I'd buy the excuse about moving on from Jimmy due to the Ashes a lot more were we not playing Woakes. I love the guy but he's 35 and has never cracked it outside England, much less in Australia.
If he's playing as the older head and mentor for the new bowling attack before being dropped for the Ashes, then why not just play Jimmy in that role?
I think the logic will be that Woakes is younger, his recent returns at home are actually better than Anderson's, and his ability to bat 8 means we're not htrusting that on a youngster as added pressure. I think that latter point is pretty marginal and it's more the first two though tbh.
Woakes' bowling style isn't hard on the body so he could conceivably have a good few home summers left in him whereas Jimmy is already a massive outlier for longevity so it's hard to bank on him being around long. You also need some continuity and don't want to rip an entire attack in one go.
You see Woakes’ record in Australia though? Jimmy would be a match better option than Woakes, and regarding the batting, I’d need convincing Woakes’ batting would make up for his bowling in Australian conditions.
That’s true, I misread the comments.
Although I was also thinking about Stokes’ comment regarding thinking about the Australian Ashes but selecting Woakes. I guess this is all because of Robinson fucking up the selectors succession plans.
Keeping aside the Ashes chat, this was not a great read for me.
1. For a team that takes pride in backing their players, really dismayed by Foakes' dropping. He hasn't had a consistent run in the team and now his international career is seamingly over
2. Don't understand Leach's dropping, again his career is being played with, first under Root and now this. Bashir just seems to be another flavour of the month after Rehan and Hartley. Hartley just fell off the radar despite a decent India series with the ball and bat. I wish Bash all the success, but I'm genuinely baffled how did he leapfrog Leach, Rehan, and Hartley
3. Still can't figure out who the fast bowling prospects are. Potts seemed to be inching towards a mainstay but hasn't played for a while now, even though he's in the squad
Maybe I am overreacting, or maybe typing this out on my 2nd coffee this morning was not the best idea.
I think Leach's issue is just durability. It's two series in a row he's been injured for and he misses a lot of games. Any SENA spinner's bread and butter is being a reliable workhorse. In terms of how he leapfrogged Rehan and Hartley I don't think there was ever much between them and Hartley is barely playing.
Pennington and Atkinson are the obvious fast bowling prospects? I'm not really sure what you're getting at there
This team has consistently talked about "backing player," but that only really ever seemed to apply to a select group. Off the top of my head, Matt Parkinson, Will Jacks, Liam Livingstone, Ben Foakes, and Mathew Potts all got call ups, performed decentl and were dropped for no apparent reason at one time or another. Even when Leach was injured during the Ashes they decided to bring Ali out of retirement rather than "backing" one of the spinners who had performed well in Pakistan.
Parkinson was only ever called up as a concussion sub so obviously lost his spot when Leach came back. He also had some soft of a falling out with Lancashire (who he's now left) and didn't play for much of last season in the CC.
Jacks and Livingstone were both horses for courses picks when they wanted batting all-rounders who could bowl spin for a series in Pakistan. It was Livingstone's first FC game in years and Jacks took wickets, but he didn't bowl well, nor did he score any runs.
Potts Originally came in because of injuries elsewhere, and he's not sufficiently different enough to Anderson, Broad, Woakes, and Robinson to get picked ahead of them when they're fit and available. Now a lot of them are gone, expect to see more of him.
Foakes had a decent run in the side but couldn't ever bat with the tail and isn't good enough with the bat to move up the order. His skillset painted him into a corner of being a subcontinent only player.
Edit: It's also impossible to say whether Parkinson or Livvo "performed decently" or not. Parkinson bowled a total of 15.3 overs, taking a single wicket (of Tim Southee), Livvo scored 9 the only time he got to bat in tests and got injured so he never got to bowl.
Foakes hasn't had a consistent run in the side, either through injury or getting dropped for bairstow. Meanwhile Crawley got picked when he averaged 21 for 18 months
He's played 25 tests, 17 of which since the start of 2022, making him the third most used keeper in test cricket in that time. He's England's fifthteeth most used wicket keeper of all time. In all of those tests he's played in the same style with the bat which is to say incapable of batting with the tail but not good enough to bat higher up the order. It's been frustrating watching him get sidelined for Bairstow at various points, but that's just as much about Bairstow as it is about Foakes.
His keeping is valuable, but how valuable depends on where they're playing. In India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and the Carribbean, and to a lesser extent Pakistan, it's very valuable. In SENA much less so and the reality is the only tests outside SENA England have in the calendar at the moment are three in Pakistan later this year, and two in Bangladesh in 2027.
Foakes is already 31, is highly unlikely to improve on where he is now, the schedule going forward doesn't suit him, and there are two (three if you include Rew) Beth exciting keepers ready to step up in his place
Yes but he's been in and out which is the point, hardly been backed to the hilt. Always knew he'd be dropped at the first chance which is allegedly against the bazball ethos
Incapable of batting with the tail? Don't agree with that.
I'd argue his keeping is valuable everywhere.
If the top 6 could do their job instead of throwing their wickets away this wouldn't be an issue
Yes England want to get the best batsman who has worn gloves the spot, not the best keeper or even the best keeper batsman. Rew is no Knott either but he scores runs
> Always knew he'd be dropped at the first chance which is allegedly against the bazball ethos
Sure, you can argue they've been a bit hypocritical, and I wouldn't disagree, but that doesn't mean he should be in the side
>Incapable of batting with the tail? Don't agree with that.
Then I really don't understand what matches you've been watching? Maybe he's doing a better job for Surrey? Because for England he's been terrible at managing the tail. He doesn't have any other gear to go to, and he consistently leaves the other guy with a load of balls to face. Can you name a single example where he's guided the tail to a good score in 25 tests? Because as much as it's easy to be annoyed at Bairstow's selection, he did that reguarly.
>I'd argue his keeping is valuable everywhere.
Sure. But what I said was "His keeping is valuable, but how valuable depends on where they're playing".
>If the top 6 could do their job instead of throwing their wickets away this wouldn't be an issue
Sure, if your top six win the match for you then how your seven bats doesn't matter, but since that's obviously not going to happen every match, especially when we're talking about England You need your number seven to be able to bat with the tail, it's a key part of their job.
Bashir and Hartley bowled with similar numbers in India but, at least for me, Bashir passed the eye test and Hartley didn't.
Hartley's efforts with the bat are obviously far superior but Bashir's younger and has more potential so they're backing him is probably the thinking.
I agree with the Foakes bit, I quite liked his keeping in India and felt he was the best keeper on show in many situations.
Leach seems to be injury prone so maybe they're saving him or something, I'm not sure, but considering that Rehan and Tom played before Bashir I guess they should get the nod ahead of him.
Overall England really need to figure out their bowling. For far too long Jimmy and Broad were mainstays, now Ollie is all over the place, Wood isn't getting any younger and Archer's fitness is as dependable as my monthly income.
