Liam Livingstone had never quite lived up to his reputation from his early 20's but if he can stay fit his bowling and batting is ideal for White ball matches. So pleased that he can bat higher up the order so he can pace his innings even if it's still electric with his power hitting. At 31 he could still have 3 or 4 good years ahead of him.
Liam Livingstone had never quite lived up to his reputation from his early 20's but if he can stay fit his bowling and batting is ideal for White ball matches. So pleased that he can bat higher up the order so he can pace his innings even if it's still electric with his power hitting. At 31 he could still have 3 or 4 good years ahead of him.
Ideal for t20. I wouldn’t pick him in ODis. I would prefer him at 6 or 7 rather than 5. I suspect our best t20 XI is Salt, Buttler, Stokes, Brook, Smith, Bethell, Livingstone, Archer, Rashid, Wood , maybe Atkinson or maybe another spinner .
Liam Livingstone had never quite lived up to his reputation from his early 20's but if he can stay fit his bowling and batting is ideal for White ball matches. So pleased that he can bat higher up the order so he can pace his innings even if it's still electric with his power hitting. At 31 he could still have 3 or 4 good years ahead of him.
Ideal for t20. I wouldn’t pick him in ODis. I would prefer him at 6 or 7 rather than 5. I suspect our best t20 XI is Salt, Buttler, Stokes, Brook, Smith, Bethell, Livingstone, Archer, Rashid, Wood , maybe Atkinson or maybe another spinner .
Would happily go into a tournament with that as a first choice side. Just would be worried about Stokes,Archer and Wood being able to last a whole tournament.
Not sure who you take as batting cover - maybe Cox?, maybe Pope? maybe a return to the setup for Tom Banton? Not convinced by Will Jacks. Think you can probably get away with Bethall as a third spinner. Maybe someone like James Coles as cover
Liam Livingstone had never quite lived up to his reputation from his early 20's but if he can stay fit his bowling and batting is ideal for White ball matches. So pleased that he can bat higher up the order so he can pace his innings even if it's still electric with his power hitting. At 31 he could still have 3 or 4 good years ahead of him.
Ideal for t20. I wouldn’t pick him in ODis. I would prefer him at 6 or 7 rather than 5. I suspect our best t20 XI is Salt, Buttler, Stokes, Brook, Smith, Bethell, Livingstone, Archer, Rashid, Wood , maybe Atkinson or maybe another spinner .
Don't disagree that this isn't, more or less, the best 11 players but I'm not sure about the balance especially with the question marks about Stokes - I've lost track of his retirement situation re white ball internationals (retired then not retired) and I'm not sure that he will play that many more anyway?
Which means that the side is at least one bowler short and that person has to be an all rounder because we can't have a tail that starts at 7. Equally, Bethell is very much a part time bowler (29 career wickets in 85 matches) meaning that we would still have just the 5 frontline bowlers with the addition of that one all rounder (imagine if Archer or Wood were to break down especially in an ODI) and I'm not sure that Brydon Carse is the man to do that specific job either.
Having Moeen Ali and/or an in form Sam Curran very much balanced our side though I think the latter might have become the analysts' victim meaning that his bowling has now been somewhat predictable. Our side is in a transitional state but it is something that should have happened in the year preceding the WC. Unfortunately, there were so few games in the calendar that we didn't have the matches that would afford us the opportunity to do so.
The Australian side that played us the other day had four seamers (Abbott, Hardie, Green and Stoinis), three spinners (Zampa, Connolly and Short) plus two other part time bowlers in the shape of David and Head). With all their players available, their side will look ridiculously strong and balanced too. Something like Head, Short (M), Marsh, Inglis, Maxwell, Stoinis, Green, Hardie, Cummins, Zampa, Hazlewood. That side leaves out the likes of Fraser-McGurk, Smith, Labuschagne, Johnson, Abbott, Ellis, Agar (Ashton), Connolly, Bartlett, Carey and Starc to name another 11. I'm not sure we have anywhere near that proven depth on the world stage.
Rain, more rain and more rain. At least Archer will get more time to rest his aching body.
Anyway, Buttler is out of the ODI series because of his calf injury and so is Hull due to a troublesome quad. Livingstone comes into the squad and Brook will skipper the side. Of all the candidates to replace Stokes / Buttler, Brook is by far the best candidate and has been for some time.
