The International Cricket Thread

[PaulWinch again]

Bairstow is a completely different player when he’s just a batsmen. Picking as keeper is a fudge and undermines his batting, whilst also undermining the team’s fielding.

[Beard82]

I agree - but I think I think they will stick with it.  Him and Roots form seems to have completely disserted them in the last couple of games - they seem to have there numbers.

[KevinGage]

Interesting article from former selector Ed Smith in the Times yesterday.

England are a more complete team after switch made easier by Pope injury

As one of five bowlers, rather than four, pace of Wood offers the variety, and Woakes benefits from that

In 2018, England had a sequence of eight wins in nine matches, across home and away series.

In several of these victories, Ben Stokes’s role was different. He batted higher in the order (sometimes as high as No 3 or 4) and was one of six (not five) bowlers, with little or no expectation that he would bowl a significant number of overs. His bowling was viewed as a bonus. The all-rounder position was filled by one or sometimes two of Chris Woakes, Moeen Ali and Sam Curran.

The team structure looked like this: six batsmen (one of whom was Stokes), then five frontline bowlers, with enough batting ability across those five bowlers to make a significant collective contribution to the batting tally. England also used this team structure in the win against Australia in the fifth Test at the Oval in 2019, the victory over West Indies in the third Test in 2020, and in the first Test win against Pakistan in the same summer.

Sometimes, England had full volition and preferred this structure on principle (such as in the series win in Sri Lanka). In other instances, the hand was slightly forced by Stokes being hampered by injury.

All taken together, it ended up being an intriguing pattern, even allowing for a small sample size and the ever-present possibility of luck and coincidence. Across the three years when I was national selector, I don’t think England lost a Test match when Stokes played as a batsman or as one of six bowlers.

That formation, of course, is also the team structure for this Test match against Australia at Headingley. Stokes, after a spike in his bowling work load at Lord’s, was deemed not fit to play in the allrounder role, leading England to tweak the structure as well as the players.

Effectively, Woakes and Moeen Ali have come in for James Anderson and Ollie Pope (two all-round cricketers coming in for two specialists), with Mark Wood a more like-for-like swap for Josh Tongue. The switch in team formation was made easier by Pope being ruled out by injury, hence avoiding the need for a tough decision about which batsman to leave out.

A personal (and minority) view follows: on decent pitches, I think the present team formation looks better for a number of reasons.

First, the bowling has more variety. When England have access to genuine pace, as they do at Headingley through Wood, they look a far more complete team. As one of five bowlers, it’s easier to fit in a truly fast bowler (many of whom find high workload difficult) because there is less expectation that they will have to bang out overs.
The same principle applies to selecting a spinner — Ali for now, with Rehan Ahmed well placed in the future. With five bowlers to share the load, there is less anxiety about the spinner being required to bowl a high volume of overs in the first innings.

Overall, instead of the term “X-factor” — which pushes the ambition to possess “something different” onto one single player — a more useful concept is aspiring to a “varied attack” across the whole bowling unit. Variety takes many forms: different speeds, different angles, different release points. Among the most useful graphics of recent years emerged from Sky’s coverage of the England v New Zealand Test at Lord’s in 2021. England’s deliveries were mostly bowled from a similar release position on the crease, with New Zealand’s spread far more widely.

When batsmen are required to make adjustments for differing types of bowlers, they are more likely to make mistakes — to the benefit of the whole bowling unit.

Woakes has put in a strong bowling performance on his return here at Headingley. His record in England is exceptional — but he looks even better when Wood is bowling rockets as part of the same attack.

Except in seam-friendly conditions, England look less threatening when they select three right-hand fast-medium bowlers and a right-arm off spinner. Further, playing five bowlers plus Stokes is more sustainable. England know where they stand, over both the short and the medium term. One long bowl by the captain won’t force a selection headache around the corner.

Above all, this team formation plays to one of England’s strengths, which is having a high number of effective all-round cricketers. Ali has five Test hundreds. Woakes debuted as a No 6 batsman and has a Test hundred against India as a No 7. Curran, waiting in the wings to perform a similar role, has swung several Tests with both bat and ball.

In this particular match-up versus Australia, England have more bowling depth (a privilege they leaned on when Ollie Robinson was injured mid-match). And despite the extra bowler, England’s lower order shouldn’t be underestimated with the bat. In the first innings, Australia were 240 for five, then all out for 263.

