England team for the 2nd test

With the news of Finn being ruled out of the second test, who should England pick?

My team would be
Cook
Compton
Trott
kp
Morgan
Prior
Bresnan
Broad
swann
Anderson
Panesar

Can't see the point in playing all 3 of Anderson, Broad, Bresnan. Too similar all currently bowling around 80mph. I'd throw Meaker in now Finn is out, it might not come off but we've got to try something.

My team would be quite different to yours:
Cook, Compton, Trott, Pietersen, Bairstow, Patel, Prior, Swann, Meaker, Anderson, Monty

What has Bresnan done to deserve a place over Samit Patel?
In my view, absolutely nothing whatsoever. If they have to drop Patel, then it has to be for either Bairstow or Morgan.
Bresnan was awful on the first day of the first test, bowling in the early 120 KPH won't trouble even the Bangladeshis. Bresnan bowled 10 overs on the first day going for 56, Patel bowled 14 overs for 39.
Patel isn't stuff for a full time 2nd spinner even on spinning tracks, but he's a more than parttime handy support spinner. He had 2 umpiring shokers from the umpires while batting absolutely unfair to drop him after that, particularly if that means retaining someone like Bresnan who has been underperforming in all formats for some time now.

Graham Onions was in the orgiinal squad

does he not come into the equation even now ?

Hmm...How Finn...who was being ignored to Bresnan until T3 of SA series and Monty's stock has risen.......

Cook
Compton
Trott
Pietersen
Bairstow
Morgan
Prior
Broad
Swann
Anderson
Panaser

Think Graeme Onions, despite his not so impressive performance in the warm ups, could be a better pick than Stuart Meaker. Unlike Bresnan and even Broad, Onions generates pretty impressive pace, not in the Finn/Yadav league, but he could bowl consistently in the high 130s, and can even go up to early 140s at times. When conditions favor him he could swing the ball, and he could move it of the seam at times. He usually bowls wickets to wickets, and if the bounce is low, that line could be trouble for some of the Indian batsmen. Besides, he has test experience and a great deal more of First class experience over Meaker. And if England need their number 11 to bat out a draw, no need to look any further!.
I would go in with
Cook
Compton
Trott
Pietersen
Bairstow
Patel
Prior
Broad/Panesar depending on pitch and conditions
Swann
Anderson
Onions.

msp83 wrote: . And if England need their number 11 to bat out a draw, no need to look any further!.

Yeah very positive mindset that

Cook
Compton
Trott
KP
Bairstow
Patel
Prior
Broad
Swann
Anderson
Panesar

With no Finn I can't possibly pick Broad at 7, Swann at 8 and then Anderson, Onions and Monty - would need some balance from Bresnan but I'm not sure he's offering that right now, after the 1st Test.

I don't really think Meaker would be that useful. He also has limited batting ability, and would be a knee-jerk pick in my view.

I agree that bresnan would be very lucky to get another chance, however, I think he is the only person able to balance the side if you pick both panesar and Swann. Some have suggested only having two pace bowlers, ok if they are reliable but would you risk it bearing in mind one of them will be broad, who is consistent only in his inconsistency. Also if you have both swann and panesar you don't need Patel's bowling, and I think you are kidding yourself if you think Patel is in the team because of his batting alone. A brave move would be both spinners plus Anderson and onions with prior at seven and both Morgan and bairstow in the too six. But I don't think we will be that brave so early in the series.

I forgot about Onions. So will revise my team to be the same as msp's

I suppose what I was getting at with Meaker is Broad and Bresnan were so terrible in the first test I'd ideally drop both of them if we need to play 2 spinners and bring in someone else. Onions is a better option than Meaker to be honest.

Disaster that Finn is ruled out. I fear our seam attack will remain ineffective due to their lack of pace (which they are down on from a year or two ago).

Fists of Fury wrote:Disaster that Finn is ruled out. I fear our seam attack will remain ineffective due to their lack of pace (which they are down on from a year or two ago).

This affected us badly in the summer vs SA and continues to now. Anderson was never the quickest so is excused. Bresnan I fear is in terminal decline which is a shame as he showed real quality reversing the ball in Aus a couple of years ago and roughing up India at home with short pitched bowling. Can't explain Broad - still carrying an injury? Sulking over Twitter?!

Indeed the lower speeds do seem to be a bit perplexing, as we are not just talking about one match or even a series, but actually a considerable length of time in different conditions.

Calamity for England with Finn ruled out. We cannot give a debut to Meaker in harsh, unfriendly conditions, so the team should be:

Cook, Compton, Trott, KP, Morgan, Prior, Patel, Broad, Swann, Anderson, Panesar.

