Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
England Cricket 2025
Comments
-
I keep hearing about the hugely talented side we sent out there. Honestly never saw it myself?
Huge question marks for me over Crawley,Duckett Pope and Brook and a bowling attack that is more than a bit Meh.
Wood is a pair of walking crutches. Archer has missed a huge amount of Cricket and his fitness is very very suspect. Carse and Atkinson really nothing special. Add to that a battered and bruised Stokes who will really struggle to hold up for 5 tests.
If you asked the Aussies whon they would want from our squad based on ability and fitness levels then Root would be the only one imo.2 -
Pope is the big one for me. If we had a solid number 3 then you can sort of afford to have Brooke etc. playing a bit stupidly on occasion. If someone could play at 3 like Stokes did yesterday then you have more of a platform, a softer ball and more tired bowlers for the explosive middle order to exploit. If he ever stops bowling Stokes could make a decent 3 for England, what I don't know is who that player is right now. It certainly isn't Bethell though1
-
Massive hype over Archer, who to me is a top class white ball bowler, but still unproven as a Test match bowler. A few great spells, but it takes more than that to be a Test match bowler. Can he come back spell after spell, and still be fast? Does he take enough wickets?carly burn said:I keep hearing about the hugely talented side we sent out there. Honestly never saw it myself?
Huge question marks for me over Crawley,Duckett Pope and Brook and a bowling attack that is more than a bit Meh.
Wood is a pair of walking crutches. Archer has missed a huge amount of Cricket and his fitness is very very suspect. Carse and Atkinson really nothing special. Add to that a battered and bruised Stokes who will really struggle to hold up for 5 tests.
If you asked the Aussies whon they would want from our squad based on ability and fitness levels then Root would be the only one imo.
In 17 Tests, he's taken 54 wickets at 32. Those aren't the stats of someone who'd going to terrorise the Aussies.3 -
Fair point!Leuth said:
Bad comparison for Pope there lol, saying he's mentally weak in Australia compared to a guy who basically had a full breakdown and retired cos Mitchell Johnson bowled quite fast at himBig_Bob said:You need balls to play in Oz. Need to take the fight to them.
Unfortunately Pope/Smith just do not have it. They are both mentally weak. Compare Pope to someone like Trott. Miles apart. Not sure about Duckett. Weirdly, I think Crawley does have it, just worry about his concentration lapses.
I meant the Trott of that 4-5 year period around 08/09 to 13/2014 where he was brilliant. Pope doesn't have it in him to reach that level IMO1 -
Just 15 of those 54 wickets have come away from home too and each at a cost of 44.60 apiece. It's also now more than six years since Archer made his England debut so that's less than three Tests a year. He's also played 71 white ball internationals so, all told, that's just a fraction of just over one game a month for the duration of his England career.killerandflash said:
Massive hype over Archer, who to me is a top class white ball bowler, but still unproven as a Test match bowler. A few great spells, but it takes more than that to be a Test match bowler. Can he come back spell after spell, and still be fast? Does he take enough wickets?carly burn said:I keep hearing about the hugely talented side we sent out there. Honestly never saw it myself?
Huge question marks for me over Crawley,Duckett Pope and Brook and a bowling attack that is more than a bit Meh.
Wood is a pair of walking crutches. Archer has missed a huge amount of Cricket and his fitness is very very suspect. Carse and Atkinson really nothing special. Add to that a battered and bruised Stokes who will really struggle to hold up for 5 tests.
If you asked the Aussies whon they would want from our squad based on ability and fitness levels then Root would be the only one imo.
In 17 Tests, he's taken 54 wickets at 32. Those aren't the stats of someone who'd going to terrorise the Aussies.
Smith sledged him yesterday with "you only bowl fast when there's nothing going on, champ" and there's an element of truth in that. Archer was more than 10km down in pace in the second innings of the first Test and first innings of the second Test. Hopefully Smith has sufficiently fired him up for the third Test!5 -
Addick Addict said:England Lions, so as not to feel left out, lost by an innings and 127 runs to the Australia A side. Bethell made 19 and 71 in the match and Bashir returned figures of 25-2-115-0.
The one shining light is the aforementioned Asa Tribe who made 129 not out of a Lions second innings total of 295. He took 195 balls (perfect for Test cricket but a strike rate of 66.15 is bound to be sniffed at by the Bazballers) and faced the bowling of four international bowlers plus a future one in the shape of Fergus O'Neill.
