England's team combination has been badly exposed

[The_Odd_One]

I see a lot of posters praising England's batting depth and how good and modern their combination is but I think that is not the case in reality.

By playing so many all-rounders or bowlers who can bat, England are really weakening their bowling unit. Moeen seems to be a batting all-rounder who can bowl part-time. Rashid is not a world class spinner. Woakes is no more Imran Khan outside England. Anderson and Broad are as usual nothing special outside their comfort zone.

I think this team combination is hurting England big time. They clearly seem to be missing a solid middle order batsman who can partner with Root and make big scores possible. Similarly, the obsession with bowlers who can bat needs to stop. Select bowlers who are better in their primary area of expertise.

A tied series at home vs Pakistan, a tied series in Bangladesh, and a likely 4-0 loss in India should be a wake up call for England that this combination is not working for them.

 

[HitWicket]

There isn't really anyone notably better right now as a specialist spinner.

 

[aloo paratha]

It's not like they're sidelining better bowlers so a bowler who can bat can play, their best bowlers can bat.

 

[Suleiman]

This is their best combination in Asia. Don't just glance over the 4-0 scoreline, they battled and gave India a much tougher time than any of SAF, NZ or Aus.

Not to mention drawing the series 1-1 vs us in UAE was there for the taking but conditions out of their control saved us, maybe even 2-0 if you are optimistic.

Think they have a case of being the best test team in the world.

 

[Usman Chadda]

This is their best combination in Asia. Don't just glance over the 4-0 scoreline, they battled and gave India a much tougher time than any of SAF, NZ or Aus.

Not to mention drawing the series 1-1 vs us in UAE was there for the taking but conditions out of their control saved us, maybe even 2-0 if you are optimistic.

Think they have a case of being the best test team in the world.

Not sure if sarcastic, but if the best test team in the world is only good enough for giving a hard time to the opposition, then Allah hi haafiz hai test cricket ka. As usual, England start believing their own hype far too much and come crashing down the ground. Seen this plenty of times to ever take this team seriously.

 

[Suleiman]

Not sure if sarcastic, but if the best test team in the world is only good enough for giving a hard time to the opposition, then Allah hi haafiz hai test cricket ka. As usual, England start believing their own hype far too much and come crashing down the ground. Seen this plenty of times to ever take this team seriously.

Who is the best team in the world then?

Them being the best in the world is based on that no other team is as equally adept abroad AND at home.

As said before no current team in the world in the top 4 is head and shoulders above the rest. But if you had to pick 1, England edges the others.

They can solidify this claim if they do well in the next Ashes. But out of all the non-Asian teams they've looked the best in Asia which was one of the big benchmarks they had to clear much like Asian teams have to do well overseas.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

This is why you don't sacrifice specialists' spots for allrounder s in the hope that they score a few runs and add depth.

 

[HitWicket]

This is why you don't sacrifice specialists' spots for allrounder s in the hope that they score a few runs and add depth.

And which specialists are currently being sacrificed?

 

[Spidy201]

it's not the team combination, but myth that "any damn spinner can get wickets for fun" is getting exposed.
first in NZ series now this establish that you get wickets in India only if you are good spin bowler

 

[Nikhil_cric]

And which specialists are currently being sacrificed?

Any accurate seamer from county cricket would've done better than either of the bhais . England are simply playing spinners for the heck of it or in the hope that they'll add rubs with the bat. They lost you the series in the UAE and now they're losing the series in India as well.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

3 double tons in test cricket and all in this year :lyon

 

[JaDed]

it's not the team combination, but myth that "any damn spinner can get wickets for fun" is getting exposed.
first in NZ series now this establish that you get wickets in India only if you are good spin bowler

Well said but I think there has been improvement in the way Pujara,Kohli,Ash and now Jayant(who I'm still not sure) are playing spinners as well.

 

[The_Odd_One]

This is their best combination in Asia. Don't just glance over the 4-0 scoreline, they battled and gave India a much tougher time than any of SAF, NZ or Aus.

Not to mention drawing the series 1-1 vs us in UAE was there for the taking but conditions out of their control saved us, maybe even 2-0 if you are optimistic.

Think they have a case of being the best test team in the world.

The pitches that England has got in this series are much easier to bat on than the ones which SA got.

 

[Suleiman]

The pitches that England has got in this series are much easier to bat on than the ones which SA got.

True, but then if they did get those pitches Moeen and Rashid wouldn't be racing Kohli for a double ton with the ball. They'd be pretty potent in those type of pitches, and it would be a gamble on Indian curators part to try that.

Dean Elgar of all people was spinning the ball in that series, so India knew they couldn't afford the same gamble vs England esp after what happened last time England toured. Even though they are not special by Asian standards, Moeen / Rashid duo is better than anything SAF, NZ or Aus have. SAF now have a decent spinner in Maharaj, but didn't have him in that series.

