Chris Woakes.

[rivera213]

Hey guys/gals,

What's your thoughts on Chris Woakes?

He took out the top 6 of a West Indies team which included test match certainties like Sarwan, Chanderpaul, Ramdin & Nash as well as Simmons who may bat @ No. 4.

He's only 20 and I'm normally cautious when involving talented young players and their development, but he may very well be ready.

Does anyone strongly disagree with me?

This isn't just a knee-jerk reaction (though the 6-43 with an economy rate of under 3 helped make my mind up about him being ready).

With our very poor bowling and Flintoff out at the moment and Prior being moved up to No. 6 in all likelyhood, I would put Woakes in the team for the 2nd test to have a look at him IF either Onions or Bresnan fail.

I doubt there will be any lasting damage even if Woakes gets smashed around by Gayle (nearly everyone has been smashed by Gayle at some point! Lol) since it's just 1 test. No-one expects him to be ready but surely it's worth a shot?

I'm glad Onions has been given a chance btw. He's bowled well for some time now and even though Durham helps bowlers, you still have to bowl well to get wickets.

Broad is in the team largely because he can bat at test level and will remain there, especially while Flintoff is out. Anderson's place isn't guaranteed and Broad hasn't exactly taken the world by storm with his bowling alone (albeit on poor wickets) so I would look at all options.

Anyways, what do you think?

- Steve

PS- Ambrose got a century (at a strike rate of 80) against the WI XI too. Prior is in the team on the "strength" of his batting. Ambrose is a better keeper than him (hell, my Nan is) and while you wont know how he bats against Fidel Edwards, he faced Jerome Taylor, Suleiman Benn and Daren Sammy who will all likely play in the 1st test.

 

[Jarquis]

Anderson's place should be assured, he's been one of our best bowlers over the past 12 months.
Now to reply to the topic I personally would say it would be best to leave Woakes in county cricket for the foreseeable future. There's no point bringing him in just for the sake of it. That 6/43 was his best return in an innings...

 

[BoyBrumby]

Impressive figures he's returned of late and is obviously on the selectors' radar with the Lions call-up and a spot in the initial 2020 WC 30, but I've never seen the boy bowl so can't really say much more than that.

Fingers crossed tho.

 

[Kweek]

who has seen him bowling?

 

[Uppercut]

Anderson's place should be assured, he's been one of our best bowlers over the past 12 months.
Now to reply to the topic I personally would say it would be best to leave Woakes in county cricket for the foreseeable future. There's no point bringing him in just for the sake of it. That 6/43 was his best return in an innings...

Producing your best figures in a tour match against a test side is nothing if not a good sign. A large part of whether a quality player at county level will make a success at international level is whether his mindset enables him to step up to the big occasion.

 

[Pratters]

Prior is in the team on the "strength" of his batting. Ambrose is a better keeper than him (hell, my Nan is)

Prior shouldn't be any where near the English test squad.

 

[Pratters]

It is too early to give him a shot. Then again, if other bowlers fail in the first test, why not give him a shot to see how he goes (if the selectors believe that he is ready). It isn't going to do much harm and the rewards of blooding a young talent can be reaped. I agree though that Anderson's place is assured. He is a very good bowler and delivers the goods.

 

[Uppercut]

Prior shouldn't be any where near the English test squad.

DWTA in that were Prior not such an incompetent glovesman people might see something I've grown more and more convinced of- that he's actually good enough to make the test side on his batting alone. Hell, you don't have to look far back to see he's better than almost anyone in county cricket. He's just bashed 140 against Hampshire when not one of his team-mates made a fifty.

 

[Pratters]

DWTA in that were Prior not such an incompetent glovesman people might see something I've grown more and more convinced of- that he's actually good enough to make the test side on his batting alone. Hell, you don't have to look far back to see he's better than almost anyone in county cricket. He's just bashed 140 against Hampshire when not one of his team-mates made a fifty.

I am not talking about batting. He shouldn't be near the side as a keeper. His keeping has been atrocious whenever I have seen him.

 

[Kweek]

imho - prior in for batting alone and Ambrose to keep...BUT that is not the discussion haha

it is imho to early to let Woakes in for a test match, a season in the CC will do him good..

although he might be a speical weapon during the Ashes, so why not already make him fully ready for test cricket and let him play a few against the Windies and see how he fares.

 

[rivera213]

Anderson's place should be assured, he's been one of our best bowlers over the past 12 months.

Not disagreeing at all- he's probably been our best let alone 1 of, but I'm sure the selectors have noticed he doesn't get wickets on pitches which don't suit him. There's nothing saying Woakes wont be the same way, but the ECB have an itchy trigger finger with bowlers.

Now to reply to the topic I personally would say it would be best to leave Woakes in county cricket for the foreseeable future. There's no point bringing him in just for the sake of it.

Fair enough.

That 6/43 was his best return in an innings...

Yep and he did it against Sarwan, Chanderpaul and Ramdin amongst others, not 6 county hacks.

Wayne Rooney saves his best for the big matches and doesn't do that well against lesser teams for the most part, just saying...

Prior shouldn't be any where near the English test squad.

+ 1 on that, that's why I put "strength".He'd have to average 70 to make up for his dropped catches.

