There may be troubles ahead: England selection issues.

[sussexpob]

In general, the reaction to this Pakistan win has been pretty rubbish from the press and fans alike. England lose one test and they go from possibly the best to a team with serious problems. Some perspective is needed. They are a decent side, they have a bowling attack that can live with anyones, but of course they need time to develop batting depth.

The one major problem is they pulled the plug on players too early. Robson/Compton should never have been dropped. Maybe even Carberry was worth another series.

Fans need to be more patient. A coach cant change a technique overnight.

[Dr Cricket]

not sure I would say england are the best test team in the world.

[sussexpob]

not sure I would say england are the best test team in the world.

Is anyone saying they are?

[Dr Cricket]

they go from possibly the best to a team with serious problems.

[Slipstream]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricke ... ord-s.html

[Arthur Crabtree]

Given Andy Flower's record of identifying new players, and selection, it would be pretty strange if his role was expanded, though perfectly credible. I don't think Strauss should do admin and cricket work. Hopefully/Probably, Newman is making this up over his coffee. The most problematic selection recently has been Vince, and it was reported, probably even by Newman, that Flower wanted him!

If Anderson breaks down over this series, the selectors might look a little more prescient.

Not obvious why Whitaker wasn't replaced a year ago. He had a terrible time after the break up of Flower's team,and if it's possible for a cricket selector to look out of his depth, he did.

[Aidan11]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricket/article-3698146/Andrew-Strauss-sack-England-s-selectors-end-season-Jimmy-Anderson-s-controversial-omission-Lord-s.html

Any decision that involves getting rid of James Whittaker gets my vote. One thing about Strauss, like him or loathe him, he's not afraid to make big decisions.

[sussexpob]

Sounds a lot like an excuse is being used to push through the agenda to bring back Flower more prominently to the top table. I wouldn’t write off a press assassination of Bayliss being made if England lose the series, and a swift exit being arranged, with the saviour of English cricket being brought back. Rather than focus on Flower’s abysmal record of identifying new test caps, we can sit here and focus on what exactly his role currently has in terms of selection cross over, and what opinions he can bring to the table?

In short, is he going to be making informed decisions based on seeing players in action? I guess not, he is based in Loughborough. This sounds like a continuation of the “pick them young” policy that hasn’t really worked. Flower isnt interested in picking a guy who averages 100, he wants to pick the guy averaging 25 with the bat who he has identified as mentally tough and approves to only him.

This idea that Whitaker has failed, and Flower would be better? Even further from Arthur, that Whitaker is out of his depth? Look at the picks. Where is he displaying his lack of depth?

Moeen Ali is the one that stands out. Picking a batsman as a spinner, sounds a crazy idea right??? ……. But Flower picked Borthwick as a number 9 bat and a spinner. Much of the same really. Kerrigan got 48 runs worth of bowling before his career was judged to have ended and he was replaced by a batsman.

Gary Ballance…. Flower pick

Sam Robson…. Id have picked him, and so would everyone

Nick Compton…. Everyone said he was dropped prematurely, now everyone says when they re-picked him it was a terrible selection…. Revisionism.

Chris Jordan…. Highly touted and did more in his early test career than all of England current stock of bowlers. Could well do it still.

Buttler….. was always going to be the next player of the rank after Prior retired.

Adam Lyth….. Go back to last year, highly supported selection

Mark Wood… has done well.

Alex Hales… who would you have picked other than him?

James Vince…. Clearly not Whitaker picking him.

Adil Rashid…. The realistic spin option they would turn to.

Im struggling to see the post Flower mistakes tbh. Which of this list above weren’t endorsed widely or by Flower before?

[sussexpob]

Its worth noting that Flower touted Ball and Vince personally as players he liked a lot. Both found themselves given tests after the winter Lions tour.

Ball took 1/88 on a bowler friendly wicket.
Vince has done nothing but fail.

Both were players who failed on the lions tour the most. So even the players that Flower DOES see he seems to get wrong.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Whitaker's most problematic squad was the whitewash party of injured tall fast bowlers. And the lack of imagination regarding the spinner pick after that. And the rotation at the top of the order (Carberry, Compton and Robson were all dropped prematurely) Admittedly the reluctance to go to James Taylor had Flower's fingerprints on it. By out of his depth, I was thinking of his public incoherence as a spokesperson for selection during the KP affair (at a time when the ECB was looking plainly idiotic), after Graves had got involved. If Flower is making these decisions still, let's have a bit of transparency. Whitaker has his name on these squads, certainly since Flower 'stepped down'.

Wood was supposed to be a Flower pick. I'd just suggest he's looked promising so far rather than having delivered.

[sussexpob]

Whitaker's most problematic squad was the whitewash party of injured tall fast bowlers. And the lack of imagination regarding the spinner pick after that. And the rotation at the top of the order (Carberry, Compton and Robson were all dropped prematurely) Admittedly the reluctance to go to James Taylor had Flower's fingerprints on it. By out of his depth, I was thinking of his public incoherence as a spokesperson for selection during the KP affair (at a time when the ECB was looking plainly idiotic), after Graves had got involved. If Flower is making these decisions still, let's have a bit of transparency. Whitaker has his name on these squads, certainly since Flower 'stepped down'.

Wood was supposed to be a Flower pick. I'd just suggest he's looked promising so far rather than having delivered.

Feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but I believe Whitaker had no decision making power until after the Ashes squad was announced, and I believe (stress believe) that once the tour party was picked it was Downton/Cook and Flower that picked the teams for individual matches. So the whitewash party had nothing to do with Whitaker. His first squad was picked after, and I am not sure he was given much choice about some of the names to fill it.