By the same token though, you can say we didn't get the same pitches SL and India got (apart from Lord's) in our tour to England and that helped us clinch a draw.

 

[shah_1]

No team is going to challenge India in these condition till they find a quality spinner.

 

[JaDed]

England is too dependent on Broad his cutters, that is what would had helped them today also lets not forget the missed catch by Rashid and absolute waste of review yesterday rendering them without a review when required against Yadav.

 

[Slog]

This is why you don't sacrifice specialists' spots for allrounder s in the hope that they score a few runs and add depth.

Isn't Indja doing same thing though?

 

[Slog]

it's not the team combination, but myth that "any damn spinner can get wickets for fun" is getting exposed.
first in NZ series now this establish that you get wickets in India only if you are good spin bowler

Tbf these pitches haven't been raging turners

If the pitches were what was served upto SA these two would have been running riot

Though on the flip side English batting wouldn't have been as competitive as it has been so far

 

[Napa]

Who is the best team in the world then?

If you actually watch games, then the obvious answer is India. Also headed to a rating of around 120, about 12 points over the next team.

Them being the best in the world is based on that no other team is as equally adept abroad AND at home.

Being given a proper thrashing by India is your idea of being "adept abroad"!!!

To say nothing about their toothless teletubbies bowling attack, against which our current #9 batsman is averaging 100+. Both their spinners are on track for being taken for more than 200 in the current game.

 

[MMHS]

To their support, I don't think there is any better spinner in ENG. It's like playing Batty instead of Moeen just for the sake of playing a specialist spinner. Situation won't change much until & unless the thought process changes at County level (Spinners are wastage of spot - don't pick spinners unless he averages 35 with bat).

But, I do agree with OP here - something I wrote during their peak days that 5 Tests in IND & 5 in AUS - both Stokes & Woakes can't survive. None of them are good in one area to play Test against those teams outside UK (PAK definitely, SRL & BD as well). In fact, WI chased 200+ to win a low scoring Barbados Test on almost a mine field against the "all-rounders" & "spinners". To his credit, Stokes has been a great success with bat, but Woakes is a wastage of spot in such conditions - ENG should have played a left-arm spinner over him as there are 9/10 right-handers in Indian line-up.

 

[Buffet]

Isn't Indja doing same thing though?

Eng is playing with 6 bowlers and Indians are playing with 5 bowlers.

 

[Buffet]

Eng is one bowler short here. 7th bowler would have done the job.

 

[Suleiman]

If you actually watch games, then the obvious answer is India. Also headed to a rating of around 120, about 12 points over the next team.



Being given a proper thrashing by India is your idea of being "adept abroad"!!!

To say nothing about their toothless teletubbies bowling attack, against which our current #9 batsman is averaging 100+. Both their spinners are on track for being taken for more than 200 in the current game.

India is not the best in the world and their recent overseas record proves that.

And as I said, England being the best says less about them and more about the meager competition from the other top 4 sides in the world.

India is the best side at home, sure, and given that England challenged them to a greater degree than the other non-Asian sides which have toured. They have shown much better application with the bat than NZ, Aus or SAF with both of their new young batsman making a great first impression.

They are not a cut above the other teams, but if you had to pinpoint 1 team for the best allround team, it is England.

They performed in UAE and ran us very close numerous times, but we didn't have the tenacity to close them out like India have here.

 

[Asim2Good]

every team get exposed now a days whenever they have to travel
soon Aus ll be expose too once they land in India (2nd time after SL tour)

its time for Pak fans to apperciate team's performances in UAE and dont b too harsh on them when fail on away tours. Every team is failing now a days except 1-2 series here n there.

 

[Buffet]

There is no clear cut best side right now, but Eng is certainly not in contention.

Some of the recent results despite winning in SA,

Eng lost in UAE
Eng failed to win at home against Pakistan.
Eng failed to win agsint BD
Getting thrashed in India.

 

[Napa]

India is not the best in the world and their recent overseas record proves that.

And as I said, England being the best says less about them and more about the meager competition from the other top 4 sides in the world.

You are of course entitled to your own opinion and to ignore facts all you want. Others are equally entitled to regard as ridiculous the idea that England which is currently being given a proper all-round thrashing by India is "adept abroad" and is the "best team in the world".

 

[Zak_Fan]

India is not the best in the world and their recent overseas record proves that.

And as I said, England being the best says less about them and more about the meager competition from the other top 4 sides in the world.

India is the best side at home, sure, and given that England challenged them to a greater degree than the other non-Asian sides which have toured. They have shown much better application with the bat than NZ, Aus or SAF with both of their new young batsman making a great first impression.

They are not a cut above the other teams, but if you had to pinpoint 1 team for the best allround team, it is England.

Even in this series, the only reason England did not get absolutely murdered is because they won 3 tosses on Indian pitches.

They performed in UAE and ran us very close numerous times, but we didn't have the tenacity to close them out like India have here.

