England vs Sri Lanka 3rd Test (Lords) June 9-13

First topic message reminder :

England expected to be unchanged, SL may tweak their lineup but likely to be close to the team that competed better in the second half of the second Test

Despite the all-formats points system, I think this match can be viewed as a dead rubber, but England will want to close out a 3-0 series win as they look to move up the Test rankings

Looks that way. Also it seems Mr Dependable Joe Root is in a bit of a slump. Only scored 87 runs this series at an average of just under 22.

Suddenly our batting lineup is looking rather fragile.

dyrewolfe wrote:Looks that way. Also it seems Mr Dependable Joe Root is in a bit of a slump. Only scored 87 runs this series at an average of just under 22.

Suddenly our batting lineup is looking rather fragile.

Amazing isn't it though that when you are scratching about for form you get one like the one that got Root today - big jag back and barely reached shin high from back of a length.

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:Compton presumably now for the chop, and Vince could be heading that way as well.

The way the new England management do things, I'd be surprised to see Vince dropped before the end of the Pakistan series.

Vince needs a score early in the Pakistan series really

Compton will get the chop, deservedly so

Compton has surely gone. I thought he looked OK today, but got out to a ball that didn't do much, just too late to move his feet. Thing is, Compton's always moved his feet rather later than most, but when he's in form it works as it means he gets great weight transfer into his shots. When he's out of nick though, it's just that bit more difficult and he ends up being a bit late on his shots, as has happened in both innings here.

I expect Vince to be given at least the start of the Pakistan series, he's had four innings, looked pretty competent, but hasn't gone on to a score yet. Give him time.

Don't buy this "Root in a slump" thing, nothing he could do about today's wicket, and he looked his brilliant self in the previous Test. A couple of poor shots do not a slump make.

Bairstow's dismissal was a bit of a tired looking shot, perhaps understandably given how much time he's spent involved in the match (coming in quite early in both innings plus keeping).

Hales has played pretty nicely again, though I really think he needs to work out a way of keeping the board ticking over against the spinners, particularly for this winter.

Finally, for all the criticism of Bairstow's keeping, Chandimal's has been a bit village at times. Something I've noticed is that he seems to have a very wide stance, which I'm not sure helps with really springing off for your first step. Should really have caught the Hales one down the leg side, and then caught completely on his heels for Finn's nick the next ball.

Worth pointing out that keeping to a pace bowler bringing the ball in is harder. You set yourself usually for the outside edge (a high proportion of keepers catches come from outside edges), but with the ball coming back into the batsman your instinct is to go the other way (towards the batsman's legside) so you're almost caught between the two, and that's what happened to Chandimal. He started to go towards the leg-side, probably also influenced by the previous ball, and got caught unable to change directions fast enough. Still, a pretty poor effort, and they're definitely some technical issues there.

A word for Pradeep too - excellent spell again at the end of the day, he's been by far the most impressive of the Sri Lankan seamers this series

I've been quite impressed by Pradeep too...though I didn't see the late session yesterday.
In fact I got a bit of a shock waking up , logging on to cricinfo and noting Finn facing the last over ! Was somewhat relieved to see he was on night watchman duty
Even so , that is a rather disappointing batting display again : I gather Root was the victim of an unplayable one ; but Compton again failed to go on from a (quite decent) start , and Vince didn't get a start at all...  
Good to see Hales in runs again.  Still work to do but this series has generally been a good one for him , and buys him some time.

Another 120 or so should put this beyond Sri Lanka ; and if balls are starting to keep low I would now give England a good chance of forcing a win even with some time potentially lost to the weather - though I guess that depends how much time we are losing...

Compton is surely gone, which is a shame as he had at times done better than most, and given a bit more backing who knows

The batting order solution might be for Bairstow at 5, with a new keeper at 7 or even 8. That would mean Vince at 3, though he is already under pressure after a very unconvincing series capped off with an abysmal dismissal yesterday

I don't like what i've seen from Vince at all; international cricket looks beyond him mentally, he hasn't looked at ease at all when batting.

Compton seems set for the chop immediately. I agree with James and MfC that Vince will get a little longer although the knives are probably being already sharpened.

The issue then is - who replaces them? There don't seem that many cabs at the rank honking their horns too loudly! Maybe Robson who was tried and didn't make a go of it before? Maybe one Test leg-spinner Borthwick? That doesn't mean they don't deserve further opportunity or that they won't succeed but their names don't give me ultra confidence. I certainly wouldn't want to bring them both in for the next Test which strengthens the case for Vince having a bit more time.

