England in India

Really impressed with both Hameed's temperament and technique. I also like the balance of the side. I think Moeen is one of the 6 best batsmen in the Country and he has earned a run at 5. This would also give us the opportunity to keep 6 picking bowlers even in home series. Rashid is developing and the number of all-rounders we have allows us to pick a player who let's face it is a bit of a luxury.

Ansari on the other hand was an odd pick. I don't see that he has had any real experience of winning matches on turning pitches. He has never operated as the primary spinner. He's basically a batsman who bowls a bit of non turning slow left arm. I know there were reservations about Leach and I know the selectors are terrified of another Kerrigan situation but he is someone who has performed on turning pitches and has won Somerset matches. I think we're in danger of picking bits and pieces cricketers.

I think they should have changed the touring party after the Bangladesh series as soon as it became obvious that Ballance couldn't continue in the side. We've not got another middle order batsman in the squad and it was pretty clear after watching Duckett against the spinners in Bangladesh that he needs o work on his technique against spin.

Overall so far I have been quite impressed by England in India. (Bangladesh different matter) The plus points have been Cook continuing to be an outstanding opener, Hameed has made a good start as partner for Cook and Stokes and Bairstow have batted well. Anderson had a good comeback and Broad bowled well. But there are some worries about the balance of the team. Rashid has done well and I thought Moeen was picked on by Michael Vaughan. I question whether Ansari is good enough yet to play test cricket. That he didn't bowl in India's second innings is a worry. I don't think he was injured. its very rare, though not so much in India, for 3 spinners to play. I just don't think the third spinner bowls that much if the other two are bowling. But in truth our spinners just aren't as good yet as the Indian spinners. Ashwin was a class act and put all our batsmen under pressure. To have 5 fielders surrounding the bat put all our batsmen under great pressure and our defensive approach just encouraged them.
Duckett looks lost against the spinners and needs to be rested and the plan to play Buttler as a batsman looks sensible in the circumstances. But the biggest worry is how much depends on the top 3 because when Cook and Root are out we seem to collapse. I know they are good but the rest have to step up. In the England second innings it was good to see Cook and Hameed really look solid but because they were so cautious it meant that Kohli could place an attacking field knowing the openers were not going to risk hitting to parts of the field where there were no fielders. Another 50/60 runs would have had the Indians worried. It's a bit of an unfair criticism I know, but being so cautious meant that they dug themselves into a hole and when Hameed and Cook went in the last 15 minutes the result wasn't in question.
If the remaining tests can be competitive then that will be good. It looks like batsmen at 1,2 and 3 are picked. We have 2 fast bowlers from Anderson, Broad and Woakes which together with Stokes gives a good pace attack. The problem being if Woakes is left out then out we have a very long tail. I think batsmen at 4 and 5 will be the weakest part of the team. Moeen isn't a number 5 IMO but at 7 and even 6 he is very good.
I guess if nothing else but Hameed's place at number 2 comes out of the tour then it would still be positive. A greater mental toughness is needed and a bit of luck and winning the toss would be good!

Makes sense - it is interesting that Somerset supporters would be happy with Leach going on an A Tour too.  County fans are normally only too keen to advocate their own players elevation to the England side.  But with spinners I think we all worry about 'the spell' being broken.  Given the issues that effected Lathwell, and subsequently Trescothick, Somerset may well be more sensitive than other counties to off field considerations related to support and context.  On the one hand India represents a massive opportunity for a spinner - on the other hand prolonged exposure to high class Indian batting against spin could damage fledgling confidence.  Despite all his success, he has only really established himself this season so I can see why Somerset may want to protect him a bit still as he should have his best days ahead of him.

On the other points - the pace of Cook and Hameed as a partnership could be an issue and I think is the reason that England went with Duckett before trying Hameed.  They are both rock solid opening batsmen but can be tied down.  Hameed is getting a baptism of fire and what is impressive is the way he is playing and adapting to the spin barrage - that can only stand him in good stead for the future.  I don't think he deserves to be properly judged until he's had a chance to play an English summer but the early signs are promising.  I feel that Moeen could work at 5, but not with Duckett batting at 4.  If you had a more balanced lineup, with someone who had more sticking power coming in at 4 then that would be fine.  The problem is that we end up 60-3 too often and Moeen striding out and that isn't really what you want.  150-3 is another matter.

Another interesting point has been the use of the review system. I think it's the first time it's been used in India. India have been against using it but it looks like they have had the advantage of the reviews but I may be wrong there. I think they have usually used their reviews before England have and that might be due to being more confident. England have appeared more wary of using an appeal and I seem to think had they appealed at least 2 (I think Root was given out when he wasn't and another I can't recall who) they would have won them. I think it's interesting because it could have a big impact in the final tests.

