England v New Zealand, 5xODI + 1xT20, 9-23 Jun, 2015

I think Hales has got in him to make a test batsman. Essentially, he's very orthodox - you don't see him swiping across the line very often.

Morgan was given a couple of tests, then disposed of because he wasn't scoring.
I thought you guys believed in giving someone a good run in the
test/ODI side to show off their potential!

Surely NOW is the time, with Morgs at the top of his game (whilst Ballance is at his nadir)

Merlin wrote:Morgan was given a couple of tests, then disposed of because he wasn't scoring.
I thought you guys believed in giving someone a good run in the
test/ODI side to show off their potential!

Surely NOW is the time, with Morgs at the top of his game (whilst Ballance is at his nadir)

16 Tests averaging 30, that's a more than reasonable run he was given.

If he goes back to Middlesex and makes some serious Championship runs then he deserves consideration again, but not before.

[quote="beamer"]Well, the Test line-up wasn't that negative in the NZ series. Cook will always play his way, but when he's making centuries we won't complain about that. Lyth seems to have more positive intent than most of the other recent openers we've tried. Obviously we've got a couple of out of form players in there, but Root always makes things happen then we have an exciting axis at 6-7-8 developing.

There's perhaps an opportunity for an aggressive player in the top 5, someone to take over the KP role long term, but sticking the one-day line-up into the Test side might be going a bit far. Still, rather that than the approach we've generally had the last couple of years - maybe England could lead the way in scoring 500 in a day in Test cricket![/quote]

With Cook and Ballance in the team I suspect that may be unattainable. But a man's got to have a dream, right?

Lindsay no.2 wrote:

beamer wrote:Well, the Test line-up wasn't that negative in the NZ series. Cook will always play his way, but when he's making centuries we won't complain about that. Lyth seems to have more positive intent than most of the other recent openers we've tried. Obviously we've got a couple of out of form players in there, but Root always makes things happen then we have an exciting axis at 6-7-8 developing.

There's perhaps an opportunity for an aggressive player in the top 5, someone to take over the KP role long term, but sticking the one-day line-up into the Test side might be going a bit far. Still, rather that than the approach we've generally had the last couple of years - maybe England could lead the way in scoring 500 in a day in Test cricket![/quote]

With Cook and Ballance in the team I suspect that may be unattainable. But a man's got to have a dream, right?

I meant if we did go the whole crazy way and pick the JAMODI side for Tests...

Basil wrote:I think Hales has got in him to make a test batsman. Essentially, he's very orthodox - you don't see him swiping across the line very often.

I had high hopes for Hales - and maybe he can still make it in today's test arena where grinding solidity is being replaced by pugnaciousness and shot-making ability - but I'm not sure he is compact enough to open and I think he may well be suspect against properly fast short-pitched stuff. He seems to get pull/hook shots high on the bat to low 80s deliveries and they do appear to head upwards quite often. Only seen a limted sample of hiw work - be more than happy for him to get a go in the test team. If Ballance does continue to play like a statue then is Hales the next cab off the rank to come in at 3?

beamer wrote:

Lindsay no.2 wrote:

beamer wrote:Well, the Test line-up wasn't that negative in the NZ series. Cook will always play his way, but when he's making centuries we won't complain about that. Lyth seems to have more positive intent than most of the other recent openers we've tried. Obviously we've got a couple of out of form players in there, but Root always makes things happen then we have an exciting axis at 6-7-8 developing.

There's perhaps an opportunity for an aggressive player in the top 5, someone to take over the KP role long term, but sticking the one-day line-up into the Test side might be going a bit far. Still, rather that than the approach we've generally had the last couple of years - maybe England could lead the way in scoring 500 in a day in Test cricket![/quote]

With Cook and Ballance in the team I suspect that may be unattainable. But a man's got to have a dream, right?

I meant if we did go the whole crazy way and pick the JAMODI side for Tests...

Oops - sorry.

What the hell - let's take it to a whole new level of crazy and dream the dream of 500 in a day with Cook and Ballance scoring all of them.

Lindsay no.2 wrote:

Basil wrote:I think Hales has got in him to make a test batsman. Essentially, he's very orthodox - you don't see him swiping across the line very often.

I had high hopes for Hales - and maybe he can still make it in today's test arena where grinding solidity is being replaced by pugnaciousness and shot-making ability - but I'm not sure he is compact enough to open and I think he may well be suspect against properly fast short-pitched stuff. He seems to get pull/hook shots high on the bat to low 80s deliveries and they do appear to head upwards quite often. Only seen a limted sample of hiw work - be more than happy for him to get a go in the test team. If Ballance does continue to play like a statue then is Hales the next cab off the rank to come in at 3?