I actually rather like VTR's suggestion of a new keeper. Bairstow has certainly shown that he can bat in Tests. I would tell him to concentrate solely upon that and to excel at it. Whilst Bairstow's keeping has improved, he still continues to drop the odd clanger and just doesn't have the reliability behind the stumps needed at the top level. I would therefore either recall Buttler (with the possible bonus of X-factor batting although the selectors may fear they're dropping one incomplete keeper for another) or call up Foakes (the one shining light in a pitiful season for Surrey).

If we're going for a specialist keeper we might as well go for one that can actually keep wicket, Buttler is a waste of a place, not a good enough batsmen or keeper for consideration.

Something along the lines of this could work (when all are fit)

Cook
Hales
Vince/Borthwick
Root
Bairstow
Stokes
Ali
(Specialist keeper - not sure who!)
Woakes (although this is just me, would likely be Finn at 10, Broad 9)
Broad
Anderson

Olly - in this Test your man Woakes has done no harm to himself (or you ).

guildfordbat wrote:Olly - in this Test your man Woakes has done no harm to himself (or you ).

Glad to see him getting a proper go in the side - think he has been unfairly maligned and has improved his bowling a lot recently (as shown by gaining the extra pace he didn't have for example in the Kerrigan game of 2013!)

I think he could play as a 3rd/4th seamer alongside Stokes - but appreciate he's probably going to be on the outside looking in waiting for an injury to get another chance

I don't think Stokes is as secure as some think, he needs to start performing more consistently with bat or ball, the odd moment here and there isn't really good enough.

I see guildford is joining Dobell in suggesting a call for his man Foakes as keeper

Haven't seen the fellow play ; but I understand he is handy with the gloves ? Is his batting up to it ? Not that he has to replicate Bairstow at seven ; but - even if he is a much superior keeper - he'd need to be competent for modern Test cricket : at least a decent eight , I think.

To be honest I doubt England will want to change keepers at the moment. With the top order batting in flux , they (and I ) like the insurance of Bairstow at seven...if he misses a few chances , they will chance that - for now.
But if they did want the change , I'd agree it makes more sense to pick a definitely superior gloveman , even if he is a moderate batsman , rather than say Buttler - who is probably not that much better than Bairstow behind the stumps ; and hasn't yet been convincing with the bat in Tests.

I am definitely one of those eating my words on Woakes, he has been our second best bowler behind Anderson. At the very least he now has the chance to be selected on merit rather than as an injury stand in.

When Wood and Stokes are back we have a strong stable of seamers and tough decisions to make. A shame the same cant be said of the batting. If Gary Ballance could work out which end of the bat to hold again, he could surely walk back into the team

Olly - I'm on an old blackberry atm, could you please put up here a link to Foakes' wonder catch at Somerset the other week, many thanks.

So back on at last...

Are we going to get a few hours in now ? England will surely want to push on and get Sri Lanka in late today : will be interesting to see if Hales can kick on with a big one...fifty up anyway

guildfordbat wrote:Olly - I'm on an old blackberry atm, could you please put up here a link to Foakes' wonder catch at Somerset the other week, many thanks.

https://twitter.com/SomersetCCC/status/737322311452217345?s=09

Here is the catch Guildford is referencing. Foakes by all accounts a very fine gloveman

Another fifty for Hales - Again sticking around whilst others fall around him

Just knock it up to 275 and declare - it's unlikely that we'll get a positive result considering the weather, and it gives Sri Lanka something to aim for, so Cook might as well.

Won't happen of course!

Alex Hales is a very lucky boy... Time to ton up and make it pay.

Duty281 wrote:Just knock it up to 275 and declare - it's unlikely that we'll get a positive result considering the weather, and it gives Sri Lanka something to aim for, so Cook might as well.

Won't happen of course!

Certainly not going to gift Sri Lanka a chance they haven't earned - nor should he. Actually won't be surprised if they're bowled out anyway ; but otherwise I'd expect a declaration setting more like 375 - maybe 400 - if they can get there reasonably quickly.
I realize it is hard to judge when to declare because of the doubtful forecast : but you'd look a right goose putting the opposition in on the assumption there would only be three hours play tomorrow and finding the famous British weather has tricked you and they end up with a full day for a leisurely chase...
Think you have to ignore the forecast and make sure you have the position you want before calling them in - though I guess you might try and push on a bit quicker to get there.

Bad luck for Sri Lanka there - bad call of no ball saves Hales. Funny : I reckon the Finn lbw was probably a no ball not given...swings and roundabouts.

Cook gone though ...

Or not...

Impact outside. Took an age though ...surely the main issue was impact point ? Why not look at that first and save five minutes ?