Very very interested to see how Tribe goes in Div 1 next season especially if he opens for Glamorgan. Could be the player we've been looking for along with Ben McKinney.
Would like to see Cox at least get a look at 3 next summer , the Pope experiment is well and truly over for me and it's time to look elsewhere.0 -
Mark Wood out for the rest of The Ashes …. Shock horror0
-
Perfect replacement: "Since debut Fisher has suffered a range of injuries including side strains, a broken thumb, a dislocated shoulder, a back stress injury and recurrent hamstring problems, all of which have limited his involvement in county cricket over a number of seasons".oohaahmortimer said:Mark Wood out for the rest of The Ashes …. Shock horror5 -
Matt Fisher is a weird choice as a replacement, didn't take a wicket against Australia A and as Chizz has correctly pointed out has battled his own range of injuries.
I hope this isn't the last we see of Mark Wood in an England shirt but I fear it might be.0 -
Maybe they've realised they should have picked more bowlers who rely on accuracy and skill in the first place2
-
Sponsored links:
-
Gutting that but hardly surprising. Has to be Potts or Tongue if we need another quick. Preferably Potts imo. He should have played the day-nighter.
Fisher is useless.3 -
Surely Pope can't be selected at three again? Bloke is averaging 18 against Australian in away Ashes tests, and is exposing up our best batsman to the new ball.
Either Stokes has to move up to three (unlikely), or we need to bring in Bethell or even the young lad Tribe from the Lions, to try and solve the issue. Pope is averaging 35 after 60 tests, and his nervousness and discomfort at three is affecting the whole line-up.1 -
brownbear said:Surely Pope can't be selected at three again? Bloke is averaging 18 against Australian in away Ashes tests, and is exposing up our best batsman to the new ball.
Either Stokes has to move up to three (unlikely), or we need to bring in Bethell or even the young lad Tribe from the Lions, to try and solve the issue. Pope is averaging 35 after 60 tests, and his nervousness and discomfort at three is affecting the whole line-up.
And he gets worse as series go on, generally.
I think he'll stay in but he shouldn't, imagine rightly or wrongly Bethell is next in if Pope is dropped.0 -
With the batting, England in recent years have always seemed to have a very light squad, with one "next cab off the rank" effectively being the cover, and the Lions effectively providing anyone else. The likes of Lawrence, Cox and now Bethell all have been this single cover, which does leave our squad rather thin, as one player can't cover 6 positions that effectively, especially against top quality opposition, while sending in someone from the Lions to face Starc and Cummins is incredibly risky.
In our Top 7, we can either replace Pope with Bethell or give Pope the gloves, and bring in Bethell in place of Smith. That's it. There are no replacements for our openers in the squad, which feels bizarre. No cover for injuries, and both are effectively undroppable.
Yet there are options for Top 3 cover out there. Looking at the top 3 runs scorers in the CC Div 1 last season, it has a familiar feel if the management hadn't just looked for Bazball style players.
Sibley 1274 @ 61
Hameed 1258 @ 66
Lyth 1173 @ 51
All 3 failed at Test cricket, but would surely have strengthened the squad as cover. Sibley is now more fluent than he was, while Hameed surely deserves a second chance?3 -
I feel so sorry for Wood. After nine months off and with just eight overs under his belt, we expected him to be match fit for the Ashes. It was clear from that Test he was struggling even more so when he only bowled three overs in the second innings. He's just started the final year of his three year central contract with the probability that, with this ongoing knee issue, he won't play again for England again meaning for the final two years of his contract he will have contributed seven wickets in total in Tests, ODIs and T20s.Addick Addict said:Even if he's OK to bowl here, I can't see the point in Wood playing in the First Test unless he bowls at least another 15-20 overs in the middle. He hasn't played a game for nine months and we're expecting him to rock up in the peak of fitness and on the money? Better he misses this one and is fully tuned up for the rest of the series than we're down a bowler during what will be a vital Test.
If we go with five seamers then Archer, Atkinson, Carse, Tongue and Stokes doesn't sound awful to me and it's not like we don't have someone with the extra pace because Archer can be the one to bowl in three or four over spells of not holding back.
