There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

[andy]

Im not really a fan of Woakes, but Onions has clearly pissed off the selectors somehow, and sadly i cant see him playing another test match..

[Durhamfootman]

Could woakes and stokes both play? If woakes batted at 8, could both equally take the 3rd seamer position if they played? Woakes has taken nearly 300 wickets at 25 for warks?

I wouldn't have thought so. Stokes is the player in possession, so will probably play, with Bresnan, also the player in possession, at #8.

County form leading up to the tests may have a bearing too.

Cook is clueless when it comes to spinners and what to do with them. I think it is entirely possible that, for the SL early season series, England could have Stokes at 6, then Woakes at 8, Bresnan 9, Broad 10, Ando 11. leaving Root (or Moeen) to provide the obligatory 1 over of spin at the end of each session, which is the only thing that Cook would be capable of thinking about for a spinner

[Gingerfinch]

Im not really a fan of Woakes, but Onions has clearly pissed off the selectors somehow, and sadly i cant see him playing another test match..

Why lob him with the lions then? Makes no sense if he has no chance of playing another test.

[englandmad666]

Everyone claiming cook is clueless with spinners... But cook won in india with his use of the "spin twins" monty and swann and not to forget swann was top wicket taker in the 2013 ashes? He must have some idea how to use them, although he panicked at the oval in september with kerrigan. Also with swann not at full fitness in aus a pitch at the Mcg not suited to monty and borthwick playing the last one. I think whilst cook is naive with spinners he must surely going into the test series against SL with a front line spinner and not part time spin of root or ali

[andy]

Im not really a fan of Woakes, but Onions has clearly pissed off the selectors somehow, and sadly i cant see him playing another test match..

Why lob him with the lions then? Makes no sense if he has no chance of playing another test.

maybe they dont rate anybody else lol...a lot of seamers have gone down injured for this trip..

[KipperJohn]

There's no point going in with a'' front-line spinner' if we haven't got one good enough to play at Test level. Of course somebody needs to be given a chance to give variety to the attack, but it's not compulsory to play a spinner, just probably desirable, Sorry Arthur but your two spinners seem a long way off now!

[andy]

you would be foolish to go into a test match without a spinner..unless its a green seaming fast bowlers paradise!

[KipperJohn]

you would be foolish to go into a test match without a spinner..unless its a green seaming fast bowlers paradise!

So if your best available spinner isn't good enough for Test cricket you'd still play him - now that would be foolish!

At the moment the only one who fits into the category of a proven Test standard is Monty - who has other issues both in the field and with the bat.

[englandmad666]

you would be foolish to go into a test match without a spinner..unless its a green seaming fast bowlers paradise!

So if your best available spinner isn't good enough for Test cricket you'd still play him - now that would be foolish!

At the moment the only one who fits into the category of a proven Test standard is Monty - who has other issues both in the field and with the bat.

I think kerrigan is though, aussies got after him but big game for the young lad and the way they treat spinners look at the way swann performed in aus... He is a experienced player and was treat like a club bowler... Bring kerrigan in give him games he will push on.

[Arthur Crabtree]

I've always supported five bowlers. I don't think I've wanted two spinners outside Asia, where they have been very effective lately, in India and UAE. I think we need to give a spinner a chance, and it may be that someone will step up, as Swann did. We'll definitely need spinners in Asia in the future. And I'd like one elsewhere. With five bowlers, you can even keep a spinner for the second innings.I don't think anyone can definitively state our spinners are without potential. They take CC wickets, and the CC is a decent standard.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Apparently, Moeen is working on a doosra! Maybe we'll all be defending his right to throw.

[bigfluffylemon]

you would be foolish to go into a test match without a spinner..unless its a green seaming fast bowlers paradise!

So if your best available spinner isn't good enough for Test cricket you'd still play him - now that would be foolish!

At the moment the only one who fits into the category of a proven Test standard is Monty - who has other issues both in the field and with the bat.

Not to mention off the field. It's a less public example than KP but Monty clearly doesn't feature in England's plans for the future, and it can't be for reasons of his bowling.

[Slipstream]

Four wickets for Woakes as England roll SLA over. But both openers fail for England. A huge lead. Interesting that Moeen bowled rather than Borthwick.

Woakes has the misfortune of competing with Stokes for a single place, which is a shame. In what position does Ali bat at county level?

Could woakes and stokes both play? If woakes batted at 8, could both equally take the 3rd seamer position if they played? Woakes has taken nearly 300 wickets at 25 for warks?

I don't think they would both play together but Stokes is likely to get injured at some point and Woakes would then be first choice at 6. We have finally found a number 6 and a reserve after looking for 3 years!!! Only trouble is now we are looking for someone to replace Strauss and Swann. I am assuming that Trott will be back. With Fraser now a selector Robson looks likely for the number 2 spot.

[meninblue]

It's a big risk playing Bresnan,Ben and Woakes in same team at this point of time. Ben will get in on his batting or bowling alone at this point of times, but you never know whether the all rounder will take wickets every innings.Add to it Bresnan-Woakes combo, it's a very big risk imo as far as bowling attack is concerned.

[englandmad666]

But why does woakes have to be considered a number 6 surely, 290+ wickets at 25 in under 90 games says the lad can bowl well enough to be first change? Agreed you cant play bres woakes and stokes unless bairstow bats at 5 with gloves? If you take woakes batting out of the equation surely them stats are the criteria required for a england bowling call up? I doubt there will be many records better to