The KP affair again, can you blame him? Even the coach, Giles, was basically told he couldn’t pick him, and the successor to Flower was told as much too….. Graves/Downton were clearly out ranking him. In the selection meeting where he announced KP wouldn’t be in the team in Early 2014, he got massacred by a public over 80% polled in KP’s favour, and a press pack sensing a story and blood. In fact, didn’t Whitaker allegedly take a call from Collier at one point mid press conference and apparently get read the riot act because he wasn’t selling the “KP is the devil” tagline with enough conviction? I think we do need to give him a lot of slack for the KP affair, he was sold down the river as much as anyone.

As for Carberry, he blew his chance himself by losing his temper about the ODI series in Australia. Worth noting too that public and press support for his continued selection was thin on the ground, and that Flower picked him in about 2011 vs BD and gave him one innings where he scored 35 odd and dropped him. Flower never wanted him, he was low down the list but called into action when other players around proved unworthy. I agreed in dropping him personally, he was 33 or 34 by the end of the Ashes. And the team needed a clean break after that tour… he wasn’t a long term option. But, as I said, he lost his temper after he says Giles couldn’t give him any future indications he was needed. Giles apparently told him “I don’t know”, which is understood to have been a blazing example that even Giles had no say on his own teams, bar a couple of names in the bowling department he wanted, and that Flower was still making all the big decisions. Carberry also I believe backed KP, and at one point indicated being black had given him a “shorter rope”, or words to those effects. He was never getting picked after that.

Compton was prematurely dropped, but by Flower in 2013. I believe the game before he was dropped it is said that Whitaker went and witnessed him play a blinding innings in the county team when he played a really gritty innings, and Flower’s statement when he was dropped paid tribute to that quality but said he couldn’t fit in outside the openers slots because of his defensive style. That says to me Flower was saying to Whitaker, yeah he’s a good player, but I don’t see a role for him in the team. I don’t think you can say he was prematurely dropped this time round, he was awful. I see this more as Flower pulling the trigger to get Joe Root elevated to opener in 2013 Ashes series. Flower clearly seen Root at the top as Strauss' long term replacement.

Robson…. Yes. But again, he got bowled out defending time and time again, and huge sections of the press were calling for his replacement due to technique questions….. Michael Vaughan was one of the most outspoken, he said he would replace Robson instantly with Hales…. Which the selectors did! There was a public driving force behind it. I would state I disagreed strongly with that, but I and others I beleive were a minority... as with Compton.

The spinner role is open to debate, I don’t know who sanctioned Moeen. To be honest, that had Moores all over it for me. Might have been Whitaker, but we don’t know. I just believe that to pick Ali would have required a rethink to the very tactical fabric of the team, and that push would have to be driven by the coach. I think England’s issues are generally self managed when players get to the team, not who is picked to go.

I cna see a coach forcing a different batsman over another on opinion, but forcing a coach to pick a person who really changes the whole team, I cannot see

[Arthur Crabtree]

There does seem to be a lack of clarity over who does what. At one time early in the Flower era, a selector was added to the tour party to give an independent opinion on selection as it was felt the coach had too much control (I think just after Moores was sacked the first time). Later on it appeared that Flower decided everything. But after Flower, the coach's role was slimmed down a little.

[westoelad]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricket/article-3698146/Andrew-Strauss-sack-England-s-selectors-end-season-Jimmy-Anderson-s-controversial-omission-Lord-s.html

Any decision that involves getting rid of James Whittaker gets my vote. One thing about Strauss, like him or loathe him, he's not afraid to make big decisions.

At last we've got a honest and knowledgeable figure who's not afraid to make the difficult calls. No comeback for Mr Petersen was his 1st clear call and at that time he said he'd give the selectors a year or so-times up then for the 3 notsowisemen.
Cooky and Strauss will run the show now but I'm sure will also pick the brains of trusted ex-colleagues still involved like Colly and Tres.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Cook is only captain for the Tests. Is Morgan having the same brief?

Was a time these decisions were taken off the skipper to simplify his relationship with the rest of the team. Why is that not necessary now?

Naturally, I don't see Cook as someone you'd want to be taking a lot of responsibility. Others disagree, but it's not as if he is Mike Brearley, Michael Vaughan or Steve Waugh.

Memorably, when Strauss took his job he was told he was not going to be judged on results. He is said to be considering getting rid of selectors who have been working in a period when results have been improving. If results get worse, subsequently, should Strauss still not be judged on results?

[sussexpob]

Any decision that involves getting rid of James Whittaker gets my vote. One thing about Strauss, like him or loathe him, he's not afraid to make big decisions.

At last we've got a honest and knowledgeable figure who's not afraid to make the difficult calls. No comeback for Mr Petersen was his 1st clear call and at that time he said he'd give the selectors a year or so-times up then for the 3 notsowisemen.
Cooky and Strauss will run the show now but I'm sure will also pick the brains of trusted ex-colleagues still involved like Colly and Tres.

[/quote]
Indeed. He was a man made of stern stuff, old Strauss. Never shirked any responsibility or hard decisions.

Some people might say he run away like a little pissy girl crying because KP insulted his fragile ego, and retired rather than be a man and united his team when it went tough.... some might even say he had to get Daddy Flower to stick up for him while he went about saying "Kevin said bad things about me, that hurts"..... or that he might have displayed the sort of behaviour unbecoming of a leader of men (and in doing so may have underlined some of KP's later points about his treatment) when deciding to honestly tell the world that he thought he was a c*nt.

Either way, he made all those difficult calls. I mean its not like Graves already said KP had no flaming chance in hell, well he did after he said he could be considered by mistake and made everyone look mental..... and that difficult call of sacking Whitaker was made in 2015 wasnt it? No actually, Strauss didnt have the balls.

Oh but he sacked Moores...... because literally everyone following cricket would have put money on Moores taking charge last summer