I think I'm right in saying that Hales bats at three for Notts in the 4 Day game. Of course there's always Moeen who has been a bona fide number three for Worcestershire for years.

Basil wrote:

Lindsay no.2 wrote:

Basil wrote:I think Hales has got in him to make a test batsman. Essentially, he's very orthodox - you don't see him swiping across the line very often.

I had high hopes for Hales - and maybe he can still make it in today's test arena where grinding solidity is being replaced by pugnaciousness and shot-making ability - but I'm not sure he is compact enough to open and I think he may well be suspect against properly fast short-pitched stuff. He seems to get pull/hook shots high on the bat to low 80s deliveries and they do appear to head upwards quite often. Only seen a limted sample of hiw work - be more than happy for him to get a go in the test team. If Ballance does continue to play like a statue then is Hales the next cab off the rank to come in at 3?

I think I'm right in saying that Hales bats at three for Notts in the 4 Day game. Of course there's always Moeen who has been a bona fide number three for Worcestershire for years.

That would be the same Moeen who bats at 8 in the test team?

He was originally picked as a batsman who bowls...

beamer wrote:
16 Tests averaging 30, that's a more than reasonable run he was given.

If he goes back to Middlesex and makes some serious Championship runs then he deserves consideration again, but not before.

He's scoring plenty for Middlesex right now.
His Test playing "career" was, if my memory serves me well, at a time when English cricket had just entered the doldrums
with a revolving door selection procedure which saw Morgan in and then out ... and then back in, before being shunted
out again.

What I'm advocating is that, with his batting at a decent peak, forceful and attacking, perhaps that's just what is needed
to balance out the crabs of Cook and Bell ... and with his new found mate Root in the squad, who knows what might happen.
Certainly right now Ballance looks like a lost soul ... exposing him to the Aussies first up when his Tyke batting is hopeless
is, IMO, asking for trouble.

Clearly the ECB have different thoughts ... taking Ballance to Spain and leaving Morgs behind ...
or maybe it's Cookie who is the actual hurdle ... with a spark of the green eyed monster at what Morgan has achieved
in such a short space of time ...

Oh well ... it was just a thought ...perhaps too ambitious at this time.

beamer wrote:He was originally picked as a batsman who bowls...

Sort of my point. He is clearly out of his depth as a batsman.

Lindsay no.2 wrote:

Basil wrote:I think Hales has got in him to make a test batsman. Essentially, he's very orthodox - you don't see him swiping across the line very often.

I had high hopes for Hales - and maybe he can still make it in today's test arena where grinding solidity is being replaced by pugnaciousness and shot-making ability - but I'm not sure he is compact enough to open and I think he may well be suspect against properly fast short-pitched stuff. He seems to get pull/hook shots high on the bat to low 80s deliveries and they do appear to head upwards quite often. Only seen a limted sample of hiw work - be more than happy for him to get a go in the test team. If Ballance does continue to play like a statue then is Hales the next cab off the rank to come in at 3?

I agree.
Hales is far from being a Test batsman - and yes, he does hit across the line.
All his on side shots are cross batted from outside off stump ... not something that will disappear when facing
international quicks.
He might score quick runs - but a string of 40's is best one can hope for.
And like Ballance (and his statuesque footwork), he will be targeted by the better bowlers.

If a vacancy does come up in the middle order, who's the next cab off the rank?

James Vince might have been, but he can't buy a run currently

Shuffling the pack to bring Moeen up the order is an option.

Jonny Bairstow is suddenly back in the game - he's scoring heavily in all formats.

Alex Hales can't be discounted.

Can't see Morgan featuring unless he goes all kinds of ballistic for Middlesex between now and the end of the season.

Basil wrote:

Lindsay no.2 wrote:

Basil wrote:I think Hales has got in him to make a test batsman. Essentially, he's very orthodox - you don't see him swiping across the line very often.

I had high hopes for Hales - and maybe he can still make it in today's test arena where grinding solidity is being replaced by pugnaciousness and shot-making ability - but I'm not sure he is compact enough to open and I think he may well be suspect against properly fast short-pitched stuff. He seems to get pull/hook shots high on the bat to low 80s deliveries and they do appear to head upwards quite often. Only seen a limted sample of hiw work - be more than happy for him to get a go in the test team. If Ballance does continue to play like a statue then is Hales the next cab off the rank to come in at 3?

I think I'm right in saying that Hales bats at three for Notts in the 4 Day game. Of course there's always Moeen who has been a bona fide number three for Worcestershire for years.

In Div 2 Baz.

