Cricket 37: Boycott's Grandma Probably Should Bat

[Jeor]

Yes, while I think Woakes is a great player and probably still should have been in the side (unless this is purposely just a rest) it is clear that for whatever reason Root has lost confidence in him.

Either Root was hesitating to use him because he thought Woakes was tired, or something has happened to push him behind even Stokes in the pecking order of seamers (admittedly Stokes bowled a great spell at Headingley, but really there was no need for that massively long spell, Root could have easily bowled Woakes).

Given all the talk about Curran it seems harsh to overlook him and if they bring Overton in, it does lengthen the tail a bit. Archer at 8 and Broad at 9 isn't terrible but it also obviously isn't as strong as having them each bat one spot lower.

[Paxter]

10 minutes ago, Jeor said:

Yes, while I think Woakes is a great player and probably still should have been in the side (unless this is purposely just a rest) it is clear that for whatever reason Root has lost confidence in him.

Either Root was hesitating to use him because he thought Woakes was tired, or something has happened to push him behind even Stokes in the pecking order of seamers (admittedly Stokes bowled a great spell at Headingley, but really there was no need for that massively long spell, Root could have easily bowled Woakes).

Given all the talk about Curran it seems harsh to overlook him and if they bring Overton in, it does lengthen the tail a bit. Archer at 8 and Broad at 9 isn't terrible but it also obviously isn't as strong as having them each bat one spot lower.

I wonder whether Woakes has been pigeon-holed as a bit of a "minnow beater" and not one for the big stage. His career bowling averages against the generally higher-performing test sides of Australia, India and South Africa are 42, 39 and 99, respectively. And while his record in England is very good, even there he hasn't taken a 5-for against any of those top teams. 

Meanwhile he destroyed Ireland and looked a million dollars in that test match...

[ljkeane]

16 minutes ago, Paxter said:

I wonder whether Woakes has been pigeon-holed as a bit of a "minnow beater" and not one for the big stage. His career bowling averages against the generally higher-performing test sides of Australia, India and South Africa are 42, 39 and 99, respectively. And while his record in England is very good, even there he hasn't taken a 5-for against any of those top teams. 

Meanwhile he destroyed Ireland and looked a million dollars in that test match...

I don't think there's any doubt he's significantly better in home conditions but that's a little harsh. He was averaging under 21 against India in the home series last year but he was struggling with injuries and missed 3 of the tests. Even then it's a little hard to pick up 5 wickets when you're the the third bowler behind Anderson and Broad.

To be fair he hasn't looked great for most of this series although how much of that is down to Root not managing his bowlers particularly well who knows.

[Paxter]

1 hour ago, ljkeane said:

I don't think there's any doubt he's significantly better in home conditions but that's a little harsh. He was averaging under 21 against India in the home series last year but he was struggling with injuries and missed 3 of the tests. Even then it's a little hard to pick up 5 wickets when you're the the third bowler behind Anderson and Broad.

To be fair he hasn't looked great for most of this series although how much of that is down to Root not managing his bowlers particularly well who knows.

Fair enough. I’m happy to lay some blame with Root - England would be a better side with him focussing on his batting and a more natural leader taking the reins. Maybe bring Morgan in as a modern day Brearley!

[williamjm]

7 hours ago, Philokles said:

Chris Woakes given a rest, which isn’t much of a surprise as he’s looked a little tired these last two tests. However, I don’t see why it is Overton coming in ahead of Curran. 

I agree, Curran has done little wrong in his Test career so far and I would have thought he was the obvious choice as a replacement.

[Paxter]

Cricinfo's Switch Hit made the following (well-made) points lamenting Root's captaincy:

• Leach: Root showing his naïveté by using him in short spells (like Moeen), when he should be used as a stock bowler (like Lyon).
• Archer: Used as a stock bowler when he should be the Mitchell Johnson / Dale Steyn shock-factor, simultaneously reducing his overall effectiveness and putting him at risk of injury. 
• Woakes: Not using him when he is most effective (a new or at least new-ish ball), then ignoring him for most of the match (and not even explaining why he is not being bowled, which has affected his confidence).

Contrast the above to Australia's pain-staking man-management of their fast-bowling coterie, as well as the trust that Paine has put in Lyon. 

[Jeor]

Yes, Root hasn't handled his bowlers well. He's overbowled Archer and underbowled Woakes, and he hasn't made much use of Leach. Now if Old Trafford is a very fast pitch he may continue to overuse Archer.

Root has come out publicly saying that he wants the top three batsmen to grind Australia's bowlers down and then have the middle order (Roy, Stokes, Buttler, Bairstow) come out and take advantage of when they're tired. It's not a bad plan, actually, given Australia only have four bowlers and Lyon (the key to their whole workload management) has come out of form. It makes the new ball very important for Australia.

I have a feeling Starc won't play. I think they would have selected Mitchell Marsh if they wanted him to play, as having Starc as part of a four-man attack would be risky if he starts spraying it everywhere and Langer's containment plan starts to come apart.

[The Winged Shadow]

England off to a good start. If they can get these two righties, it will be tough for Aussies to recover.

[Paxter]

The Smith show resumes. Only this time he has a partner in crime with Marnus.

Warner’s poor record in England just keeps getting worse.

