The International Cricket Thread

[PaulWinch again]

I’d also bring Malan in. The Aussies picked form batsmen very deliberately, we haven’t.

You could argue that Burns, Root, Buttler, Denly, Bairstow and Ali all came into this game in poor form. Only one of those players genuinely found their way out of that poor form, Burns. Root did to an extent, but you cannot carry that many players. Did the others get more than 50 runs between them in the entire game?

[taylorsworkrate]

Yep Root out captained by Smith (pretty clear he is still in charge). In all fairness though when your spinner bowls that poorly on a pitch that's only help for the bowlers is a bit of spin, theres not a great deal he could have done.

I agree about bowling to Smith in the 1st innings. That was just giving up.

[PaulWinch again]

True but the Aussie pace bowlers were much better too. They bowled with control. In the second innings our bowling and fielding was pathetic.

[tricky59]

Having been today, my expectations were met in that I didn't take anything for tea. 
I can't see Roy being a test player, Moeen has been all over the place with his batting and bowling, Buttler and Bairstow do not give me any confidence and, although I like Denly's technique at 33 he is not the No 4 we need.
I can see that Archer and Leach can come in next time and Foakes, if he is available, is a better keeper and batsman than Bairstow or Buttler when the chips are down. As for the other shortcomings I don't have an answer.
Aussies have questions about their batting but they have a good bowling unit.
It's going to be difficult to get back into this.

[PaulWinch again]

Roy has the talent, but he needs to think about the situation. If we had been chasing say 220 for a win today I could have reconciled what he did, because in that situation knocking Lyon out of the game makes sense and is a calculated risk. However in this game we were never every scoring 400 on the last day, so even if Roy had put that ball in the stands what does it do? There’s no scoreboard pressure on Australia, so it was a risk that offered no benefit. That’s all about decision making and he needs to learn that.
He is one I’m less concerned about though, I think he can deliver and needs time.

[olaftab]

Last two teams, Australia and India, after winning the World Cup lost the Test series that followed🤔

[Richard]

I'll console myself with that one olaftab !

[paul_e]

Roy has the talent, but he needs to think about the situation. If we had been chasing say 220 for a win today I could have reconciled what he did, because in that situation knocking Lyon out of the game makes sense and is a calculated risk. However in this game we were never every scoring 400 on the last day, so even if Roy had put that ball in the stands what does it do? There’s no scoreboard pressure on Australia, so it was a risk that offered no benefit. That’s all about decision making and he needs to learn that.
He is one I’m less concerned about though, I think he can deliver and needs time.

I don't quite agree, very few bowlers like getting smashed around in a test. if Roy had gone after him and got 7-8 boundaries in 4-5 overs I think the atmosphere of the game would've changed. The problem was they lad a trap by offering him space to charge out and smash through cow corner/mid-wicket and he didn't have the test experience to see how Lyon was going to bowl to that field before he ran in head first. It was a very silly shot and he should know better but the idea of going after Lyon was fine for me. That their quicks got cheap wickets later was more testament to how poorly we were batting than a sign that the pitch had anything in it for them.

[hilts_coolerking]

We needed to be positive against Lyon, rotate the strike, not be intimidated, be purposeful in defence, but he was bowling that well, on a helpful pitch, with a mammoth score to defend, that they were never going to take him out of the attack whatever we did.  The sad fact is that what Roy can do well was never going to be much use to us today.  In those conditions Lyon's too good for our players; just as it was in Australia.

[Risso]

I’d also like an explanation of the lack of Woakes bowling yesterday. If he’s injured that’s bad, but understandable. If he wasn’t then it casts further doubt on Root’s captaincy. Not least because he’s put extra miles in Broad and Stokes legs and we’ve got all sorts of injury concerns.

Root had a dreadful game as captain. Starting right from the Aussie first innings when he put every fielder on the boundary for Smith. Absolutely idiotic. It just got worse yesterday.

He looks like a little boy lost to be honest.  His batting is crap at the moment, and nothing he seems to do in terms of on-field decision making seems to work.  To lose as badly as that considering where we had them in the first innings was really poor.  He's just not leading by example, either in his batting or his general organisation.

[olaftab]

When the Aussies were 122/8 Root had no slip fielders for Smith allowing him to pick his shots without worry or bother. Amongst his many errors that was the worst.

[Villafirst]

I’d also bring Malan in. The Aussies picked form batsmen very deliberately, we haven’t.

You could argue that Burns, Root, Buttler, Denly, Bairstow and Ali all came into this game in poor form. Only one of those players genuinely found their way out of that poor form, Burns. Root did to an extent, but you cannot carry that many players. Did the others get more than 50 runs between them in the entire game?

I'd rather see Dominic Sibley instead of Malan......

[Villafirst]

When the Aussies were 122/8 Root had no slip fielders for Smith allowing him to pick his shots without worry or bother. Amongst his many errors that was the worst.

With a fully fit Anderson, Australia wouldn't have got 150. We played with 10 men most of the match. That decision to play Jimmy cost us the match, end of.....

[paul_e]

When the Aussies were 122/8 Root had no slip fielders for Smith allowing him to pick his shots without worry or bother. Amongst his many errors that was the worst.

With a fully fit Anderson, Australia wouldn't have got 150. We played with 10 men most of the match. That decision to play Jimmy cost us the match, end of.....

That's a big part of the problem but if we don't try to bowl Smith out for the entire series then we're going to be embarrassed repeatedly, I agree completely with Aftab, spreading the field to Smith when we had them at 122/8 was fucking awful game management from Root.

[Villatillidie1982]

We would all moan if Dean Smith picked Jack knowing that he wasn't fit. Why did the selectors pick Anderson?

Picking another spinner may have got Steve Smith out earlier, twice. All said in hindsight admittedly.

As we have said many times, we go again....