No way you can loose series 3/2 in England with third class captain like Kohli, who insist to have 5 batsman in test Xl
India tour of England 2018
- Thread starter Targaryen
- Start date
Shaw ready for oval?
Shaw ready for Oval?
Chatter: Time to blood young Shaw?
If Shaw does come in, it will be India's fourth opening combination during this series, highlighting India's problems at the top.
If Shaw does come in, it will be India's fourth opening combination during this series, highlighting India's problems at the top.
Should India bring in the 18-year-old Prithvi Shaw for the final Test? Given Ravichandran Ashwin's inefficiency and injury woes coming to the fore in the previous Test, should the tourists go easy with him? 4-1 or experimenting with new faces instead of the already exasperated James Anderson and Stuart Broad - which should have been the right way forward? Ahead of the fifth and final Test, Vishaal Loganathan and Rob Johnston try to answer all these questions and more.
Will India get back to chopping and changing now that the series is done and dusted?
Vishaal: For once, India look like they are in need of a few changes.
KL Rahul needs to work on his technique a bit more, and India should be looking at bringing in the young Prithvi Shaw in his place. It almost seems too early to bring in a teenager into the team, but given India have struggled finding an opening alliance that has clicked, another opening combination could be on the cards. If Shaw does come in, it will be India's fourth opening combination during this series, highlighting India's problems at the top.
Shikhar Dhawan should retain his place ahead of Rahul. The left-hander has shown great application and execution since coming back into the side for the third and fourth Tests. Even if he hasn't really set the scoreboards racing, like he usually does when in flow, there's a glimpse of something significant around the corner when he's batted. The same cannot be said of Rahul, who has struggled both while trying to be defensive or attacking. With Shaw coming in, India will have two attacking batsmen at the start, and it can't be too bad a thing for the team to start off that way.
The other change that India could possibly look at is replacing R Ashwin. The offspinner looked way below par in Southampton, failing to utilise the rough the way Moeen Ali did for England. He also seemed to be pulled down by an injury, failing to completely pivot while bowling and thus reducing his effectiveness.
India's change will depend on the pitch. If there's a hint of dryness, R Jadeja should be the straight replacement for Ashwin, otherwise, another pacer could come in.
Have India played so badly that they might end up losing 4-1?
Vishaal: There are two ways of looking at this.
They have certainly competed hard, but for Lord's, and could very well have finished at least level in the series having had the upper hand in both Edgbaston and Southampton. If they had managed to pull through in one of those games, India would have been going into London with history on the line - no Indian team has ever won three Tests in England before. If just the level of competition is taken into consideration, India have shown that they are certainly on par with England, even if they're playing in alien conditions.
The other is that they've failed to capitalise on key moments. For a number one side, India should have seized them and put England on the mat when they had the chance. Failing to do so cost them big time. For a side that wants to be the best travelling side in the world, such lack of intent is alarming, and thus a 3-1 deficit is completely understandable.
Why has India's lower order underperformed compared to England's?
Vishaal: Well, England bat way too deep for starters and India's tail is quite long. Consistently, India have bowled superbly against the England top order only to find one batsman in the lower half to take the game away. Sam Curran did it in Birmingham and in Southampton, Chris Woakes did it at Lord's.
India's lower half, by comparison, is brimming with inexperience. Hardik Pandya is playing his first Test series outside the sub-continent; Rishabh Pant is playing his first ever, while Ashwin with the bat hasn't really promised much. The rest are frontline bowlers who cannot be trusted to play long innings. India's struggles start almost immediately after the fifth wicket, and while they've trusted the youngsters to chip in, the conditions and bowlers in England will always make that a hard task.
England, on the other hand, have players like Ben Stokes, Jos Buttler, Sam Curran, Chris Woakes and Moeen Ali turning up in the lower order.
With the series won, should England have opted for experimentation at The Oval?
Rob: Firstly, let's get one thing clear. England have quite rightly picked Alastair Cook for The Oval, a Test which will be his 161st and last. Talk of leaving him out and picking a new batsman ahead of the winter tours was decidedly harsh. Cook deserves a fine send-off.