The choice of Panesar in my view should based on the conditions as well.
I did mention on the first test thread Dravid saying on commentary that the Mumbai pitch is likely to have some grass on it so that it would stay together and without it there is a chance of ball turning from day one and pitch breaking up later. I don't think I would have a particular problem with that, ones in a while a pitch where 250 becoming a good first innings total could be good funn. But it is unlikely that the BCCI would go for something like that, despite all the talk of a raging turner, all that we had for the first test was a good track where there was some decent help for the spinners. So if there is grass cover, then England will have to go in with 3 seamers. If there is nothing of that sort, then Monty should be played. Broad's current and recent form doesn't make an automatic selection, his batting of late has been more about hype rather than substance, but I don't see England dropping him as yet. Perhaps fair enough, last year, and even at the beginning of this year, he was running through lineups. Ideally it should have been Anderson, Swann, Finn and Onions/Panesar. Finn's out and Broad is unlikely to be dropped. So if they have to play 2 spinners, then they have to play with only 2 seamers. Onions deserves a chance after his consistent showing in domestic cricket and the only opportunity he got in the test side this season, but it remains to be seen whether England will make such a tough call at this stage.

msp83 wrote:What has Bresnan done to deserve a place over Samit Patel?

Flip that question around?

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

msp83 wrote:What has Bresnan done to deserve a place over Samit Patel?

Flip that question around?

Think I have already provided my views above.
Patel, a non-regular bowler, bowled more than 30 overs, picked up a wicket, went at a rate of just over 3 in the India first innings. On the first day he bowled 14 overs and gave away runs under 3 an over. Bresnan on the other hand offeredfar too many hit me balls, could only be used for 10 overs on day one of the match, went at close to 6 then. He bowled at a pace that didn't trouble the Indian batsmen one bit, and unlike Patel, he's a regular bowler.

Bresnan has at least got a decent test record to fall back on AND he batted better than Patel.

No brainer.

Besides, Bresnan's issues, the lack of pace and nip aren't new. There was a reason as to why he was dropped from the test side in more helpful conditions, and his performances in the T-20 WC was nothing to wright home about either.

India picked RP Singh for the England tour on the back of his past good record in England. And we all know what happened afterwards!.

msp83 wrote:India picked RP Singh for the England tour on the back of his past good record in England. And we all know what happened afterwards!.

But Bresnan had a better game than Patel and he has a decent test record. Patel is a good county player, no more.

How did Bresnan have a better game?

Well, Bresnan's past performances v India were more consistent and more more recent than RP Singh's. But after the troubles of the last match Bresnan can't really be retained - he had a shocker, the other bowlers both bowled (marginally) better and have more credit, and Bresnan also had a poor time of it in the summer.

If we play two seamers it should still be Anderson and Broad. If we play three it has to be Onions.

msp83 wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

msp83 wrote:What has Bresnan done to deserve a place over Samit Patel?

Flip that question around?

Think I have already provided my views above.
Patel, a non-regular bowler, bowled more than 30 overs, picked up a wicket, went at a rate of just over 3 in the India first innings. On the first day he bowled 14 overs and gave away runs under 3 an over. Bresnan on the other hand offeredfar too many hit me balls, could only be used for 10 overs on day one of the match, went at close to 6 then. He bowled at a pace that didn't trouble the Indian batsmen one bit, and unlike Patel, he's a regular bowler.

Given the relative success of other spinnrs vs other seamers in that match Patels perfomance with the ball was poor in the extreme.
What value does a third spinner bring to the side (discounting KP), unless youre seriously suggesting he stays in ahead of Pannessar?

I think my real point was ...why would either of them get picked anyway.

Cook
Compton
Trott
KP
Patel
Prior
Bresnan
Swann
Meaker
Anderson
Panesar

I'd be pretty peed if we go in with the medium pace of Broad over Onions or Meaker.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

msp83 wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

msp83 wrote:What has Bresnan done to deserve a place over Samit Patel?

Flip that question around?

Think I have already provided my views above.
Patel, a non-regular bowler, bowled more than 30 overs, picked up a wicket, went at a rate of just over 3 in the India first innings. On the first day he bowled 14 overs and gave away runs under 3 an over. Bresnan on the other hand offeredfar too many hit me balls, could only be used for 10 overs on day one of the match, went at close to 6 then. He bowled at a pace that didn't trouble the Indian batsmen one bit, and unlike Patel, he's a regular bowler.

