ENG v South Africa: Test series

[El_Nombre]

I'm not entirely convinced on this new kit. Looks a bit baggy. Like something out of the 90s.

[shrewsbury saddler]

This is the best I've seen Moeen Ali bowl in long time. He's not just looking dangerous , he's stopped giving them the one or two bad balls an over. If the Dawson selection was to shake him up, it seems to be working.

[Exile]

This is the best I've seen Moeen Ali bowl in long time. He's not just looking dangerous , he's stopped giving them the one or two bad balls an over. If the Dawson selection was to shake him up, it seems to be working.

Good first innings stats for Ali. Looks like this test is England's to lose from here.

[boringteacher]

This is the best I've seen Moeen Ali bowl in long time. He's not just looking dangerous , he's stopped giving them the one or two bad balls an over. If the Dawson selection was to shake him up, it seems to be working.

Good first innings stats for Ali. Looks like this test is England's to lose from here.

I'd agree. Unless there is significant rain tomorrow, I can't see that SA have the batting quality to survive 4+ sessions on a pitch thats turning a bit.

[Welsh_Saddler]

It's to be hoped that the pitch really is turning into a dog, looking at England's mega-dodgy batting this morning. Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory!! Losing 7 wickets for 43 runs in one session takes some doing........

[shrewsbury saddler]

It's to be hoped that the pitch really is turning into a dog, looking at England's mega-dodgy batting this morning. Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory!! Losing 7 wickets for 43 runs in one session takes some doing........

Might not have made any difference, but it was noticeable that the runs from Ballance and Cook had dried up for a fair while before the collapse began. Sooner or later, they're going to have to tweak the order even if they keep the same personnel.

SA three down at tea. Famous last words, but I think the only question now is how soon it will end. My guess would be early tomorrow.

[boringteacher]

Impressive win, but a piss poor overall performance from SA. Most ragged, medioce effort I can remember seeing from any SA team. I've never seen one with the lack of fight shown here. They could do with 5 days of rain in Notts starting next Friday!

Excellent cricket pitch, no doubt there'll be some whines/excuses from SA but they were outscored by 100 or so on both innings - and the ball did seam around on day 1 but they couldnt sustain a whole day in the field. I was expecting a real fight today, but there was a gulf between the teams.

[shrewsbury saddler]

Impressive win, but a piss poor overall performance from SA. Most ragged, medioce effort I can remember seeing from any SA team. I've never seen one with the lack of fight shown here. They could do with 5 days of rain in Notts starting next Friday!

Excellent cricket pitch, no doubt there'll be some whines/excuses from SA but they were outscored by 100 or so on both innings - and the ball did seam around on day 1 but they couldnt sustain a whole day in the field. I was expecting a real fight today, but there was a gulf between the teams.

As you say, pitch produced over 1000 runs, so couldn't have been that bad. Series could go two ways now. SA could fade, or come back fighting. The return of du Plessis could be even more significant than the loss of Rabada. He must be fuming, quietly or otherwise, about what he saw.

[shrewsbury saddler]

Interesting day, so far. Anderson , in particular has bowled better than his figures would suggest. 350/400 might turn out to be not such a bad score, if it keeps swinging and seaming..

[boringteacher]

Very even first day, though SA should have been well on top after the 3rd wicket partnership. 400 is probably the par score imo - I dont expect this pitch to massively deteriorate so lets hope not much time is lost today.

nice to see a contest

[shrewsbury saddler]

This game has gone away from England. Got Amla out, but didn't review. It's a priority that Root improves his reviews. Maybe he's not consulting with Cook enough.

[boringteacher]

Deader than Disco.

Excepting Dawson (who I expect bugger all from anyhow), the real disappointment for me is Wood. I thought he'd be a threat here.

Much thinking I'd think after our defeat late tomorrow/early Tuesday. I'd hope Woakes would be fit for the 3rd test, but I wouldnt rush him back. Given our lack of a decent frontline spinner, 3 seamers + Stokes + Ali is the way to plan for the winter imo. As for the extra batsman, Stoneman impressed me maiking a ton earlier in the year at Edgbaston (though it was only v the Bears) - left handed and 30 though. Please, please not Samit Patel again - a walking wicket for any test class paceman.