But England could have opted to bring in Surrey's in-form opener Rory Burns, the only player to pass 1,000 Championship runs so far this season, for a debut on his home ground in preparation for the three-match series in Sri Lanka. Burns could have opened alongside Keaton Jennings with Cook moving to three - a position which England still don't have an answer for. That would have allowed Burns to make his debut on his home ground and get his feet under the table before the winter.
England also could have left out one of James Anderson or Stuart Broad after a gruelling run of matches in order to take them out of the firing line and perhaps could have given a Test debut to Essex's Jamie Porter who was included in the squad for the first three games. It is understood that England's selectors are considering resting one of Broad or Anderson for Sri Lanka so, as with Burns, it was an opportunity to give Porter a home Test debut for a likely one this winter.
Instead, selectors Ed Smith and James Taylor have decided to stick with the tried and trusted in a bid to win the series 4-1 which would be an emphatic victory against the world number one ranked team. And it's hard to disagree with the logic. England are not yet a good enough Test team that they can take any matches lightly and before this series they had won just one of their last nine matches. Right now, they just need to keep on winning.
Has Joe Root become a more assertive captain during this series?
Rob: It's hard to say for sure of course because much of a captain's job is done behind the scenes but there have been visible signs during this series that Root is becoming more decisive in his leadership.
Before the fourth Test at the Ageas Bowl, he refused to say that Jonny Bairstow would return behind the stumps when he recovered from a finger injury despite Bairstow saying just the day before that he desperately wanted to. "You don't always get what you want," Root said. "There's no guarantees in international sport." In contrast to the normal controversy-free Root press conferences, this was close to a public put down.
Then, during the game, Root clashed with James Anderson over field placings and put the field where he, rather than the bowler, wanted it. And finally, in the second innings, he decided to promote Moeen Ali to number three so that he could bat at number four, the position he says he gets more out of himself. Halfway through a game, that was a bold call and despite Moeen getting out cheaply, it sort of worked as Root made a valuable 40-odd that on another day and on another pitch would have been worth a fair few more.
And it's about time Root took more of a lead. Since he took charge of the side last summer, there has been the inescapable feeling that the senior players of Anderson, Alastair Cook and Stuart Broad have held too much sway and Root has failed to stamp his mark on things. It cannot have been easy for Root to inherit a dressing room with such legends of English cricket, but he is the captain of the ship now and he must lead it. There have been signs he is finally making his mark.
With Moeen back, do England need two spinners?
Rob: Not if he bowls like he did in Southampton they don't. Legspinner Adil Rashid only bowled 14 overs in the game and Moeen toiled away almost unchanged from one end in the second innings in preference to his great friend Rashid.
The Yorkshire leggie has had a quiet series, including not bowling or batting in the second Test at Lord's, but is notionally England's number one spinner. Moeen says that he is still a batsman who bowls and prefers being labelled the second slow bowler. It is, frankly, bizarre. But at home, England probably don't need the both of them and Ollie Pope could return to the team to replace Rashid at The Oval.
The disadvantage of such a move would be that it reduces the variation available to Root. This series he has had a left-arm seamer in Sam Curran, Rashid and some right-arm fast-bowlers. It is a variety which was sorely lacking during the Ashes and which England will need on the flat pitches of Sri Lanka and West Indies now. Rashid was selected as the sole spinner for the first three matches; leaving him out now, ahead of a winter in which he will be required, would seem counterproductive.
© Cricbuzz
Resources
Shaw ready for Oval?
Chatter: Time to blood young Shaw?
If Shaw does come in, it will be India's fourth opening combination during this series, highlighting India's problems at the top.
If Shaw does come in, it will be India's fourth opening combination during this series, highlighting India's problems at the top.
Should India bring in the 18-year-old Prithvi Shaw for the final Test? Given Ravichandran Ashwin's inefficiency and injury woes coming to the fore in the previous Test, should the tourists go easy with him? 4-1 or experimenting with new faces instead of the already exasperated James Anderson and Stuart Broad - which should have been the right way forward? Ahead of the fifth and final Test, Vishaal Loganathan and Rob Johnston try to answer all these questions and more.