India's recent away record and performance has been far better than what western sides have achieved in Asia.

 

[Zak_Fan]

Infact, the only reason England seems to be doing better than others sides in this series is because they won 3/4 crucial tosses. If it wasn't for it, this side would get murdered in these conditions.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Isn't Indja doing same thing though?

As Buffet said, England are playing an extra bits n pieces cricketer. Also Ashwin would walk into our squad on his bowling along let alone the useful runs that he adds. We don't play the same lineup for all conditions anyway.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Infact, the only reason England seems to be doing better than others sides in this series is because they won 3/4 crucial tosses. If it wasn't for it, this side would get murdered in these conditions.

Not even about tosses. We have been terrible with our catching . Otherwise we would've destroyed England 5 zip.

 

[ExpressPacer]

England, in my opinion, might pulling off a 2010's West Indies or Sri Lanka. All spots given to all rounders with only no specialists in their bowling department. The sad truth is, you need to play specialist bowlers and not all rounders no matter how many people or how much they say that cricket is a batsman's game and blah blah. I would disagree, the competition between the ball and the bat is still very high in cricket and is evident from the recent Aus-Sri Lanka series, India vs any opposition in India, New Zealand vs Pakistan, and maybe even England vs Pakistan in England because even though the bowlers did not exactly dominate by a whole lot, we never saw huge scores.

Just because talented individuals like Smith and Kohli have lit up series with their phenomenal batting in Aus vs India series or Hash and AB have decimated with their batting, does not mean that cricket is entirely a batsman's game now. These players are just extremely talented individuals. We still have the Syen's, the Rabada's, the Mitchell Starc's, heck, the Ashes series which Aussies won primarily because of Johnson was only 2 years ago?!

The concept of playing all rounders is like chopping the branch which you are sitting on because it just finishes your own bowling. We saw something similar in the recent ODI's Pakistan played in England where they tried their hand at giving specialist positions to all rounders and it was evident that it may be a wrong move considering the record of most runs in an innings was broken.

Some people may argue that why play an ordinary spinner from your domestic cricketer when you can have someone who has the same talent as him whilst bowling and can also bat a bit. My only example to them is one man: Shahid Afridi. Had he played as a specialist bowler, his career would have been far, far better and I'm not even kidding, he could have been regarded as an ATG by even people on this forum and cricket analysts. Heck, had he only concentrated on his batting he would have had a more successful career. His average certainly would not have been in the 20's.

This is why cricket isn't a sport that is played on computer screens or cricinfo. A lot of things come into consideration. Any psychologist would be ready to point out that playing more than one role takes a toll on you mentally too, if not physically. You have an added responsibility. And many players may feel like that they can perform in the batting department if they're bowling doesn't work out to secure a spot in the team. This is what kill's the team because then you're dividing your time, training and commitment to two different roles in the team and not giving 100% to one role.

Just because you have the talent to do good in more than one department of the game does not mean you should. Ever heard of 'Jack of all trades, master of none', anyone? And playing more than one all rounder (two at MOST) cannot be justified by citing examples of greats like Imran Khan, Kallis and Dev. They were exceptional cricketers and a few exceptions do not make a difference. Even Shane Watson cannot be an example because we all saw how it all took a toll on his body and mentally. In the end, he was only reduced to playing in franchise t20's around the world, bowling 3-4 overs and batting 3 overs at most.

India, in this aspect, are a very interesting team because they don't play too many all rounders. In fact, they only all rounder in their team is Jadega. Instead, they try and convert their bowlers into decent lower order batsmen and that is how the game was/is supposed to be played. Ashwin, Yadav are playing the team as bowlers. Their playing role is BOWLER. If they are to do good, OK. If no, no problem. Batting is the responsibility of the batsmen.

The only problem is, sometimes, this habit of converting bowlers into decent tailenders can backfire because when someone shows some batting ability, he is quickly turned into an all rounder and batted higher up the order which takes a toll on his bowling. The perfect example of this is Irfan Pathan who was nothing short of immensly talented but had his career end only in his mid-20's because of ignorance by the Indian coaches and board. This is where the problem lies for Ashwin too, as long as he was batting at 7 down, it was okay but when he's brought to number 4, this is when India are playing a gargantuan gamble with their best bowler. No matter times they tell him that, its OK if he doesn't perform as a batsman, somewhere, deep down inside, he WILL most definitely feel like he's not doing good enough and he need's to work on his batting and then, the division of time and resources will come into play. If not that, then it will be enough of a mental battle for him to fail in his stronger department, or at least not find the success as he did in the past and may be reduced to being a bits and pieces player.

So, I think, there's a reason players have specialist positions. Even in our daily life, we have our own particular roles. We're supposed to do one job and when someone works more than they can, it starts to show. When single mothers raise children, we see what's missing. We see the toll that it takes on the mother, or the child. So, from this example from our daily lives, I think its easy to say, its best to let the professionals do their job and only play one all rounder in the team, someone like Abdul Razzaq, bits and pieces and player. If that one all rounder turns legendary, good. But don't expect for all your all rounder's to do the same and ruin the team.