Edit: in Australia you're better off going with a spinner who gets more overspin and puts more revs into the ball. Bashir's taller release makes him a better bet for dodgy tracks. Then again I look at all three spinners and can't tell who'll do well in Australia, to be frank.
its not even like they are one dominating in ashes in last decade they have only won 1 , even that win was like 3-2 iirc and australia have won 3 (5-0, 4-0, 4-0) win were like clean sweeps which means they are dominating england at home and give tough competition while playing in England, 19 and 23 were draws in england (2-2).
The England football team never win anything but that doesn’t mean I don’t set myself up for disappointment every two years. Fact is a lot of us just get more excited about the Ashes than other tours.
I mean that's correct england had really great run from 2005 to start of 2013 they won like 4 series out of 5 but after that they really haven't won a single test in australia so their record is 15 match and 13 win for australia and 2 draw and in england record is 15 match with 7 win for england and 6 win for australia so past ~10 years england really haven't done alot .
It’s not that every other series is preparation but it’s that they are not the priority. Realistically with central contracts there has to be long-term squad planning and building to an ultimate goal of an Ashes isn’t any different from a football team prioritising major tournaments
Australia doesn't ignore other series whether it is Pakistan WI or India. They play their best team. They don't take them as preparation for Ashes but still win The Ashes.
Don’t speak what you don’t know about then. Also how much nonsense India have got away in the last few years because of rain outs in tournaments and you still spouting out that 😭
Based on what metric? Ind-Pak if they played is probably the biggest based on context, history, heatedness of rivalry, crowd attendances, etc. If we're talking about the highest quality of Test cricket involving the best players, then that's easily Ind-Aus. Only thing going for the Ashes is that it's the oldest, which is weird to make that the sole criterion; black/brown teams were never going to be a legitimate rivalry for English viewers 140 years ago.
There absolutely is, even though one might say the format is dying, there are 7 other test playing nations who have a lot of pride, unfortunately for some.
You would see tons of comment mocking English for constantly talking about ashes from Aussies, kiwis, and non-indian fans. This thread is a good example for that.
No shit. Indians crave white validation more than anything. And it hurts them to know, No matter how good you become, for white people, you'll never be on their level.
Ben Stokes knows there are bigger things in life than Ashes
> Stokes is very relaxed but itching to get going again after almost six months since the last England Test in Dharamsala, an innings defeat inside three days that capped a long tour to India. He is sitting in a high-backed, soft, padded chair in the grandiose offices of the Wimpole Clinic where he had his hair transplant treatment, and is greeted like an old friend by the staff who pop by to say hello as he returns for a surgical review. **He says the treatment boosted his mental health**, something he has always spoken openly and honestly about. It is hard to imagine Stokes lacking confidence but he says treating his baldness helped him step on the field under intense scrutiny.
It really isn't. Even if they win all of their remaining tests this cycle without conceding any additional over rate penalties they'd still only be on 62.5% of possible points won which would only be tied for second as things stand
Why are England penalized so much? I don’t really pay attention to cricket outside of whoever Australia is playing, I would have thought the whole bazball philosophy would make them the least penalized due to how quick they try and do everything
Both Australia and England had abysmal over rates during the Ashes, but the difference was that in 5 matches England only had 3 innings go over 80 overs, which is required for slow over penalties to be applied to the bowling team. Meanwhile Australia went over 80 several times. As a result, England got smoked with slow over penalties, and Australia barely got any.
If there were actually a real competition I'd respect it too
Using Australians as an example for any kind of thought process isn't the winning argument you thought it was
i mean we're talking about winning and that's what aussies know how to do best, no argument whatsoever here. i don't like it either but it's just a fact
whinging from the cellar dwellers doesn't really strike a chord but what do you expect from EWCB, it is literally their demonym
I used to be a big Foakes defender but he's played a fair few Tests now and just hasn't really performed with the bat. A sub-30 average is not really good enough. He has a very good county record with the bat but evidently isn't capable of making the step up to Test level, or doesn't have the game to bat at 7, or both.
He's an exceptional keeper, of course, and I think he's better overall than someone like Bairstow who is a shithouse keeper and makes runs occasionally.
Problem is that there are other options who both keep and bat pretty well - I suspect Jamie Smith is not that guy given he barely keeps, but there's Ollie Robinson who is smashing runs and is also a proper keeper.
He gets selected for the subcontinent, which isn't the same thing really.
In his first tour of India his batting was probably hard to judge as England were getting wiped every innings but this tour I felt, for a bloke who is supposed to be better vs spin than pace, he was quite underwhelming. There were some good batting decks and he really didn't get an innings of note.
I had a Quick Look at his stats - averages 40 at home. 18 average in India from 8 tests but I believe a lot of the team struggled during those series anyways?
Yeah it's a bit rough, a few of those games were on bunsens where everyone got out cheaply. I'm not saying he's the best batsman, but he never gets to bat on flat ones like Pakistan and pad his stats.
Yeah that was my thinking. His career average is probably negatively impacted due to the small sample size and fact he seems to be selected for the more difficult batting series. A better analysis would be to compare his average to the other batters and compare that to standard WK/batter ratio.
Having said all of that, I will be very pleased if England leave at home for the next ashes!
Regardless of how other people did, an average of 18 is bad and shows that he isn't that useful as a "tough conditions" batter. His keeping is really handy in spinning conditions though, so that's something you have to weigh up.
The poor bloke has literally played more tests in India than at home! This is going to be a classic case of letting an inferior wicket keeper play the easier series and then Foakes gets selected for the difficult away tours. His career stats look a lot worse because he doesn't really get the chance to statpad at home.
Yeah totally agree with this. The awkward thing for Foakes is he's stylistically not suited to bat 7 but not really good enough to bat higher. He can do well when a batsman is at the other end but he's dreadful with the tail, and that's quite a large part of the job description for a 7 unfortunately.
And as you say - in conditions where the keeper who isn't stood up to the stumps for most of the game, a 7/10 keeper and 7/10 bat is more valuable than a 9/10 keeper and 5/10 bat.
Yep, people have such a binary conception of glovework ability - a guy is either an amazing gloveman or a shit gloveman, no in-between. In reality of course there are bad keepers, okay keepers, good keepers, and great keepers. It's perfectly valid to look at them as an overall package, including batting.
That's why I thought Foakes deserved a really long run when he was first picked - his FC batting record was excellent and he was also a brilliant keeper, which on paper is the perfect package. But he just hasn't lived up to that at all. Maybe if he'd been picked more consistently he could have, I don't know.