Will India get back to chopping and changing now that the series is done and dusted?
Vishaal: For once, India look like they are in need of a few changes.
KL Rahul needs to work on his technique a bit more, and India should be looking at bringing in the young Prithvi Shaw in his place. It almost seems too early to bring in a teenager into the team, but given India have struggled finding an opening alliance that has clicked, another opening combination could be on the cards. If Shaw does come in, it will be India's fourth opening combination during this series, highlighting India's problems at the top.
Shikhar Dhawan should retain his place ahead of Rahul. The left-hander has shown great application and execution since coming back into the side for the third and fourth Tests. Even if he hasn't really set the scoreboards racing, like he usually does when in flow, there's a glimpse of something significant around the corner when he's batted. The same cannot be said of Rahul, who has struggled both while trying to be defensive or attacking. With Shaw coming in, India will have two attacking batsmen at the start, and it can't be too bad a thing for the team to start off that way.
The other change that India could possibly look at is replacing R Ashwin. The offspinner looked way below par in Southampton, failing to utilise the rough the way Moeen Ali did for England. He also seemed to be pulled down by an injury, failing to completely pivot while bowling and thus reducing his effectiveness.
India's change will depend on the pitch. If there's a hint of dryness, R Jadeja should be the straight replacement for Ashwin, otherwise, another pacer could come in.
Have India played so badly that they might end up losing 4-1?
Vishaal: There are two ways of looking at this.
They have certainly competed hard, but for Lord's, and could very well have finished at least level in the series having had the upper hand in both Edgbaston and Southampton. If they had managed to pull through in one of those games, India would have been going into London with history on the line - no Indian team has ever won three Tests in England before. If just the level of competition is taken into consideration, India have shown that they are certainly on par with England, even if they're playing in alien conditions.
The other is that they've failed to capitalise on key moments. For a number one side, India should have seized them and put England on the mat when they had the chance. Failing to do so cost them big time. For a side that wants to be the best travelling side in the world, such lack of intent is alarming, and thus a 3-1 deficit is completely understandable.
Why has India's lower order underperformed compared to England's?
Vishaal: Well, England bat way too deep for starters and India's tail is quite long. Consistently, India have bowled superbly against the England top order only to find one batsman in the lower half to take the game away. Sam Curran did it in Birmingham and in Southampton, Chris Woakes did it at Lord's.
India's lower half, by comparison, is brimming with inexperience. Hardik Pandya is playing his first Test series outside the sub-continent; Rishabh Pant is playing his first ever, while Ashwin with the bat hasn't really promised much. The rest are frontline bowlers who cannot be trusted to play long innings. India's struggles start almost immediately after the fifth wicket, and while they've trusted the youngsters to chip in, the conditions and bowlers in England will always make that a hard task.
England, on the other hand, have players like Ben Stokes, Jos Buttler, Sam Curran, Chris Woakes and Moeen Ali turning up in the lower order.
With the series won, should England have opted for experimentation at The Oval?
Rob: Firstly, let's get one thing clear. England have quite rightly picked Alastair Cook for The Oval, a Test which will be his 161st and last. Talk of leaving him out and picking a new batsman ahead of the winter tours was decidedly harsh. Cook deserves a fine send-off.
But England could have opted to bring in Surrey's in-form opener Rory Burns, the only player to pass 1,000 Championship runs so far this season, for a debut on his home ground in preparation for the three-match series in Sri Lanka. Burns could have opened alongside Keaton Jennings with Cook moving to three - a position which England still don't have an answer for. That would have allowed Burns to make his debut on his home ground and get his feet under the table before the winter.
England also could have left out one of James Anderson or Stuart Broad after a gruelling run of matches in order to take them out of the firing line and perhaps could have given a Test debut to Essex's Jamie Porter who was included in the squad for the first three games. It is understood that England's selectors are considering resting one of Broad or Anderson for Sri Lanka so, as with Burns, it was an opportunity to give Porter a home Test debut for a likely one this winter.