[Jeor]

45 minutes ago, Paxter said:

The Smith show resumes. Only this time he has a partner in crime with Marnus.

Warner’s poor record in England just keeps getting worse.

Warner has definitely been found out as a flat track bully. Scores of 2, 8, 3, 5, 61, 0 and 0 are terrible figures by any stretch. As an opener, you would normally expect the batsman to at least soak up a few balls, but Warner's not even doing that. At least even Bancroft usually got to double figures and usually lasted to the end of that opening spell.

Finally we get to see Australia's two form batsmen together at the crease - good work from them so far, but it needs to continue. The rest of the order doesn't have a great amount of confidence and if the ball starts reversing early (as commentators seem to think) then that will leave the lower order exposed. One or both need to go on and make centuries. Root will know this as well and I bet he will bring back Archer for a fiery spell at Smith straight after lunch.

The commentators are talking about the toss being a good one to win. Batting is good, but the pitch will take turn later on and the ball is scuffing up a lot so there will be reverse. So much for my prediction with Starc - they've picked him and I bet it was because of the possibility of getting the ball to reverse. He could be dangerous in the later overs.

[Paxter]

A great start for Australia, let’s see if they can keep this up.

For once Root bowled Leach early and he repaid the faith by being the most economical bowler. I’m still confused by the Overton selection. 

[Jeor]

2 minutes ago, Paxter said:

I’m still confused by the Overton selection. 

Yes, I don't see how he's an improvement over Woakes in the bowling department. And Woakes is clearly a far superior batsman.

Broad going around the wicket to Warner and causing him trouble is reminiscent of Flintoff bowling around the wicket to Gilchrist in 2005. Both times the English bowlers have completely dismantled the normally aggressive batsmen's confidence.

[Paxter]

6 minutes ago, Jeor said:

Yes, I don't see how he's an improvement over Woakes in the bowling department. And Woakes is clearly a far superior batsman.

And even if Woakes was fatigued, Overton is a poor replacement (he would barely make the second XI if Wood or Stone were fit). Curran would have strengthened the batting and still provided a fourth seam option. 

Meanwhile Australia is coping just fine with a three-man pace attack.

[Jeor]

2 minutes ago, Paxter said:

Meanwhile Australia is coping just fine with a three-man pace attack.

One of the reasons Australia has coped is because they've rotated their bowlers. Having 5 quality fast bowlers for only 3 spots really helps. Cummins is the only one who has played all four Tests so far. Hazlewood missed the first, Pattinson missed the second and fourth, Siddle missed the third and fourth. Starc has only played in this one. And Cummins hasn't played in the tour matches to preserve his fitness. As a result, however the results go in this match, Australia have managed their pace battery well and will have the opportunity to have a well rested pace attack ready for the Fifth Test.

However, this Test is probably the most dangerous for the Australian bowlers. The pitch looks like a belter and there don't seem to have been many problems with scoring runs. It will be hard for Australia to enact their normal "containment" plan. On top of that they've selected Mitchell Starc with Lyon not in top form. It may be that they reasoned that this was going to be a high run-rate Test anyway, so might as well pick Starc.

[Paxter]

Fair call on the rotation. I guess England would have been well positioned on that front had Anderson, Wood and Stone been fit! I doubt Anderson was ever going to play all five tests. 

[Jeor]

Yes, England could have had a similar situation with Anderson, Broad, Woakes, Archer and Wood, let alone Stone and Curran.

I think you have to give credit to the Australian rotation policy, which generally seems to have worked out pretty well (and the bowlers have repaid the selectors in the sense that none of them have had a truly awful match, touch wood). It's evidence of good planning given that there were a few Tests bunched up together.

Rain delay, and just looking at the forecast it looks like there is going to be a fair bit of rain throughout the Test. We could get a Fifth Test decider!

[ljkeane]

Well that didn't last long.

There was quite a lot of sniggering about Labuschagne as a 'like for like' replacement for Smith when he came in as a concussion replacement but he's proving to be a bit too much like Smith for England's liking at the moment. Archer doesn't look great out there either which isn't ideal.

[Jeor]

I have a feeling Archer is a bit of a rhythm bowler (as most are). He can't just "bring it" at will but when the conditions and circumstances are right then he can regularly hit 90mph. If you look at his run-up and action, it's not the type that will generate express pace all the time, whereas a guy like Shoaib Akhtar you knew where all that pace was coming from. I think Archer will just have some spells that are genuinely quick and other spells where he's just like everyone else.

[Jeor]

The vaunted pace in this pitch is not there (or at least not in these conditions). If batting stays like this with the pace of the bowlers down and the ball getting old, I imagine someone like Jason Roy might actually have a score in him.

EDIT: Labuschagne out - the guy just can't get his way to a century, but I think we'll happily take four consecutive 50s from him. It's amazing how Labuschagne and Smith look so composed and every single other Australian batsman looks like a walking wicket. Travis Head comes in and basically is creating a half-chance for a wicket every other ball.

[Paxter]

Apart from losing Marnus towards the end of the day, that was a near-perfect day for Australia. Paine did the right thing at the toss and his batsmen haven't let him down this time. Again I would tend to question Root's captaincy - Leach is perfectly capable of wheeling through more overs of good, controlled test bowling than a single six-over spell. And at least if wickets aren't falling, you can stop the opposition going at nearly four runs per over.