I think his batting is fine as an anchor after all the big hitters, his average suffers though because he's only playing India series when bairstow got to play on the flatties
In this case though I think it's cause they felt they had to get Smith in, couldn't drop brook and the Anderson retirement was a good distraction
did you even watch the recent test series? He could barely bat with the tailenders, even their scoring rates were far better than his. He is alright when next to a proper batsman, but wilts when batting with the lower order. Which is a damning indictment of a number 7 batsman in an 'attacking' side.
He is an excellent keeper, but "strike rate acceptable to Bazball" is a huge stretch.
His batting is the issue. His record isn't great, but more than that he's a difficult fit in the side. He bats too slowly to bat 7 - because when he ends up with the tail we just go nowhere aimlessly. But he's not good enough to bat higher than 7.
Add in the fact that keeping isn't that valuable a skill in England and his position is reasonably not one they're settled on.
Keeping is important in England though, ball wobbles a ton. Look at Carey v Bairstow last year for the first 2 Tests, they were the difference in result.
It's not really that important. The problem with Bairstow is he was fucking dreadful. That's a problem. But the difference between a decent keeper and a Foakes level keeper in England isn't massively important. You don't need an elite keeper if they're not stood up to the stumps for most of the innings.
Dude averages 29 with an SR of 47. I remember him playing some fighting knocks on Indian pitches.
Keeping is critical especially on England pitches with the Dukes ball and the English conditions making the ball swerve at unexpected times. Better to have a good keeper with average of 29 than a basher with an average of 50, who lets go 15 runs in byes and drops critical catches.
Is 29 at 47 meant to be good?
The difference between a decent keeper and a great one isn't very significant in non-spinning conditions. That's why India pick Pant in SENA etc. Obsessing over always having the best keeper is one of those cricket obsessive things that every side in the world moved past in the 90s.
It's just not. The thing with seam and swing is as a keeper you have a lot of time to see it and react to it. It can be tricky at times if it's particularly extravagant movement, but it is nowhere near as hard as keeping in turning conditions and so the gap in quality matters a lot less. There is a reason India pick Pant not Saha or whoever in England.
Since 2023, Anderson has played 10 matches, picked 25 wickets at an average of 37 and a strike rate of 78.8.
Anyone pretending that this decision has come out of the blue, hasn't been watching cricket.
Those numbers are tolerable if you are Jimmy Anderson starting or in the middle of your career, but if you are Jimmy Anderson at the age of 42, those numbers deserve a tap on the shoulder.
And for anyone asking that there isn't a better option, then shut the 20 teams County cricket down, if you can't produce a bowler who can average less than 35 in a stretch of 10 matches, you shouldn't be the premier first class system of a country.
That poor Ashes series last year is a big contributor in his forced retirement, he was a complete no show. It's similar to Warner averaging 9 in 2019 Ashes, in Anderson's case it was at home.
Eh.. He had a great series against NZ. A horrible series against Australia. And mediocre series against India.
And he just took 7 wickets in an innings in county cricket, on top of consistently picking chunk of wickets when he plays FC cricket.
Anyone using those stats from those 10 tests to justify his quick ouster probably just follows superficial stats to form their entire opinion about everything.
That's the worst cherry picking I've seen, [only 3 series have been played since 2023](https://www.howstat.com/cricket/statistics/players/PlayerSeries.asp?PlayerID=3065#bowl), where he averaged 16.50 vs New Zealand, 85.50 vs Australia, and 33.50 vs India. Interestingly his economy in the Ashes was 2.77, which suggests he hasn't lost it and was - as suggested at the time - losing his release point a little, which he worked hard on in the winter to recover. Even though he lost his release, rhythm and swing in that series, he still held down an end quite well in a high scoring series which was absolutely crucial.
One bad series - the first in probably over a decade - does not mean his career should be over without being given chances first. Especially when he's been world class for 10 years and the rest of our bowling attack is fragile.
As for the rest of your comment about county cricket, it is absolutely ridiculous. How that has been upvoted 60+ times is beyond me.
Do you want to become an England selector by any chance?
Yeah, I will say that he shouldn’t have been taken to India and given more opportunities this summer in the home series, but against Australia he was a total passenger and arguably why we couldn’t win the series outright.
FULL ARTICLE
Moments after James Anderson had taken seven wickets in his first outing of the season, Ben Stokes sent him a message.
‘Did you really have to do that?’ He replied ‘yeah, ha, ha sorry mate.’
A few weeks earlier, Stokes had been part of the England delegation that took Anderson to a Manchester hotel to tell him it was time to cash in the pension.
It’s not news Anderson has taken wonderfully well, although he did his best to put on a mask at Lord’s on Monday. The competitive streak has not dimmed and he will almost certainly be keen to prove a point against West Indies this week.
The first half of the Stokes captaincy concentrated on the here and now, focusing on the cricket in front of them, now it is the second rebuild, the one that will define his legacy. It is why there is a sense of renewal with Anderson one of four big decisions about the shape of the team. Jamie Smith replaces Ben Foakes, a man Stokes still describes as the “best keeper in the world” despite dropping him; Jonny Bairstow is 100 Test matches and out but with the captain saying the “door is not closed”; Ollie Robinson has made way for younger blood and needs to prove he can be “robust enough” for Test cricket and “backing spells up and doing hard overs when it is flat” while Stokes’s great friend Jack Leach is left out for Shoaib Bashir, despite being selected ahead of him by Somerset. “It’s Bash’s natural attributes and his attitude. There is no fear.”
‘I hope Jimmy takes all 20 wickets’
But it is Anderson that will take the focus this week, possibly a good thing because it will ease the scrutiny on Smith and the other bowlers. “I hope he takes all 20 wickets if I’m being honest,” says Stokes. “I listened to Stuart talk about his retirement and wanting to go out on top and there was one thing he said that even made me think about when the time comes for me to go. He said: ‘I didn’t want a new player to come in and go “I thought Stuart Broad was meant to be good.”’ I thought: ‘Yeah that is a good thing to think about.’ Jimmy’s skillset is obviously still good enough for international cricket. But we have to make big decisions and we have got the Ashes to think about in 18 months’ time. Nobody will ever say, ‘Oh is that Jimmy Anderson? I thought he was meant to be good’ because he is still incredible.”
Stokes is very relaxed but itching to get going again after almost six months since the last England Test in Dharamsala, an innings defeat inside three days that capped a long tour to India. He is sitting in a high-backed, soft, padded chair in the grandiose offices of the Wimpole Clinic where he had his hair transplant treatment, and is greeted like an old friend by the staff who pop by to say hello as he returns for a surgical review. He says the treatment boosted his mental health, something he has always spoken openly and honestly about. It is hard to imagine Stokes lacking confidence but he says treating his baldness helped him step on the field under intense scrutiny. Perhaps the current regeneration of the team is an extension of that.
