There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

[Arthur Crabtree]

... but we've called up Tredwell and Borthwick. Which tends to confirm how secure is Monty's position.

[Making_Splinters]

So one spinner retires and we call up two to replace him, England really don't have a *modded* clue what's going on do they?

Neither Borthwick nor Tredwell are a test class spinner.

[Gingerfinch]

So one spinner retires and we call up two to replace him, England really don't have a *modded* clue what's going on do they?

Neither Borthwick nor Tredwell are a test class spinner.

They may want two spinners for the Sydney test, and are undecided on who?

[hopeforthebest]

There's no obvious ugly duckling around who's going to turn into a Swann any time soon.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Very good. Maybe if we wish, really, really hard.

[D/L]

... but we've called up Tredwell and Borthwick. Which tends to confirm how secure is Monty's position.

Surely, calling nobody up would have been an indication of that?

[Albondiga]

Borthwick ---- 'couldn't turn milk' A Yorkshire saying I believe.

[Durhamfootman]

I was given a DVD for Christmas entitled six of the best. It features a one eyed view of England over 6 matches from each of the seventies, eighties, nineties, and noughties.

One thing that struck me over the seventies and eighties (the disc that I've now watched) was that England seemed to regularly play with 2 spinners in the side.

Initially the 2 spinners were Deadly and Ray Illingworth, and I'm assuming (happy to be corrected, though) that Illy played as an all rounder.

Once Botham came into the side as an opening bowler able to bat at 6, the 2 spinners became Deadly/Edmonds, then Edmonds/Emburey

It occurs to me that if Stokes makes the grade as a genuine test quality all rounder, then 2 spinners might be a viable option for more than matches on pitches suggesting excessive turn.

I do think that there is some merit in having a spin attack able to turn the ball both ways. Has a nice balance to it.

Might just be me, of course

[Arthur Crabtree]

It asks a lot of one player to represent the whole of one kind of bowling, in all its guises.

[Arthur Crabtree]

If only there was a young spin bowling all rounder out there...

[backfootpunch]

If only there was a young spin bowling all rounder out there...

its a shame that both borthwick and rashid play for counties whos pitches are generally made for seam bowlers and are in the teams as batsmen and partnership breakers, if they want to get better as bowlers they need to move counties and play there games on pitches that offer more for spin bowling where they would hopefully bowl more overs and gain much more confidence

[alfie]

I have no problem in principle with two spinner attacks. But you have to have two spinners worth their place. Otherwise you end up with Salisbury and Croft or something like it...

Swann and Panesar worked in India recently. But was next to useless as a plan in Adelaide. And now Swann is gone...

A second spinner will be selected alongside Monty when they next tour in Asia. But until then they probably have a choice between (a) continuing with Monty and hoping he does enough with the ball to offset what he costs them in the field (b) picking a "second all rounder" alongside Stokes and hoping the seamers do most of the work ; or (c) identifying a genuine spin bowling prospect and picking him with the assurance of a season to bed in , come what may. Does anyone think such a creature exists ?
Perhaps (d) pick four fast bowlers and a full set of batsmen ? Might serve for the home summer ; but doesn't strike me as the way back to the top...

[alfie]

Perhaps more pressing than the bowling is what to do with the batting , which has been horrendous on this tour.

Cook and Pietersen , but who else ? Seems absurd to question Bell after his home performance ; but he has been dismal. Still he has credit. So if the Stokes at six is to continue ( and I suspect it will , at home ) only Root and Carberry's spots leave room for experimentation.

Carberry has shown determination on this tour ; and some ability. But he has also shown that he remains a limited player - not unlike Compton ? And at 31 , is he worth persevering with ? Hard to see him being part of the next really good England Test Team...
Root looks a bit lost at the moment. He started well in the Test arena , but all the messing about with his place in the order seems to have taken a toll. Surely he is a player for the future ; but I fear for him in the short term. Not a Test number three at the moment. Back to open , perhaps ? And if he fails , probably back to the County game for a while... Or back down the order ? Whatever it is , I think a decision needs to be taken after this tour. Staying with the status quo seems unacceptable to me after this dreadful series. Assuming - sadly - that Trott won't be back , I think someone has to be injected into the order to try and give it a lift. Else in a year or two KP will pack it in and we'll be left with more holes than surrounding material...

[Albondiga]

I was given a DVD for Christmas entitled six of the best. It features a one eyed view of England over 6 matches from each of the seventies, eighties, nineties, and noughties.

One thing that struck me over the seventies and eighties (the disc that I've now watched) was that England seemed to regularly play with 2 spinners in the side.

Initially the 2 spinners were Deadly and Ray Illingworth, and I'm assuming (happy to be corrected, though) that Illy played as an all rounder.

Once Botham came into the side as an opening bowler able to bat at 6, the 2 spinners became Deadly/Edmonds, then Edmonds/Emburey

It occurs to me that if Stokes makes the grade as a genuine test quality all rounder, then 2 spinners might be a viable option for more than matches on pitches suggesting excessive turn.

I do think that there is some merit in having a spin attack able to turn the ball both ways. Has a nice balance to it.

Might just be me, of course

Durhamfootman ------ I can assure you it's not just you !!!!! My captain for many of my club games was a man who believed that when you changed the bowling you CHANGED MORE THAN JUST THE BOWLER otherwise it wasn't worth it. He always wanted one bowler who was the quickest he could get , one swing bowler , one seam bowler and two spinners which was generally one off spinner and one slow left arm. One or more of those five were allrounders. He won more dames than he lost because the batsmen generally knew that 180 to 200 was going to be enough.

[sussexpob]

Durhamfootman ------ I can assure you it's not just you !!!!! My captain for many of my club games was a man who believed that when you changed the bowling you CHANGED MORE THAN JUST THE BOWLER otherwise it wasn't worth it. He always wanted one bowler who was the quickest he could get , one swing bowler , one seam bowler and two spinners which was generally one off spinner and one slow left arm. One or more of those five were allrounders. He won more dames than he lost because the batsmen generally knew that 180 to 200 was going to be enough.

Never worked for Steve Waugh..... and he had arguably the best dual spinner combo ever