 

[street cricketer]

You can't win in India without proper spinners irrespective of whatever team combination you come up with.

Said it during England's tour of the UAE and again now. It's like trying to win a game overseas with Binny and Pandya as the frontline bowlers. England must groom proper spinners if they harbour any idea of winning in Asia. Maybe Mason Crane..

 

[Robert]

The art of English spin is at a 140-year low. I think Cook is mentally exhausted and should be relieved of the captaincy so he can get back to scoring runs. Root is batting out of position. Bairstow should be relieved of the gloves. Anderson is near the end. Broad is the world's best all-conditions quick but has been injured.

 

[Cricfan4eva]

There is no clear cut best side right now, but Eng is certainly not in contention.

Some of the recent results despite winning in SA,

Eng lost in UAE
Eng failed to win at home against Pakistan.
Eng failed to win agsint BD
Getting thrashed in India.

They couldn't beat WI either, something India did comfortably.

 

[Cricfan4eva]

You can't win in India without proper spinners irrespective of whatever team combination you come up with.

Said it during England's tour of the UAE and again now. It's like trying to win a game overseas with Binny and Pandya as the frontline bowlers. England must groom proper spinners if they harbour any idea of winning in Asia. Maybe Mason Crane..

Unfair to slate Pandya without him actually getting a chance. Just because he's an IPL product doesn't mean he'll turn out to be poor. Dravid rates Jayant, and he also rates Pandya, I think he knows a bit of cricket, doesn't he?
--

Nvm I read it again and you meant playing Hardik as a front line bowler. Well yes fair point.

 

[Napa]

England, in my opinion, might pulling off a 2010's West Indies or Sri Lanka. All spots given to all rounders with only no specialists in their bowling department. The sad truth is, you need to play specialist bowlers and not all rounders no matter how many people or how much they say that cricket is a batsman's game and blah blah. I would disagree, the competition between the ball and the bat is still very high in cricket and is evident from the recent Aus-Sri Lanka series, India vs any opposition in India, New Zealand vs Pakistan, and maybe even England vs Pakistan in England because even though the bowlers did not exactly dominate by a whole lot, we never saw huge scores.

Just because talented individuals like Smith and Kohli have lit up series with their phenomenal batting in Aus vs India series or Hash and AB have decimated with their batting, does not mean that cricket is entirely a batsman's game now. These players are just extremely talented individuals. We still have the Syen's, the Rabada's, the Mitchell Starc's, heck, the Ashes series which Aussies won primarily because of Johnson was only 2 years ago?!

The concept of playing all rounders is like chopping the branch which you are sitting on because it just finishes your own bowling. We saw something similar in the recent ODI's Pakistan played in England where they tried their hand at giving specialist positions to all rounders and it was evident that it may be a wrong move considering the record of most runs in an innings was broken.

Some people may argue that why play an ordinary spinner from your domestic cricketer when you can have someone who has the same talent as him whilst bowling and can also bat a bit. My only example to them is one man: Shahid Afridi. Had he played as a specialist bowler, his career would have been far, far better and I'm not even kidding, he could have been regarded as an ATG by even people on this forum and cricket analysts. Heck, had he only concentrated on his batting he would have had a more successful career. His average certainly would not have been in the 20's.

This is why cricket isn't a sport that is played on computer screens or cricinfo. A lot of things come into consideration. Any psychologist would be ready to point out that playing more than one role takes a toll on you mentally too, if not physically. You have an added responsibility. And many players may feel like that they can perform in the batting department if they're bowling doesn't work out to secure a spot in the team. This is what kill's the team because then you're dividing your time, training and commitment to two different roles in the team and not giving 100% to one role.

Just because you have the talent to do good in more than one department of the game does not mean you should. Ever heard of 'Jack of all trades, master of none', anyone? And playing more than one all rounder (two at MOST) cannot be justified by citing examples of greats like Imran Khan, Kallis and Dev. They were exceptional cricketers and a few exceptions do not make a difference. Even Shane Watson cannot be an example because we all saw how it all took a toll on his body and mentally. In the end, he was only reduced to playing in franchise t20's around the world, bowling 3-4 overs and batting 3 overs at most.

India, in this aspect, are a very interesting team because they don't play too many all rounders. In fact, they only all rounder in their team is Jadega. Instead, they try and convert their bowlers into decent lower order batsmen and that is how the game was/is supposed to be played. Ashwin, Yadav are playing the team as bowlers. Their playing role is BOWLER. If they are to do good, OK. If no, no problem. Batting is the responsibility of the batsmen.