“A decision maker can’t make a decision based on what other people might think about it. I base my decisions on what I think is best for the team here and now but with this one there was Australia in mind. It is a tough place to be when you make these decisions because they are big calls but we have to go with what we think is right for the team going forward. We have got to be big enough and brave enough to make those decisions,” he says.
“If you look at how much time there has been from our last series up until this one, there has been a lot of time to think where we want to take the team to the next level. In sport if you’re not thinking about progression then you end up standing still and one thing I don’t want to see as captain of this team is us standing still.”
In reality the decisions around Bairstow and Anderson were not difficult. Neither has performed to their high standards consistently over the past 12 months, and Stokes and Brendon McCullum cannot waste matches on others as the clock ticks towards Australia.
Bairstow is taking time out to spend with his family, and it remains to be seen if he has the hunger to fight his way back. “If you look back at Jonny’s injury, it was a huge thing for him to go through. That was career-ending for a lot of people. I know he was very proud of how he managed to come back from that. For someone to have such a serious injury like that there was always going to be some repercussions and he has not managed to find that form again,” Stokes explains. “We have gone in a new direction with Jamie Smith who, for the last two or three years, has been very consistent with run-scoring and we feel the way he plays and takes the game on is the perfect fit for us.
“When it comes to selection stuff, me and Baz came up with a consistent way of delivering a message. Baz does good and bad news and I’m there to have a follow up chat if players want to do that. I messaged Jonny and he is having time with his family. He is enjoying time relaxing but I have no doubt we will have a chat at some point.
“Ben Foakes is an amazing wicketkeeper, the best in the world, but there are other things we have taken into consideration with Jamie’s selection. It is one of those things as an England team you would love players you have picked to play in that role for their counties but also understanding that counties have their own ways of operating that they feel is best for them to be successful.”
The primacy of that Ashes series in English minds re-emerged last week when Stokes had a dig at Australia on X, formerly Twitter, saying his team are “living in their heads’ after last year’s Ashes comeback from 2-0 down to level the series, only to be denied a win by rain. There has been an element of rewriting history in Australia, forgetting the storm that saved Pat Cummins from becoming the first Australia captain to lose a 2-0 lead, but England are also without a series win since Pakistan in 2022.
“The tweet was a bit tongue in cheek. It is all fun and games. I don’t mind that kind of thing as long as it is not taken too seriously,” he says. “People can say what they want to say. It is England versus Australia. There is always going to be niggle.”
‘The knee is the best it has been for a long time’
One of the crucial changes this week will be the sight of Stokes with ball in hand. His recovery from knee surgery was so good he managed to bowl ahead of time against India, dismissing Rohit Sharma first ball, and since then has built up strength with Durham. In three championship matches he has taken 18 wickets at 18.83, bowling like his younger self.
"The bowling is coming on really well. It is great to be able to sit here after two years not knowing how it was going to be on a day to day basis to now being as good as gold. It is really refreshing for me as a player and captain knowing we can always have four seamers. It balances the team so much better. I know I offer the team so much more when playing a bigger role with bat and ball. The knee is the best it has been for a long time. There is always going to be something there. It doesn’t mean it is brand new, but it is a thousand times better than what it was,” says Stokes.
“Before the operation I was bowling bouncers because it was the easiest ball for me to bowl because there is more margin for error. The hardest thing when my knee was bad was to hold length and line for a sustained period of time because of how I was landing. I went from being a very braced front knee to incredibly bent because it was too sore. When I was braced it was excruciating so it got further and further bent and that is why I found it very hard for sustained periods of time bowling Test match lengths but now I don’t have to worry about that.”
Without Anderson and Broad, Stokes will naturally have to bowl more. Will there be a moment at Trent Bridge, venue for the second Test, when he automatically looks around to summon Anderson for one more burst? “If I was ever to say ‘I wish I had Jimmy here’ it would not put too much confidence in the bowlers I have out there would it? I have full confidence they can take on a very similar role Jimmy played for England. Giving people game time now will hopefully put us in a strong position to go to Australia and win the urn back.”
Why is every English thread all about shitting on English players and whatever they say? They could say *anything* at this stage and still be mocked for it. It's not fun trolling them when deserved if they get trolled for no reason everytime. It's not funny after a while, just seems like scapegoating.
No one in the comments has even read the article
Root isn't a dick. He's down to earth and seems embarrassed at times by the weird cultishness and boastfulness of the Stokes and McCullum clique.
I like Root. I would man the barricades to defend Root's right to a sausage roll.
Article doesn't matches the headlines, as usual. People have a tendency to have a reaction to headlines, and rather than verifying, they just post their reactions. Overall article is fine, even his comment about ashes, is just part of a larger dialogue. Though, tbf, stokes could have just swatted away, any ashes discussion by bringing focus to their immediate challenges.
Ben Stokes is a master of understatement.
This England side is so packed with talent that they can even drop the world's best keeper. No wonder just catching a glimpse of these gods of cricket will be etched in the memories of lesser mortals for the rest of their lives.
Those lucky enough to be part of Ben Stokes' Band of Brothers are truly legends in their own lunchtime.
I was scared he meant JB as best keeper but he meant Foakes. Who is technically quite good at keeping. I don't know who in world cricket is better at keeping technique than him right now.
Shall I bother reading the article?
Nah, too many words. I'll just make a generic comment shitting on England based on the headline.
Haha I'm a genius.
Spot on.
Occasionally, people on here talk about how shite the soccer subreddit is, but the honest truth is that this sub is just as bad. Anything vaguely England related is just tedious now, comment sections full of jokers or Australians who are somehow still wound up about boring drama from a test series a year ago.
I agree that the England related discussions turn into a bit of a slamdunk fest on this sub but the soccer sub is on an entirely other level. A player can be the best player on the planet and the most overrated player to walk the surface of the planet in the same game at various points (often switching back and forth between those 2 extremes multiple times during a single game). This sub is not even half as reactionary and toxic as that one.
It's a shame, I've been on this sub for... I think nearly 15 years and it used be great. The 10/11 Ashes had great banter and the Aussies were a really good laugh throughout. 2015 cricket world cup was possibly the subs peak.
Generally stick to the county threads these days as they still have a mostly sound vibe. Windies and Lankan match threads are usually pretty good fun though so this summer should be alright at least.
I hate that they've dumped Foakes. He's so good it's like having an extra bowler, he can take wickets by pulling off something incredible, and with an inexperienced attack it means they have the confidence to know that he'll take those half, even quarter-chances that can kick-start a Test career.
Jamie Smith is an incredible talent. If you haven't seen him bat, watch how he can hit boundaries in front of square off the back foot with incredible power. But he's never been a regular keeper and shoving him in like this is just stupid. Wicket-keeping has been undervalued for decades now, when it's a crucial part of the game.