Given the relative success of other spinnrs vs other seamers in that match Patels perfomance with the ball was poor in the extreme.
What value does a third spinner bring to the side (discounting KP), unless youre seriously suggesting he stays in ahead of Pannessar?

I think my real point was ...why would either of them get picked anyway.

In comparison to the Indian seamers, the English seamers were outbowled. Zaheer and Umesh picked up 7 wickets in the match while the 3 English seamers just managed the one wicket of Zaheer Khan.
Now coming to the last point you made, on what is the case for Patel as such.
Patel has scored big runs in the warm up matches, and demonstrated an ability to score runs against spin bowling in the sub-continent in other formats. Both Eoin Morgan and Jonny Bairstow have shown a weakness against spin in recent times, and so it may not be a very sound idea to go in with both of them.
Patel as 3rd spinner could be handy even if Monty plays, he can bowl a bit in between giving enough time for Swann and Panesar to rest as well as avoid overbowling the 2 seamers.

I don't think Onions will bowl faster than Broad. Meaker will, but selecting him would be very knee-jerk when 4 Tests ago people were suggesting England's was the best bowling attack in the world, and at that stage (and without having done much since) Meaker was 7th or 8th in line.

Shelsey93 wrote:I don't think Onions will bowl faster than Broad. Meaker will, but selecting him would be very knee-jerk when 4 Tests ago people were suggesting England's was the best bowling attack in the world, and at that stage (and without having done much since) Meaker was 7th or 8th in line.

Shelsey, if the West Indies test Onions played early this year is any indication, he could certainly bowl faster than Stuart Broad. Onions was consistently touching speeds in the high 130s and at times even early 140s in that match. Its been a while since Broad reached those high points.

Stella wrote:Bresnan has at least got a decent test record to fall back on AND he batted better than Patel.

No brainer.

it is a travesty....people are fighting over Bresnan v. Patel

Was going to pick Finn... but he's injured now

Cook
Compton
Trott
Pietersen
Bairstow
Patel
Prior
Swann
Broad
Anderson
Panesar

With Finn and Bell unavailable I'd pick;

1.Cook
2.Compton
3.Trott
4.KP
5.Bairstow
6.Morgan
7.Prior
8.Swann
9.Anderson
10.Panesar
11.Onions

Can't see it being done but simply put I wan't two front-line spinners in India therefore Panesar. I've brought Onions in as I feel Broad/Bresnan are looking (and bowling) too slow. They are looking tired and have lost any zip/pace they usually get off the wicket and are therefore lacking penetration.

Other changes I'd drop Patel as without Bresnan/Broad I want 6 front-line batsmen and without Bell I think our best middle order is Trott,KP,Bairstow,Morgan.

KP_fan wrote:

Stella wrote:Bresnan has at least got a decent test record to fall back on AND he batted better than Patel.

No brainer.

it is a travesty....people are fighting over Bresnan v. Patel

Who's bowling will be more effective in the sub-continent though? Anywhere else in the World it's Bresnan, but in India it's Patel.

Prior
Cook
Trott
Pietersen
Morgan
Bairstow wk
Patel
Broad
Swann
Anderson
Panesar

There you go....three spinners and Pietersen........two paceman..........

In form Prior doing a Sangakarra.......................

Right, I've gone through all 10 team selections posted on here (including my own) and the popular consensus is:

Cook
Compton
Trott
Pietersen
Bairstow
Patel
Prior
Broad
Swann
Anderson
Panesar

Duty - just as well you confined consideration to selections on 606v2. On the official Surrey Supporters' website one poster has called up James Treadwell to play alongside Swann and Monty!

Duty281 wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

Stella wrote:Bresnan has at least got a decent test record to fall back on AND he batted better than Patel.

No brainer.

it is a travesty....people are fighting over Bresnan v. Patel

Who's bowling will be more effective in the sub-continent though? Anywhere else in the World it's Bresnan, but in India it's Patel.

fatel averages 60.5 in tests ( all in asia) and 10 with the bat.

Bresnan avergaes 41 with the ball and 33 with the bat in asian tests

So aside from being wrong , youre right.

And before you start he has better figures in ODIs and T20s in Asia too including a 5/48 in India

Now Im not advocating hes any good, just debunking the notion that Samit Patel is actually capable of producing good quality international cricket.