We also missed the opportunity to play Tongue or Potts in that first Test. We'll never know what their contribution might have been or whether they might have then played in the second Test too. All because we gambled on the fitness of a guy who had bowled eight overs in nine months and a steadfast refusal to arrange a second match pre-Ashes which would have been an opportunity to test Wood once again instead of doing that on the ultimate stage. McCullum is well known for his love of horses, greyhounds and gambling. I'm pretty sure Key loves a bet too. They've been gambling with so many of their decisions
We spent two years preparing for this and have ended up with a squad including an unfit quick, just the one reserve batter, no reserve keeper/batter (that isn't Pope given his place under scrutiny), a rookie batter with next to zero career red ball runs behind him and a spinner who can't take wickets because he hasn't developed the experience to learn what his game is about. We were also told by Key that there is no point sending a seamer because "this 75mph, keeper up, dobbing it on a length – we know that doesn't work in Test cricket, wherever you are”. How about 80mph on a length with a keeper who can stand up to that? Like Neser (35) and Boland (36) bowling to Carey? How about Anderson who bowled almost 150 overs in the CC this season (even for that one Test) to Foakes? I forgot - one's too old and the other can't bat at a run a ball. The Aussies don't judge a player on age. They judge it on ability, fitness and desire.
We don't fail to plan.........10 -
Hameed was a bit unlucky tbh, the injury when he first came in, then when he fought his way back in it was into a crap away Ashes (familiar), and then he's not at all Bazbally.killerandflash said:With the batting, England in recent years have always seemed to have a very light squad, with one "next cab off the rank" effectively being the cover, and the Lions effectively providing anyone else. The likes of Lawrence, Cox and now Bethell all have been this single cover, which does leave our squad rather thin, as one player can't cover 6 positions that effectively, especially against top quality opposition, while sending in someone from the Lions to face Starc and Cummins is incredibly risky.
In our Top 7, we can either replace Pope with Bethell or give Pope the gloves, and bring in Bethell in place of Smith. That's it. There are no replacements for our openers in the squad, which feels bizarre. No cover for injuries, and both are effectively undroppable.
Yet there are options for Top 3 cover out there. Looking at the top 3 runs scorers in the CC Div 1 last season, it has a familiar feel if the management hadn't just looked for Bazball style players.
Sibley 1274 @ 61
Hameed 1258 @ 66
Lyth 1173 @ 51
All 3 failed at Test cricket, but would surely have strengthened the squad as cover. Sibley is now more fluent than he was, while Hameed surely deserves a second chance?
I'd worry if he's quite good enough/consistent enough, but he was a bit unlucky.0 -
That Key comment should be his downfall. This obsession with this idea that you have to go 4 seamers that all bowl 85-90 mph is so deeply flawed.
The leading wicket taker in the country was a late 70s seamer in Tom Taylor at Worcestershire , the second domestic seamer on that list was George Hill at Yorkshire who should have been with the Lions but he was overlooked , again isn't someone that's overly quick but puts the ball in the right areas.
Neser showed us how it's done , it's got to be tempting for the Aussies to give a 5th test debut to Fergus O'Neill too.
3 -
The obsession with pace is mystifying, as when we battered the Aussies in 2010 we used nagging seam and relentless accuracy from Anderson, Tremlett and Bresnan. I've lived here in Australia for twenty years, and nobody has come here and battered them with all out pace - just doesn't happen.5
-
And the best spinner was Jack Leach, 52 wickets @ 23. And that's not on the dustbowl pitches that Somerset used to have either.
But he fails the Charlton Life Bazball height test.1 -
I've had this argument with peole and always refer back to Matthew Hoggard, slow if you compare him to Simon Jones, Flintoff and Harmison but did what he was told, put the ball in the right area consistently but he was always the player people seemed to want to drop and I'm certain he took most wickets in 2005 as wellbrownbear said:The obsession with pace is mystifying, as when we battered the Aussies in 2010 we used nagging seam and relentless accuracy from Anderson, Tremlett and Bresnan. I've lived here in Australia for twenty years, and nobody has come here and battered them with all out pace - just doesn't happen.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
the English climate is just not conducive to keeping pace bowlers in one piece for too longChizz said:
Perfect replacement: "Since debut Fisher has suffered a range of injuries including side strains, a broken thumb, a dislocated shoulder, a back stress injury and recurrent hamstring problems, all of which have limited his involvement in county cricket over a number of seasons".oohaahmortimer said:Mark Wood out for the rest of The Ashes …. Shock horror0 -
It's the variety.Carter said:
I've had this argument with peole and always refer back to Matthew Hoggard, slow if you compare him to Simon Jones, Flintoff and Harmison but did what he was told, put the ball in the right area consistently but he was always the player people seemed to want to drop and I'm certain he took most wickets in 2005 as wellbrownbear said:The obsession with pace is mystifying, as when we battered the Aussies in 2010 we used nagging seam and relentless accuracy from Anderson, Tremlett and Bresnan. I've lived here in Australia for twenty years, and nobody has come here and battered them with all out pace - just doesn't happen.