With the ball doing a bit for Herath , and skidding low the other end , might not need a huge lead at all.
Still doubt an early declaration ; perhaps best for the game if they get bowled out - as may well happen. You wouldn't say either of them look safe at the moment.

Not much going Sri Lanka's way at the moment (though one should note Matthews is really rubbish at choosing when to refer !)
The marginal calls are all going against them. Reckon Tucker , who did such a great job as TV umpire last match , might wish he'd stayed in the box this time as he's got a few wrong. So has his partner.
But let us cut the umpires some slack ...it isn't easy.

This increasingly uneven bounce tells me we might not need full time today and tomorrow to get a result...

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Olly - I'm on an old blackberry atm, could you please put up here a link to Foakes' wonder catch at Somerset the other week, many thanks.

https://twitter.com/SomersetCCC/status/737322311452217345?s=09

Here is the catch Guildford is referencing. Foakes by all accounts a very fine gloveman

Another fifty for Hales - Again sticking around whilst others fall around him

Many thanks, Olly.

Alfie - I haven't seen Dobell's comments about Foakes but he's certainly a nimble and athletic keeper. Bet you would like him taking a catch like this off your bowling! Sensible batsman as well who gears his knock to team needs - wouldn't be out of place at number 8 in the Test side.

Alastair Cook just tries to play a reverse sweep in a Test Match... It went exactly how you imagine it would!

In response to some comments further up, I would agree Compton is gone. His trouble was even when in good touch he would still have to battle and fight for everyone of his runs, and when out of form it was borderline unwatchable.

I would leave Root at 4. He is fine where he is. I'd pick Borthwick, his spin doesn't come into it all either, not when you are picking a number three bat! The fact he has scored consistent runs in Durham at 3 for a few years now is by far the prevailing factor.

I quite rate Vince, although he hasn't covered himself in glory so far. Certainly gets the first two vs Pakistan to see how he goes at five.

I'd say Buttler is comfortably a better keeper than Bairstow, he's a very competent keeper these days but would stick with Bairstow for the Tests vs Pakistan. When we go to India this winter and our playing on pitches ragging square, it'll be interesting to see where they go as there will be huge pressure on the keeper.

I think Stokes is pretty safe for now. He's a special talent who can turn games with bat or ball. And both his averages are going the right way, but he does need to keep building.

Vs Pak: Cook, Hales, Borthwick, Root, Vince, Stokes (if fit), Bairstow, Ali, Broad, Finn (just), Anderson.

P.S. I still don't rate Woakes that much. He's a decent reserve!

I'm on an ipad at present , guildford - so I can't play anything off that link of Olly's . Will have a look when I can get back on to the pc.

Dobell was discussing Bairstow's keeping after day two , and suggested Foakes might be the man to take over behind the stumps ; as he thought him more of a keeper first than Buttler. Presume he has watched him a bit : unless he's just picking up on comments from yourself and the Corporal

A quick look on Crinifo suggests that Foakes is a more competent first class batsmen than Buttler any way and does actually play for Surrey in that format.

If England are focused on making this safe first and then putting SL in, would a lead of 400 be safe if they can get there?

Alex

Hales gone for 94.

Rats. Umpires call , but out. Guess he had a fair bit of luck before ; but I'd like to have seen him get a hundred today ; it hasn't been easy batting.

Well played anyway At least he has cemented his place for a while now , after the doubts raised in SA. Reckon he will have other chances to get to 100

Hales and Cook did a sterling job of steadying the 2nd innings after an early wobble...but why on earth didn't England declare after Hales' wicket?

They can't seriously think SL will chase down over 300 on a pitch that won't be the batting paradise it was earlier?

Seems odd. Seems they want to ensure they don't lose. A few more tonight and it would be too big a mountain for SL I'd think if they were chasing 350.

Errrr why are we still batting...

Weird! Cook declares when he's on 49. Having gone that far, why not wait until he got his 50?

As it is SL have to chase over 360. Expect they will simply bat out for a draw.

I see no reason why Sri Lanka wouldn't bat to try and chase these down personally - something which isn't completely out of the question and which would be a historic run chase for them

alfie wrote:I'm on an ipad at present , guildford   - so I can't play anything off that link of Olly's .  Will have a look when I can get back on to the pc.