Liam Livingstone had never quite lived up to his reputation from his early 20's but if he can stay fit his bowling and batting is ideal for White ball matches. So pleased that he can bat higher up the order so he can pace his innings even if it's still electric with his power hitting. At 31 he could still have 3 or 4 good years ahead of him.
Ideal for t20. I wouldn’t pick him in ODis. I would prefer him at 6 or 7 rather than 5. I suspect our best t20 XI is Salt, Buttler, Stokes, Brook, Smith, Bethell, Livingstone, Archer, Rashid, Wood , maybe Atkinson or maybe another spinner .
Don't disagree that this isn't, more or less, the best 11 players but I'm not sure about the balance especially with the question marks about Stokes - I've lost track of his retirement situation re white ball internationals (retired then not retired) and I'm not sure that he will play that many more anyway?
Which means that the side is at least one bowler short and that person has to be an all rounder because we can't have a tail that starts at 7. Equally, Bethell is very much a part time bowler (29 career wickets in 85 matches) meaning that we would still have just the 5 frontline bowlers with the addition of that one all rounder (imagine if Archer or Wood were to break down especially in an ODI) and I'm not sure that Brydon Carse is the man to do that specific job either.
Having Moeen Ali and/or an in form Sam Curran very much balanced our side though I think the latter might have become the analysts' victim meaning that his bowling has now been somewhat predictable. Our side is in a transitional state but it is something that should have happened in the year preceding the WC. Unfortunately, there were so few games in the calendar that we didn't have the matches that would afford us the opportunity to do so.
The Australian side that played us the other day had four seamers (Abbott, Hardie, Green and Stoinis), three spinners (Zampa, Connolly and Short) plus two other part time bowlers in the shape of David and Head). With all their players available, their side will look ridiculously strong and balanced too. Something like Head, Short (M), Marsh, Inglis, Maxwell, Stoinis, Green, Hardie, Cummins, Zampa, Hazlewood. That side leaves out the likes of Fraser-McGurk, Smith, Labuschagne, Johnson, Abbott, Ellis, Agar (Ashton), Connolly, Bartlett, Carey and Starc to name another 11. I'm not sure we have anywhere near that proven depth on the world stage.
Liam Livingstone had never quite lived up to his reputation from his early 20's but if he can stay fit his bowling and batting is ideal for White ball matches. So pleased that he can bat higher up the order so he can pace his innings even if it's still electric with his power hitting. At 31 he could still have 3 or 4 good years ahead of him.
Ideal for t20. I wouldn’t pick him in ODis. I would prefer him at 6 or 7 rather than 5. I suspect our best t20 XI is Salt, Buttler, Stokes, Brook, Smith, Bethell, Livingstone, Archer, Rashid, Wood , maybe Atkinson or maybe another spinner .
Don't disagree that this isn't, more or less, the best 11 players but I'm not sure about the balance especially with the question marks about Stokes - I've lost track of his retirement situation re white ball internationals (retired then not retired) and I'm not sure that he will play that many more anyway?
Which means that the side is at least one bowler short and that person has to be an all rounder because we can't have a tail that starts at 7. Equally, Bethell is very much a part time bowler (29 career wickets in 85 matches) meaning that we would still have just the 5 frontline bowlers with the addition of that one all rounder (imagine if Archer or Wood were to break down especially in an ODI) and I'm not sure that Brydon Carse is the man to do that specific job either.
Having Moeen Ali and/or an in form Sam Curran very much balanced our side though I think the latter might have become the analysts' victim meaning that his bowling has now been somewhat predictable. Our side is in a transitional state but it is something that should have happened in the year preceding the WC. Unfortunately, there were so few games in the calendar that we didn't have the matches that would afford us the opportunity to do so.
The Australian side that played us the other day had four seamers (Abbott, Hardie, Green and Stoinis), three spinners (Zampa, Connolly and Short) plus two other part time bowlers in the shape of David and Head). With all their players available, their side will look ridiculously strong and balanced too. Something like Head, Short (M), Marsh, Inglis, Maxwell, Stoinis, Green, Hardie, Cummins, Zampa, Hazlewood. That side leaves out the likes of Fraser-McGurk, Smith, Labuschagne, Johnson, Abbott, Ellis, Agar (Ashton), Connolly, Bartlett, Carey and Starc to name another 11. I'm not sure we have anywhere near that proven depth on the world stage.
5 bowlers plus Bethell and Stokes
I do see that but, for the reasons I've set out above, I don't see Stokes playing in the WC in two years time and that is what we should be preparing for. Whoever takes his place has to be able to bat because having the likes of Overton, Atkinson, Archer, Rashid and Wood isn't really going to help if we lose a number of wickets - as we found in both the T20s against Australia.
