Get a clue. Haari was responding to Rohit Doshi's tripe - it was him not Haari who raised the irrelevant topic of India.
England in Sri Lanka March-April 2011/12
- Thread starter lancashire666
- Start date
puddleduck
Chairman of Selectors
As much as England batted poorly, for once it was their fielding and indiscipline that cost them. In tough conditions to take wickets you just can't let teams score an extra 150+ runs with their tails. Essentially what England lost by.
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
Although England have lost four test in a row and the top order's clear inability vs spin is being cruelly expose i am taking a long term view on this.
In recalling Australia glory # 1 era from 1995-2006/07, in the embryonic years he Aussies struggled in the sub-continent losing in India 1996, 1998, and Sri Lanka 1999 and India 2001.
It took AUS until 2004 to conquer the sub-continent.
So although i don't believe England are the # 1 team as the rankings state, this first sub-continent teams under the "New England" team whose legacy begun in the 2010/11 Ashes win is their first of many tests.
Its a team that will conceivably be together for another 5 years. Only a replacement for Strauss and a clear cut new # 6 batsmen is what is needed in the top order.
When AUS lost those early series in India & SRI - their were no calls to get rid of Steve Waugh, Mark Waugh, Ponting etc - because those were AUS best batsmen regardless, just like how Cook/Trott/KP/Bell/Prior are. Thus calls from Michael Vaughan to have batting changes is highly knee-jerk.
ENG still have a team that should win/or be highly competitive in away countries like AUS/SA/NZ/WI - they just like AUS need to find out what is the best "English way" to bat in the sub-continent.
In recalling Australia glory # 1 era from 1995-2006/07, in the embryonic years he Aussies struggled in the sub-continent losing in India 1996, 1998, and Sri Lanka 1999 and India 2001.
It took AUS until 2004 to conquer the sub-continent.
So although i don't believe England are the # 1 team as the rankings state, this first sub-continent teams under the "New England" team whose legacy begun in the 2010/11 Ashes win is their first of many tests.
Its a team that will conceivably be together for another 5 years. Only a replacement for Strauss and a clear cut new # 6 batsmen is what is needed in the top order.
When AUS lost those early series in India & SRI - their were no calls to get rid of Steve Waugh, Mark Waugh, Ponting etc - because those were AUS best batsmen regardless, just like how Cook/Trott/KP/Bell/Prior are. Thus calls from Michael Vaughan to have batting changes is highly knee-jerk.
ENG still have a team that should win/or be highly competitive in away countries like AUS/SA/NZ/WI - they just like AUS need to find out what is the best "English way" to bat in the sub-continent.
Sedition
Panel of Selectors
Well Sri Lanka's got one monkey off their back, having lost their last 4 test series (SA, Pak, Aus and Eng), they're now in a position where they'll at least draw the series. Had to go all the way back to July 2009 since Sri Lanka have actually won a test series, against Pakistan in their match-fixing prime.
Fair point, but England's "inability to play spin" is a bit deeper than just not being good at playing it, they don't even make the bowlers get them out.
So yes, England's conceding of runs to the Sri Lankan lower order was the difference, but if England had applied themselves more than they did (93 between the top six in the 1st innings?) and a few rank poor shots 2nd innings, they would have made it a lot closer or probably won.
There was not one single bowled in the England 2nd innings so no sharp spinners through the gate, the only batsman not out caught was Bell who pre-empted a sweep and was out LBW.
Don't agree with this completely, whilst the Broad no-ball cost us 45 runs or so, and the two Monty drops off Jayawardene cost about 33 is about the difference between the scores, the real issue was getting bowled out for 46 overs in the first innings, just criminal on that wicket. Even in the second innings all barring a couple of dismissals were completely careless.
Anderson in the first innings completely outperformed the situation for a seamer (and an often criticised one dimensional seamer at that). Unfortunately Monty's drops are one of the reason why he's unlikely be our #1 spinner again. Not just the fact he dropped them, but the complete lack of technique, keeping your hands together isn't difficult.
Brilliant innings from Trott and the fluky wicket of Prior set off the collapse. Despite 4 successive defeats we shouldn't get too massively critical in general, we've been in positions to win the last 3. I agree with War, sub-continent isn't easy (we all know what happens in the reverse fixtures), you just can't expect someone to be able adapt to any conditions, when they may face those conditions once every couple of years! Playing away in most sport is difficult, but in cricket it's harder than most.
That all said, shot selection is a major concern, the sweep shot has cost England massively in this Test. For me, the next match should determine Strauss' place in the side, it won't, but it should. He's scored 1 century in his last 29 Tests. Many times stats can be misleading, those are fairly emphatic, that's a third (give or take a couple of matches) of his career!
Got to replace Broad for the next match, he simply isn't fit. Got to be Bresnan with our batting fragility at the moment. I'd rather Finn, but Bresnan is Mr Dependable and offers other skills. I'm not sure I'd bother to make any other changes, even with the many failures around the batting, you got us in to the mess, you get us out of it.
ste_mc_efc
Chairman of Selectors
Sri Lanka are a decent team who did well in SA, which aren't exactly favourable conditions to them.
I thought before the series that a drawn series would be about par.
I thought before the series that a drawn series would be about par.
I agree and that reinforces what I have been saying, it isn't an inability to play spin but an inability to play with any sense and application, the ability to make most of your ability and not just try silly or pre-emptive shots meaning the bowler doesn't even have to bowl you a good ball to get you out.
I had to look further into that, interesting indeed as is some of the other stats I'm going to add.
Strauss - 29 Tests, 1511 runs @ 32.85 (100 x1)
Pietersen - 28* Tests, 1814 runs @ 44.24 (100 x3)
*same period as Strauss' last 29 Tests.
