive and he doesn’t have
the presence that a Morgan or Stokes possess. His own form as fallen off a cliff too. As to who else could do it, the obvious answer is Brook. He has done it for England U19s and did so in Stokes' absence. If Brook possibly has a fault, it is that he is, by all accounts, one of the ones that likes to party the most but, hopefully, the responsibility of the captaincy will help him to grow up a bit. Unfortunately, it really is "land of the blind" stuff.
What no captain can do is change a system that does not produce batters that can bat time, be that in red or white ball, or a decent spinner of any description. A change of attitude from the coach to encourage our batsman to bat for a "long time" rather than a "good time" will help but the lack of spinners is the responsibility of the ECB. Let's face it, with the recent sell out of the game, that isn't going to happen any time soon because we aren't going to see much spin for most of the season given that two thirds of all CC games are now being played in April, May and September. Once upon a time the likes of Edmonds, Emburey, Underwood etc etc would, season in season out, take over 100 wickets in the CC alone. Now we struggle to find many that take 20. You don't become a top class spinner by bowling in the nets.
The lack of nous in the ODI games. Is that many of the team have not played in domestic games for years and some young players have never played domestic 50 over games for their clubs This season coming highlightes this. There is no official 2nd eleven 50 over competition, there is the Metro Bank one day cup. Teams such as Surrey who will have 14 to 15 players playing for the hundred teams will field a 2nd eleven squad mainly. So most of the senior players will not play a 50 over game this season.
This is the crux of the issue. The Metro Bank is now a glorified second XI comp , last year Sussex didn't even field any overseas players in it and Paul Farbrace essentially treated it as a chance to blood young players. I doubt any of the squad that went to the CT will be anywhere near a Metro Bank game because they'll all be playing in The Hundred.
Selection has screamed throwing shit at a wall and hoping some of it sticks.
Which is what they have been doing but it's always rookies because they seem to write off those that play on the county circuit. To a degree that has worked but they still need enough county games. The likes of Alex Carey played all forms of the game for their State and Club. How many of ours do that? It also won't work with spinners. We've ended up picking someone who is third choice at their county. There is a reason that Adil Rashid is so good and it isn't just because he's played so many white ball matches. He played 175 FC games and took 512 wickets @ 35.05. England's number one has played 27 FC matches and has 66 wickets @ 49.25 with almost half of those taken in the Indian subcontinent where conditions for spinners are at their optimum.
Throwing Bashir and any other rookie spinner against the wall isn't going to work unless they happen to be a Warne or Murali and we certainly don't have any of those. That goes for red and white ball. Why else have we operated under the premise of "better we let people think that he isn't good enough rather than playing him and proving that to be the case" with Rehan Ahmed? We have a chance to do that on Saturday by leaving Smith out, moving Root to three and Buttler to four. It's the only way we are going to find out and he's going to learn.
Selection has screamed throwing shit at a wall and hoping some of it sticks.
Not sure who else they should have picked though .
Agreed, weve gone from feeling like we could put 2 sides out in these competitions to not even knowing who should be in one.
Personally I think Pope is built for the 50 over game (more so than tests) and would try and get him in the side. 2 spinners is a must in any format. I get why Dawson has turned down being on the bench in the past but he really is the player in all formats that could give us the balance. Had the potential to have a later England career as Swann did. I fear that ship has sailed.
Selection has screamed throwing shit at a wall and hoping some of it sticks.
Not sure who else they should have picked though .
Agreed, weve gone from feeling like we could put 2 sides out in these competitions to not even knowing who should be in one.
Personally I think Pope is built for the 50 over game (more so than tests) and would try and get him in the side. 2 spinners is a must in any format. I get why Dawson has turned down being on the bench in the past but he really is the player in all formats that could give us the balance. Had the potential to have a later England career as Swann did. I fear that ship has sailed.
Dawson's ship has well and truly sailed. He's getting paid three times as much for one franchise tournament than he would playing for England for a year (unless we made him central contract number 31 for the year). We picked Moeen for the Ashes when neither were centrally contracted and Dawson was then asked to be a "good tourist" like a rookie such as Rehan Ahmed. He can't turn down contracts in the hope of being picked for England without that underpin but we now have more centrally contracted players than ever. The very reason that Dawson is still hungry is because he has to put food on the table for him and his family and it is clear from Key's comments that, a bit like a boy band that has fallen out, it would take something exceptional for that relationship to heal.