[shrewsbury saddler]

"the real disappointment for me is Wood"
My thoughts too. He got picked originally for his pace. his average is now down to less than 85mph. He's not the worst fast-medium bowler England have had,but does he offer anything different? They need to find some pace and bounce for the Ashes.

[PT]

Another collapse today.

Without going the full Boycott, a game like this needs a few to show some application, get their nut down and cherish their wicket like it was the holy grail itself. See a bowler off. Not by trying to smash him out of the park but by making him run in for 8 overs without him getting a sniff that you're about to do anything wreckless.

It doesn't help when two of your top four are walking wickets but blimey this was a poor batting performance.

[SaigonSaddler]

*Phhhutttt*

[Andy_Petterson]

"the real disappointment for me is Wood"
My thoughts too. He got picked originally for his pace. his average is now down to less than 85mph. He's not the worst fast-medium bowler England have had,but does he offer anything different? They need to find some pace and bounce for the Ashes.

Wood is class. He's just not bowling 100% at the moment either because of injury or fear of injury.

More concerning is the loss of cheap wickets. Too much T20 mentality. We need a Boycott or a Tavare in the side.

[Exile]

"the real disappointment for me is Wood"
My thoughts too. He got picked originally for his pace. his average is now down to less than 85mph. He's not the worst fast-medium bowler England have had,but does he offer anything different? They need to find some pace and bounce for the Ashes.

Wood is class. He's just not bowling 100% at the moment either because of injury or fear of injury.

More concerning is the loss of cheap wickets. Too much T20 mentality. We need a Boycott or a Tavare in the side.

A Tavare? Are test matches going to go for nine days again? :shock:

[Kevlar]

Sadly , Test match cricket will be dead in 10 years time .

All the young up and and coming cricketers are interested in is the white ball stuff, where they can make a nice wedge .

And why shouldn't they ?

[Exile]

Sadly , Test match cricket will be dead in 10 years time .

All the young up and and coming cricketers are interested in is the white ball stuff, where they can make a nice wedge .

And why shouldn't they ?

The experts were saying this 30 years ago.

[El_Nombre]

I must admit I feel a tad sorry for the bowlers. Liam Dawson included and it's pretty obvious I'm not his biggest fan.

Why is it when ever we give a bad batting performance there is always a finger pointed at a bowler or two. South Africa made 2 sub 350 scores in this test, the bowling really wasn't the issue. And yet, twitter and pundits are full of criticism for any bowler not names James or Stuart.

Bumble is calling for Crane to come in, Botham is saying we should stick with Jennings but drop Wood and Dawson for Rashid and one other.

Why is it we seem to give a million chances to batsmen but a few bad performances for a bowler and it's easy to drop them? It's baffled me for years with England.

Jennings has 44 in 4 innings and looks like a man who has been batting in Division 2. Gary Ballance is on chance number 459 at number 3 for God knows what reason. Yet the popular answer is: we need to change the bowlers.

I would drop Dawson for Crane but only because I wouldn't have played him in the first place. Those two batsmen can go back to their county and start over again. If there isn't a better number 3 in the country than Gary Ballance then we really are in trouble.

Edit: Sorry Bumble was talking about Wood, not Botham

[shrewsbury saddler]

I must admit I feel a tad sorry for the bowlers. Liam Dawson included and it's pretty obvious I'm not his biggest fan.

Why is it when ever we give a bad batting performance there is always a finger pointed at a bowler or two. South Africa made 2 sub 350 scores in this test, the bowling really wasn't the issue. And yet, twitter and pundits are full of criticism for any bowler not names James or Stuart.

Bumble is calling for Crane to come in, Botham is saying we should stick with Jennings but drop Wood and Dawson for Rashid and one other.

Why is it we seem to give a million chances to batsmen but a few bad performances for a bowler and it's easy to drop them? It's baffled me for years with England.

Jennings has 44 in 4 innings and looks like a man who has been batting in Division 2. Gary Ballance is on chance number 459 at number 3 for God knows what reason. Yet the popular answer is: we need to change the bowlers.

I would drop Dawson for Crane but only because I wouldn't have played him in the first place. Those two batsmen can go back to their county and start over again. If there isn't a better number 3 in the country than Gary Ballance then we really are in trouble.

