Print

[Seniorplayer]

Yes looking at that side we look a bit light batting wise
I know I know I know !! But like him or not rate him(i do) chris woakes i vital to england

interesting
Is he vital though brcause of what he brings to the team  two 50 s top  score 66  and one five for (6/70 ) in tests or because when hes in the team it has a more balanced look.

[Tailendfielder]

I think the selection is poor. I can understand there issues, with so many allrounders in he side you've either selected a Buttler playing as a specialist batter at 7 or ur picking too many bowlers. I can understand trj not being selected. 5 seamers is too many and ensures roots's least favourte is unlikely to do much.

If they are so confused about the balance because of Ali, Bairstow and Stokes i would pick a keeper.

Lets not start the whole ridiculous Woakes thing again though. His a top player and will be around the England side for a few years, like him or not. Particularly as two of our best bowlers are getting on.

[t2ylo]

I think once you start including part timers you're always going to look bowling heavy.Root has 30 1st class wicket, Jennings has 18 in far less games, do we count his as a 5th seamer.

I agree we look bowler heavy on paper, but the strength of those bowlers with the bat allows us that luxury.

more to the point with 3 "all rounders" in the team Bairstow/Moeen/Stokes surely that means we can pick another batsman
And a few overs here and there from Root should be ample.
It smacks of lack of faith in Ali to be the main spinner

[Rob580]

I'm thinking that Root doesn't think much of Ali as a spinner, and that he's pretty much going to play as a batsman.

Until he once and for all proves he's not consistent or tough enough to score regular test match runs, then we can get another batsman in. Shame they didn't just do it now, save all the time figuring out what is already obvious.

Picking Dawson seems odd, however he did perform well and they like his attitude, just yet to be convinced he's good enough for international cricket in either discipline. We could just accept that we don't have a good enough spinner and play a seam attack until one develops enough o be considered for test match cricket (Mason Crane needs another couple of seasons bowling hundreds of overs in county cricket before he's ready)

[Alvaro]

Two hundreds in India at no.5.

Highly likely that this time next week he will have 2000 Test runs and 100 wickets.

[t2ylo]

Two hundreds in India at no.5.

Highly likely that this time next week he will have 2000 Test runs and 100 wickets.

He's in my team every time. Still doesn't explain why we need Dawson

[Alvaro]

Andy Flower likes him

[edge]

I'm thinking that Root doesn't think much of Ali as a spinner, and that he's pretty much going to play as a batsman.

Until he once and for all proves he's not consistent or tough enough to score regular test match runs, then we can get another batsman in. Shame they didn't just do it now, save all the time figuring out what is already obvious.

Picking Dawson seems odd, however he did perform well and they like his attitude, just yet to be convinced he's good enough for international cricket in either discipline. We could just accept that we don't have a good enough spinner and play a seam attack until one develops enough o be considered for test match cricket (Mason Crane needs another couple of seasons bowling hundreds of overs in county cricket before he's ready)

This is the only explanation for Dawson's selection that really makes sense to me - they've decided they don't fancy Moeen as a bowler (hard to argue with a test average of 42) but he scored too many runs in the winter to be dropped. Dawson gets in as a holding spinner who'll tie an end up and get good runs at 8, Moeen gets his chance to sink or swim at 5. Be interesting to see the batting order and how many overs Moeen gets, there's plenty of batsmen/Ben Foakes in the counties scoring runs and eyeing up that no5 spot if Mo gets put there and fails.

Don't have a problem with Ballance getting selected at all but I'd rather have seen him in the middle order, seems pretty clear he prefers batting there?

[ppccopener]

Ballance may well prefer 5 it's where he gets a lot for Yorks. Bayliss wants root to bat 3, root wants 4 I reckon so gaz slots in to 3 and tells Bayliss that's where he's batting. Makes sense to me 

Not quite the alleged almighty bust up on the ashes tour between Goochie and KP. 'The team needs you to bat 3' ...'I bat 4'

Goochie:' no....the team needs you to bat 3'. 'I'm still batting 4' !!!

But new skipper is never more powerful than right now.he likes number 4 I think.

[ppccopener]

interesting
Is he vital though brcause of what he brings to the team  two 50 s top  score 66  and one five for (6/70 ) in tests or because when hes in the team it has a more balanced look.

Totally repect your opinion having seen a lot of cricket like myself. But yes...he is vital to the team, when he is fit I'd be amazed if he was not straight in...stats may not back it up true but stats never tell the whole story of a players value to the tam. Woakes does a lot of unglamorous work for the team, and I think England know it, they have backed him all the way.

He's a talented cricketer and yes @Tailendfielder has a good point...Jimmy and broad are in the last third of their career, we need Woakes who is improving.

But as I said, everyone has an opinion it's what makes cricket great talking points for us all 

[Churchy1989]

Anyone going Sunday that wants to grab a beer?

[Seniorplayer]

I think the selection is poor. I can understand there issues, with so many allrounders in he side you've either selected a Buttler playing as a specialist batter at 7 or ur picking too many bowlers. I can understand trj not being selected. 5 seamers is too many and ensures roots's least favourte is unlikely to do much.

If they are so confused about the balance because of Ali, Bairstow and Stokes i would pick a keeper.

Lets not start the whole ridiculous Woakes thing again though. His a top player and will be around the England side for a few years, like him or not. Particularly as two of our best bowlers are getting on.

How can  a  dicussion around Woakes  be ridiculous  A player with only two fifties and one five four in tests that doesnt scream top player but do agree there's a lack of  seamers banging on the test match door  to replace Broad and Jimmy  which may lead to him being in the England team  for a while.

[edge]

How can  a  dicussion around Woakes  be ridiculous  A player with only two fifties and one five four in tests that doesnt scream top player but do agree there's a lack of  seamers banging on the test match door  to replace Broad and Jimmy  meaning he could be around for a while.

You love quoting incorrect stats about Chris Woakes! Also pretty pointless - for example Keaton Jennings only has one test ton, which tells you... absolutely nothing about how good a test play he may be. Silly to complain a bloke who bats at 9 only has two fifties too. I could go on, one of England's best players in recent times.

[Seniorplayer]

 Not going to comment further wouldn't call him one of England's best

[edge]

Not going to comment further wouldn't call him one of England's best

Well I'll just leave this here for you, Woakes' career test stats so far (17 tests) compared to Broad's first 17 tests. You love stats, so as you'll be pleased to see here, Woakes could never be a top player