Even if Dawson did come back, it still wouldn't solve the long term issue. He's 35 in a few days time and we have to produce the Dawson's of tomorrow. But how do we do that under the current system?
Selection has screamed throwing shit at a wall and hoping some of it sticks.
Not sure who else they should have picked though .
Agreed, weve gone from feeling like we could put 2 sides out in these competitions to not even knowing who should be in one.
Personally I think Pope is built for the 50 over game (more so than tests) and would try and get him in the side. 2 spinners is a must in any format. I get why Dawson has turned down being on the bench in the past but he really is the player in all formats that could give us the balance. Had the potential to have a later England career as Swann did. I fear that ship has sailed.
Dawson should have been brought back into the fold 2 years ago, before bridges were burnt completely. That Pope has never played a single ODI game for England is baffling.
The England management seem to have a mindset that T20/Hundred batsmen are the way to go, when with 50 over games you have time to play a longer innings. Similarly they're obsessed with pace at the moment, it's as if they've got this mindset as to the bowlers we want in the Ashes next winter and that's colouring our selections for every series and every form of cricket. No left armer like a Curran, while bowlers who don't have express pace like a Sam Cook are totally ignored.
Another game washed out in Rawalpindi today. Luckily it was a dead rubber, but it would be really bad for the competition if either of the remaining group games fell foul of the weather too.
Another game washed out in Rawalpindi today. Luckily it was a dead rubber, but it would be really bad for the competition if either of the remaining group games fell foul of the weather too.
Does mean that in their home tournament Pakistan have played 1 match at home. A disgrace
Selection has screamed throwing shit at a wall and hoping some of it sticks.
Not sure who else they should have picked though .
Isn't that part of the problem? No one knows who our best eleven 50-over players are. I wonder how many 50-over games the England team have played in the last three years - of any standard.
Another game washed out in Rawalpindi today. Luckily it was a dead rubber, but it would be really bad for the competition if either of the remaining group games fell foul of the weather too.
I don't understand why washed-out games can't be played the next day. Yes, I know there are some logistical problems, but surely, for a major tournament, they can be handled.
Another game washed out in Rawalpindi today. Luckily it was a dead rubber, but it would be really bad for the competition if either of the remaining group games fell foul of the weather too.
I don't understand why washed-out games can't be played the next day. Yes, I know there are some logistical problems, but surely, for a major tournament, they can be handled.
There's something wrong when such a short tournament can be so influenced by the weather.
Speaking on the Today programme, Vaughan added: "There's no left-arm seam bowlers, no left-arm spin, no left-handed batters [and] we just seem to be all out in terms of pace.
"I don't know who that person is who's made the decision that it's all about pace in white-ball cricket.
"If you ask most batters around the world, of course you don't want to face 90mph, but if there's a place where you'd love to face 90mph, it's in the sub-continent.
"England have hit both India and [teams] in the Champions Trophy with a huge amount of pace and batters have been deflecting the ball to all parts."
Reflecting on England's previous successes with fast-medium bowlers as opposed to out-and-out quicks, Vaughan continued: "I'll just go back to the 2019 World Cup final. I know it's different conditions but Chris Woakes and Liam Plunkett got 6-79 [and] they bowl around 82-84 mph.
"Recently, England have been hell-bent on making sure they're looking for that 90mph bowler.
"The England Lions tour of Australia - a young chap, Sonny Baker, bowled nicely, he bowled 90mph. He's been given a central contract, or a contract that England can manage.
"There's a lad at Essex called Sam Cook. He's 27, he bowls 82mph, he's got 311 wickets in county cricket at an average of 19. He was the pick of the bowlers on the Lions tour and he hasn't got that contract.
"It's a clear decision by the England management that it's all about pace.
"In the time I've been watching cricket, playing cricket, and involved in English cricket, Stuart Broad and Jimmy Anderson have been our best two bowlers. They don't bowl at 90mph."
"Trust the process" was always Ben Stokes mantra when asked about wickets given away cheaply.
Perhaps Baz McCallum can explain the 'Process' as talented cricketers giving their wickets away when neatly set for a decent score.
Playing India before the Champions trophy just jettisoned any confidence and when a talented batter like Brook gives his wicket away cheaply you wonder what has occured ?