4 Hoggards without the pace of Harmison, Flintoff etc would have been an issue, but so would 4 Harmisons without Hoggard there, Jones getting swing etc.3 -
The Aussies having 2 consecutive left arm quicks has been a massive help for them too. Without his injuries, Reece Topley might have given us that variety in Test cricket too.North Lower Neil said:
It's the variety.Carter said:
I've had this argument with peole and always refer back to Matthew Hoggard, slow if you compare him to Simon Jones, Flintoff and Harmison but did what he was told, put the ball in the right area consistently but he was always the player people seemed to want to drop and I'm certain he took most wickets in 2005 as wellbrownbear said:The obsession with pace is mystifying, as when we battered the Aussies in 2010 we used nagging seam and relentless accuracy from Anderson, Tremlett and Bresnan. I've lived here in Australia for twenty years, and nobody has come here and battered them with all out pace - just doesn't happen.
4 Hoggards without the pace of Harmison, Flintoff etc would have been an issue, but so would 4 Harmisons without Hoggard there, Jones getting swing etc.0 -
The top half of this aussie batting lineup has an average around 17 against seam up bowlers when the ball is delivered on a line to hit the stumps. If they got to 200/5 they'd be hugely overachieving.
Stats like these are freely available.
England's seam bowlers delivered less than 10% of balls that could hit the stumps.
That is A grade deliberately choosing not to do your job properly.
Not that we need anything like rational analysis to compound the case for the dismissal of Baz and Stokes and for some very uncomfortable questioning of the senior squad members who are silently playing along with the infantile bazball pantomime
5 -
Absolutely and thats what I'm sayingNorth Lower Neil said:
It's the variety.Carter said:
I've had this argument with peole and always refer back to Matthew Hoggard, slow if you compare him to Simon Jones, Flintoff and Harmison but did what he was told, put the ball in the right area consistently but he was always the player people seemed to want to drop and I'm certain he took most wickets in 2005 as wellbrownbear said:The obsession with pace is mystifying, as when we battered the Aussies in 2010 we used nagging seam and relentless accuracy from Anderson, Tremlett and Bresnan. I've lived here in Australia for twenty years, and nobody has come here and battered them with all out pace - just doesn't happen.
4 Hoggards without the pace of Harmison, Flintoff etc would have been an issue, but so would 4 Harmisons without Hoggard there, Jones getting swing etc.
Hoggard maintained a line and length and especially with Jones getting that mad reverse swing at the opposite end meant Hoggard would pick up wickets as the batsmen had to score off him1 -
Well I never.oohaahmortimer said:Mark Wood out for the rest of The Ashes …. Shock horror
Probably see Archer out after the next one and Stokes to miss one of the last two if not both!0 -
Could swear I’ve just Sam Cook at the Sainsbury’s opposite Charlton station. Don’t know if he’s in Oz but could’ve sworn it was him0
-
Addick Addict said:
I feel so sorry for Wood. After nine months off and with just eight overs under his belt, we expected him to be match fit for the Ashes. It was clear from that Test he was struggling even more so when he only bowled three overs in the second innings. He's just started the final year of his three year central contract with the probability that, with this ongoing knee issue, he won't play again for England again meaning for the final two years of his contract he will have contributed seven wickets in total in Tests, ODIs and T20s.Addick Addict said:Even if he's OK to bowl here, I can't see the point in Wood playing in the First Test unless he bowls at least another 15-20 overs in the middle. He hasn't played a game for nine months and we're expecting him to rock up in the peak of fitness and on the money? Better he misses this one and is fully tuned up for the rest of the series than we're down a bowler during what will be a vital Test.
If we go with five seamers then Archer, Atkinson, Carse, Tongue and Stokes doesn't sound awful to me and it's not like we don't have someone with the extra pace because Archer can be the one to bowl in three or four over spells of not holding back.