Bethell is a batsman who occasionally bowls - he returned 3-0-28-0 and then didn't get a bowl in the other T20. More to the point, he is thrown the ball as a sixth or seventh option in white ball cricket - this summer he bowled just 99 balls in total in 24 matches in the Blast and the Hundred - that's an average of 4 balls a game. Until such time as he becomes a frontline bowler he will not be anything other than a last resort/captain's punt to do so. He needs to be bowling more but, as we are finding with our young spinners in red ball cricket, the teams that he is attached to aren't giving him that opportunity.
By comparison, that Australian team (Head, Short (M), Marsh, Inglis, Maxwell, Stoinis, Green, Hardie, Cummins, Zampa, Hazlewood) has 10 options of which at least eight could be asked to come on at any given time. We have to get ourselves into that position of having that option but making the assumption that Stokes will be around to fulfill that option and including him now doesn't smack to me as the right sort of preparation. It's exactly what we did in the last two WCs, especially in the 50 over comp and we were beaten by virtually everyone as a result.
Liam Livingstone had never quite lived up to his reputation from his early 20's but if he can stay fit his bowling and batting is ideal for White ball matches. So pleased that he can bat higher up the order so he can pace his innings even if it's still electric with his power hitting. At 31 he could still have 3 or 4 good years ahead of him.
Ideal for t20. I wouldn’t pick him in ODis. I would prefer him at 6 or 7 rather than 5. I suspect our best t20 XI is Salt, Buttler, Stokes, Brook, Smith, Bethell, Livingstone, Archer, Rashid, Wood , maybe Atkinson or maybe another spinner .
Don't disagree that this isn't, more or less, the best 11 players but I'm not sure about the balance especially with the question marks about Stokes - I've lost track of his retirement situation re white ball internationals (retired then not retired) and I'm not sure that he will play that many more anyway?
Which means that the side is at least one bowler short and that person has to be an all rounder because we can't have a tail that starts at 7. Equally, Bethell is very much a part time bowler (29 career wickets in 85 matches) meaning that we would still have just the 5 frontline bowlers with the addition of that one all rounder (imagine if Archer or Wood were to break down especially in an ODI) and I'm not sure that Brydon Carse is the man to do that specific job either.
Having Moeen Ali and/or an in form Sam Curran very much balanced our side though I think the latter might have become the analysts' victim meaning that his bowling has now been somewhat predictable. Our side is in a transitional state but it is something that should have happened in the year preceding the WC. Unfortunately, there were so few games in the calendar that we didn't have the matches that would afford us the opportunity to do so.
The Australian side that played us the other day had four seamers (Abbott, Hardie, Green and Stoinis), three spinners (Zampa, Connolly and Short) plus two other part time bowlers in the shape of David and Head). With all their players available, their side will look ridiculously strong and balanced too. Something like Head, Short (M), Marsh, Inglis, Maxwell, Stoinis, Green, Hardie, Cummins, Zampa, Hazlewood. That side leaves out the likes of Fraser-McGurk, Smith, Labuschagne, Johnson, Abbott, Ellis, Agar (Ashton), Connolly, Bartlett, Carey and Starc to name another 11. I'm not sure we have anywhere near that proven depth on the world stage.
5 bowlers plus Bethell and Stokes
I do see that but, for the reasons I've set out above, I don't see Stokes playing in the WC in two years time and that is what we should be preparing for. Whoever takes his place has to be able to bat because having the likes of Overton, Atkinson, Archer, Rashid and Wood isn't really going to help if we lose a number of wickets - as we found in both the T20s against Australia.
Bethell is a batsman who occasionally bowls - he returned 3-0-28-0 and then didn't get a bowl in the other T20. More to the point, he is thrown the ball as a sixth or seventh option in white ball cricket - this summer he bowled just 99 balls in total in 24 matches in the Blast and the Hundred - that's an average of 4 balls a game. Until such time as he becomes a frontline bowler he will not be anything other than a last resort/captain's punt to do so. He needs to be bowling more but, as we are finding with our young spinners in red ball cricket, the teams that he is attached to aren't giving him that opportunity.