Edit: Sorry Bumble was talking about Wood, not Botham

Yes. But the batting has been a problem for at least 10 years, and doesn't look to be improving under Bayliss. If they're even going to put up a fight in the Ashes, it's the bowlers that will do it, and I don't think four fast-mediums and an off-spinner will achieve. Touring off-spinners have nearly always performed disappointingly in Aus.

[El_Nombre]

I must admit I feel a tad sorry for the bowlers. Liam Dawson included and it's pretty obvious I'm not his biggest fan.

Why is it when ever we give a bad batting performance there is always a finger pointed at a bowler or two. South Africa made 2 sub 350 scores in this test, the bowling really wasn't the issue. And yet, twitter and pundits are full of criticism for any bowler not names James or Stuart.

Bumble is calling for Crane to come in, Botham is saying we should stick with Jennings but drop Wood and Dawson for Rashid and one other.

Why is it we seem to give a million chances to batsmen but a few bad performances for a bowler and it's easy to drop them? It's baffled me for years with England.

Jennings has 44 in 4 innings and looks like a man who has been batting in Division 2. Gary Ballance is on chance number 459 at number 3 for God knows what reason. Yet the popular answer is: we need to change the bowlers.

I would drop Dawson for Crane but only because I wouldn't have played him in the first place. Those two batsmen can go back to their county and start over again. If there isn't a better number 3 in the country than Gary Ballance then we really are in trouble.

Edit: Sorry Bumble was talking about Wood, not Botham

Yes. But the batting has been a problem for at least 10 years, and doesn't look to be improving under Bayliss. If they're even going to put up a fight in the Ashes, it's the bowlers that will do it, and I don't think four fast-mediums and an off-spinner will achieve. Touring off-spinners have nearly always performed disappointingly in Aus.

I think your falling into that trap though by saying that."The batting is rubbish so we need to improve the bowling to compete". Well how about we put as much effort into changing the batting line up until it works rather than keep hoping the bowlers skittle people for lower and lower scores.

It's not just about Aus either. We need a frontline spinner to compete on every surface around the world. Ali has his moments but he is, at best, a secondary spinner. He chips in with the bat and brings balance but that's not going to get you a result on a 5 day test wicket and turn you into a threat in places like the UAE. Yeah a spinner may struggle in Aus, play horses for courses then. Move the team around.

But irrespective of all that we will never be the force we want to if we keep expecting the bowlers to defend rubbish totals. The batsmen need to improve and there are a number that just won't cut it. Ballance is the glaring one for me. I bet teams love it when he walks out of the pavilion.

[shrewsbury saddler]

I must admit I feel a tad sorry for the bowlers. Liam Dawson included and it's pretty obvious I'm not his biggest fan.

Why is it when ever we give a bad batting performance there is always a finger pointed at a bowler or two. South Africa made 2 sub 350 scores in this test, the bowling really wasn't the issue. And yet, twitter and pundits are full of criticism for any bowler not names James or Stuart.

Bumble is calling for Crane to come in, Botham is saying we should stick with Jennings but drop Wood and Dawson for Rashid and one other.

Why is it we seem to give a million chances to batsmen but a few bad performances for a bowler and it's easy to drop them? It's baffled me for years with England.

Jennings has 44 in 4 innings and looks like a man who has been batting in Division 2. Gary Ballance is on chance number 459 at number 3 for God knows what reason. Yet the popular answer is: we need to change the bowlers.

I would drop Dawson for Crane but only because I wouldn't have played him in the first place. Those two batsmen can go back to their county and start over again. If there isn't a better number 3 in the country than Gary Ballance then we really are in trouble.

Edit: Sorry Bumble was talking about Wood, not Botham

Yes. But the batting has been a problem for at least 10 years, and doesn't look to be improving under Bayliss. If they're even going to put up a fight in the Ashes, it's the bowlers that will do it, and I don't think four fast-mediums and an off-spinner will achieve. Touring off-spinners have nearly always performed disappointingly in Aus.

I think your falling into that trap though by saying that."The batting is rubbish so we need to improve the bowling to compete". Well how about we put as much effort into changing the batting line up until it works rather than keep hoping the bowlers skittle people for lower and lower scores.