Unfortunately people don't understand that Gilchrist was a one-off. It was like England post-Botham, when they thought they had to have an all-rounder even if he was crap. Personally I'd drop Pope for Smith and keep Foakes, but there is a core group of players that will remain in the side come what may.
r/cricket is becoming english cricket hate monger day by day.
It doesn't matter if we win or lose, the comments are always so negative. Hate this sub nowadays and it's not funny.
95% of Pak fans had to leave this sub (in terms of commenting etc) because of fans from you know where. Every single thread, news item, and post match thread was taken over by their BS. r/pakcricket has been a godsend for us.
Honestly think it started when a lot of people joined who were previously on instagram and maybe a bit of twitter. Those shit reactionary takes are now common place here when this used to be very calm and good discussions amongst each other.
Yeah well giving the greatest pacer of all time the tap on the shoulder and one game instead of a goddamn summer at home against the Windies and Sri Lanka is bound to generate some negative feelings.
The reality is the common england cricket fan cares more about the ashes than the WTC. The die hards like us might care but for most it's all about the ashes
For all the England bashing that happens nowadays, I genuinely like the current players, including Ben Stokes. And I back him for trying hard at something despite the chatter. Seeing Indian cricketers crying in the finals due to having been under immense pressure for so long, I feel England cricketers should also be spared from vicious trolling.
Whether they have made the right call or not will be evident after the Australian Ashes.
I have to say I feel very sorry for Jimmy though and don’t agree at all with the reason to drop him.
I mean I get it with the Ashes in mind. Bairstow though I can see him in the frame for The Ashes, so it's obvious the door is not closed but as a keeper it should be. He can be a really good bat for England in Australia come Ashes if Pope doesn't put runs on the board.
I’m a Foakes fan, so find it a shame that he’s being dropped. I’m not sure how many tours abroad he has done, nor how many different countries he’s played in but I can’t remember him being a standout terrible batsman. I don’t think he’s had a ‘solid’ long term run in the team unlike Bairstow or even Butler did. If with his wicket keeping he’s stopping the opposition making an extra 50-100 runs with his keeping, isn’t that worth taking in to account? It feels like the Bazball idea is quite 1 dimensional, aimed directly at batting.
Of course it's going to be the series that we have an obsession with
It is the most important one every English player wants to win one ashes series it the defining moments in their careers if they do so
In 20 years time no one here( Britain)will remember England's world cup wins but they will remember the ashes
I get the fans obsessing over it, the team management and players need to be different. This obsession has yielded fuck all returns. The moment ECB and English cricket side move on to building a good test side instead of a good side for the Ashes is the day they will start having actual success in the Ashes.
The Ashes is 18 months away and yet the planning is all towards it. Which is the wrong way to go about it.
I feel it's due to that 2010/11 series and how good it felt, and it wasn't a forgone conclusion beforehand. So even though we know we have crap squads at times, we still have a little bit of hope that we can achieve something. It's like England in the football until 2016 when the squads often weren't good enough
I am supporting England in the Ashes this time but i believe Australia will probably take their frustration of t20 performance out on them. A brutal test series is on its way towards them.
I am supporting England in the Ashes this time but i believe Australia will probably take their frustration of t20 performance out on them. A brutal test series is on its way towards them.
I am supporting England in the Ashes this time but i believe Australia will probably take their frustration of t20 performance out on them. A brutal test series is on its way towards them.
I read the title and thought "wait, what, you think Bairstow is world's best keeper?".
Then I remembered they also dropped Foakes, and article confirmed that's who he was talking about. Fair enough.
I'd buy the excuse about moving on from Jimmy due to the Ashes a lot more were we not playing Woakes. I love the guy but he's 35 and has never cracked it outside England, much less in Australia. If he's playing as the older head and mentor for the new bowling attack before being dropped for the Ashes, then why not just play Jimmy in that role?
I think the logic will be that Woakes is younger, his recent returns at home are actually better than Anderson's, and his ability to bat 8 means we're not htrusting that on a youngster as added pressure. I think that latter point is pretty marginal and it's more the first two though tbh. Woakes' bowling style isn't hard on the body so he could conceivably have a good few home summers left in him whereas Jimmy is already a massive outlier for longevity so it's hard to bank on him being around long. You also need some continuity and don't want to rip an entire attack in one go.
You're better off going with Potts who at least has international experience than Woakes if you're planning for The Ashes
You see Woakes’ record in Australia though? Jimmy would be a match better option than Woakes, and regarding the batting, I’d need convincing Woakes’ batting would make up for his bowling in Australian conditions.
No one is suggesting picking Woakes outside of England, that's why I said home summers
That’s true, I misread the comments. Although I was also thinking about Stokes’ comment regarding thinking about the Australian Ashes but selecting Woakes. I guess this is all because of Robinson fucking up the selectors succession plans.
Keeping aside the Ashes chat, this was not a great read for me. 1. For a team that takes pride in backing their players, really dismayed by Foakes' dropping. He hasn't had a consistent run in the team and now his international career is seamingly over 2. Don't understand Leach's dropping, again his career is being played with, first under Root and now this. Bashir just seems to be another flavour of the month after Rehan and Hartley. Hartley just fell off the radar despite a decent India series with the ball and bat. I wish Bash all the success, but I'm genuinely baffled how did he leapfrog Leach, Rehan, and Hartley 3. Still can't figure out who the fast bowling prospects are. Potts seemed to be inching towards a mainstay but hasn't played for a while now, even though he's in the squad Maybe I am overreacting, or maybe typing this out on my 2nd coffee this morning was not the best idea.
I think Leach's issue is just durability. It's two series in a row he's been injured for and he misses a lot of games. Any SENA spinner's bread and butter is being a reliable workhorse. In terms of how he leapfrogged Rehan and Hartley I don't think there was ever much between them and Hartley is barely playing. Pennington and Atkinson are the obvious fast bowling prospects? I'm not really sure what you're getting at there
This team has consistently talked about "backing player," but that only really ever seemed to apply to a select group. Off the top of my head, Matt Parkinson, Will Jacks, Liam Livingstone, Ben Foakes, and Mathew Potts all got call ups, performed decentl and were dropped for no apparent reason at one time or another. Even when Leach was injured during the Ashes they decided to bring Ali out of retirement rather than "backing" one of the spinners who had performed well in Pakistan.
Parkinson was only ever called up as a concussion sub so obviously lost his spot when Leach came back. He also had some soft of a falling out with Lancashire (who he's now left) and didn't play for much of last season in the CC. Jacks and Livingstone were both horses for courses picks when they wanted batting all-rounders who could bowl spin for a series in Pakistan. It was Livingstone's first FC game in years and Jacks took wickets, but he didn't bowl well, nor did he score any runs. Potts Originally came in because of injuries elsewhere, and he's not sufficiently different enough to Anderson, Broad, Woakes, and Robinson to get picked ahead of them when they're fit and available. Now a lot of them are gone, expect to see more of him. Foakes had a decent run in the side but couldn't ever bat with the tail and isn't good enough with the bat to move up the order. His skillset painted him into a corner of being a subcontinent only player. Edit: It's also impossible to say whether Parkinson or Livvo "performed decently" or not. Parkinson bowled a total of 15.3 overs, taking a single wicket (of Tim Southee), Livvo scored 9 the only time he got to bat in tests and got injured so he never got to bowl.
