Print

[Seniorplayer]

Bit harsh  leaving Curran out of the  NZ tour understand a fully fit Mark Wood is needed but  woakes should have been left out  he's  already had to many tour failures

[jp2408]

Bit harsh  leaving Curran out of the  NZ tour understand a fully fit Mark Wood is needed but  woakes should have been left out  he's  already had to many tour failures

Without Woakes we would have a proper tail though - particularly without Stokes in the side. You would end up with something like:

7. Ali
8. Overton/Crane
9. Wood
10. Broad
11. Anderson

If Stokes plays and everyone moves down a slot that is doable, but otherwise Woakes is a must for his batting as much as his bowling in my view. Particularly for NZ where he is almost playing as a 4th seamer anyway (assume we will play 4 given conditions).

[edge]

You've got a point there @Buzz, although to be fair Livingstone batted 3 for Lancs all last year. Wouldn't want to throw him in there on test debut though, we need to get away from asking players to start their test career at 3 and give debutants the best chance of easing their way in to tests.
Suspect the selectors are still closing their eyes and hoping Stokes will be available and that will make everything ok again. More debuts to come, definitely a good time for someone to score a load for the Lions!

[six and out]

I really think the selectors are putting all their eggs in a Stokes shaped ginger basket.

They keep on selecting him in the squad in hope that he can play and then they have the flexibility to pick a side a lot easier - pick an extra batter, or even a proper spinner etc...

Then when he can't play it's too late the squad is all out of shape, they have no back up plan etc...

Why not do it the other way round - don't pick Stokes in the squad - think he won't be available, and pick a squad that will cover our deficiencies of not having him etc...

Then if he is available brilliant, hooray, superb, he is back!

[Neon Cricket]

Still find the whole Moeen witch-hunt a little baffling, he's had one bad series - am I missing something? Aus is arguably the hardest place to come and perform. Obviously he hasn't been good enough, but surely deserves another series or so after what he's brought to the side over the past few years? He got a 10fer just 6 months ago...

[edge]

Still find the whole Moeen witch-hunt a little baffling, he's had one bad series - am I missing something? Aus is arguably the hardest place to come and perform. Obviously he hasn't been good enough, but surely deserves another series or so after what he's brought to the side over the past few years? He got a 10fer just 6 months ago...

Unfortunately Moeen averages 30 with the bat and 40 with the ball, so it's not just been one poor series! Trouble is that he's occasionally brilliant but when he's not being brilliant he's being sadly poor. Not 100% for axing him but think his place in the side is much harder to justify without Stokes balancing the team.

[jp2408]

I really think the selectors are putting all their eggs in a Stokes shaped ginger basket.

They keep on selecting him in the squad in hope that he can play and then they have the flexibility to pick a side a lot easier - pick an extra batter, or even a proper spinner etc...

Then when he can't play it's too late the squad is all out of shape, they have no back up plan etc...

Why not do it the other way round - don't pick Stokes in the squad - think he won't be available, and pick a squad that will cover our deficiencies of not having him etc...

Then if he is available brilliant, hooray, superb, he is back!

I think they have to pick him for legal reasons so as to show that they aren't prejudging the outcome of the legal process.. So that if he was cleared he is in the squad and hasn't been unfairly excluded and stopped from earning money on the basis of unproven allegations etc.

Fact is he is effectively suspended and unavailable for selection until the outcome is known.

[northernboy1987]

Unfortunately Moeen averages 30 with the bat and 40 with the ball, so it's not just been one poor series! Trouble is that he's occasionally brilliant but when he's not being brilliant he's being sadly poor. Not 100% for axing him but think his place in the side is much harder to justify without Stokes balancing the team.

This is basically where I'm at now I think. I like Mo but he's like the little girl with the little curl from the Longfellow poem isn't he - "And when she was good, she was very, very good, but when she was bad she was horrid"

[FattusCattus]

I'm not sure I'm blaming Moeen directly, but the management and coaching staff are culpable.