Having a 'shit' pile on is not just standard for CL but I would imagined for all social media outlets on all platforms concerning Football, cricket and tiddly winks etc when it's a national side and they play below par as a team despite individual good performances; both Duckett and Root have applied their selves with some success.
Despite the jeopardy of the 50 over game it's not the 20 over slog fest or the lucrative 100's which is for a different audience of piss heads, mexican wave fans, music fans at the interval and a family day out after school finishes.
I invested time and emotional support and now feel discombobulated in the 'process'.
Speaking on the Today programme, Vaughan added: "There's no left-arm seam bowlers, no left-arm spin, no left-handed batters [and] we just seem to be all out in terms of pace.
"I don't know who that person is who's made the decision that it's all about pace in white-ball cricket.
"If you ask most batters around the world, of course you don't want to face 90mph, but if there's a place where you'd love to face 90mph, it's in the sub-continent.
"England have hit both India and [teams] in the Champions Trophy with a huge amount of pace and batters have been deflecting the ball to all parts."
Reflecting on England's previous successes with fast-medium bowlers as opposed to out-and-out quicks, Vaughan continued: "I'll just go back to the 2019 World Cup final. I know it's different conditions but Chris Woakes and Liam Plunkett got 6-79 [and] they bowl around 82-84 mph.
"Recently, England have been hell-bent on making sure they're looking for that 90mph bowler.
"The England Lions tour of Australia - a young chap, Sonny Baker, bowled nicely, he bowled 90mph. He's been given a central contract, or a contract that England can manage.
"There's a lad at Essex called Sam Cook. He's 27, he bowls 82mph, he's got 311 wickets in county cricket at an average of 19. He was the pick of the bowlers on the Lions tour and he hasn't got that contract.
"It's a clear decision by the England management that it's all about pace.
"In the time I've been watching cricket, playing cricket, and involved in English cricket, Stuart Broad and Jimmy Anderson have been our best two bowlers. They don't bowl at 90mph."
Speaking on the Today programme, Vaughan added: "There's no left-arm seam bowlers, no left-arm spin, no left-handed batters [and] we just seem to be all out in terms of pace.
"I don't know who that person is who's made the decision that it's all about pace in white-ball cricket.
"If you ask most batters around the world, of course you don't want to face 90mph, but if there's a place where you'd love to face 90mph, it's in the sub-continent.
"England have hit both India and [teams] in the Champions Trophy with a huge amount of pace and batters have been deflecting the ball to all parts."
Reflecting on England's previous successes with fast-medium bowlers as opposed to out-and-out quicks, Vaughan continued: "I'll just go back to the 2019 World Cup final. I know it's different conditions but Chris Woakes and Liam Plunkett got 6-79 [and] they bowl around 82-84 mph.
"Recently, England have been hell-bent on making sure they're looking for that 90mph bowler.
"The England Lions tour of Australia - a young chap, Sonny Baker, bowled nicely, he bowled 90mph. He's been given a central contract, or a contract that England can manage.
"There's a lad at Essex called Sam Cook. He's 27, he bowls 82mph, he's got 311 wickets in county cricket at an average of 19. He was the pick of the bowlers on the Lions tour and he hasn't got that contract.
"It's a clear decision by the England management that it's all about pace.
"In the time I've been watching cricket, playing cricket, and involved in English cricket, Stuart Broad and Jimmy Anderson have been our best two bowlers. They don't bowl at 90mph."
seems to be a very outdated policy. Sort of reminds me of when a player in football couldn't be considered because of his height. This viewpoint has fortunately on the most part changed. Some of the best players have been shorter than 6 foot.
Plus it also shows how blinkered the selectors and the coaches in the England set up are. Also shows what this Bazball is becoming. We will play how we want. It's positive. Throw your bat at everything and chuck the ball as fast and as hard down the pitch as possible with the tallest and quickest bowlers regardless of merit, conditions or opposition.
The best facilities in the world. The highest financial retainers for men and women. Across Australia, India and now Pakistan, there have been 17 matches of various short-form durations. 16 have ended in defeat. That is a record that a team like the Netherlands would be ashamed about. But we are told this is the way England want to play their cricket. What's that definition of madness?
Anyway. To today. Afghanistan have won the toss and elected to bowl. Both teams are unchanged. Here's hoping that they repeat Wednesday's performance and knock Australia out.