The only problem is, sometimes, this habit of converting bowlers into decent tailenders can backfire because when someone shows some batting ability, he is quickly turned into an all rounder and batted higher up the order which takes a toll on his bowling. The perfect example of this is Irfan Pathan who was nothing short of immensly talented but had his career end only in his mid-20's because of ignorance by the Indian coaches and board. This is where the problem lies for Ashwin too, as long as he was batting at 7 down, it was okay but when he's brought to number 4, this is when India are playing a gargantuan gamble with their best bowler. No matter times they tell him that, its OK if he doesn't perform as a batsman, somewhere, deep down inside, he WILL most definitely feel like he's not doing good enough and he need's to work on his batting and then, the division of time and resources will come into play. If not that, then it will be enough of a mental battle for him to fail in his stronger department, or at least not find the success as he did in the past and may be reduced to being a bits and pieces player.

So, I think, there's a reason players have specialist positions. Even in our daily life, we have our own particular roles. We're supposed to do one job and when someone works more than they can, it starts to show. When single mothers raise children, we see what's missing. We see the toll that it takes on the mother, or the child. So, from this example from our daily lives, I think its easy to say, its best to let the professionals do their job and only play one all rounder in the team, someone like Abdul Razzaq, bits and pieces and player. If that one all rounder turns legendary, good. But don't expect for all your all rounder's to do the same and ruin the team.

A rather long post, but enjoyed reading it. Agree with your point that bowlers should be selected on their bowling ability rather than preference being given to all-rounders.

 

[Varun]

The art of English spin is at a 140-year low. I think Cook is mentally exhausted and should be relieved of the captaincy so he can get back to scoring runs. Root is batting out of position. Bairstow should be relieved of the gloves. Anderson is near the end. Broad is the world's best all-conditions quick but has been injured.

Who would you suggest captain England if not Cook? We've seen in the past that the moment a new captain is appointed, the older one struggles to adapt to his new position as a mere batsman and retires with three or four years still left in the tank - Vaughan, Hussain, Strauss, etc.

Would that also happen to Cook if say, Root/Broad/Stokes were made skipper?

 

[ExpressPacer]

A rather long post, but enjoyed reading it. Agree with your point that bowlers should be selected on their bowling ability rather than preference being given to all-rounders.

Haha, thank you bro. Gonna shorten my posts a little from now. Actually, its just that this is a topic I strongly feel about since we talk too much of the competition between the bat and ball being reduced to nil even though it is usually the managements fault that batsmen succeed.

 

[The_Odd_One]

True, but then if they did get those pitches Moeen and Rashid wouldn't be racing Kohli for a double ton with the ball. They'd be pretty potent in those type of pitches, and it would be a gamble on Indian curators part to try that.

Dean Elgar of all people was spinning the ball in that series, so India knew they couldn't afford the same gamble vs England esp after what happened last time England toured. Even though they are not special by Asian standards, Moeen / Rashid duo is better than anything SAF, NZ or Aus have. SAF now have a decent spinner in Maharaj, but didn't have him in that series.

By the same token though, you can say we didn't get the same pitches SL and India got (apart from Lord's) in our tour to England and that helped us clinch a draw.

On a rank-turner, England would have been embarrassed even further. At least on these pitches, they have been able to score in the 1st innings.

And yes, Pakistan got easier conditions in England than what SL got. Pakistan should have won that series 2-1.

 

[Suleiman]

You are of course entitled to your own opinion and to ignore facts all you want. Others are equally entitled to regard as ridiculous the idea that England which is currently being given a proper all-round thrashing by India is "adept abroad" and is the "best team in the world".

Sure, the #1 spot is a very much debatable title for any of the test teams going around atm as they all have their weaknesses be it lack of allrounders, mediocre pacers, spinners, or batsmen ill equipped in certain conditions. And as someone said there isn't a clear cut team. Others are equally entitled to regard or disregard the idea of England being #1, let alone India.

 

[Suleiman]

On a rank-turner, England would have been embarrassed even further. At least on these pitches, they have been able to score in the 1st innings.

And yes, Pakistan got easier conditions in England than what SL got. Pakistan should have won that series 2-1.

That's true, then again there's hardly a team atm that can actually hold its own on rank turners.

We already got exposed courtesy Bishoo in UAE, SL, Aus, SAF and NZ aren't all that as well.

That leaves India and England. Former has class acts like Rahane and Kohli who would've been the difference between the 2 sides. And while England may not have won any games just like now, I still think they would've given India a greater challenge still compared to the other western teams.

 

[Bilal7]

The only reason they are hurting is because Adil and Moeen are definitely not suited to being the main bowlers of the English team. They're good support bowlers, especially Ali, but when they're asked to run through teams, especially subcontinent teams, they'll struggle.

If you replaced Adil with Yasir Shah, this would be a great combination for England and once they go back home, you'll see this combination succeeding yet again.

It's not about playing all-rounders over better players. Stokes, Moeen and Woakes will make the English team on at least one of their skills.

