The Stokes and Woakes Thread

[Dan Jamson]

Yes it is.......but is it a strong "middle" order which is what it will be if Stokes is batting at 5.



That side is just too light on the batting IMO.

For India-

Cook
Hales
Root
Ballance
Bairstow
Stokes
Borthwick
Ali
Woakes
Rashid
Anderson

Broad doesn't bowl that well in Sub con conditions. And his 3 tests in India he's been absolute pony. Obviously they won't leave him out, but it's what they should do IMO

 

[Howe_zat]

For India-

Cook
Hales
Root
Ballance
Bairstow
Stokes
Borthwick
Ali
Woakes
Rashid
Anderson

Broad doesn't bowl that well in Sub con conditions. And his 3 tests in India he's been absolute pony. Obviously they won't leave him out, but it's what they should do IMO

The whole reason people are talking about Borthwick is because he's been playing up the order, if you're not bringing him in to bat at 3 he is particularly pointless

 

[91Jmay]

Borthwick at 7 would be an 'interesting' blend of a position England absolutely do not need to find a batsmen and a player absolutely not suiting that position.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

That side is just too light on the batting IMO.

It is light on batting if Vince replaces one of the all rounders so no change there then. The fact is we have no outstanding candidate to play there and have a lot of good all rounders who have averages that are better than the bat currently in the side. There will be arguments galore over the coming weeks as to what we could/should do but I think it is safe to say we don't want Ian Bell back given his crap record away against spin.

 

[Adders]

OK so you guys that are in the know......give me the low down on Borthwick.

I already hate him just because of Scaly..........but is he a genuine option as a top order batsmen/second spinner for India?? First class bowling and batting averages in the mid 30's doesn't scream selection to me.

 

[Adders]

There will be arguments galore over the coming weeks as to what we could/should do but I think it is safe to say we don't want Ian Bell back given his crap record away against spin.

There certainly will be!! So many options atm it's not funny and no matter which way they do go there will be plenty of people up in arms over it. I mean not saying it will happen but there has to be a chance Woakes will be left out........can you imagine that given his numbers over the summer.??

 

[Groundking]

What the **** is up with this obsession with 2 spinners in the subcontinent when you have sub-par spin options. Australia and ourselves have both shown recently in SL and the UAE (respectively), that it's just a massive pressure release when you bring these poor players on.

Pick our best bowlers and stick with it, so:

Cook
Hales
Root
Borthwick
Ballance
Stokes
Bairstow
Ali
Woakes
Broad
Anderson

Bring Borthwick in as Vince isn't good enough and the rest of the team picks itself. Root and Borthwick can help out with 7/8 overs a day is the seamers are struggling, but they really shouldn't.

 

[harsh.ag]

Who would be a better spin bowler, Moeen or Rashid?

 

[theegyptian]

What the **** is up with this obsession with 2 spinners in the subcontinent when you have sub-par spin options. Australia and ourselves have both shown recently in SL and the UAE (respectively), that it's just a massive pressure release when you bring these poor players on.

If they were going back to the UAE you'd be right - although I'm sure that Bayliss would still pick 2 or 3 spinners.

Think it's slightly different on this India tour. Wickets are likely to be turning a load from day 1 (as they have in the last few years) and India haven't exactly played spin amazingly recently. It'll probably force England into playing two spinners which is bad news given they don't have one good spinner. It'll be so much more in favour of spin that Ali and Rashid will still be a better bet than another seamer.

It's likely going to be a disaster. Moeen bowls worse the more it spins and can't bowl round the wicket to right handers.

 

[theegyptian]

If they're going to pick 4 seamers and 2 spinners (ali and rashid) then I can't help but feel one of the seamers should be Wood but it's hard to get him in the team.

To play 6 bowlers and not signicantly weaken the batting all of Woakes, Stokes, Ali and Rashid will likely have to play which leaves two spots for Anderson and Broad. Wood would probably be more use than Broad in an attack with those 5 other bowlers in the likely conditions.

If the games are going to be really low scoring 250 plays 200 plays 200 plays 100 type games, then playing 6 bowlers doesn't really make a load of sense given the bowlers aren't going to be bowling a load of overs.

Do these big turners that India have been producing in recent years offer much for the seamers?

Problem with playing 3 seamers and 2 spinners is that both spinners really can't be relied upon

**** knows what England will end up with. The one thing I'd be against is the three spinner route but Bayliss seems to have the aussie in Asia blind spot going on some of the decisions from last winter( No James Taylor, Three spin attack)

 

[91Jmay]

Saffer seamers all bowled well in the last series there IIRC.

Jimmy/Broad/Woakes can all bowl good cutters so should be a big weapon in our armory.

 

[Black_Warrior]

For some reason people saying Stokes and Woakes together annoys the hell out of me.
t

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Saffer seamers all bowled well in the last series there IIRC.

Jimmy/Broad/Woakes can all bowl good cutters so should be a big weapon in our armory.

Stokes reverses it well as well so if they get it going he is a very useful asset.

At least when you add Finn if firing and a fit Wood into it we now have options. Looked a bit bare behind Anderson and Broad a few years ago.

 

[Cabinet96]

Bayliss already talking about bringing Rashid in for the Oval. He's going to end up playing three at some point in India for sure.

 

[Dan]

Pick ****ing Ansari.

 

[Starfighter]

AWTA

In India or turning conditions generally (like the current Sl vs Aus series) you'll want someone who can bowl accurately, maybe skid a few, but generally bowls wicket to wicket fairly flat while still spinning the ball. I haven't seen a huge amount of Ansari, but he looks much more likely than Rashid to get the job done. Panesar had great success bowling his skiddy stuff last time, whereas bowlers who loop the ball like Warne don't go as well. And Rashid is simply not accurate enough, especially with the not-very accurate Moeen at the other end.

 

[91Jmay]

Yeah, Ansari bowling some darts into rough created by our quicks is a pretty enticing prospect. He has gone ok this year as well since he has come back from injury. Think he has 23 wickets @ 28 a piece?

 

[Groundking]

Yeah, Ansari bowling some darts into rough created by our quicks is a pretty enticing prospect. He has gone ok this year as well since he has come back from injury. Think he has 23 wickets @ 28 a piece?

Yeah, and he'd offer much more with the bat than Rashid.

I really really hope Rashid doesn't get picked in the 11 for India, he's rubbish.

 

[91Jmay]

Nah he isn't that much better a bat than Rashid if at all. He just gets shoved up the order a little artificially because Surrey have had glut of middle-lower middle order bats but no top 3 recently.

 

[aussie tragic]

Some countries would be very thankful to have Stokes, Bairstow, Woakes and Ali.

Australia has no-one of that calibre past the top 5 (Marsh and Nevill suck at Test batting)