It's not just about Aus either. We need a frontline spinner to compete on every surface around the world. Ali has his moments but he is, at best, a secondary spinner. He chips in with the bat and brings balance but that's not going to get you a result on a 5 day test wicket and turn you into a threat in places like the UAE. Yeah a spinner may struggle in Aus, play horses for courses then. Move the team around.

But irrespective of all that we will never be the force we want to if we keep expecting the bowlers to defend rubbish totals. The batsmen need to improve and there are a number that just won't cut it. Ballance is the glaring one for me. I bet teams love it when he walks out of the pavilion.

But when is that going to happen? Certainly not in the next six months. A short-term solution is needed. If not, it probably won't be 5-0, but could easily be 3/4-0.

[El_Nombre]

I must admit I feel a tad sorry for the bowlers. Liam Dawson included and it's pretty obvious I'm not his biggest fan.

Why is it when ever we give a bad batting performance there is always a finger pointed at a bowler or two. South Africa made 2 sub 350 scores in this test, the bowling really wasn't the issue. And yet, twitter and pundits are full of criticism for any bowler not names James or Stuart.

Bumble is calling for Crane to come in, Botham is saying we should stick with Jennings but drop Wood and Dawson for Rashid and one other.

Why is it we seem to give a million chances to batsmen but a few bad performances for a bowler and it's easy to drop them? It's baffled me for years with England.

Jennings has 44 in 4 innings and looks like a man who has been batting in Division 2. Gary Ballance is on chance number 459 at number 3 for God knows what reason. Yet the popular answer is: we need to change the bowlers.

I would drop Dawson for Crane but only because I wouldn't have played him in the first place. Those two batsmen can go back to their county and start over again. If there isn't a better number 3 in the country than Gary Ballance then we really are in trouble.

Edit: Sorry Bumble was talking about Wood, not Botham

Yes. But the batting has been a problem for at least 10 years, and doesn't look to be improving under Bayliss. If they're even going to put up a fight in the Ashes, it's the bowlers that will do it, and I don't think four fast-mediums and an off-spinner will achieve. Touring off-spinners have nearly always performed disappointingly in Aus.

I think your falling into that trap though by saying that."The batting is rubbish so we need to improve the bowling to compete". Well how about we put as much effort into changing the batting line up until it works rather than keep hoping the bowlers skittle people for lower and lower scores.

It's not just about Aus either. We need a frontline spinner to compete on every surface around the world. Ali has his moments but he is, at best, a secondary spinner. He chips in with the bat and brings balance but that's not going to get you a result on a 5 day test wicket and turn you into a threat in places like the UAE. Yeah a spinner may struggle in Aus, play horses for courses then. Move the team around.

But irrespective of all that we will never be the force we want to if we keep expecting the bowlers to defend rubbish totals. The batsmen need to improve and there are a number that just won't cut it. Ballance is the glaring one for me. I bet teams love it when he walks out of the pavilion.

But when is that going to happen? Certainly not in the next six months. A short-term solution is needed. If not, it probably won't be 5-0, but could easily be 3/4-0.

To the Bowling? Well if we are looking at just Aus I think Woakes waltzes back into the side. He comes in for Dawson/Crane and Ali plays as first spinner on their pitches. Then if you do get a turner you take the spinner and possibly drop Wood, who I think suits Aussie pitches down to the ground. He should love it on those trampolines. So your bowling options become Stokes, Ali, Woakes, Wood/Crane, Broad, Anderson.

Looking on the wider scale, Crane has to come in sooner rather than later. I don't like the idea of going back to Rashid.

Then the batting needs to be looked at like I said above. Jennings looks like a victim of playing Division 2 cricket unfortunately (and averaging in the 30s against it) and I've covered Ballance. Stoneman comes in for me and anybody for Ballance.

[shrewsbury saddler]

I agree about Crane. You might as well get him into the team sooner rather than later. Woakes , I'm not so sure about. He has a very good record at home, not so good abroad. And he's another 85mph bowler. The kookaburra does nothing after 10 overs. You need pace and bounce in Australia. Not sure where that's going to come from. Maybe they need to take another look at Plunckett, and, er, Finn.

[El_Nombre]

I agree about Crane. You might as well get him into the team sooner rather than later. Woakes , I'm not so sure about. He has a very good record at home, not so good abroad. And he's another 85mph bowler. The kookaburra does nothing after 10 overs. You need pace and bounce in Australia. Not sure where that's going to come from. Maybe they need to take another look at Plunckett, and, er, Finn.