I was a Moeen fan, but I think he's lost it of late.
Quite what "it" is I can't put my finger on it, but his bowling is far too loose and his batting's kinda sloped off a bit.
Perhaps, as advocated for Morgan earlier, if he stayed and excelled again at Worcs, then maybe get him back.
Till then, I'm a Rashid fan.... a leggie who can turn it the other way ... and someone who can bat rapidly.

Merlin wrote:

Basil wrote:

Lindsay no.2 wrote:

Basil wrote:I think Hales has got in him to make a test batsman. Essentially, he's very orthodox - you don't see him swiping across the line very often.

I had high hopes for Hales - and maybe he can still make it in today's test arena where grinding solidity is being replaced by pugnaciousness and shot-making ability - but I'm not sure he is compact enough to open and I think he may well be suspect against properly fast short-pitched stuff. He seems to get pull/hook shots high on the bat to low 80s deliveries and they do appear to head upwards quite often. Only seen a limted sample of hiw work - be more than happy for him to get a go in the test team. If Ballance does continue to play like a statue then is Hales the next cab off the rank to come in at 3?

I think I'm right in saying that Hales bats at three for Notts in the 4 Day game. Of course there's always Moeen who has been a bona fide number three for Worcestershire for years.

In Div 2 Baz.

I was a Moeen fan, but I think he's lost it of late.
Quite what "it" is I can't put my finger on it, but his bowling is far too loose and his batting's kinda sloped off a bit.
Perhaps, as advocated for Morgan earlier, if he stayed and excelled again at Worcs, then maybe get him back.
Till then, I'm a Rashid fan.... a leggie who can turn it the other way ... and someone who can bat rapidly.

Moeen's played more Div 1 cricket than Chef!

For years with us, he was a batsman who bowled , then in 2011 it was announced that he would be our frontline spinner - his form with the bat dipped after that for the best part of two seasons while he adjusted to the role of genuine allrounder batting at three (not an easy ask). He finally appeared to crack it in 2013 with runs and wickets across all formats.

I see parallels with his England career. His one and only score of substance was before his bowling became a potent weapon. His injury came at an unfortunate time and, to be honest, he should have been left in England for the Windies tour. Now England are paying the price for their impatience.

I see he bowled 12 overs today compared with Ajmal's 18 for no return in either case. Doubtless, Bumpy Rhodes and Daryl Mitchell will be criticised for putting Worcestershire's interests first, but a day 1 pitch shouldn't normally get spinners' juices flowing.

Basil wrote:

Moeen's played more Div 1 cricket than Chef!

For years with us, he was a batsman who bowled , then in 2011 it was announced that he would be our frontline spinner - his form with the bat dipped after that for the best part of two seasons while he adjusted to the role of genuine allrounder batting at three (not an easy ask). He finally appeared to crack it in 2013 with runs and wickets across all formats.

I see parallels with his England career. His one and only score of substance was before his bowling became a potent weapon. His injury came at an unfortunate time and, to be honest, he should have been left in England for the Windies tour. Now England are paying the price for their impatience.

I see he bowled 12 overs today compared with Ajmal's 18 for no return in either case. Doubtless, Bumpy Rhodes  and Daryl Mitchell will be criticised for putting Worcestershire's interests first, but a day 1 pitch shouldn't normally get spinners' juices flowing.

Okay, point taken.... and yes agree he shouldn't have toured the WIndies.

Certainly NOT a day 1 pitch at Uxbridge ... where Middlesex were bailed out by skipper Franklin .
I see the two ex test players Robson and Compton failed .... yet again!
Come back Morgs and Finn ... the sooner the better.

PS. Uxbridge is normally a venue that yields 1,200runs in four days !

Merlin wrote:

Basil wrote:

Moeen's played more Div 1 cricket than Chef!

For years with us, he was a batsman who bowled , then in 2011 it was announced that he would be our frontline spinner - his form with the bat dipped after that for the best part of two seasons while he adjusted to the role of genuine allrounder batting at three (not an easy ask). He finally appeared to crack it in 2013 with runs and wickets across all formats.

I see parallels with his England career. His one and only score of substance was before his bowling became a potent weapon. His injury came at an unfortunate time and, to be honest, he should have been left in England for the Windies tour. Now England are paying the price for their impatience.

I see he bowled 12 overs today compared with Ajmal's 18 for no return in either case. Doubtless, Bumpy Rhodes  and Daryl Mitchell will be criticised for putting Worcestershire's interests first, but a day 1 pitch shouldn't normally get spinners' juices flowing.

Okay, point taken.... and yes agree he shouldn't have toured the WIndies.