 

[Shoggz]

Nothing to do with his bowling abilities but seeing him interviewed on Sky Sports I couldn't help thinking of Tim Southee. Very similar!

 

[Uppercut]

I am not talking about batting. He shouldn't be near the side as a keeper. His keeping has been atrocious whenever I have seen him.

No arguments there, I'm all in favour of a keeper who can catch. I'd have Prior at 6 with Flintoff at 7 and whoever the most competent glovesman in the country happens to be at 8.

 

[Jarquis]

Not disagreeing at all- he's probably been our best let alone 1 of, but I'm sure the selectors have noticed he doesn't get wickets on pitches which don't suit him. There's nothing saying Woakes wont be the same way, but the ECB have an itchy trigger finger with bowlers.




Fair enough.




Yep and he did it against Sarwan, Chanderpaul and Ramdin amongst others, not 6 county hacks.

Wayne Rooney saves his best for the big matches and doesn't do that well against lesser teams for the most part, just saying...




+ 1 on that, that's why I put "strength".He'd have to average 70 to make up for his dropped catches.

Begs the question, why hasn't he managed it against said county hacks?

 

[Uppercut]

Begs the question, why hasn't he managed it against said county hacks?

A FC bowling average of 24 renders that question somewhat redundant because he by and large has, but I'd also like to point out that he was pretty damn young at the time.

And anyway, you don't specifically want players who tear up county hacks in your test side, you want the guy who runs through test batting lineups.

 

[stumpski]

I haven't seen much of Woakes but my guess is that he's roughly where Broad was a couple of years ago. There are seven ODIs against Australia at the end of the season, plenty of scope to look at some new players there - I'd be very wary of selecting him before then.

 

[Kweek]

No arguments there, I'm all in favour of a keeper who can catch. I'd have Prior at 6 with Flintoff at 7 and whoever the most competent glovesman in the country happens to be at 8.

has to be either Read, Ambrose or Foster


Read is not eligable anymore unless he quits ICL(right?) Ambrose can score runs and so can Foster

so basically down to Foster and Ambrose

has to be Ambrose because of recent form..

should mail thre link of this topic to Mr.Flower

 

[Jarquis]

A FC bowling average of 24 renders that question somewhat redundant because he by and large has, but I'd also like to point out that he was pretty damn young at the time.

And anyway, you don't specifically want players who tear up county hacks in your test side, you want the guy who runs through test batting lineups.

A low economy or high strike rate could explain a low average... without necessarily being a prolific wicket taker. If the number of 5fers a bowler had taken was not at all reflective of their ability/success why would it be recorded?

I accept the fact he's a young and promising bowler, but at the minute that is all he is.

I agree you don't specifically want players who tear up county hacks in an International side; the flipside of this would be someone like Mark Ramprakash pounding county bowling attacks but couldn't transfer this to the test arena in large. However, if England were to pick a bowler who was by in large an unsuccessful county bowler ( i'm not saying Woakes is) then i'm sure quite a few people would have something to say about it. Generally ripping through county attacks with some degree of regularity is what gets you noticed. Just so happens Woakes gave his best bowling display against a batting line up which is greater than that of any County team, but until he repeats it; he should not be considered for test match selection.

 

[Kweek]

why isn't Davies tried out for England btw (i'm going very off-topic this)

 

[Uppercut]

A low economy or high strike rate could explain a low average... without necessarily being a prolific wicket taker. If the number of 5fers a bowler had taken was not at all reflective of their ability/success why would it be recorded?

I accept the fact he's a young and promising bowler, but at the minute that is all he is.

I agree you don't specifically want players who tear up county hacks in an International side; the flipside of this would be someone like Mark Ramprakash pounding county bowling attacks but couldn't transfer this to the test arena in large. However, if England were to pick a bowler who was by in large an unsuccessful county bowler ( i'm not saying Woakes is) then i'm sure quite a few people would have something to say about it. Generally ripping through county attacks with some degree of regularity is what gets you noticed. Just so happens Woakes gave his best bowling display against a batting line up which is greater than that of any County team, but until he repeats it; he should not be considered for test match selection.

Ah of course, I certainly wouldn't consider him for selection at the moment either.

why isn't Davies tried out for England btw (i'm going very off-topic this)

Amongst other things, because he's always injured. If his 68 FC games had all come at once then he might play, but you'd generally want someone to have a full season or so of cricket before putting them into the test side and Davies has never had it. He's not a brilliantly exciting player, he's just very accurate and moves the ball both ways at around 80mph.

The other factor is that he's not the greatest at the one-day stuff. This is crucial not only because so few longer-form games here are televised (and everyone knows wickets taken on TV count tenfold) but because there's a tendency to use the English ODI side as a breeding ground for test cricketers. Were he to play in the OD side and perform well he'd surely be tried out at tests before too long.

Despite all this, he is still in the Lions squad (although not currently because he's injured again) so he could get a run out at some stage. Given his performances you'd think that there'd be a few on the board calling passionately for his selection but not many of us see him play a great deal and it's hard to get excited about someone you haven't watched a lot. The type of player Davies is works against him too- his nagging consistency isn't something you get the distinct impression of when you only see him once or twice. If he were a less effective bowler but blasted out batsmen at express pace he might well leave his mark on us.