Instead, selectors Ed Smith and James Taylor have decided to stick with the tried and trusted in a bid to win the series 4-1 which would be an emphatic victory against the world number one ranked team. And it's hard to disagree with the logic. England are not yet a good enough Test team that they can take any matches lightly and before this series they had won just one of their last nine matches. Right now, they just need to keep on winning.
Has Joe Root become a more assertive captain during this series?
Rob: It's hard to say for sure of course because much of a captain's job is done behind the scenes but there have been visible signs during this series that Root is becoming more decisive in his leadership.
Before the fourth Test at the Ageas Bowl, he refused to say that Jonny Bairstow would return behind the stumps when he recovered from a finger injury despite Bairstow saying just the day before that he desperately wanted to. "You don't always get what you want," Root said. "There's no guarantees in international sport." In contrast to the normal controversy-free Root press conferences, this was close to a public put down.
Then, during the game, Root clashed with James Anderson over field placings and put the field where he, rather than the bowler, wanted it. And finally, in the second innings, he decided to promote Moeen Ali to number three so that he could bat at number four, the position he says he gets more out of himself. Halfway through a game, that was a bold call and despite Moeen getting out cheaply, it sort of worked as Root made a valuable 40-odd that on another day and on another pitch would have been worth a fair few more.
And it's about time Root took more of a lead. Since he took charge of the side last summer, there has been the inescapable feeling that the senior players of Anderson, Alastair Cook and Stuart Broad have held too much sway and Root has failed to stamp his mark on things. It cannot have been easy for Root to inherit a dressing room with such legends of English cricket, but he is the captain of the ship now and he must lead it. There have been signs he is finally making his mark.
With Moeen back, do England need two spinners?
Rob: Not if he bowls like he did in Southampton they don't. Legspinner Adil Rashid only bowled 14 overs in the game and Moeen toiled away almost unchanged from one end in the second innings in preference to his great friend Rashid.
The Yorkshire leggie has had a quiet series, including not bowling or batting in the second Test at Lord's, but is notionally England's number one spinner. Moeen says that he is still a batsman who bowls and prefers being labelled the second slow bowler. It is, frankly, bizarre. But at home, England probably don't need the both of them and Ollie Pope could return to the team to replace Rashid at The Oval.
The disadvantage of such a move would be that it reduces the variation available to Root. This series he has had a left-arm seamer in Sam Curran, Rashid and some right-arm fast-bowlers. It is a variety which was sorely lacking during the Ashes and which England will need on the flat pitches of Sri Lanka and West Indies now. Rashid was selected as the sole spinner for the first three matches; leaving him out now, ahead of a winter in which he will be required, would seem counterproductive.
© Cricbuzz
Resources
India beaten in southafrica and Now in England, I think India need to change captain.Pujara And rahane not plays single innings with any confidence at all.Kohli is fantastic batsman while he is on Fields English bowlers under pressure.
I think both Dhawan and Ashwin capable captain for India
Virat might continue as batsman.
I think both Dhawan and Ashwin capable captain for India
Virat might continue as batsman.
Master Bates
School Cricketer
No way. Rahane has to be the captain. Ohterwise we have to stick with Virat! Never ever think of Dhawan or Ashwin as captain!
True. Sadistic, yes. But a 4-1 scoreline will trigger the negative reactions on Shastri/Kohli a lot more than a 3-2 scoreline. But you know what? Even with a 4-1 scoreline, these guys will say "that does not represent how close this series was". Well.... they will have their excuses ready!
Ravi says today, check the history in the last 15-20 years we indian not score this many runs in England in test matches. In directly he wants to saves his coach job on his way return to India soon.Former cricketers critisize him of batting Disaster in England Because coach only give good speech but not doing much to improve and Guide his team
Shahtri should gave full credit to indian bowling because last series or so bhuvi took 19 wickets in England in 3 tests here while without him indian seamer doing great.
