Search results

fair play to the chap. He's done me RIGHT up!

Rather than 'aftertime' when we see how TRJ gets on, I'll pin my colours to the mast right now, and say I'm am NOT in favour of his section. Just like Dawson, another throw-back to England selections of the 80s and 90s when they were so desperate to find players who could do a 'bit of both'...

Its a terribly conservative pick, which, as we've discussed earlier in the thread is simply not required, because of the two-string capabilities of Bairstow, Stokes, Moeen, (Woakes) and Root.

KwaZulu Natal?

Maybe. Still leaves a spot for an opener though (not that I'm writing off Jennings). Hopefully Hameed will come good long term. Dawson is still the sore thumb. Just can't fathom the logic. He's not a promising youngster (27), he's not performing with the bat in the CC (220 runs @ 22 with a...

Utterly bizarre.

Bit like his Dad, then. (although Luke didn't have to face Curtley Ambrose first ball!)

How could anyone possibly tell, in light of your serious suggestions over the years? #JLloydSamuel

Although, if you'd said Luke WELLS, that might be worthy of debate at some point. He is the second-highest averaging English batsman in the County game this summer (after Ballance), with 88.00.

Luke Wright who is about 33, has never played a Test, is not a top order batsman, has never shown any interest in patiently building an innings in his entire career, and has got off the mark in 2 of his last 3 Sussex innings with a straight six? Yes, me too.

And on the subject of occasional spinners - further to the 'what is the point of Dawson?' debate - I reckon Joe Root's spin looks more threatening than his does. Sack him off now, for an extra batter, or Woakes, if fit.

Current form aside, Haseeb Hameed is surely nailed on to be a part of England's top order plans? If he could develop his leg spin, so much the better.

Indeed. ZIM added 520 runs for the last five wickets across their two innings. Impressive. In return, SRI went on from 203/5 in their chase, still almost 200 short, to win with the loss of just one more wicket.

Ironically, on the very same day we were discussing England's failure to apply themselves in the face of a huge fourth innings target, Sri Lanka were pulling off the fifth highest winning chase of all time, in a terrific Test match in Colombo. http://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/scorecard/ECKO41971

Maybe not QUITE as poor, but I think most predictions were that they wouldn't last the day.

Hey Simster Have you spotted any other VALUE in the betting markets today?

Ballance has a huge flaw in technique, which will be his downfall whether he bats at 2, 3, 4, 9 or 11.

He knows that. But BG is being stupid, in refusing to accept that it is perfectly possible for players to get out, without having committed any mistake, to a brilliant delivery (a 90mph out-swinging Yorker for example). Basically the only way to have played an effective defensive stroke to that...

Only if you're 'accepting' that every Test side in the world bar India and South Africa, is 'generally poor'.

Why would we need to resort to that, when we have Marcus Trescothick ready to go?