Comments
This kamikaze cricket we are seeing in all formats is beginning to fail miserably and there has to be a more sensible attitude.
Salt is not a fifty over player and i feel a little sorry for Livingstone coming is so far down the order and being expected to get us out the shit alongside the bowlers.
The only players to come out of this tournament with any credit are Duckett , Root and Rashid . All of which are 30 , 34 and 37 receptively . Perhaps it's time to bring back Bairstow , Hales and Roy ! ( Joke)
The whole Bazball thing has become Embarrassing .
I totally agree with @North Lower Neil that The 100 is to blame. I love Cricket , even more than football but i hate that format.
If players lack experience in the 50 over game, then rather than just "letting them play their natural game" they have to be taught how to pace a 50 over innings, especially when you are in situations where you can't afford to lose wickets. As the likes of Brook and Smith aren't going to learn/practice that playing 50 over domestic games, then it had to be learnt in ODIs.
England's tour of India, especially the 50 over part seemed quite casual, a chore to be got over before the Champions Trophy started, when that was the chance for players to bat themselves into rhythm.
This season coming highlightes this.
There is no official 2nd eleven 50 over competition, there is the Metro Bank one day cup.
Teams such as Surrey who will have 14 to 15 players playing for the hundred teams will field a 2nd eleven squad mainly. So most of the senior players will not play a 50 over game this season.
I watched Archer come back for a second spell when we needed his pace to get a wicket. He bowled 4 balls in the low 70 miles an hour in his first over. What is the point, it just seems players are in their own world and do what they want, this is not giving the captain your best effort.
Time for a shake up.
Since the start of the last World Cup, England have lost 17/25 ODIs. We've been beaten by India (4/4), Australia (5/7), West Indies (3/6), Afghanistan (2/2) and on the sole occasions we’ve played South Africa, Sri Lankan and New Zealand. In addition to those two victories against Australia and three against West Indies, we've succeeded in beating, once each, Bangladesh, Netherlands and Pakistan. We've lost six ODIs on the bounce and 11 of our last 12 white ball matches. We've been knocked out in the group stages of our last two 50 over ICC comps and were anything but impressive in the T20 WC.
Yet we have the best infrastructure and facilities of any of those countries and our players are at the very top so far as guaranteed income is concerned. We have next to no domestic competition for a lot of our England players despite all of that - they are centrally contracted and the ECB controls where and who they play for domestically and as a result they are prevented from playing in our very own 50 over comp. So how do we know that we have the best players if they don't play against each other? How do they get better in the 50 over game and specifically in pacing an innings? A lot of them are very good at hitting 20 balls for 30 on a road in a team innings of 100 ball duration but can they consistently face 100 balls themselves in an innings that lasts 300 balls? That same argument holds for the red ball game too because those same players play next to zero CC matches compared to all the 120/100 ball matches that they play in the year.
One positive aspect that McCullum has, undoubtedly, brought to the team is the removal of that "fear factor" which can and does inhibit players. In some respects, though, this seems to have become somewhat overdone to the extent that we see players laughing in the field when there is a misfield or on the balcony when they've just got out. We don't want players beating themselves up, but perception is everything and it looks as if they don't care when, perhaps, they really don’t? The only time we actually see they care is when they lose but, even then, we hear from the players “what does it matter if we lose 3-0 here if we end up meeting India in the Champions Trophy final?”. The bad news for England is that, in the same way as winning can be habit forming, so can losing.
Then we hear in post-match interviews about all the "positives" and excuses such as a so called "impact" sub cost us the game. But then those same errors rear their ugly head, the players have a laugh and the excuse book comes out again. Anyone questioning McCullum, Stokes or Buttler is bluntly told that this is the brand of positive cricket we play now. Well there is absolutely nothing positive about losing 24 matches of the last 46 games in all forms of the game.
The Women have a fundamental issue and that is that they aren't good enough - perhaps because many of the old guard have retired, some are coming to the end of their careers and others are just starting theirs. Are we getting to the stage where the same argument holds for the men? There are fundamentals that are wrong and specifically the balance of the side and lack of a second spinner in white ball let alone a first spinner in Test cricket.
Equally, being mentally tired won't wash given how much time most of then spend away chasing the dollar and playing for England shouldn't be a stepping stone to franchise cricket especially when the largest slice of their cake is that "comfort zone" of a central contract. It's also quite well known that this group, under McCullum, love to play hard off the pitch and not just on the golf course. They must start doing the same on the pitch too and perhaps be seen to be giving supporters their all. Actions, words and all that.