 

[Justcrazy]

To their support, I don't think there is any better spinner in ENG. It's like playing Batty instead of Moeen just for the sake of playing a specialist spinner. Situation won't change much until & unless the thought process changes at County level (Spinners are wastage of spot - don't pick spinners unless he averages 35 with bat).

But, I do agree with OP here - something I wrote during their peak days that 5 Tests in IND & 5 in AUS - both Stokes & Woakes can't survive. None of them are good in one area to play Test against those teams outside UK (PAK definitely, SRL & BD as well). In fact, WI chased 200+ to win a low scoring Barbados Test on almost a mine field against the "all-rounders" & "spinners". To his credit, Stokes has been a great success with bat, but Woakes is a wastage of spot in such conditions - ENG should have played a left-arm spinner over him as there are 9/10 right-handers in Indian line-up.

Why they not playing Monty ?

 

[Ab Fan]

Firstly, it needs to be made clear that England didn't fared better than other non-Asian teams in this series vs India.

The reason why people feel they did better is because the games were taken to 5th day but that is simply a horrible way to judge things. The reason games went to the last day was because the pitches were flatter in comparison to other teams particularly SA.Its obvious that matches played on flat pitches won't get over in 3 days.

Moreover, England got lucky with the tosses unlike the Kiwis who lost all the tosses.

England lost the games by margin( two of them by innings defeat) and are 0-3 in this series which clearly reflects the dominance India had in this series.

Lets not forget that SC teams have done better in England than in SA or Aus where they struggle to draw a series.

On paper and on current form, India are the best teams going around particularly after the recent failures of other strong contenders- England in this series, Pakistan in NZ series and Australians vs South Africa at home.

 

[samplepiece]

4 seamers were definitely excessive but I think England also got done in a little by the weather. Mumbai is generally a humid place and Wankhede is right on the edge of the Arabian sea, so it does swing here, conventionally and reverse. However humidity has been under 40% of late here resulting in very little swing.

 

[Napa]

If you look at England's performance, their batting actually has done okay. Their biggest failure has been in getting the Indian lower half out.

1st Test: England batting does well and scores 500+ in the first innings and they put India under pressure. However their bowlers cannot get Ashwin and Jadeja out cheaply and India avoids defeat.

2nd Test: They have India down to 5-127 in the 2nd innings, but India still goes on to score 204 which proves too much and England loses.

3rd Test: India is down to 5-156, but goes on to 10-417. England loses.

4th Test: India is down to 5-305, but goes on to 10-613. England loses.

The biggest problem for England has been the lack of bowling which can get the Indian lower half out. None of their bowlers look threatening.

 

[Markhor]

Mark Wood has been a big miss. He'd have been ideal for these conditions with his pace and ability to reverse the ball but sadly his ankle problems keep flaring up.

Trevor Bayliss has not impressed as coach. There's been constant tinkering, some poor selections (Hales in Tests, Vince, Ballance, selecting Compton then undermining him in public, Batty and Dawson whilst ignoring Jack Leach) and whilst the LOI team has significantly improved, the Test side is going downhill.

 

[Robert]

What frustrates me is that England are not getting better in the series. They should have leared how to stay in and make runs by now. In 1984 and 2012 they came to India, lost the first test, learned how to score big runs and won the series. These batters are still making the same errors after four tests.

 

[Robert]

Why they not playing Monty ?

Not selected after his mental health issues.

Also, Chef does not rate Monty, who does not seem to know what fields he wants. A bowler-captain might be able to help him more. It is a shame as he has thrived under other batter-captains such as Strauss, and when Swann was there to help him.

 

[KhalidRafi]

This was always on the cards. England are seriously lacking when it comes to having WC spinners. Four years ago they had Swann and Panesar, now they have Rashid, who is okay at best. And Ali, who simply isn't a specialist spinner, nor someone who can actually spin the ball.
The batting order was far stronger aswell four years ago.

 

[LastManstanding]

Mark Wood has been a big miss. He'd have been ideal for these conditions with his pace and ability to reverse the ball but sadly his ankle problems keep flaring up.

Trevor Bayliss has not impressed as coach. There's been constant tinkering, some poor selections (Hales in Tests, Vince, Ballance, selecting Compton then undermining him in public, Batty and Dawson whilst ignoring Jack Leach) and whilst the LOI team has significantly improved, the Test side is going downhill.

First flower, then Moorse and now Bayliss, perhaps problem lies somewhere else.

 

[The_Odd_One]

This was always on the cards. England are seriously lacking when it comes to having WC spinners. Four years ago they had Swann and Panesar, now they have Rashid, who is okay at best. And Ali, who simply isn't a specialist spinner, nor someone who can actually spin the ball.
The batting order was far stronger aswell four years ago.

Moeen is not suited for the role of 2nd spinner. He is the 3rd spinner at best. England needed one more spinner instead of a pacer.

 

[Bewal Express]

Not selected after his mental health issues.