If a honest county fast medium bumbler like the Bredvan can outperform you in all formats and all conditions then really you arent bringing balance to the side, youre bringing shame to it.

well...I told ya
this guy is making too many mistakes...and needs to be released from england duties


http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-england-2012/content/current/story/592189.html

Flower admits selection errors
George Dobell

November 20, 2012


Andy Flower has admitted that England made a mistake in not selecting Monty Panesar for the first Test of the series against India at Ahmedabad. England lost the Test by nine wickets after conceding a first innings deficit of 330 with Flower, the England team director, also conceding that he misread the pitch.

Bit of good news.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/bcci-goes-with-dhoni-orders-rank-turners-for-remaining-tests-t20s/1033935/
Well done, Mahendra Singh Dhoni. Will provide everyone a more meaningful challenge, the batsman can play their shots and the excellent ones can survive and score well. The seamers should enjoy the bounce. The spinners can have a bawl , and they very much deserve it.

Panaser will play and so will Swann. So, Patel's bowling won't be needed, apart from a few overs here and there, hence what's the point in him playing.

Because he seems a better bet against spin than Morgan and Bairstow. One of them will have to come in, its better to play Patel than playing both of them together.

msp on recent evidence panessar is a better bat than Patel at test level.

Morgan was the previous incumbent of the "playing spin specialist" role.

Patel averages under 30 at first class level, and even less in tests, he cant be slected as a batsman alone. As a thrid spinner hes not good enough to justify keeping a proper batsman or 3rd seamer out.

Yes he battered some puddings in the warm ups, but thsi seems typical of a guy who folds like a pancake at the highest level.

#hatel

msp83 wrote:Bit of good news.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/bcci-goes-with-dhoni-orders-rank-turners-for-remaining-tests-t20s/1033935/
Well done, Mahendra Singh Dhoni. Will provide everyone a more meaningful challenge, the batsman can play their shots and the excellent ones can survive and score well. The seamers should enjoy the bounce. The spinners can have a bawl , and they very much deserve it.

yes MSP.....it is good news and worth reading in full.

The implication of this is that Ashwin who the English batsmen were able to keep out...and read off the pitch his "other ones" would be deadly

I predict a 3rd or early 4th day finish in Mumbai......and sub 200 totals for England in each inning.
Eng should realize that they got te better of the bowling conditions in Motera where the ball spun and bounced more on the first 3 days


The BCCI has responded quickly to skipper M S Dhoni’s demand for a pitch with “turn and bounce” after India’s first Test win on the “slow and low” Motera track. Three days before the Mumbai Test, the board has asked state associations hosting the remaining three Tests and the two T20s — starting with Mumbai Cricket Association (MCA) — to prepare rank turners.

“We have asked the curators to cooperate with whatever demands the Indian captain has regarding the pitches for the Tests and T20s against England,” a BCCI official told The Indian Express. Curators of two venues confirmed that they had received instructions from the board.

Dhoni had complained about the pitches in the two Tests against New Zealand earlier this year, even though India had won 2-0. He had demanded wickets that would assist his spinners from the very beginning.

“When the wicket seams right from the first delivery, nobody asks questions. What you don’t want is ridges in the wicket. The only way to take the toss out of the equation is to have pitches that turn right from the start,” Dhoni said in Ahmedabad on Monday.

If MCA officials are to be believed, Alastair Cook & Co will be welcomed at Wankhede with a pitch with probably more bite than they can handle. “In comparison to Motera, where the pitch was slow, the spinners will not only get a lot of turn here, they will also benefit from added bounce,” an official said.

While the BCCI made its stand clear, it is learnt that Dhoni had rung up some MCA officials and asked for a pitch that would suit his demands.

I agree completely with PSB and Stella. I can only see the point of Patel if he is the second spinner (an attempt at a batting allrounder). As a frontline batsmen he surely is not in the top six batters available.

A bunsen burner of a pitch might also help Swann and Panesar bowl out india cheaply, granted probably not for as little as England will manage.

LivinginItaly wrote:A bunsen burner of a pitch might also help Swann and Panesar bowl out india cheaply, granted probably not for as little as England will manage.

this will be one of those tests...where India scores 320ish offcourse Swann and Panesar ( now certain) will get wickets...but good seamer with 135kph of speed will also be amongst wickets.
and India bundles opponents for 150-200 ish

statements like the following from BCCI sources are going to kill England psychologically even if pitch does turn and bounce as much as stated

If MCA officials are to be believed, Alastair Cook & Co will be welcomed at Wankhede with a pitch with probably more bite than they can handle.

that Patel and Bresnan types are in the squad of 15 ( or 16 or 17 now) shows eitehr how little England has in terms of talent.....or how lopsided / agenda based selections are....
I think it's the latter