I expressed reservations about Buttler getting the job in the first place, as much because of having to skipper, be the main man with the bat and keeping is too much. Nothing has changed in that respect even less taking the gloves off him. He's reactive to anything and seems to utilise a rulebook that dictates fields and bowling changes. It was one of Morgan’s great strengths to keep the batter guessing but, under Buttler, everything has been so predictable. It's passive and he doesn’t have the presence that a Morgan or Stokes possess. His own form as fallen off a cliff too. As to who else could do it, the obvious answer is Brook. He has done it for England U19s and did so in Stokes' absence. If Brook possibly has a fault, it is that he is, by all accounts, one of the ones that likes to party the most but, hopefully, the responsibility of the captaincy will help him to grow up a bit. Unfortunately, it really is "land of the blind" stuff.
What no captain can do is change a system that does not produce batters that can bat time, be that in red or white ball, or a decent spinner of any description. A change of attitude from the coach to encourage our batsman to bat for a "long time" rather than a "good time" will help but the lack of spinners is the responsibility of the ECB. Let's face it, with the recent sell out of the game, that isn't going to happen any time soon because we aren't going to see much spin for most of the season given that two thirds of all CC games are now being played in April, May and September. Once upon a time the likes of Edmonds, Emburey, Underwood etc etc would, season in season out, take over 100 wickets in the CC alone. Now we struggle to find many that take 20. You don't become a top class spinner by bowling in the nets.
Rant over!
This is the crux of the issue. The Metro Bank is now a glorified second XI comp , last year Sussex didn't even field any overseas players in it and Paul Farbrace essentially treated it as a chance to blood young players. I doubt any of the squad that went to the CT will be anywhere near a Metro Bank game because they'll all be playing in The Hundred.
Throwing Bashir and any other rookie spinner against the wall isn't going to work unless they happen to be a Warne or Murali and we certainly don't have any of those. That goes for red and white ball. Why else have we operated under the premise of "better we let people think that he isn't good enough rather than playing him and proving that to be the case" with Rehan Ahmed? We have a chance to do that on Saturday by leaving Smith out, moving Root to three and Buttler to four. It's the only way we are going to find out and he's going to learn.
Personally I think Pope is built for the 50 over game (more so than tests) and would try and get him in the side. 2 spinners is a must in any format. I get why Dawson has turned down being on the bench in the past but he really is the player in all formats that could give us the balance. Had the potential to have a later England career as Swann did. I fear that ship has sailed.
Even if Dawson did come back, it still wouldn't solve the long term issue. He's 35 in a few days time and we have to produce the Dawson's of tomorrow. But how do we do that under the current system?
The England management seem to have a mindset that T20/Hundred batsmen are the way to go, when with 50 over games you have time to play a longer innings. Similarly they're obsessed with pace at the moment, it's as if they've got this mindset as to the bowlers we want in the Ashes next winter and that's colouring our selections for every series and every form of cricket. No left armer like a Curran, while bowlers who don't have express pace like a Sam Cook are totally ignored.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c2411v19v5vo
Perhaps Baz McCallum can explain the 'Process' as talented cricketers giving their wickets away when neatly set for a decent score.
Playing India before the Champions trophy just jettisoned any confidence and when a talented batter like Brook gives his wicket away cheaply you wonder what has occured ?
Having a 'shit' pile on is not just standard for CL but I would imagined for all social media outlets on all platforms concerning Football, cricket and tiddly winks etc when it's a national side and they play below par as a team despite individual good performances; both Duckett and Root have applied their selves with some success.
Despite the jeopardy of the 50 over game it's not the 20 over slog fest or the lucrative 100's which is for a different audience of piss heads, mexican wave fans, music fans at the interval and a family day out after school finishes.
I invested time and emotional support and now feel discombobulated in the 'process'.
Shit happens.
Bloody ridiculous.
Plus it also shows how blinkered the selectors and the coaches in the England set up are.
Also shows what this Bazball is becoming. We will play how we want. It's positive. Throw your bat at everything and chuck the ball as fast and as hard down the pitch as possible with the tallest and quickest bowlers regardless of merit, conditions or opposition.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c2411v19v5vo