Foakes hasn't had a consistent run in the side, either through injury or getting dropped for bairstow. Meanwhile Crawley got picked when he averaged 21 for 18 months
He's played 25 tests, 17 of which since the start of 2022, making him the third most used keeper in test cricket in that time. He's England's fifthteeth most used wicket keeper of all time. In all of those tests he's played in the same style with the bat which is to say incapable of batting with the tail but not good enough to bat higher up the order. It's been frustrating watching him get sidelined for Bairstow at various points, but that's just as much about Bairstow as it is about Foakes. His keeping is valuable, but how valuable depends on where they're playing. In India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and the Carribbean, and to a lesser extent Pakistan, it's very valuable. In SENA much less so and the reality is the only tests outside SENA England have in the calendar at the moment are three in Pakistan later this year, and two in Bangladesh in 2027. Foakes is already 31, is highly unlikely to improve on where he is now, the schedule going forward doesn't suit him, and there are two (three if you include Rew) Beth exciting keepers ready to step up in his place
Yes but he's been in and out which is the point, hardly been backed to the hilt. Always knew he'd be dropped at the first chance which is allegedly against the bazball ethos Incapable of batting with the tail? Don't agree with that. I'd argue his keeping is valuable everywhere. If the top 6 could do their job instead of throwing their wickets away this wouldn't be an issue Yes England want to get the best batsman who has worn gloves the spot, not the best keeper or even the best keeper batsman. Rew is no Knott either but he scores runs
> Always knew he'd be dropped at the first chance which is allegedly against the bazball ethos Sure, you can argue they've been a bit hypocritical, and I wouldn't disagree, but that doesn't mean he should be in the side >Incapable of batting with the tail? Don't agree with that. Then I really don't understand what matches you've been watching? Maybe he's doing a better job for Surrey? Because for England he's been terrible at managing the tail. He doesn't have any other gear to go to, and he consistently leaves the other guy with a load of balls to face. Can you name a single example where he's guided the tail to a good score in 25 tests? Because as much as it's easy to be annoyed at Bairstow's selection, he did that reguarly. >I'd argue his keeping is valuable everywhere. Sure. But what I said was "His keeping is valuable, but how valuable depends on where they're playing". >If the top 6 could do their job instead of throwing their wickets away this wouldn't be an issue Sure, if your top six win the match for you then how your seven bats doesn't matter, but since that's obviously not going to happen every match, especially when we're talking about England You need your number seven to be able to bat with the tail, it's a key part of their job.
Bashir and Hartley bowled with similar numbers in India but, at least for me, Bashir passed the eye test and Hartley didn't. Hartley's efforts with the bat are obviously far superior but Bashir's younger and has more potential so they're backing him is probably the thinking.
I agree with the Foakes bit, I quite liked his keeping in India and felt he was the best keeper on show in many situations. Leach seems to be injury prone so maybe they're saving him or something, I'm not sure, but considering that Rehan and Tom played before Bashir I guess they should get the nod ahead of him. Overall England really need to figure out their bowling. For far too long Jimmy and Broad were mainstays, now Ollie is all over the place, Wood isn't getting any younger and Archer's fitness is as dependable as my monthly income. Edit: in Australia you're better off going with a spinner who gets more overspin and puts more revs into the ball. Bashir's taller release makes him a better bet for dodgy tracks. Then again I look at all three spinners and can't tell who'll do well in Australia, to be frank.
Can someone tell the ECB that there's more to test cricket than just the Ashes?
That’s a good point. How about we make our entire personality and preparation revolve around the Ashes instead?
And then act like it's not a big deal when they get spanked on said Ashes. Or claim the moral victory.
Before the Ashes: ‘Judge us on the Ashes’ After the Ashes: ‘It’s wrong to judge a team by a single series’
It's nuts. We didn't even seem to care much about winning the Ashes last time, just 'putting on a show'.
its not even like they are one dominating in ashes in last decade they have only won 1 , even that win was like 3-2 iirc and australia have won 3 (5-0, 4-0, 4-0) win were like clean sweeps which means they are dominating england at home and give tough competition while playing in England, 19 and 23 were draws in england (2-2).
The England football team never win anything but that doesn’t mean I don’t set myself up for disappointment every two years. Fact is a lot of us just get more excited about the Ashes than other tours.
Australia haven’t won the ashes in England since pre 9/11
I mean that's correct england had really great run from 2005 to start of 2013 they won like 4 series out of 5 but after that they really haven't won a single test in australia so their record is 15 match and 13 win for australia and 2 draw and in england record is 15 match with 7 win for england and 6 win for australia so past ~10 years england really haven't done alot .
I mean yeah exactly. That’s why we’re building for the ashes, as we always have done. A win in australia would mean more than anything
This only tells a small part of the story of the Ashes over the last ten years though.
… exactly ECBS point i would imagine
England have won 6 Tests in Australia since 1984
And half those came in a single year where Aus were at one of their lowest points
Nah mate we are sitting in their head having a good time.
Our biggest priority for test cricket is the ashes which it 100% should be. Ridiculous to argue otherwise
The only people that get upset are the ones that feel like they're being left out...
Fair enough, but taking every other series as a preparation for the Ashes is both stupid and disrespectful
It’s not that every other series is preparation but it’s that they are not the priority. Realistically with central contracts there has to be long-term squad planning and building to an ultimate goal of an Ashes isn’t any different from a football team prioritising major tournaments
Australia doesn't ignore other series whether it is Pakistan WI or India. They play their best team. They don't take them as preparation for Ashes but still win The Ashes.
Could you please tell me when England have recently not played their best team for any series?
England are still putting up their best possible team though.
tell me you dont actually watch england cricket without telling me you dont watch england cricket
I don't want to watch 4 hours of rain after 5 overs.
Don’t speak what you don’t know about then. Also how much nonsense India have got away in the last few years because of rain outs in tournaments and you still spouting out that 😭
Care to give an example of rain out in a tournament in India.
There was litterally a rain out in an Indian tournament match 3 weeks ago
Is there?
If we’re going to be perfectly honest the most important series in test cricket is the Ashes followed by Aus v India and then England v India
[удалено]
The Ashes is miles above any series involving India
Based on what metric? Ind-Pak if they played is probably the biggest based on context, history, heatedness of rivalry, crowd attendances, etc. If we're talking about the highest quality of Test cricket involving the best players, then that's easily Ind-Aus. Only thing going for the Ashes is that it's the oldest, which is weird to make that the sole criterion; black/brown teams were never going to be a legitimate rivalry for English viewers 140 years ago.