We also missed the opportunity to play Tongue or Potts in that first Test. We'll never know what their contribution might have been or whether they might have then played in the second Test too. All because we gambled on the fitness of a guy who had bowled eight overs in nine months and a steadfast refusal to arrange a second match pre-Ashes which would have been an opportunity to test Wood once again instead of doing that on the ultimate stage. McCullum is well known for his love of horses, greyhounds and gambling. I'm pretty sure Key loves a bet too. They've been gambling with so many of their decisions
We spent two years preparing for this and have ended up with a squad including an unfit quick, just the one reserve batter, no reserve keeper/batter (that isn't Pope given his place under scrutiny), a rookie batter with next to zero career red ball runs behind him and a spinner who can't take wickets because he hasn't developed the experience to learn what his game is about. We were also told by Key that there is no point sending a seamer because "this 75mph, keeper up, dobbing it on a length – we know that doesn't work in Test cricket, wherever you are”. How about 80mph on a length with a keeper who can stand up to that? Like Neser (35) and Boland (36) bowling to Carey? How about Anderson who bowled almost 150 overs in the CC this season (even for that one Test) to Foakes? I forgot - one's too old and the other can't bat at a run a ball. The Aussies don't judge a player on age. They judge it on ability, fitness and desire.
We don't fail to plan.........
Overs in First-Class cricket since August for the bowlers selected in the First two Ashes Tests:
England
Atkinson - 66
Archer - 0
Carse - 0
Stokes - 0
Jacks -0
Wood - 0
Total - 66 (average 11)
Australia
Starc - 31
Boland - 90.4
Neser - 115.5
Doggett - 64.4
Green - 20
Lyon - 150.1
Total - 471.4 (average 78)
So, we arrive in Australia on the back of those stats and decide that the best way forward is to have one practice game. We then get found out in the First Test but instead of participating in another game, our boys were straining themselves in the nets hence McCullum's comment "if anything we over trained in the five days in between". That's not purposeful practice.
When asked about this, Jimmy Anderson, said this:
"For me, I always felt like I need games to build up that intensity and also that match fitness because you can do all the nets you want but you need to get ready for a tough day of Test cricket you need to be standing in the field for six hours a day and then bowling your spells around that. I remember Peter Moores, my old coach at Lancashire, saying two games into a season was when I was starting to hit my straps. I always felt I needed that time."
Alastair Cook's response to that was:
"Sorry but I find that mad. We have England's best ever bowler, 700 wickets, saying that he needs two to three games. I could have thrown Jimmy out into the Perth game as a captain and trusted him to bowl but he's got all that experience behind him whereas these bowlers have not much experience and they're just going in there fresh. I've found it almost madness in terms of the way they've operated".
On the pink ball issue Anderson said that it was a missed opportunity to play in the practice game with a pink ball because there were three bowlers that have never played in a pink ball Test. Even the Australian bowlers might not have played in such a game but they have experience of playing domestic pink ball games. He and Cook went on to talk about the difficulty for the batter to play pink ball under lights and there are so many different considerations to take into account including fielding of course. Cook's response was "Jamie Smith, never played a Test or home pink ball game under lights and has a nightmare with bat and gloves. Go figure".
........we plan to fail.2 -
Carey’s performance is proof if ever needed that a solid wicket-keeper is invaluable at the elite level of test cricket. It’s so frustrating that we have by almost every metric the best wicket keeper in the world in Foakes who has been completely disregarded by this setup because he doesn’t look to smash every ball.Addick Addict said:
I feel so sorry for Wood. After nine months off and with just eight overs under his belt, we expected him to be match fit for the Ashes. It was clear from that Test he was struggling even more so when he only bowled three overs in the second innings. He's just started the final year of his three year central contract with the probability that, with this ongoing knee issue, he won't play again for England again meaning for the final two years of his contract he will have contributed seven wickets in total in Tests, ODIs and T20s.Addick Addict said:Even if he's OK to bowl here, I can't see the point in Wood playing in the First Test unless he bowls at least another 15-20 overs in the middle. He hasn't played a game for nine months and we're expecting him to rock up in the peak of fitness and on the money? Better he misses this one and is fully tuned up for the rest of the series than we're down a bowler during what will be a vital Test.
If we go with five seamers then Archer, Atkinson, Carse, Tongue and Stokes doesn't sound awful to me and it's not like we don't have someone with the extra pace because Archer can be the one to bowl in three or four over spells of not holding back.