Dobell was discussing Bairstow's keeping after day two , and suggested Foakes might be the man to take over behind the stumps ; as he thought him more of a keeper first than Buttler. Presume he has watched him a bit : unless he's just picking up on comments from yourself and the Corporal

Hi Alfie - although Dobell could still pick up quite a bit from the Corporal at least , he does watch Surrey semi-regularly. I'm not a massive fan of Dobell. He remains too supportive of Chris Adams for my liking and that of most Surrey supporters although I believe he's right about Foakes. Alec Stewart - whilst normally supportive of Surrey players, not prone to mass exaggeration - described the young keeper this week as ''a very special talent''.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:I see no reason why Sri Lanka wouldn't bat to try and chase these down personally - something which isn't completely out of the question and which would be a historic run chase for them

Totally agree unless of course too much of the day is lost to rain at outset. That would leave Sri Lanka with no option other than to try and bat out the remaining overs for the draw.

So today Alistair Cook played a reverse sweep, a ramp shot and a slog over midwicket for six

And still managed to go at a strike rate of 56

Fantastic stuff

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:So today Alistair Cook played a reverse sweep, a ramp shot and a slog over midwicket for six

And still managed to go at a strike rate of 56

Fantastic stuff

But it doesn't quite eclipse his finest moment!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0C-MnNk--8

dyrewolfe wrote:Weird! Cook declares when he's on 49. Having gone that far, why not wait until he got his 50?

As it is SL have to chase over 360. Expect they will simply bat out for a draw.

Do not underestimate batsmen and the silly statistics they thrive on, ending on 49 doesn't affect his 50 to 100 conversion rate.

Still no play but the prospect of a start after lunch. No chance of this being uninterrupted from the restart so I would guess England will have 40-50 overs at best to take all ten wickets. Not likely really but SL now having no real chance of victory might help England

Cant help feeling the lack of a wicket taking spinner is going to hurt England here. Sure they should be looking at their prime asset, espeiclaly in classic english conditions, (the 4 man seam attack) to deliver the majority across the series but Ali has been very conspicuous in his absence form the wickets column since Durban. And without offering and stand out economy rate.

Last day against frail opposition is a great time to right that, if the much vaunted swingers dont get in first.

England and Cook will take some flack for not being quite agressive enough with their declaration but really theys till should be fancying themselves to be able to do a job. Yesterday evening was a waste by the new ball bowlers, and keeping across the game has been an issue. Add to that an underperforming spinner and theres plenty of reasosn why England might blow a chance of 3-0

Along with the rain of course.

So it's not been raining for the past half hour...so they've decided to take lunch despite them being off the field all morning?

Cricket eh

The Lord's lunch is supposed to be very good, can't deny the players that vs some cricket for those who have paid £75 to get in!

Herath will certainly be pleased I imagine....

I think the declaration came at about the right time to be honest - Sri Lanka need about 330 to win, with what would have been 105 overs without the rain. While it was always likely that some time was going to be lost today, I think England had to reckon on 70 to 80 overs at least, so SL could have scored the runs in the time allowed (noting that the current schedule allows 81 overs, but that rain and light are likely to impact this).

It's actually been quite a slow match - only about 550 runs scored in the first two days for the loss of 11 wickets. England got on top on day 3, but the Perrera - Herath partnership got SL close enough to our score and took an hour or so out of the game, so with the dodgy weather a draw has looked a decent bet for a while, especially with SL getting through the session yesterday evening with no loss.

Looks to me now like a draw is favourite, with an England win only if we have some magic from one of the seamers, and probably not enough play to let SL chase down the runs.

dummy_half wrote:I think the declaration came at about the right time to be honest - Sri Lanka need about 330 to win, with what would have been 105 overs without the rain. While it was always likely that some time was going to be lost today, I think England had to reckon on 70 to 80 overs at least, so SL could have scored the runs in the time allowed (noting that the current schedule allows 81 overs, but that rain and light are likely to impact this).

It's actually been quite a slow match - only about 550 runs scored in the first two days for the loss of 11 wickets. England got on top on day 3, but the Perrera - Herath partnership got SL close enough to our score and took an hour or so out of the game, so with the dodgy weather a draw has looked a decent bet for a while, especially with SL getting through the session yesterday evening with no loss.

Looks to me now like a draw is favourite, with an England win only if we have some magic from one of the seamers, and probably not enough play to let SL chase down the runs.

I do too, but hes going to get some flack for it. Possibly more so the slow scoring ...but it does seme to be one of those tests where batsmen have had to dig in for their runs. Noone has come up with that magic blitz innings. Without wishing to sound like Im bashing him on all fronts that was maybe Alis job.
For all the difference declaring 2 or 3 overs earlier wouldve made.

Anderson with a wicket then is rains straightaway. Time rapidly slipping away in this game. Forget the supposed remaining 77 overs, a better way to looks at it is we should have had 30 or so overs already today, only 3.4 have been managed so far