Also, Chef does not rate Monty, who does not seem to know what fields he wants. A bowler-captain might be able to help him more. It is a shame as he has thrived under other batter-captains such as Strauss, and when Swann was there to help him.

Really disappointed with England, bowling has been average with the fast bowlers making little headway and spinners just not good enough. I knew before the series that Broad will find a way not to play, he did the same when Johnson was rampant in Australia and Jimmy is very average on these wickets. The decision not to include Bell was plain stupid, he is not the greatest but he would have been better than the 4's that played. Move Root back to 4 as when he gets out, there seems to be quantity but little quality in the middle order.

 

[HitWicket]

Really disappointed with England, bowling has been average with the fast bowlers making little headway and spinners just not good enough. I knew before the series that Broad will find a way not to play, he did the same when Johnson was rampant in Australia and Jimmy is very average on these wickets. The decision not to include Bell was plain stupid, he is not the greatest but he would have been better than the 4's that played. Move Root back to 4 as when he gets out, there seems to be quantity but little quality in the middle order.

Given Broad got smashed on the foot requiring a trip to hospital during the 13/14 ashes and was visibly hobbling in the 2nd test of this series I'm not exactly sure either were finding ways not to play. Doubt he'll be risked in the last test though given the series situation now, had the big bash lined up in a couple of weeks however.

 

[Bewal Express]

Given Broad got smashed on the foot requiring a trip to hospital during the 13/14 ashes and was visibly hobbling in the 2nd test of this series I'm not exactly sure either were finding ways not to play. Doubt he'll be risked in the last test though given the series situation now, had the big bash lined up in a couple of weeks however.

Broad always seems to be OK for the green wickets on which he is lethal, but on dry hard wickets he seems to get "injured" very quickly.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

England need to groom their 19 and 20 years old offspinner and legspinner.

One is Mason Crane. Others name i am forgetting.

 

[HitWicket]

Broad always seems to be OK for the green wickets on which he is lethal, but on dry hard wickets he seems to get "injured" very quickly.

Broad missed a single innings in that 13/14 Ashes after getting a 90mph Johnson yorker flush on the boot, and ended the tour with 21 wickets at 27.52...?

Even so far on this tour he'd been bowling pretty well up until he got injured including his extremely good spell whilst hobbling in the 2nd test.

 

[Mamoon]

The problem is that Moeen and Rashid are not quality spinners. You simply cannot win in Asia when they are your frontline spinners.

However, other spinners in England are supposed to be equally poor but they are worse with the bat, so that makes Moeen and Rashid the kings among blind men.

England though is one genuine batsman short. Taylor's retirement has hit them hard, he was a great talent who was getting into his own at this level, and could play spin as well as he demonstrated in the UAE.

The emergence of Hameed though can change things for England. Not entirely convinced with that Jennings guy though, I feel that the hundred was a bit of a fluke.

Also, it is imperative that they take gloves off Bairstow. He is a top batsman and can fill the void left by Taylor. Keeping his inhibiting his potential as a batsman.

 

[Hasan123]

England need to pick specialists instead of concentrating on picking players who can do both in bits. Stokes is fine all rounder but Moen isn't a 2nd spinner, Rashid needs more help and also Bairstow should bat up the order instead of being hid down the order. Leach should have been selected over Ansari in the squad and over woakes in the playing 11. But due to him maybe not being a decent bat they didn't select him which is rather sad.

 

[Robert]

Broad always seems to be OK for the green wickets on which he is lethal, but on dry hard wickets he seems to get "injured" very quickly.

Eh? On dry hard wickets he gets lift and reverse. Look again at his record since 2010.

He hardly gets a green wicket anyway - most English test tracks are slow without much lateral movement these days. On the one occasion I recall they got a real old fashioned seamer recently, they didn't know what to do and all bowled too short.

Even the 8-15 was as much to do with Aussie batters self-destructing when they saw a bit of lateral movement. Border or Tugga would have got a ton on that deck.

 

[MMHS]

Why they not playing Monty ?

He is struggling to make his County side these days. Even if picked, I don't think he would have made much difference in Asia now. Also, he is in his mid 30s - probably, it's time to look forward. To England's benefit, they have completed most of their Asia tour, may be only SRL tour left in next 4 years. But, in SRL, Pom pacers should do better than anywhere else in Asia; therefore it's time to build for future.

ECB has 4 years to find couple of genuine spinners for next Asia tour. As I mentioned in another post - spin talent still is not an issue there yet; but ECB has to come up with a program for Counties to encourage playing spinners & more importantly give them lots of overs. No spinner can develop with 20 overs/FC match - that too like 4/5 overs short spell, often being asked to hurry-up to make up over-rate. It's always great if your spinner (in fact any bowler) can contribute with bat, but ONLY IF they make the team on bowling merit as one of 4 bowlers - that's why bowling all-rounders are the most valuable assets in Cricket, particularly in longest format - just count how many MoS has Imran, Wasim, Hadlee, Benaud, Miller, Warne, Botham, Kapil, Lindwall, Gregory, Davidson, Ashwin, Polly or Marshall, even Cairns, Vettory has won. A player, averaging 25 with bat and 25 with ball is twice the player of someone averaging 35 with bat & 38 with ball.