In contrast, England were 87 for five and all out 237 — exactly the pattern of lower-order resistance that helped England to win many of those Tests in 2018.

There are two important riders to these arguments. First, the logic only applies to some groups of players. The West Indies team of the 1980s (just four quicks) or the Australia of the 1990s/2000s (three quicks and Shane Warne) had their own, different solutions. In the future, England may have different types of players in the squad, requiring distinct selection principles. Second, of course, though England have selected well here, there is no guarantee that they will win the Test. But over the long term it pushes the odds more in England’s favour.

[UK Redsox]

The main difference between the two sides is the fielding, they are better than us in the field. If we were better at it we’d have just regained the Ashes. There isn’t much between the two sides otherwise.

It's odd as well, considering McCullum's limited overs success and the makeup of this side - which is effectively a ODI side that plays a bit of Test cricket now and again.

They should be razor sharp in the field.

You’d think that Colly would be drilling the side on fielding

[PaulWinch again]

It’s been a stunning series, it deserves to go to the final game.

[PaulWinch again]

No Ashes tests in the North in 2027, ridiculous.

[PaulWinch again]

As an aside Starc has been outstanding for Aus. Previously I always thought he was a bit erratic, but he’s been excellent.

[Rory]

As an aside Starc has been outstanding for Aus. Previously I always thought he was a bit erratic, but he’s been excellent.

The ball to Mo was a beauty.

[tomd2103]

Interesting article from former selector Ed Smith in the Times yesterday.

England are a more complete team after switch made easier by Pope injury

As one of five bowlers, rather than four, pace of Wood offers the variety, and Woakes benefits from that

In 2018, England had a sequence of eight wins in nine matches, across home and away series.

In several of these victories, Ben Stokes’s role was different. He batted higher in the order (sometimes as high as No 3 or 4) and was one of six (not five) bowlers, with little or no expectation that he would bowl a significant number of overs. His bowling was viewed as a bonus. The all-rounder position was filled by one or sometimes two of Chris Woakes, Moeen Ali and Sam Curran.

The team structure looked like this: six batsmen (one of whom was Stokes), then five frontline bowlers, with enough batting ability across those five bowlers to make a significant collective contribution to the batting tally. England also used this team structure in the win against Australia in the fifth Test at the Oval in 2019, the victory over West Indies in the third Test in 2020, and in the first Test win against Pakistan in the same summer.

Sometimes, England had full volition and preferred this structure on principle (such as in the series win in Sri Lanka). In other instances, the hand was slightly forced by Stokes being hampered by injury.

All taken together, it ended up being an intriguing pattern, even allowing for a small sample size and the ever-present possibility of luck and coincidence. Across the three years when I was national selector, I don’t think England lost a Test match when Stokes played as a batsman or as one of six bowlers.

That formation, of course, is also the team structure for this Test match against Australia at Headingley. Stokes, after a spike in his bowling work load at Lord’s, was deemed not fit to play in the allrounder role, leading England to tweak the structure as well as the players.

Effectively, Woakes and Moeen Ali have come in for James Anderson and Ollie Pope (two all-round cricketers coming in for two specialists), with Mark Wood a more like-for-like swap for Josh Tongue. The switch in team formation was made easier by Pope being ruled out by injury, hence avoiding the need for a tough decision about which batsman to leave out.

A personal (and minority) view follows: on decent pitches, I think the present team formation looks better for a number of reasons.

First, the bowling has more variety. When England have access to genuine pace, as they do at Headingley through Wood, they look a far more complete team. As one of five bowlers, it’s easier to fit in a truly fast bowler (many of whom find high workload difficult) because there is less expectation that they will have to bang out overs.
The same principle applies to selecting a spinner — Ali for now, with Rehan Ahmed well placed in the future. With five bowlers to share the load, there is less anxiety about the spinner being required to bowl a high volume of overs in the first innings.

Overall, instead of the term “X-factor” — which pushes the ambition to possess “something different” onto one single player — a more useful concept is aspiring to a “varied attack” across the whole bowling unit. Variety takes many forms: different speeds, different angles, different release points. Among the most useful graphics of recent years emerged from Sky’s coverage of the England v New Zealand Test at Lord’s in 2021. England’s deliveries were mostly bowled from a similar release position on the crease, with New Zealand’s spread far more widely.

