RugbyRebels

I didnt see much point in batting on after we reached a lead of 400. We could have had another 7/8 overs at India today and still been perfectly fresh to resume in the morning.
Lovely ball from Leach to get the wicket. More of that required.

Captains tend to be cautious, and we don't have Swann anymore. I can't say I blame Root for not trusting Leach and Bess

If the game is about the 20-25 overs of each of the new balls it doesn't make much difference to us. The only other threat we might have is Anderson and his reverse swing. Much more likely this comes down to how much India want to save the game

Good decision to bat on!

All round top effort from England.

I don't think we let a session of cricket go past that we didn't compete well in, yes sometimes India edged it but that was impressive from the call at the toss to the last wicket. I don't know if that's the best England win, but it's one of the most consistent strong displays in a game for sure

A really good response from India after going 3 down, not sure what England are trying to do other than hope their spinners get control of line and length (which would be an odd thing given how how many years they've bowled without that)

Interesting to see how batsman now sweep so happily to the ball wide of off stump, that's a new challenge to the finger spinner and especially the ones who only go one way

6 down now, but by heavens this is a day 3 or 4 pitch already. India will be pleased to have runs in the bank

Digby wrote:6 down now, but by heavens this is a day 3 or 4 pitch already. India will be pleased to have runs in the bank

They'll be even more pleased to have the better spin bowlers

Which Tyler wrote:

Digby wrote:6 down now, but by heavens this is a day 3 or 4 pitch already. India will be pleased to have runs in the bank

They'll be even more pleased to have the better spin bowlers

Yet on the first test showing, we oddly have the better players of spin...

Maybe suggesting our spinners aren’t actually that bad or that India’s aren’t actually that good...

If we can keep them under 350, we have a chance

But why the hell is root bowling with the new ball?!

That's a big 300 on this track.Kohli's review of his clean-bowl was most unusual...shame..
Pant could disrupt things a bit tomorrow.Can only think Root had some cunning plan, but not clear tbh.

Root is getting spin bowling much faster, so why not take the new ball and get the bounce too.

And Kohli, for all that was actually very funny given just how out he was, is likely to be in quite a lot of trouble. Though they might only fine him and then even if it's a big fine that's nothing to Kohli. If they don't act on this they're condoning abuse being directed at the umpires. I hope at least it encourages our top order not to drive expansively and to try and make India bowl well over 100 overs, we'll see

This is the England I remember from the 90s and early 00s.

Will India enforce the follow-on?

Which Tyler wrote:This is the England I remember from the 90s and early 00s.

Will India enforce the follow-on?

In fairness, this is a horrible bloody pitch. Ashwin is literally unplayable on this surface and India have tightened the screw well.

Puja

Yep, I think had we batted superbly we might have added 70-80 more. Variable bounce, sometimes significant bounce and sharp spin makes this a lottery, maybe the ball does fly just wide of your bat and off stump often enough you get to 50, but that's going to be down to dumb luck more than the batsman

India have bowled and batted on a very poor Test wicket better than Eng, they probably knew they would.
This match is a goner know so they'll have to take it on the chin.

Kohli does love a whinge, to the point of now contesting a DRS. Visually I did think Root was out lbw but what value is there in telling the umpire the DRS ball tracking is wrong? And at what point does the game sit on one of its absolute stars?

Stop your pommy whinging. “Oh it’s such a tewwibly awful pitch. It’s unplayable!”

Except that India scored 615 runs on it. And their no 8 (8!) scored 106 at a SR of over 71 in the 3rd innings.

Yes, it tends to turn a bit in India. It’s called home advantage. Your lads just need to bat better. Although I’d prefer it if you don’t. I think the conditions at Lord’s would favour NZ most if we played India in the WTC Final

Lizard wrote:Stop your pommy whinging. “Oh it’s such a tewwibly awful pitch. It’s unplayable!”

Except that India scored 615 runs on it. And their no 8 (8!) scored 106 at a SR of over 71 in the 3rd innings.

Yes, it tends to turn a bit in India. It’s called home advantage. Your lads just need to bat better. Although I’d prefer it if you don’t. I think the conditions at Lord’s would favour NZ most if we played India in the WTC Final

You're missing the point - it was pretty much unplayable at points when Ashwin was bowling. The fact that India scored 615 runs on it says terrible things about our bowling attack without Anderson on a turning pitch, not great things about the pitch.

Puja

The selection policy is odd.
For a series like this I would prefer to see the best XI out there, every game. (Moeen's packed his bags and is offski now too..)

Some rotation of the bowlers makes sense to me. Anderson playing test matches with a 3 or 4 day break doesn't look sensible as a for instance.

And fair play to India for playing much better, I don't mind the home conditions. You might argue winning the toss has proved overly influential in both games so far, but the side batting 2nd in both matches haven't helped themselves as much as they could have done so sympathy will be short on the ground.

Galfon wrote:The selection policy is odd.
For a series like this I would prefer to see the best XI out there, every game. (Moeen's packed his bags and is offski now too..)

I don't think it is that odd really. There have been some injuries (Burns, Crawley and Pope) so that is players off the bat. England have rotated the seamers regularly during Covid and Archer is injured and Wood is a big injury risk. Vaughan and the media love Bairstow but he has been pretty average for a long time and Pope and Crawley are ahead of him now.

At the moment, there are only 2 definitely missing from what England would normally do in these conditions; Ali and Buttler (Curran v the other seamers is a toss up). And even then it is questionable whether Buttler is that much better (if at all) than Foakes in sub continent conditions IMO.

I would have thought pulling out all the stops to stop India clawing back in the series was worth a go - Bairstow can play spin and is in good nick, Bess worth a gamble for attacking spin ( like Ali in the team but he needed match time after Covid imo, his economy not for the first time made things more difficult) and Anderson is bowling supremely, and could gave been used sparingly.

Galfon wrote:I would have thought pulling out all the stops to stop India clawing back in the series was worth a go - Bairstow can play spin and is in good nick, Bess worth a gamble for attacking spin ( like Ali in the team but he needed match time after Covid imo, his economy not for the first time made things more difficult) and Anderson is bowling supremely, and could gave been used sparingly.

I think resting Jimmy with the D/N game coming up rather than bowling on a dust bowl isn't an unusual step though.

This is the thing with Bairstow, scores of 47*, 35, 28 and 29 in SL isn't that good a set of numbers. It is sort of what Bairstow does now, he might be better against spin than Crawley and Pope but both the latter are the future and the present on non spinning pitches. I'd say the younger guys are more likely to score lower but also more likely to go big.

Vaughan bangs on about trying to win the ashes and should be playing their best team in India. The team to do both may be different. Bairstow shouldn't be near the ashes squad never mind team.

So the conundrum is, do England pick these younger guys knowing they will be the team for the summer and beyond or throw in a Bairstow who is better at spin but can pencil in 20's and 30's with the odd score 40 and rarer 50 for limited gains. For me I'd stick with the younger guys as I don't think Bairstow will or can play a match winning innings so I'd persevere.

I would caveat that with if Crawley can't replace Lawrence then I'd play Bairstow.

So there we have it, Moeen is worth nearly 5x Malan, and nobody even wanted Roy and Rashid. Do people not watch players before bidding on them?

Name 3 seamers and 1 spinner, win the toss and bat first. Interesting strategy there Joe.

Need to go big.