Again, I'd experiment with an opener from the ranks already. Jos maybe, to be the attacking foil to Cook's defence.
Quote from: Monty on August 17, 2018, 04:39:17 PMAgain, I'd experiment with an opener from the ranks already. Jos maybe, to be the attacking foil to Cook's defence.That's got 0-1 written all over it.
For sure, but to be honest I can't think of a 'specialist opener' in the country right now of whom that's not true - including Cook.
Quote from: Drummond on August 17, 2018, 03:47:08 PMQuote from: paul_e on August 17, 2018, 02:33:56 PMIn defence of the decision I think it's reasonable to use Curran a little sporadically for the next year or 2 because whilst he has done very well he is still very young. Curran, Stokes and Woakes have all been excellent over the 2 tests (as has Jimmy). Broad is the one who should be a little worried, after the first innings he had 3 for 120 in a series that should've been perfect conditions for him. His 2nd innings at Lords will have helped him but I think it's getting to the point where those spells won't be enough if the others keep bringing this level of performance.Why should Broad be worried? He's in the bloody squad.Curran has played well, handled himself well and Stokes behaved like a twat. Why should Curran be dropped on current form?I know he's in the fucking squad, but I think he should be looking over his shoulder because his place will be under threat if he carries on with hias feast or famine form from the last couple of years. This isn't a controversial opinion, almost every discussion about English Cricket for the last few months has inculded comments about Broad (and Cook) hanging on by their fingertips by putting in a good display whenever the talk of dropping them gathers pace. If we've got Jimmy, Woakes, Stokes and Curran all in form (as is the case right now) then Broads place looks harder to justify.As for Curran, he's very young and playing him for the entire test series probably isn't in his own best interests so if this is just a case of resting him then I don't have a problem with it. Stokes did behave like a twat, no one is denying that, but once they decided to make him available for selection the option to drop him because of it goes away and the decision is purely on performance. On that measure Stokes didn't deserve to be dropped either, and nor does Woakes. I'm not saying the decision is right or wrong but I can understand it.
Quote from: paul_e on August 17, 2018, 02:33:56 PMIn defence of the decision I think it's reasonable to use Curran a little sporadically for the next year or 2 because whilst he has done very well he is still very young. Curran, Stokes and Woakes have all been excellent over the 2 tests (as has Jimmy). Broad is the one who should be a little worried, after the first innings he had 3 for 120 in a series that should've been perfect conditions for him. His 2nd innings at Lords will have helped him but I think it's getting to the point where those spells won't be enough if the others keep bringing this level of performance.Why should Broad be worried? He's in the bloody squad.Curran has played well, handled himself well and Stokes behaved like a twat. Why should Curran be dropped on current form?
In defence of the decision I think it's reasonable to use Curran a little sporadically for the next year or 2 because whilst he has done very well he is still very young. Curran, Stokes and Woakes have all been excellent over the 2 tests (as has Jimmy). Broad is the one who should be a little worried, after the first innings he had 3 for 120 in a series that should've been perfect conditions for him. His 2nd innings at Lords will have helped him but I think it's getting to the point where those spells won't be enough if the others keep bringing this level of performance.
Only person to blame for Stokes being unavailable is Stokes.