Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
- 1.5K All Categories
- 1 Site Stuff
- 31 Admin (FAQs, rules, queries etc.)
- The Boleyn Arms
- 34 General Chatter
- 7 Member info & Family Album
- 3 Radio Llama (music videos)
- 415 Fun & Games
- 111 BA Predictor Threads
- 34 Word Games
- 4 Quizzes
- 2 Pun Threads
- 299 Magic Minutes
- 3 Other Fun & Games
- 117 Current West Ham
- 200 Men's First Team
- 3 Women's Team
- 12 PL2 & Academy
- 32 Management & Board
- 15 Stadium & Training Ground
- 27 West Ham Miscellaneous
- West Ham Matches
- 402 Match Threads
- 72 MOTM
- 9 West Ham Nostalgia
- 35 Former Players and Staff
- 4 Past Games & Glories
- 37 Transfers
- 46 Transfer Speculation
- 87 Completed Transfers
- 55 Internationals
- 48 Men's Internationals
- 5 Women's Internationals
- 2 Youth Internationals
- 121 Football Chatter
- 43 Football Chatter
- 270 Other Teams & Matches
- 26 Other Players & Staff
Comments
Really not seeing that myself 🤷♂️
8 down. Come on England.
227-8, Australia need 54, England need 2 wickets.
Also, didn’t know it was a one test series?
Sport at it’s very best.
It had everything didn’t it?
Well played Aussie, particularly Pat Cummins at the death but both sides were superb.
This could be some series.
That declaration on Day 1 looks naive. I would say in hindsight but I suspect most thought it was a mistake at the time.
And ultimately England had to carry Anderson and Moeen who I thought both underperformed.
But a great game overall, and hopefully the rest of the series will be as exciting (but with an England win).
The Moeen question is a big one; his finger isn't going to toughen up straight away, so it brings into question his ability to bowl the required in a Test all this summer imo. He was only brought back into the red ball game because of the dirth of alternatives, so who is the next in line?
It's not even as if we have a reliable all-rounder/5th bowler to rely on; although Stokes apparently ending the first Test in no worse shape with his knee that he started it is a huge plus, the number of overs he can be trusted to bowl in any match is seriously limited.
Is the answer an all seam attack with only Root to try and tie down an end? He bowled well and cheaply at Egbaston, but I'm not sure he won't be attacked more in a game where the Aussies have more of an upper hand. We do at least have options in the fast bowling department, as solid cases can be made for the inclusion of both Woakes and Wood, but it's asking an awful lot of Root.
We've already discussed the Bairstow/Foakes situation; imo if Foakes had played we'd have had a much better chance of winning, but it's unlikely Bairstow will keep quite as poorly in the next match. It's still a big question though, but I'm not sure Stokes and McCullen will change their position, even though Lords isn't the easiest ground at which to keep wicket.
The remaining 4 Tests come in 2 "back-to-back" pairs when the matches are only separated by 3 days; I strongly suspect Anderson will only play one Test in each pair. That leaves a choice of Lords or Headingly, and then Old Trafford or The Oval. So there's likely to be some natural rotation anyway, but possibly even more when the spinner situation is resolved.
I find it a bit of a slight on the county bowlers that have been playing red-ball cricket. I thought Dawson should have got the call personally; he's been in and around the England white-ball squads for a while and has been a consistent performer for Hampshire in the longer format, and is no mug with the bat. To be overlooked for someone who retired and gave up on red-ball cricket is a bit of a kick in the teeth, IMO. Rihan Ahmed was the other name bandied around, and I wouldn't have been against his inclusion, although he's probably a bit too raw and inexperienced to be thrown into an Ashes match.
Foakes has to come in for Lords. You say Bairstow won't keep as poorly as he did in this game, but there's every chance that he does. He's not what I call an instinctive 'keeper like Foakes, and could easily cost us another 100 runs in the next game.
I doubt Stokes and McCullum will change anything; they appear to be stubborn in their approach to the game and I expect them to be stubborn in selection. The only change I can see them making is Wood for Anderson if the Lords pitch is anything like what we saw at Edgbaston.
I would probably go with:
Bairstow
Duckett
Pope
Root
Brook
Stokes
Foakes
Robinson
Dawson
Broad
Wood
As I said earlier, Root did a great job at Edgbaston, but Australia were always under pressure; I'm really not sure how well he's going to do if, for instance, they win the toss and get a good start, as I suspect they could really go after him in those circumstances.
Dawson is certainly an option, as Rehan Ahmed hasn't had that good a season with the ball so far; the alternative might be all seam/pace and chancing Root as our main spinning option. Woakes would surely play in those circumstances, as neither Wood nor Anderson can be relied on for lengthy spells so I suspect it will be one or the other of those two (I can see those 2 alternating in the remaining 4 Tests). A left field option might be Livingstone, or even Will Jacks, although both are more batsmen who bowl than bowlers who bat, but our options are limited; at least both have been in and around the England white-ball teams recently.
Mo was included, presumably, because of his experience, but the next spinner called up is the complete opposite.
I might keep banging the drum for Dawson, but I think he should have been next in line.
Still. Go well, Rehan.