When batsmen are required to make adjustments for differing types of bowlers, they are more likely to make mistakes — to the benefit of the whole bowling unit.

Woakes has put in a strong bowling performance on his return here at Headingley. His record in England is exceptional — but he looks even better when Wood is bowling rockets as part of the same attack.

Except in seam-friendly conditions, England look less threatening when they select three right-hand fast-medium bowlers and a right-arm off spinner. Further, playing five bowlers plus Stokes is more sustainable. England know where they stand, over both the short and the medium term. One long bowl by the captain won’t force a selection headache around the corner.

Above all, this team formation plays to one of England’s strengths, which is having a high number of effective all-round cricketers. Ali has five Test hundreds. Woakes debuted as a No 6 batsman and has a Test hundred against India as a No 7. Curran, waiting in the wings to perform a similar role, has swung several Tests with both bat and ball.

In this particular match-up versus Australia, England have more bowling depth (a privilege they leaned on when Ollie Robinson was injured mid-match). And despite the extra bowler, England’s lower order shouldn’t be underestimated with the bat. In the first innings, Australia were 240 for five, then all out for 263.

In contrast, England were 87 for five and all out 237 — exactly the pattern of lower-order resistance that helped England to win many of those Tests in 2018.

There are two important riders to these arguments. First, the logic only applies to some groups of players. The West Indies team of the 1980s (just four quicks) or the Australia of the 1990s/2000s (three quicks and Shane Warne) had their own, different solutions. In the future, England may have different types of players in the squad, requiring distinct selection principles. Second, of course, though England have selected well here, there is no guarantee that they will win the Test. But over the long term it pushes the odds more in England’s favour.

Still enjoying the win from earlier, but there are going to be some major questions over the next week or so regarding selection for what is another must-win game at Old Trafford.  Barring injury, Wood and Woakes must surely be in, so my line up as it stands would look like:

Crawley, Duckett, TBC, Root, Brook, Stokes, TBC, Woakes, Wood, TBC, TBC.

Didn't work out today, but if we are going to play a spinner rather than just have Root filling in, then Ali could bat 3 and that would mean we could also play four seamers. 

Bairstow looks all over the place at the moment and Foakes surely has to come in now and bat at 7.  I suppose one other option though would be to keep Bairstow in the side just as a batsman and bat him or Stokes at 3, with Foakes coming in to keep.

The big call will be the other two seamer positions (if we go with the four) and I suppose it will heavily depend on the pitch at Old Trafford.   As mentioned above, Woakes and Wood surely must start if they are fit, then it might be two from four of Robinson (if fit), Broad, Tongue and Anderson. 

[Risso]

Crawley, Duckett, Stokes, Root, Brook, Foakes, Ali, Woakes, Wood, Broad, Tongue

[paul_e]

No Ashes tests in the North in 2027, ridiculous.

Agreed, quite why the northern and midlands grounds can be rotated but Lords and Oval are guaranteed matches I don't know but it's bullshit and needs to be changed, in particular the whole 'home of cricket' thing needs to be left in the past.

[ADVILLAFAN]

No Ashes tests in the North in 2027, ridiculous.

I think they should alternate each Ashes series. So one time 2 tests in North, 2 in Midlands and 1 in London. Next time 2 Oop North, 1 Midlands, 2 London; then 1 North, 2 Mids and 2 London, in rotation.

But they'd never only have 1 test in London.

I'd happily not have a test at Lords, we have a crap record there after all

[paul_e]

Crawley, Duckett, Stokes, Root, Brook, Foakes, Ali, Woakes, Wood, Broad, Tongue

Yep, seems fair on form and ability. I'd hoped Jimmy would take the chance to go and play a county match but he's not in the lancs squad for tomorrow so I don't see any way for him to find the form he's been missing.

[Louzie0]

With Risso
Ditch Bairstow before the 4th Test match. Complete disaster.

And, for the future I suggest play another Test in Edgbaston.

[PaulWinch again]

I’m not sure I see Foakes as a 6. I also think Stokes at 3 probably significantly risks him being in very early and being exposed.