Haha I still have a nervous twitch whenever the name Finn is mentioned but I take your point. I think Wood will surprise a few people, especially if he can get back up to the 90s but I'd rather we went for Plunkett than finn

[shrewsbury saddler]

There was an article in the i this morning about Bayliss,I can't seem to find online, which basically asked, "what exactly does he do?" i've been wondering the same thing for a while. He gives the impression of being laid-back and in control, but he's increasingly looking like a teenage slacker-always an excuse as to why he did nothing.He hasn't even watched Stoneman play. He seems very good at delegating.I don't think he'll survive past a bad Ashes.Which, at the moment is likely to be what we'll get.

Edit. Found it.
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/cric ... 47561.html

[Over The Moon]

There was an article in the i this morning about Bayliss,I can't seem to find online, which basically asked, "what exactly does he do?" i've been wondering the same thing for a while. He gives the impression of being laid-back and in control, but he's increasingly looking like a teenage slacker-always an excuse as to why he did nothing.He hasn't even watched Stoneman play. He seems very good at delegating.I don't think he'll survive past a bad Ashes.Which, at the moment is likely to be what we'll get.

Edit. Found it.
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/cric ... 47561.html

I think Bayliss just let's Farbrace get on with the coaching, which makes you wonder what the hell does he do, if he isn't going around the grounds looking at players like Stoneman, I suppose he will say that's the selectors job.
I think he was brought in mainly to improve the one day side after the shocking performances in 2015 World Cup and to be fair he has done, but the test performances on the whole haven't when England lose, they lose badly like in India, this test against SA and the first test defeat to Bangladesh, like you say lose this series against SA, the Ashes and he will be out on his backside.

[El_Nombre]

There was an article in the i this morning about Bayliss,I can't seem to find online, which basically asked, "what exactly does he do?" i've been wondering the same thing for a while. He gives the impression of being laid-back and in control, but he's increasingly looking like a teenage slacker-always an excuse as to why he did nothing.He hasn't even watched Stoneman play. He seems very good at delegating.I don't think he'll survive past a bad Ashes.Which, at the moment is likely to be what we'll get.

Edit. Found it.
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/cric ... 47561.html

I think Bayliss just let's Farbrace get on with the coaching, which makes you wonder what the hell does he do, if he isn't going around the grounds looking at players like Stoneman, I suppose he will say that's the selectors job.
I think he was brought in mainly to improve the one day side after the shocking performances in 2015 World Cup and to be fair he has done, but the test performances on the whole haven't when England lose, they lose badly like in India, this test against SA and the first test defeat to Bangladesh, like you say lose this series against SA, the Ashes and he will be out on his backside.

It's an interesting article. I'm dubious about the effectiveness of all head coaches, not just Bayliss. Once the initial philosophy of a head coach is implemented what else does he do? As you say, the selection and player development can be "blamed" on others. The philosophy remains the same whether you are playing Bangladesh in Asia or Australia at home. You don't need a head coach to say "it might spin a bit here" in the middle of the desert and vice verse.

It's a good point about the one day team too, he and Strauss are clearly focusing on that format more than they are the test arena, which greatly worries me.

To be fair to Bayliss his philosophy was radically different to his predecessors and worked to begin with but it is very much a case of what have you done for me lately? As a person who watches test match cricket and doesn't really bother with ODI games that is not a lot. He needs to make changes for the third test in my opinion and they need to work. Not just him but the selectors too. I genuinely can't work out the logic at the moment. The logic of playing Liam Dawson as a front line batting spinner in a team that bats to 7 at worst. The logic of playing Gary Ballance at all, never mind at number 3. The logic of playing two spinners at Trent Bridge, granted SAs spinner turned it a bit more than previous matches there but I feel that would have been luck rather than judgement considering what we know about the place.

[shrewsbury saddler]

Even with white ball, I'm not sure how big an influence he's been, and how much more it's down to Farbrace and Morgan. There was a distinct improvement against NZ 2015 before he came.

" I'm dubious about the effectiveness of all head coaches, not just Bayliss." So am I, which makes you wonder why they're paying him 500 grand a year, and whether the set-up would look much different without him. Why not Farbrace, the selectors and the respective captains?