Squad for First Test against Sri Lanka

I think that's about right. No major surprises really. It's a side that balances out the need to bring in some fresh faces against throwing the baby out with the bath water. There's some really interesting players in there.

Stokes just hasn't really played all that much this year - he's only really just coming back from injury. I'm sure he'll be in the frame by mid-summer but it's fair that they make it clear he has to work for his place especially as he has had a number of discipline issues. I think he's someone who will do better when kept on his toes a bit. I'm not surprised they've picked Robson over Carberry but I am surprised at how they have treated Carberry. I thought when they picked him for the ODI squad they were essentially giving him a vote of confidence for the Test side. If they weren't going to play him I'm not really sure why they picked him for the other format - it's just a bit odd. Robson has clearly been their man for a while though so we'll see how he goes.

I'll be interested to see what they do with the order actually. I don't think it's at all clear who will bat in which position (I mean most of those guys have always batted 3 for their counties) so that'll give us some idea of the roles they expect each batsman to play and their current hierarchy too. I actually think it's a reasonably balanced middle order compared with what we've had. Ballance and Root are generally fairly patient players (although Ballance definitely has an attack mode); Bell and Ali are very attacking and both can be guilty of being too loose at times, giving it away when well set Agree with you on need for more aggressive opener but we haven't had one since Trescothick and there isn't really anyone out there who fits the bill; Hales possibly but his 1st class record is appalling and he's only just got himself back in the Notts side.

On the bowling - Sensible decision on the Root/Ali spin platoon. No obvious attacking spinner out there and both of those guys should be good enough to hold up an end at least at a time of year when Spin shouldn't be that vital. I think Ali is potentially battling Borthwick for the spinning all rounders spot at number 6 but right now is both a better batsmen and bowler - he's an exciting if flawed cricketer, I hope they give him the whole summer to show what he can do. Though Borthwick has the advantage of being a leggy. Possibility Rashid may come back into that equation as well at some point for the same reason. Bowling does look a bit one paced - but then conditions should suit that in this test so perhaps not an immediate concern. Glad they rewarded Plunkett for his efforts but I think he'll be the one left out. Glad they went with Jordan - he just strikes me as a proper sparkplug cricketer - stuff just seems to happen when he's involved, shades of Flintoff in that respect. He's just really exciting to watch and very athletic and whole hearted; someone England cricket fans can really get behind (what the hell Surrey did with him all those years should be investigated....). I think it will be a strong, disciplined bowling unit but it does lack the one bowler to really bring the fire power. Nothing new there - that's been England's achilles heal for most of the time I've been following them. You're right that there's not really an awful out there - all the guys you mentioned are either injury prone, raw or just not of sufficient quality yet. You can get round it with a disciplined approach though and we're not playing a very good Test side; they're nowhere near the team their One Day Side is.

Finally, I guess you could say Buttler may have been unlucky but I've come round to the idea that Prior should probably stay. To people who want to pick Buttler I say look at his 1st Class record - it's really not very good and that was batting mainly at Taunton. I've no doubt he's got the ability but I don't think he's yet got his head round the longer format. Again, I'm not altogether sure why James Taylor has fallen so completely off the England map.

He's actually still under 30 so in theory is in his prime really.  I think he was damaged by being bought into the Test side far too young before he'd properly developed his game.  He went through years of struggle and injury, and 2 years ago it looked like he was probably finished as a professional.  But he moved to Yorkshire at the start of last season and has been completely rejuvenated  He's better and quicker than he was last time he played for England and he'll have 8 years worth of experience on him plus he'll be desperate to take his chance.  Players get better as they got older sometimes, particularly bowlers (look at Ryan Sidebottom's second coming) so I think this is a decent selection that rewards a player who has really put the hard yards over the last few years.

