England v WI, 2nd Test, Chester-le-Street, May 14 - 18

No Vaughan, but just like the Terminator, the Shermanator will be back.

This gladdens the hearts of many cricket fans. Some of them may even be English.

Aye - what joy.

Tinker back in the nick of time to hand the urn to Oz on a silver platter.

Miller says this gives them 'plenty of options'. One of these will presumably be to go down the 6 batsman / 4 bowler route at Chester-le-Street after Bresnan (the 5th bowler) only got 7 overs at Lord's.

Sid comes back into the 13 man squad too at the expense of Monty.

England squad: AJ Strauss (captain), AN Cook, RS Bopara, KP Pietersen, PD Collingwood, IR Bell, MJ Prior (wicketkeeper), SCJ Broad, TT Bresnan, GP Swann, JM Anderson, G Onions, RJ Sidebottom.

Presumably Bresnan and one of the two returning faces will miss out.

That would be my guess too, Lardy.

FB Bell-haters' best bet might be to see him included here, in the hope that he fails on a lively Durham wicket. I can't really see Sidebottom being ready for a Test return just yet.

After a positive selection in the first Test I guess it was obvious that we would see a backward step here!

One minute they are suggesting the days of cheap recalls are over then they backtrack like this. Anyway, county runs aren't the issue with Bell, his problem is temperament not form and technique and it's one I can't see being solved at this level.

As for Sidebottom I think it's too soon to bring him back as well. Needs longer to prove his fitness issues are sorted and he still has what it takes.

Agree with all of that, Beamer.

Bell immediately crumbles in the face of a potential Test match later in the week, and has been bowled for a 5 ball duck this morning at Canterbury in the FPT.

Monty could find it difficult to force his way back.

I doubt if there will be any changes made when push comes to shove. It's fair enough to name an extra batsman in the squad - just in case - but it would be monstrously unfair on Bresnan to drop him on the evidence of just seven overs.

Of course, you're right, young Mr Seal . . . but is there a feeling they have one bowler too many?

Basil wrote:I doubt if there will be any changes made when push comes to shove. It's fair enough to name an extra batsman in the squad - just in case - but it would be monstrously unfair on Bresnan to drop him on the evidence of just seven overs.

Not fair at all, but what's fairness got to do with anything?

Four seamers is an increasingly moribund tactic for England, particularly in the first half of May, and especially when arguably your best bowler over recent times has been a spinner.

Would be very harsh on Bresnan, but I hope they are now looking to pick teams to win Test matches rather than what they consider to be fair or unfair.

Big_Bad_Bob wrote:

Basil wrote:I doubt if there will be any changes made when push comes to shove. It's fair enough to name an extra batsman in the squad - just in case - but it would be monstrously unfair on Bresnan to drop him on the evidence of just seven overs.

Not fair at all, but what's fairness got to do with anything?

Four seamers is an increasingly moribund tactic for England, particularly in the first half of May, and especially when arguably your best bowler over recent times has been a spinner.

Would be very harsh on Bresnan, but I hope they are now looking to pick teams to win Test matches rather than what they consider to be fair or unfair.

If they think he's good enough to play in the first place, then surely they want to know if they were right - I would have thought that means another game.

I'm sure they would, but he's just as likely to be a passenger in the 2nd Test as he was in the 1st.

I don't really see the Windies improving much, in fact I'd expect them to aggregate even less with the bat up in the north-east, so another 7 overs or so is going to tell them cock all - unless they're going to drop one of the other bowlers...?

Well I'm still reeling from the continued non-selection of Saj Mahmood in favour of some fat Yorkie and Ryan Sicknote.

Ian Bell can fiddle with his teeny-tiny-testes and f*ck the f*ck off.

Incidentally, since Bell was overlooked for the first Test as he was doing "well but not well enough", he's gone 29, 27, 37, 30*.

Good to see he's not contributing pretty little 20s and 30s any more. Oh...

Dello wrote:Incidentally, since Bell was overlooked for the first Test as he was doing "well but not well enough", he's gone 29, 27, 37, 30*, DUCK.

Good to see he's not contributing pretty little 20s and 30s any more. Oh...

Fixed for today's failure.

So he's back to his best Test form ... slot him in at number 3.

Obviously picked as a specialist short leg, he can bat at 8...

He ain't going to play. End of.

Same XI for England.

Richardson in for Windies.

I'm not really sure why England haven't just named the same XI 4 days out from the start of this match. I'd be very surprised if they make any changes to an England team that won its first test match since September last year.

All that naming Bell in the squad does is give the little runt reward for his recent 20's and 30's. Hardly send out a message that he needs to show more passion, more fight, and more runs, does it.

It might have scare him into making a few low scores.

Cunning plan, if so.

We've just won a test in 3 days, the team must being buoyant and feel they can do the same again and the selectors go and do this. Why?

Only one reason Bell is back, Giles loves him.

What happened to this supposed "New England"?


Obviously not that 'new'

Looks like Bresnan will be the unlucky one at the Riverside with either Bell coming in at No.6. (where he always seems to get lots of runs) if a defensive option is sought (which would be consistent with Strauss & Flower's previous tactics) or Sidebottom playing if another 3-day win is desired with the advantage of giving Sid a pre-Ashes runout.

That still leaves the problem of who to leave out for the 1st Test against Oz to provide a place for Freddie (assuming he's fully fit then). Also Cardiff is an unknown quantity at Test level and England may need another spinner in the form of either Panesar or Rashid necessitating further changes. Will Onions suffer the curse of the recent English fifers-on-debut (last one before Onions, James Kirtley, and, before him, Richard Johnson) who have played fewer Tests than they have taken wickets in their first match?