Yes, first innings was the killer and imy comment about slow scoring wasn't meant as a big criticism and had they managed to get through to the end they would have received, quite rightly, even more praise. But they didn't and perhaps they were unlucky not to do so. My point was that by being so negative the scoring rate almost stopped completely and it passed the initiative to Kohli. They had a mixed attack at the time, spinner and fast medium and the batsmen understandably were looking at the clock with an hour to go. Against Ashwin there were 5 fielders around the bat and for a 19 year old the pressure must have been enormous. Bowlers were bowling well but they knew the batsmen were making no attempt to score and at 80 odd without loss England had wrested back some initiative only to give it back to India. IMO!
But you were correct, the first innings was the reason for the defeat. This current test looks a bit closer hopefully.

Well today India did to us what we have been doing to lots of others, scoring lots of runs in the latter part of the innings. To go from 204-6 to 417 all out will be the match winning part of the match. Moeen is a great number 7 or acceptable number 6. I don't think he's a number 5 and he is definitely not a number 4. (I know he came in at 3 in this innings but that was due to illness). He may bat there for Worcestershire but England and test cricket is a different proposition. And I think that at the moment the lack of a dependable number 4 is making the captain and coach look to play players where they are not comfortable. Watching it today I thought the England players looked a bit demoralised in the field as the 7th and 8th wicket partnerships grew and they are tired. Cook doesn't usually drop the chance he did near the end and it was generally a bit sloppy. But having said that there were lots of plus points. Rashid bowled well as did Stokes and they kept going so well done to them. Stokes increasingly looks to be a world class performer with bat and ball and that looks good for the future.
We will lose this match and the series but there are enough positives to be fairly confident about this team. Most departments look ok. I know the spinners have come in for criticism but Rashid and Moeen have done well enough to be good in all conditions with the exception of India. The truth is Indias spinners are just better. Fast bowlers and batsmen are about OK although we miss a number 4. And Root is still there and he always has a 150 in him, hopefully!
2 things have struck me watching today. I've thought how much England are relying on Cook and Root. Yet India are even more reliable on Kohli. Take his runs away and they would probably not be winning this series. He is a very good player and I'm sure England must be aware of his weaknesses if he has any. It would be interesting to see how India cope with him failing. Everything, batting, fielding and leading depends upon him. Secondly the use of the review system seems to have gone Indias way. I have no problem with that but had this series been the same as others with no review system I think the results might have been closer.

On this point Irish, I was in Taunton today and the lead story in the sports section of the Somerset County Gazette was Matt Maynard saying that Jack Leach should have been chosen instead of Liam Dawson to replace Ansari. He quoted all the statistics about JLs 65 wickets compared to the 20 Dawson got and made the point that England need to bowl teams out by getting 20 wickets and that JL was the man to do that. He said he should have gone originally and even more so now. First time I've seen that view expressed by Somerset. Whilst not conclusive seems to go against the idea that Somerset advised the ECB that he shouldn't go to India.
Looking forward to tonight's/ tomorrow's test match, be interested to see how Keaton Jennings gets on, good luck to him.

Fair enough and it makes sense.  I think England perhaps have an over obsession with the balance of the side - I've never understood why it is considered particularly important that spinners should be able to bat anymore than seamers.  It all comes down to the same issue of balance but I don't feel seamers are discriminated against in selection due to batting ability than spinners are.  Doesn't make much sense to me.

Very promsising start by Jennings.  This winter has definitely clarified some things about these young openers we have.  Jennings and Hameeb look the business and should be in the side going forward - for Duckett the jury is still out.  I'd have Hameed and Cook for the left-hand/right-hand partnership and Jennings at 3.  Decent day for England although India will also be happy to take 5 wickets having lost the toss.  The last wicket probably evens up the day - as is often the case, the first session of the 2nd day could well be the pivotal one and we need to get momentum back.

I understand the thinking behind that but I would be very surprised if it happened. It smacks too much of panic and England not knowing what to do and it's almost an admission that their batsmen don't know how to handle the Indian bowlers. And of course it would have made more sense 3/4 years ago when we didn't need to do it but Broad was a much better batsman then. He seems to have dropped a few levels in his batting since.
At the moment we have to just man up and accept that the Indians are better bowlers and batsmen than us and hope that our batsmen can put up 400 in an innings and not collapse in the second innings. And I hope this stupid debate about Cook's captaincy can stop and let them get on with concentrating on their batting.