But the basic answer to your question is no not really.  There's a bit of a talent gap between what's currently in County Cricket and what's coming through.  The good young bowlers that are out there are a bit young and raw still (the ones mentioned by Jack) and have yet to do much to scream out that they deserve selection.  It seems Finn is being rehabilitated so actually there's not a lot at the kind of 'promising early career worth a punt' stage.  This is partly because there's a generation of promising English seamers who have actually dissapointed a bit (of which Woakes is one and until recently Jordan was another).  The two that really stand out as having lost their way are James Harris and Ajmal Shahzad - they just didn't develop as expected.  It's left a bit of a gap.

That's true and it just goes to show how quickly things can change.  There was a time when we arguably had 2 seperate batteries of seamers we could throw out and be confident of success against pretty much every test nation in any conditions.  A few key injuries, a few key retirements and you can end up decimating your resources though.  The fact is that Finn, Shahzad, Panesar, Tremlett, Bresnan, Onions, Harris and Woakes who were all considered A1 prospects have all lost their way for one reason or another over the last 2/3 years.  It's left us a bit short.  Having said that I think we have a decent squad for this series and this English summer - whether it's a good lineup for overseas tests I'm not so sure.  No frontline spinner and a one paced attack is rarely successful outside of England and New Zealand.

Sadly Monty seems to have completely lost the plot - possibly another broken by the pressure ECB seems to heap on its players.  He's actually done OK (if not particularly spectacularly) at Essex but turned up late to a team meeting last week and was dropped and then put on a sabbatical which suggests there's some underlying issues.  We do need to have a look at what we're doing with our players - it's staggering and a bit scary the number that seem to be having serious off field problems.  Cricket has always been a bit like that - it is a very mentally difficult game - but this is getting ridiculous.  I mean I can reel off a dozen England players over the last 5 years who have had serious off field problems.

Seems to be the case yes.  There are hints here and there but I don't think anyone's really sure - perhaps he has simply lost his love for the game.

I found the Andy Flower England team to be joyless.  Yes, they were good and they won but I thought it was a very functional team that played in a very mechanical way and with quite stoic body language.  It was based on discipline and excellent, if dull, tactics rather than self-expression and I was just never convinced the players were having that much fun even when they were winning.  I therefore wasn't that surprised that when they stopped winning things unraveled quickly because I think that's all they had.  I know it sounds silly but you need more than just winning in cricket to keep a dressing room together - you spend so long together you need on some level to like each others company and be able to have fun.

Everything from the body language on the pitch to the sterile atmosphere around the team in press conferences and deadly, deadly seriousness in which everything seemed to be done just put me off really - while I wanted them to beat Aus and South Africa I found myself not caring greatly how they did against the rest (I've always been a cricket fan first and foremost anyway so I've never been that partisan).  I was far more drawn to the 2005 successful side - it may have been more flawed but it had way more interesting players and genuine personalities in it.  When Graeme Swann is a 'character' simply by virtue of not sounding like a media managed tool then I think you have problems.

I think it was a very mentally punishing way of playing and we're seeing the results of that in countless players having various versions of burnout problems.  You can't play at that intensity for that long without having some kind of release.  Also, to be an international cricketer these days requires a spectacular amount of dedication (we are way past the Botham/Gower 'I turn up for training when I fancy it' type era) - you have to sacrifice other aspects of your life.  Most of Monty's career has been a triumph of hard work really (he's not necessarily the most talented bowler - he's just very, very disciplined and clearly works incredibly hard) which was rewarded by steadily progressing up the ranks.  Now it looks like he's gone as far as he can and his international career is likely over (or close to over) maybe he's going through a 'what the hell was the point of all that' situation.  His marriage fell apart (happens a lot to international cricketers with the travel pressures) and he's drifted through several counties.  I'm just guessing here but I imagine he's a bit fed with it all because from his point of view he's sacrificed his youth for a career that's not going to be what he thought it was - it's not like cricketers make all that much money and he's a clever guy who could have done other things and had more of a life.  If that sounds a bit OTT I know a lot of professional cricketers at a number of levels - from international right down to club pros and a surprising number of them end up unhappy and disillusioned with the game for that reason. In my general experience the better the cricketer the more likely he is to be disenchanted with cricket - the game has a weird psychology.