Our only experienced spinner, offering the only variety to a 4 man medium-paced attack, strains his side and cuts his finger - he's not really going to be that good is he? added to this, he's continually picked despite not performing for 5 tests in a row - it's not doing him any favours really, is it?

I would like to think that moving forward, some lessons are learn't and we a) start prioritising extreme coaching for young test-hopefuls who offer variety (quicks, spinners, left-armers)  b) we have experienced reserves lined up to parachute in when such things happen as to Ali (Patel or someone else who isn't a callow youth).

With 38 support staff paid to be on tour and the wages the England guys are getting, surely there is money out there to be diverted into working with these hopefuls, and to unearth some talent?

Broad, Anderson and Swann at their best were a very good attack, but it soon runs out behind them and we start to look a little 1990's right arm samey.

[six and out]

I think they have to pick him for legal reasons so as to show that they aren't prejudging the outcome of the legal process.. So that if he was cleared he is in the squad and hasn't been unfairly excluded and stopped from earning money on the basis of unproven allegations etc.

Fact is he is effectively suspended and unavailable for selection until the outcome is known.

Even if that is the case my point still stands.

The squad is based around him being available and has no contingency if he isn't.

[Seniorplayer]

Mo should never haver been given the test match first spinner role because he isn't one prior to the Aus tour who said so Moeen himself

[Seniorplayer]

Without Woakes we would have a proper tail though - particularly without Stokes in the side. You would end up with something like:

7. Ali
8. Overton/Crane
9. Wood
10. Broad
11. Anderson

If Stokes plays and everyone moves down a slot that is doable, but otherwise Woakes is a must for his batting as much as his bowling in my view. Particularly for NZ where he is almost playing as a 4th seamer anyway (assume we will play 4 given conditions).

Yes if he scores runs or stays  in when the batters are scoring and doesnt expose the tail as happened in Aus.

[Big Mac]

Even after a horrendous Ashes tour, Moeen has the 5th best strike rate (66.4) among English spinners (min. 20 wickets) since the Second World War.

Of the four spinners with a better strike rate, Swann (Top with a S/R of 60.1) is the only one that played in the last 60 years. (Well, 59 years in February if we're being pedantic)

Moeen has a better strike rate than Underwood, Panesar, Lock, Edmonds, Emburey, Titmus and pretty much everybody else that has turned out for England.

He's not perfect but that's got to count for something.

[HallamKeeper]

Does anyone know what the pitches are likely to be like?

My memory isn't great but didn't they play on a couple of dead drop in tracks last time down there? Keep hearing people say they will be green seamers.

I think until we unearth the next 100-test players we should have enough bowlers to cover the overs if 1 or 2 promising but raw talents have a bad day. So that means Woakes, Ali, Stokes will be needed to score some runs if at all possible.

[six and out]

Does anyone know what the pitches are likely to be like?

My memory isn't great but didn't they play on a couple of dead drop in tracks last time down there? Keep hearing people say they will be green seamers.

I think until we unearth the next 100-test players we should have enough bowlers to cover the overs if 1 or 2 promising but raw talents have a bad day. So that means Woakes, Ali, Stokes will be needed to score some runs if at all possible.

Auckland -

according to cricinfo there hasn't been a Test there since 2014 and it was quite a game!

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/11825/scorecard/667651/new-zealand-vs-india-1st-test-india-tour-of-new-zealand-2013-14/

We were last there in 2013 we held out for a draw - when Prior got a 2nd innings 100 - Finn got 6 for.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/12231/scorecard/569245/new-zealand-vs-england-3rd-test-england-tour-of-new-zealand-2012-13/

Christchurch -

The Bangladesh Test in January - pretty low scoring with Boult and Southee cleaning up

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/10680/scorecard/1019987/new-zealand-vs-bangladesh-2nd-test-bangladesh-tour-of-new-zealand-2016-17/