We also missed the opportunity to play Tongue or Potts in that first Test. We'll never know what their contribution might have been or whether they might have then played in the second Test too. All because we gambled on the fitness of a guy who had bowled eight overs in nine months and a steadfast refusal to arrange a second match pre-Ashes which would have been an opportunity to test Wood once again instead of doing that on the ultimate stage. McCullum is well known for his love of horses, greyhounds and gambling. I'm pretty sure Key loves a bet too. They've been gambling with so many of their decisions
We spent two years preparing for this and have ended up with a squad including an unfit quick, just the one reserve batter, no reserve keeper/batter (that isn't Pope given his place under scrutiny), a rookie batter with next to zero career red ball runs behind him and a spinner who can't take wickets because he hasn't developed the experience to learn what his game is about. We were also told by Key that there is no point sending a seamer because "this 75mph, keeper up, dobbing it on a length – we know that doesn't work in Test cricket, wherever you are”. How about 80mph on a length with a keeper who can stand up to that? Like Neser (35) and Boland (36) bowling to Carey? How about Anderson who bowled almost 150 overs in the CC this season (even for that one Test) to Foakes? I forgot - one's too old and the other can't bat at a run a ball. The Aussies don't judge a player on age. They judge it on ability, fitness and desire.
We don't fail to plan.........Ironically Foakes alleged weakness is with the bat, but he is exactly the kind of measured batter we have been crying out for the last two tests. Granted he might not score at a run a ball but he also doesn’t throw his wicket away like most of our top order.7 -
They don't value wicketkeeping or keeping wickets, sadly.Notts_Addick said:
Carey’s performance is proof if ever needed that a solid wicket-keeper is invaluable at the elite level of test cricket. It’s so frustrating that we have by almost every metric the best wicket keeper in the world in Foakes who has been completely disregarded by this setup because he doesn’t look to smash every ball.Addick Addict said:
I feel so sorry for Wood. After nine months off and with just eight overs under his belt, we expected him to be match fit for the Ashes. It was clear from that Test he was struggling even more so when he only bowled three overs in the second innings. He's just started the final year of his three year central contract with the probability that, with this ongoing knee issue, he won't play again for England again meaning for the final two years of his contract he will have contributed seven wickets in total in Tests, ODIs and T20s.Addick Addict said:Even if he's OK to bowl here, I can't see the point in Wood playing in the First Test unless he bowls at least another 15-20 overs in the middle. He hasn't played a game for nine months and we're expecting him to rock up in the peak of fitness and on the money? Better he misses this one and is fully tuned up for the rest of the series than we're down a bowler during what will be a vital Test.
If we go with five seamers then Archer, Atkinson, Carse, Tongue and Stokes doesn't sound awful to me and it's not like we don't have someone with the extra pace because Archer can be the one to bowl in three or four over spells of not holding back.
We also missed the opportunity to play Tongue or Potts in that first Test. We'll never know what their contribution might have been or whether they might have then played in the second Test too. All because we gambled on the fitness of a guy who had bowled eight overs in nine months and a steadfast refusal to arrange a second match pre-Ashes which would have been an opportunity to test Wood once again instead of doing that on the ultimate stage. McCullum is well known for his love of horses, greyhounds and gambling. I'm pretty sure Key loves a bet too. They've been gambling with so many of their decisions
We spent two years preparing for this and have ended up with a squad including an unfit quick, just the one reserve batter, no reserve keeper/batter (that isn't Pope given his place under scrutiny), a rookie batter with next to zero career red ball runs behind him and a spinner who can't take wickets because he hasn't developed the experience to learn what his game is about. We were also told by Key that there is no point sending a seamer because "this 75mph, keeper up, dobbing it on a length – we know that doesn't work in Test cricket, wherever you are”. How about 80mph on a length with a keeper who can stand up to that? Like Neser (35) and Boland (36) bowling to Carey? How about Anderson who bowled almost 150 overs in the CC this season (even for that one Test) to Foakes? I forgot - one's too old and the other can't bat at a run a ball. The Aussies don't judge a player on age. They judge it on ability, fitness and desire.
We don't fail to plan.........Ironically Foakes alleged weakness is with the bat, but he is exactly the kind of measured batter we have been crying out for the last two tests. Granted he might not score at a run a ball but he also doesn’t throw his wicket away like most of our top order.0