By comparison, that Australian team (Head, Short (M), Marsh, Inglis, Maxwell, Stoinis, Green, Hardie, Cummins, Zampa, Hazlewood) has 10 options of which at least eight could be asked to come on at any given time. We have to get ourselves into that position of having that option but making the assumption that Stokes will be around to fulfill that option and including him now doesn't smack to me as the right sort of preparation. It's exactly what we did in the last two WCs, especially in the 50 over comp and we were beaten by virtually everyone as a result.
Yep. Marsh still bowls too, I think. Their allrounders are better than ours; only Stokes and Livingstone really contribute with both bat and ball. I think Curran's skills on the international stage have regressed.
Ollie Pope, keen to follow in the footsteps of Joe Root who did the same thing when Yorkshire ended up being relegated, is resting so will miss out on the final two rounds of the County Championship to play golf in the BMW PGA Celebrity Pro-Am Golf tournament. Let's hope he doesn't do a Johnny Bairstow as that golf is seemingly a very dangerous game.
Yes international sport is mentally tiring etc, but it's hardly been a mentally tough summer for the England batsmen, with 2 low key series. Indeed it might have done Pope some good to go back to the ranks at his county, and to score some runs at a more normal pace, alongside Sibley and Burns, instead of trying to whack every ball as soon as he gets to the crease.
Saq Mahmood has been added to the England squad for the ODI series. Indeed it was surprising he wasn't in the squad in the first place, ditto Livingstone.
Comments
So pleased that he can bat higher up the order so he can pace his innings even if it's still electric with his power hitting.
At 31 he could still have 3 or 4 good years ahead of him.
Would happily go into a tournament with that as a first choice side. Just would be worried about Stokes,Archer and Wood being able to last a whole tournament.
Not sure who you take as batting cover - maybe Cox?, maybe Pope? maybe a return to the setup for Tom Banton? Not convinced by Will Jacks. Think you can probably get away with Bethall as a third spinner. Maybe someone like James Coles as cover
Which means that the side is at least one bowler short and that person has to be an all rounder because we can't have a tail that starts at 7. Equally, Bethell is very much a part time bowler (29 career wickets in 85 matches) meaning that we would still have just the 5 frontline bowlers with the addition of that one all rounder (imagine if Archer or Wood were to break down especially in an ODI) and I'm not sure that Brydon Carse is the man to do that specific job either.
Having Moeen Ali and/or an in form Sam Curran very much balanced our side though I think the latter might have become the analysts' victim meaning that his bowling has now been somewhat predictable. Our side is in a transitional state but it is something that should have happened in the year preceding the WC. Unfortunately, there were so few games in the calendar that we didn't have the matches that would afford us the opportunity to do so.
The Australian side that played us the other day had four seamers (Abbott, Hardie, Green and Stoinis), three spinners (Zampa, Connolly and Short) plus two other part time bowlers in the shape of David and Head). With all their players available, their side will look ridiculously strong and balanced too. Something like Head, Short (M), Marsh, Inglis, Maxwell, Stoinis, Green, Hardie, Cummins, Zampa, Hazlewood. That side leaves out the likes of Fraser-McGurk, Smith, Labuschagne, Johnson, Abbott, Ellis, Agar (Ashton), Connolly, Bartlett, Carey and Starc to name another 11. I'm not sure we have anywhere near that proven depth on the world stage.
Anyway, Buttler is out of the ODI series because of his calf injury and so is Hull due to a troublesome quad. Livingstone comes into the squad and Brook will skipper the side. Of all the candidates to replace Stokes / Buttler, Brook is by far the best candidate and has been for some time.
Bethell is a batsman who occasionally bowls - he returned 3-0-28-0 and then didn't get a bowl in the other T20. More to the point, he is thrown the ball as a sixth or seventh option in white ball cricket - this summer he bowled just 99 balls in total in 24 matches in the Blast and the Hundred - that's an average of 4 balls a game. Until such time as he becomes a frontline bowler he will not be anything other than a last resort/captain's punt to do so. He needs to be bowling more but, as we are finding with our young spinners in red ball cricket, the teams that he is attached to aren't giving him that opportunity.
By comparison, that Australian team (Head, Short (M), Marsh, Inglis, Maxwell, Stoinis, Green, Hardie, Cummins, Zampa, Hazlewood) has 10 options of which at least eight could be asked to come on at any given time. We have to get ourselves into that position of having that option but making the assumption that Stokes will be around to fulfill that option and including him now doesn't smack to me as the right sort of preparation. It's exactly what we did in the last two WCs, especially in the 50 over comp and we were beaten by virtually everyone as a result.