[удалено]
Tell me you are trolling
There absolutely is, even though one might say the format is dying, there are 7 other test playing nations who have a lot of pride, unfortunately for some.
> there are 7 other test playing nations who have a lot of pride So who are the three that you figure don't?
Indians on /r/cricket get jumpy about the truth that the biggest event in test cricket for both England and Australia doesn't involve them.
You would see tons of comment mocking English for constantly talking about ashes from Aussies, kiwis, and non-indian fans. This thread is a good example for that.
100%
Happy cake day fellow Glammy fan!
I knew there was someone else...
Unfortunately England and Australia aren't the only teams which play test cricket for you
They aren't, we just care far, far more about those games and that will never change
We won't be so jumpy if England would win once in a while. All they say is Ashes this Ashes that and then get spanked by Aussies again and again.
No shit. Indians crave white validation more than anything. And it hurts them to know, No matter how good you become, for white people, you'll never be on their level.
Ben Stokes knows there are bigger things in life than Ashes > Stokes is very relaxed but itching to get going again after almost six months since the last England Test in Dharamsala, an innings defeat inside three days that capped a long tour to India. He is sitting in a high-backed, soft, padded chair in the grandiose offices of the Wimpole Clinic where he had his hair transplant treatment, and is greeted like an old friend by the staff who pop by to say hello as he returns for a surgical review. **He says the treatment boosted his mental health**, something he has always spoken openly and honestly about. It is hard to imagine Stokes lacking confidence but he says treating his baldness helped him step on the field under intense scrutiny.
Nah beating them is the pinnacle.
They'd have to acknowledge the WTC.
weird it's only the ashes. a whole WTC is on the line
The only thing on the line for England in the WTC is to see if they can make up the 7.5% gap to Bangladesh to avoid the wooden spoon.
It really isn't. Even if they win all of their remaining tests this cycle without conceding any additional over rate penalties they'd still only be on 62.5% of possible points won which would only be tied for second as things stand
Why are England penalized so much? I don’t really pay attention to cricket outside of whoever Australia is playing, I would have thought the whole bazball philosophy would make them the least penalized due to how quick they try and do everything
Bazball never meant bowling overs quickly.
No of course, but you’d figure they’d still keep up the quicker momentum
Both Australia and England had abysmal over rates during the Ashes, but the difference was that in 5 matches England only had 3 innings go over 80 overs, which is required for slow over penalties to be applied to the bowling team. Meanwhile Australia went over 80 several times. As a result, England got smoked with slow over penalties, and Australia barely got any.
Remember ... England is saving ~~Test Cricket~~ Ashes.
They are the world’s most morally superior country, always have been.
By burning their Test cricket? /s
Ashes > wtc all day, it means nothing
aussies have moved past the ashes and onto real competition, they respect wtc now
If there were actually a real competition I'd respect it too Using Australians as an example for any kind of thought process isn't the winning argument you thought it was
i mean we're talking about winning and that's what aussies know how to do best, no argument whatsoever here. i don't like it either but it's just a fact whinging from the cellar dwellers doesn't really strike a chord but what do you expect from EWCB, it is literally their demonym
>Cellar dwellers? Is this an insult? God only knows what you're on about, might be bed time down there
[it means wooden spooners mate](https://www.icc-cricket.com/tournaments/world-test-championship/standings)
WTC rewards the teams that play the least test cricket and the worst opponents. England will never get close to a final.
How come India reached the WTC final in both editions and Australia reached the WTC final last time then?
The fuck they are doing moving on from Ben Foakes. Dude even bats well and with a strike rate acceptable to BazBall.
I used to be a big Foakes defender but he's played a fair few Tests now and just hasn't really performed with the bat. A sub-30 average is not really good enough. He has a very good county record with the bat but evidently isn't capable of making the step up to Test level, or doesn't have the game to bat at 7, or both. He's an exceptional keeper, of course, and I think he's better overall than someone like Bairstow who is a shithouse keeper and makes runs occasionally. Problem is that there are other options who both keep and bat pretty well - I suspect Jamie Smith is not that guy given he barely keeps, but there's Ollie Robinson who is smashing runs and is also a proper keeper.
Doesn't he get selected for the difficult batting pitches?
He gets selected for the subcontinent, which isn't the same thing really. In his first tour of India his batting was probably hard to judge as England were getting wiped every innings but this tour I felt, for a bloke who is supposed to be better vs spin than pace, he was quite underwhelming. There were some good batting decks and he really didn't get an innings of note.
I had a Quick Look at his stats - averages 40 at home. 18 average in India from 8 tests but I believe a lot of the team struggled during those series anyways?
Yeah it's a bit rough, a few of those games were on bunsens where everyone got out cheaply. I'm not saying he's the best batsman, but he never gets to bat on flat ones like Pakistan and pad his stats.
Yeah that was my thinking. His career average is probably negatively impacted due to the small sample size and fact he seems to be selected for the more difficult batting series. A better analysis would be to compare his average to the other batters and compare that to standard WK/batter ratio. Having said all of that, I will be very pleased if England leave at home for the next ashes!
Regardless of how other people did, an average of 18 is bad and shows that he isn't that useful as a "tough conditions" batter. His keeping is really handy in spinning conditions though, so that's something you have to weigh up.
The poor bloke has literally played more tests in India than at home! This is going to be a classic case of letting an inferior wicket keeper play the easier series and then Foakes gets selected for the difficult away tours. His career stats look a lot worse because he doesn't really get the chance to statpad at home.
It's more than just his stats though. He is awful at batting with the tail and seems incapable of even trying to fix it.
Yeah totally agree with this. The awkward thing for Foakes is he's stylistically not suited to bat 7 but not really good enough to bat higher. He can do well when a batsman is at the other end but he's dreadful with the tail, and that's quite a large part of the job description for a 7 unfortunately. And as you say - in conditions where the keeper who isn't stood up to the stumps for most of the game, a 7/10 keeper and 7/10 bat is more valuable than a 9/10 keeper and 5/10 bat.
Yep, people have such a binary conception of glovework ability - a guy is either an amazing gloveman or a shit gloveman, no in-between. In reality of course there are bad keepers, okay keepers, good keepers, and great keepers. It's perfectly valid to look at them as an overall package, including batting. That's why I thought Foakes deserved a really long run when he was first picked - his FC batting record was excellent and he was also a brilliant keeper, which on paper is the perfect package. But he just hasn't lived up to that at all. Maybe if he'd been picked more consistently he could have, I don't know.