Halfway through the 1st day, England 154-4. Root 25* Moeen 20*

Yes - it's annoying isn't it.  There is enough interest in any Test cricket in this country provided you set the prices accordingly.  It should be possible to get close to a sell out but they insist on charging big money even for games against the likes of Sri Lanka, New Zealand etc.  Daft.

In general, I thought it was quite a pedestrian Test played out on a fairly uncompetitive wicket that was too batsman friendly as it often seems to be at Lords these days.  Having said that the finish was very exciting.  If England had picked a specialist we may have won.  As it is I think the result was about right.  Sri Lanka played well and didn't deserve to lose because of one poor session.  This last Test will be interesting - England were quite fun to watch at times but didn't really convince particularly with the ball.  New players did OK - Moen looked good 1st innings and did as much as could be expected with the ball, Ballance played well and can book himself in for the summer I think, Jordan was a real spark plug in all aspects of the game, still question marks about Robson I think.

was listening to that on Radio 4 and dear old Jonathan was having quite a laugh as [at the time] SKY TV were showing-[Broad] after him taking the two in his over .stuart broad is on a hat- trick!! oh the beauty of modern day radio. what happened next!!!

How good has Balance looked in these 2 test's? Haven't heard to much about him, but he seems a more than able replacement for Trott at number 3.
We should just be leading come the end of play today, push on tomorrow and we should win this game quite comfortably.

This Second Test is bubbling under nicely.  A good nip and tuck game.  Sri Lanka didn't bat well in the first innings and England bowled with good disicpline.  Then, just when it looked like England were going to bat them out the game, some life came into the wicket and the Sri Lankans bowled themselves back into the match.  I don't think England have bowled very well in the 2nd innings becuase there seems to be something in the wicket and they've not exploited it regularly enough.  The result is that SL are going to set us a tricky target here.  Anything under 250 should be chaseable, 250-300 is anyone's game I think, 300+ and they become favourites.  Good match here and crucial first hour after lunch - if England knock them over quickly it should be our game, if Matthews can nurse 60+ runs out of the tail then the pendulum switches to Sri Lanka.

Some interesting subplots too.  Robson has secured his place with that knock but Cook's struggles continue (captains innings in run chase required I think), Ballance has had a great series.  Still question marks over Ali but he has that sparkplug quality - again removes Sangakarra and put us back on top when the game was beginning to drift their way.  What a comeback for Plunkett - great story that because the guy was more or less finished as a professional a couple of years ago.  Sometimes it pays to bring guys back for a second go because you know they'll give it everything and they'll have a few years of experience to draw on.  Sidebottom was a classic example of that and perhaps Swann too.  We write people off too early sometimes - particularly bowlers.  It's an artisan skill - many have the tools when their younger but only develop the bowling brain later.  Plunkett was typical of that in his 1st go around - he had the talent but didn't really know how to bowl.  Saj Mahmood never did learn how to bowl despite having everything a top bowler needs.

On the Sri Lankan side, I've been far more impressed with the seam attack than I expected to be.  They've given us some real problems.  Hard to be too harsh on Herath - England deliberately prepared wickets that would give him no help whatsoever.  Sangakarra has been the story - finally getting the respect he deserves in England and silenced the critics who said he couldn't play here.  If you look at his record it compares with anybody's - this is a true all time great of the game.  In games he didn't keep in he averages over 70! That's second only to Bradman.  This is a pretty special player.  However, Matthews is the one who has played SL's most important innings.  His innings at Lords saved them the match and now he's giving his team a chance in this one.  Superb competitor.  I've been really impressed with SL. In this country we tend to treat them as a second class Test nation whereas if you look at the history test series between England and Sri Lanka have been very even over the years.  They really compete well and deserve more respect than they get in this country.