Certainly NOT a day 1 pitch at Uxbridge ... where Middlesex were bailed out by skipper Franklin .
I see the two ex test players Robson and Compton failed .... yet again!
Come back Morgs and Finn ... the sooner the better.

PS. Uxbridge is normally a venue that yields 1,200runs in four days !

Not with us batting last on it, it won't

taipan wrote:

beamer wrote:He was originally picked as a batsman who bowls...

Sort of my point. He is clearly out of his depth as a batsman.

I hadn't realised quite how low his Test average had sunk, given he made a decent impression last summer. But if you bat someone at 8 then in most cases they will play like a number 8. The initial explanation of him being in the nets as wickets fell on the first day v NZ leading to Stokes being promoted above him was quickly forgotten with the success of that experiment, and suddenly Mo was a bowler who bats. In which case we do have to ask, is he really our best spinner...

The benefit of all-rounders is they have two chances to contribute, but then again, how many of them do we really need?

beamer wrote:

taipan wrote:

beamer wrote:He was originally picked as a batsman who bowls...

Sort of my point. He is clearly out of his depth as a batsman.

I hadn't realised quite how low his Test average had sunk, given he made a decent impression last summer. But if you bat someone at 8 then in most cases they will play like a number 8. The initial explanation of him being in the nets as wickets fell on the first day v NZ leading to Stokes being promoted above him was quickly forgotten with the success of that experiment, and suddenly Mo was a bowler who bats. In which case we do have to ask, is he really our best spinner...

The benefit of all-rounders is they have two chances to contribute, but then again, how many of them do we really need?

What you have with Stokes, Buttler and Moeen is three number sixes (at test level), so two of them have to bat out of position.

Basil wrote:

beamer wrote:

taipan wrote:

beamer wrote:He was originally picked as a batsman who bowls...

Sort of my point. He is clearly out of his depth as a batsman.

I hadn't realised quite how low his Test average had sunk, given he made a decent impression last summer. But if you bat someone at 8 then in most cases they will play like a number 8. The initial explanation of him being in the nets as wickets fell on the first day v NZ leading to Stokes being promoted above him was quickly forgotten with the success of that experiment, and suddenly Mo was a bowler who bats. In which case we do have to ask, is he really our best spinner...

The benefit of all-rounders is they have two chances to contribute, but then again, how many of them do we really need?

What you have with Stokes, Buttler and Moeen is three number sixes (at test level), so two of them have to bat out of position.

Yeah, so the question is, does the side have the right balance to it with those three - ignoring their batting and assuming that they're not the best spinner, keeper and 4th seamer available, given whoever bats 8 is wasted in that role?

Stokes and Buttler have proved their worth in terms of game-changing ability, so not suggesting either of them should go. But their presence means picking the best available spinner is possible without worrying about batting ability, and if he can bat at 8 that's a bonus.

beamer wrote:

Basil wrote:

beamer wrote:

taipan wrote:

beamer wrote:He was originally picked as a batsman who bowls...

Sort of my point. He is clearly out of his depth as a batsman.

I hadn't realised quite how low his Test average had sunk, given he made a decent impression last summer. But if you bat someone at 8 then in most cases they will play like a number 8. The initial explanation of him being in the nets as wickets fell on the first day v NZ leading to Stokes being promoted above him was quickly forgotten with the success of that experiment, and suddenly Mo was a bowler who bats. In which case we do have to ask, is he really our best spinner...

The benefit of all-rounders is they have two chances to contribute, but then again, how many of them do we really need?

What you have with Stokes, Buttler and Moeen is three number sixes (at test level), so two of them have to bat out of position.

Yeah, so the question is, does the side have the right balance to it with those three - ignoring their batting and assuming that they're not the best spinner, keeper and 4th seamer available, given whoever bats 8 is wasted in that role?

Stokes and Buttler have proved their worth in terms of game-changing ability, so not suggesting either of them should go. But their presence means picking the best available spinner is possible without worrying about batting ability, and if he can bat at 8 that's a bonus.

Owzabout Ballance out - Buttler to 5, Stokes 6, Moeen 7 and in at 8 pop-pickers it's Rashid.

There's a lot of Test shuffling been going down on this thread since Merls pushed Morgs forward.

Why not open with Bell and Wood, bring Buttler in at 3, .....

PeterCS wrote:There's a lot of Test shuffling been going down on this thread since Merls pushed Morgs forward.

Why not open with Bell and Wood, bring Buttler in at 3, .....

It's the newly liberated world of Strauss's ECB my friend. Your suggestion could be the cricketing manifestation of the butterfly effect. Who knows what the outcome will be - but I like it.

The NZ one-dayers already seem to be history, desp the O/T title.

And there's still a 20T to go ...