Big difference in runs and averages, but KP has only scored two more hundreds. Bell has scored eight and Cook 10 in the same period. The other interesting stat is Strauss averaged 45.08 against the aussies in that same period, 38.17 against India, but it is the averages against Sri Lanka, South Africa and Pakistan killing him :
vs AUS/IND : 770 runs @ 42.78
vs SRI/SAF/PAK : 555 runs @ 22.20
It's fine to say "who else is there?" but why persist with a line-up that isn't scoring runs? If we're going to lose we might as well lose with people who theoretically can't play spin since they can't do any worse. We can't be sure what will happen, we can be sure what has happened and does most of the time.
Last series win in Sri Lanka : 2000/01
Last series win in India : 1984/85
Last series win in Pakistan/away to Pakistan : 2000/01
Over a decade of sticking with the same faces and not winning, even longer against India. Gatting, Robinson, Fowler and Downton carried the batting for England, none of the batsmen had special career averages (around 35-36) and Downton averaged under 20.
I think maybe you're right, is there much point at this stage making any changes? I doubt any lessons will be learned, for all the experience and ability to score runs in England and on flat foreign tracks, these batsmen seem happy never to learn and just keep failing in some series safe in the knowledge they won't be dropped.
The other thing about Strauss vs Australia is that he had to face Doherty, Beer and Smith last Ashes - all who turn into him and all are very average standard. I think of Hauritz vs Strauss in 2009, Strauss was very uncomfortable. So this coming Ashes with Lyon vs Strauss, I hope Clarke will throw the ball to him early and often. That may help nullify Strauss' recent run-fest vs Australia.
I know Michael Yawn says a lot, and trying to be trendy and controversial way too much and rarely says anything worth noting, he has made an interesting point about the batting.
Michael Vaughan believes England need to freshen up their top order after a 75-run defeat by Sri Lanka extended their losing run to four Tests.
The ex-captain says changes are needed to give England a chance against India in their four-Test series in November.
"I don't think England can arrive in India with this top five," he said.
"Something needs freshening up, whether it is now or at the end of the summer. England can't afford to go in with players carrying baggage against spin."
BBC Sport - Michael Vaughan calls for England batting changes
Name 2012 average Career av
A Strauss 25.4 41.2
A Cook 13.5 47.9
J Trott 35.6 53.6
K Pietersen 12.5 48.2
I Bell 14.5 46.8
M Prior 33 43.6
Harsh of them to include Trott and Prior in that. Low 30s for a keeper as a personal bat spell is pretty good, mid-30s for a poor series isn't bad for batsman either, if only the rest had had such good 'poor series' then we'd not have lost every Test.
Michael Vaughan believes England need to freshen up their top order after a 75-run defeat by Sri Lanka extended their losing run to four Tests.
The ex-captain says changes are needed to give England a chance against India in their four-Test series in November.
"I don't think England can arrive in India with this top five," he said.
"Something needs freshening up, whether it is now or at the end of the summer. England can't afford to go in with players carrying baggage against spin."
BBC Sport - Michael Vaughan calls for England batting changes
Name 2012 average Career av
A Strauss 25.4 41.2
A Cook 13.5 47.9
J Trott 35.6 53.6
K Pietersen 12.5 48.2
I Bell 14.5 46.8
M Prior 33 43.6
Harsh of them to include Trott and Prior in that. Low 30s for a keeper as a personal bat spell is pretty good, mid-30s for a poor series isn't bad for batsman either, if only the rest had had such good 'poor series' then we'd not have lost every Test.
Quite, everyone says "Ooh England, they can't play spin." which is simply wrong, yes, we aren't as good at playing spin as the sub-continent teams, but welcome to home advantage, I could reverse that with how they cope (or don't, as the case is) with our seamers at home. All of the top 6 have shown they can play spin at some point (Strauss has a decent record in India iirc), the problem isn't technical, it's mental.
Owzat said:
Many know I'm a big supporter of KP, he's had a poor winter (outside the UAE ODIs) of that there is no doubt, but he has made big strides of late and the team have put a lot in to him, he's not the player he was, but he can still turn a match and win you a match in a session. He will get himself up for South Africa, I'd always persist with a talent like that and in that period you've shown, albeit a little short on centuries, a more than acceptable record.
As for replacements, the openers you're looking at Carberry (a good player of spin) and Hales. Possibly Stephen Moore and because I'm biassed, I'm going to throw in Chris Nash as well!
Taylor is the next obvious middle order player, not quite sure he's "there" yet, maybe another summer. Bopara and Patel are good, but not quite sure they have the potential Taylor has.
Strauss for me is the weakest link in the batting, Bell is just too inconsistent to know what to do with.
Edit: Broad confirmed out of 2nd Test. You really want to play Finn, but not sure we can with the batting situation. Or do we go super attacking and tell the batsman to just get on with it? Though Bresnan will do well out here.
Dipak
ICC Board Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2010
- Location
- Mumbai, India
Another MASSIVE setback for England in an already disastrous tour - England in Sri Lanka 2012: Broad out of Sri Lanka tour | Cricket News | Global | ESPN Cricinfo
Finn should come in. It's high time to blood youngsters like Hales, Stokes and James Taylor in the squad now, make them used to the SC conditions.
----------
Also, Bresnan should come in for Monty. Compensates for Broad's loss with the bat too and at least he will field and bowl better than him.
Finn should come in. It's high time to blood youngsters like Hales, Stokes and James Taylor in the squad now, make them used to the SC conditions.
----------
Also, Bresnan should come in for Monty. Compensates for Broad's loss with the bat too and at least he will field and bowl better than him.
Last edited:
Dipak
ICC Board Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2010
- Location
- Mumbai, India
^ corrected
Similar threads
- Locked