Shahtri should gave full credit to indian bowling because last series or so bhuvi took 19 wickets in England in 3 tests here while without him indian seamer doing great.
Certainly. Hardik also need rest.
Cook
Jennings
Moeen (#3)
Root
Pope
Bairstow (#6)
Buttler
Woakes
Curran
Broad
Anderson
-------------+-++
India
Dhawan
Shaw
Pujara
Kohli
Rahane
Vihari/Thakur
Pant
Jadeja
Shami
Ishant
Bumrah
Ashwin injured while Pandya dropped.Ben Stokes Injured
Jennings
Moeen (#3)
Root
Pope
Bairstow (#6)
Buttler
Woakes
Curran
Broad
Anderson
-------------+-++
India
Dhawan
Shaw
Pujara
Kohli
Rahane
Vihari/Thakur
Pant
Jadeja
Shami
Ishant
Bumrah
Ashwin injured while Pandya dropped.Ben Stokes Injured
Last edited:
abhi_jacko
National Board President
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2008
- Location
- India
- Profile Flag
- India
- Online Cricket Games Owned
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - PS4
This idiot has the audacity to make comments like this:
https://www.cricbuzz.com/cricket-ne...d-the-same-run-as-this-one-india-cricket-team
no team had such a run in the last 15-20 years?
Dravid's XI won the Test series in England
Ganguly's XI almost won/tied the series Down Under against an invincible Aussie side.
This guy is pathetic. Instead of copping any blame, he is once again spewing nonsense
https://www.cricbuzz.com/cricket-ne...d-the-same-run-as-this-one-india-cricket-team
no team had such a run in the last 15-20 years?
Dravid's XI won the Test series in England
Ganguly's XI almost won/tied the series Down Under against an invincible Aussie side.
This guy is pathetic. Instead of copping any blame, he is once again spewing nonsense
Your entire comment is rubbish. Invincible Australian side? Who do you think you're kidding? That team was missing the greatest bowler of all time (Glenn Donald McGrath) and the 3rd greatest bowler of all time (Shane Keith Warne). Drawing against Australia without McGrath and Warne is like England drawing against an India team missing Bumrah, Kumar, Ashwin and Shami. It is not at all worthy of achievement. The draw was a very poor result, that Indian team should have won. Rest assured, had the legendary mastermind McGrath played, Dravid, Tendulkar and co would have been torn to shreds. They would have played meek, defensive cricket, in recognition of Australia's resulting overwhelming superiority. It would have been 4-0.
Velocity
International Coach
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2015
- Profile Flag
- India
- Online Cricket Games Owned
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Steam PC
Baffled on why there's talk Vihari should be handed a debut. Karun Nair has been sitting on the bench for a couple of weeks. Isn't it fair that he play rather than a guy who just recently arrived? Karun Nair was selected as a backup to the middle order and he should definitely play if Pandya is dropped.
Master Bates
School Cricketer
Definitely. Nair at 6 would be fine!
Master Bates
School Cricketer
Now, my XIs:
England:
Cook
Jennings
Root
Bairstow
Stokes / Pope(if injured)
Ali
Buttler
Woakes
Curran
Broad
Anderson[DOUBLEPOST=1536231359][/DOUBLEPOST]India:
Dhawan
Shaw
Pujara
Rahane
Nair / Vihari
Pant
Jadeja
Shami
Ishant
Bumrah
Velocity
International Coach
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2015
- Profile Flag
- India
- Online Cricket Games Owned
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Steam PC
You are massively underrating Australia's backup bowlers, such as Brett Lee and Jason Gillespie, who are both competent bowlers. If you knew anything about Australian cricket, you'd know that the early 2000's was when they were at their peak and the best side in world cricket then. They still had their lineup of Langer, Hayden, Ponting, Martyn, Gilchrist which had bowlers tearing their hair out.
It was still a strong team and it's no joke to be drawing or winning with such a young Indian team in Australia. Almost all opposition struggled to win against the mighty Aussies in their own backyard.
Similar threads
- Poll