Only way ENG can find proper spinners, if Spinners are picked as a vital part of the 4 men attack on bowling merit. If they can bat like Moeen or Ansari, even better; but picking bits & pieces spinners on duel merit don't prepare them mentally as a spinner spinner. A spinner's best weapon is his accuracy - ability to tie batsmen by bowling on a particular strategy. They can't develop that in nets - it has to be developed in match condition with 35/38/48 even 58 overs innings.

In terms of individual ball skill - Adil, Ansari or Moeen has bowled many good balls, but even on rank turners, they have spoiled that with a loose one almost every over. That can work against County batsmen, or in cricket where overs are limited & batsmen are forced to score at a certain rate. It won't work in Test matches, even in BD - UNLESS ICC MAKES TEST CRICKET ANOTHER JOKE WITH 4 DAYS DURATION OR LIMITING 1ST INNINGS TO CERTAIN OVERS. If BCCI, PCB, BCB & SLCB has any intelligence - they MUST, MUST, MUST stop any conspiracy of reducing days or overs from current Test standards. Non Asian sides will crash them with 4 men relentless pace attack with much fitter athletes at their home & will get away with 4 Day draws before the wickets break properly in Asian venues. To force result in 4 days, if you make rank turners - there won't be much difference left between Ashwin, Yasir, Herath, Miraj and Moeen, Lyon, Santner & Maharaj. It's a BIG, BIG booby trap - Asian sides must not step into it. This is something I have explained several times - why 4 day Test will kill spinners, but that's different discussion.

Since the improvement of drainage system, English grounds are far better for spinners these days. IND won the CT 2013 on wickets turning & bouncing sharp more than most grounds in IND - that too in May; this year PAK won 2 Tests with Yasir taking 18 wickets, SRL beat Poms in a Test scoring 500+ in 2nd innings & Herath taking 7/8 wickets in the match - therefore condition is not an excuse any more; quality spinners can perform in ENG, on their wickets. Unless their strategy regarding spinners changes in FC system, before SAF & AUS, ENG will be exposed at home by the Asian sides; because Asian spinners will bowl much, much better in UK than in SAF or AUS grounds. And, next time Poms visits Asia - it'll take lots of rain to avoid 13-0 (5+3+3+2), may be even more if PAK plays 4 Tests & BD plays 3. It was stupendous stupidity for PCB's part to play Abu Dhabi Test on that wicket & same is for BCCI for that Rajkot track - otherwise Poms last 13 Test in IND, UAE, BD would have been 12-1, with that 1 being a 22 runs win against BD - next time, half of those 13-0 in mentioned, will end in Test having 3 innings.

 

[Swaraj!!]

The English combination is still a fantastic team. They have one or two key misses and tough luck with some other factors.

1. Moeen batting at 4 is a big problem. He surely is not a 3 down player, regardless of how valuable he is. England really need to find a proper No. 4 even if it means someone like Woakes misses out. The key issue is that you really have to have a strong middle order to build up consistent performances. Moeen is probably the perfect No. 6.

2. Bairstow looks pretty good definitely, and he is batting at 5, which I believe is correct number for him. But because of Moeen, he is effectively batting at 4. This has resulted in a series of middling scores for him recently.

3. Stokes has had a run of poor dismissals, but even then too I don't think he has looked a classic No. 6 batsman. I think he needs to shepherd the following batsmen a bit more but he doesn't do that. Why? Because he is followed by a batsman and all those all-rounders who really can be hit-or-miss on turning pitches with a good attack.

So, in general, having too many all-rounders has led to a false sense of security which leads players playing differently to what their role and batting number should actually demand. This team, to be honest, looks like an ODI team.

On the bad luck front, I strongly believe they have really missed Broad. Broad would have been invaluable with the ball. Then again, they have been playing catch-up with their 4-2 3-3 bowling combinations.

Having said all of this, could they have won. I think if they had addressed the above, they could have atleast taken a game or so, but still not the series. For the series they really need a spinner who can take wickets and control the runs. And they truly do not have one of those.

 

[KhalidRafi]

Moeen is not suited for the role of 2nd spinner. He is the 3rd spinner at best. England needed one more spinner instead of a pacer.

Playing the extra pacer was a definite error on England's part, but at the same time it reflects on the lack of confidence they have in their other two spinners Batty and Ansari, who have been pretty poor in the one Test match they each played. But yeah, still think they could have both done better than Woakes or Ball.

 

[JaDed]

Broad's defn England's top bowler and among top 3 pacers right now but don't think he has it in him to play 5 tests in tougher conditions ,he can easily do 3 though.Easily edges out Anderson due to his cutters.