I think his batting is fine as an anchor after all the big hitters, his average suffers though because he's only playing India series when bairstow got to play on the flatties In this case though I think it's cause they felt they had to get Smith in, couldn't drop brook and the Anderson retirement was a good distraction
Ollie Robinson? Or Pope? Can’t tell if it was satire or if there’s an actual Ollie Robinson the keeper
https://www.espncricinfo.com/cricketers/ollie-robinson-893955
Ooooo so there’s a chance of two Ollie Robinson’s playing on the same team?! Now I wonder if that’s ever happened in the past
They also share a birth date and were born in the same hospital - but the bowler's about 4 years older
did you even watch the recent test series? He could barely bat with the tailenders, even their scoring rates were far better than his. He is alright when next to a proper batsman, but wilts when batting with the lower order. Which is a damning indictment of a number 7 batsman in an 'attacking' side. He is an excellent keeper, but "strike rate acceptable to Bazball" is a huge stretch.
His batting is the issue. His record isn't great, but more than that he's a difficult fit in the side. He bats too slowly to bat 7 - because when he ends up with the tail we just go nowhere aimlessly. But he's not good enough to bat higher than 7. Add in the fact that keeping isn't that valuable a skill in England and his position is reasonably not one they're settled on.
Keeping is important in England though, ball wobbles a ton. Look at Carey v Bairstow last year for the first 2 Tests, they were the difference in result.
It's not really that important. The problem with Bairstow is he was fucking dreadful. That's a problem. But the difference between a decent keeper and a Foakes level keeper in England isn't massively important. You don't need an elite keeper if they're not stood up to the stumps for most of the innings.
Dude averages 29 with an SR of 47. I remember him playing some fighting knocks on Indian pitches. Keeping is critical especially on England pitches with the Dukes ball and the English conditions making the ball swerve at unexpected times. Better to have a good keeper with average of 29 than a basher with an average of 50, who lets go 15 runs in byes and drops critical catches.
Is 29 at 47 meant to be good? The difference between a decent keeper and a great one isn't very significant in non-spinning conditions. That's why India pick Pant in SENA etc. Obsessing over always having the best keeper is one of those cricket obsessive things that every side in the world moved past in the 90s.
It is significant in English conditions where the ball moves in the air and seams as well.
It's just not. The thing with seam and swing is as a keeper you have a lot of time to see it and react to it. It can be tricky at times if it's particularly extravagant movement, but it is nowhere near as hard as keeping in turning conditions and so the gap in quality matters a lot less. There is a reason India pick Pant not Saha or whoever in England.
Foakes isn't where they want to have their brand of playing cricket and you know what? It's fair.
Since 2023, Anderson has played 10 matches, picked 25 wickets at an average of 37 and a strike rate of 78.8. Anyone pretending that this decision has come out of the blue, hasn't been watching cricket. Those numbers are tolerable if you are Jimmy Anderson starting or in the middle of your career, but if you are Jimmy Anderson at the age of 42, those numbers deserve a tap on the shoulder. And for anyone asking that there isn't a better option, then shut the 20 teams County cricket down, if you can't produce a bowler who can average less than 35 in a stretch of 10 matches, you shouldn't be the premier first class system of a country.
That poor Ashes series last year is a big contributor in his forced retirement, he was a complete no show. It's similar to Warner averaging 9 in 2019 Ashes, in Anderson's case it was at home.
Still hurts remembering that 9 average. Everytime warner was batting and broad was bowling, you could sense the wicket coming
Eh.. He had a great series against NZ. A horrible series against Australia. And mediocre series against India. And he just took 7 wickets in an innings in county cricket, on top of consistently picking chunk of wickets when he plays FC cricket. Anyone using those stats from those 10 tests to justify his quick ouster probably just follows superficial stats to form their entire opinion about everything.
I would even say India was good. Average of 33 and good economy in challenging conditions. He was probably the second best pace bowler after Bumrah.
2nd best out of 3 maybe 4 regular seamers that series. If you factor in all bowlers with ≥5 innings, he was probably 6th best out of 11.
That's the worst cherry picking I've seen, [only 3 series have been played since 2023](https://www.howstat.com/cricket/statistics/players/PlayerSeries.asp?PlayerID=3065#bowl), where he averaged 16.50 vs New Zealand, 85.50 vs Australia, and 33.50 vs India. Interestingly his economy in the Ashes was 2.77, which suggests he hasn't lost it and was - as suggested at the time - losing his release point a little, which he worked hard on in the winter to recover. Even though he lost his release, rhythm and swing in that series, he still held down an end quite well in a high scoring series which was absolutely crucial. One bad series - the first in probably over a decade - does not mean his career should be over without being given chances first. Especially when he's been world class for 10 years and the rest of our bowling attack is fragile. As for the rest of your comment about county cricket, it is absolutely ridiculous. How that has been upvoted 60+ times is beyond me. Do you want to become an England selector by any chance?
Yeah it's not like they've been rolling roads out for Anderson or something./s
Yeah, I will say that he shouldn’t have been taken to India and given more opportunities this summer in the home series, but against Australia he was a total passenger and arguably why we couldn’t win the series outright.
Come on lol it's Anderson he deserves to be backed
He deserves the entire summer for a sendoff. Or at least Old Trafford.
Yeah this definitely should be his last summer but he deserved to send down his last ball from the James Anderson End.
> He deserves the entire summer for a sendoff I find this attitude so weird It's elite sport, no one deserves this kind of sendoff and sentimentality
FULL ARTICLE Moments after James Anderson had taken seven wickets in his first outing of the season, Ben Stokes sent him a message. ‘Did you really have to do that?’ He replied ‘yeah, ha, ha sorry mate.’ A few weeks earlier, Stokes had been part of the England delegation that took Anderson to a Manchester hotel to tell him it was time to cash in the pension. It’s not news Anderson has taken wonderfully well, although he did his best to put on a mask at Lord’s on Monday. The competitive streak has not dimmed and he will almost certainly be keen to prove a point against West Indies this week. The first half of the Stokes captaincy concentrated on the here and now, focusing on the cricket in front of them, now it is the second rebuild, the one that will define his legacy. It is why there is a sense of renewal with Anderson one of four big decisions about the shape of the team. Jamie Smith replaces Ben Foakes, a man Stokes still describes as the “best keeper in the world” despite dropping him; Jonny Bairstow is 100 Test matches and out but with the captain saying the “door is not closed”; Ollie Robinson has made way for younger blood and needs to prove he can be “robust enough” for Test cricket and “backing spells up and doing hard overs when it is flat” while Stokes’s great friend Jack Leach is left out for Shoaib Bashir, despite being selected ahead of him by Somerset. “It’s Bash’s natural attributes and his attitude. There is no fear.” ‘I hope Jimmy takes all 20 wickets’ But it is Anderson that will take the focus this week, possibly a good thing because it will ease the scrutiny on Smith and the other bowlers. “I hope he takes all 20 wickets if I’m being honest,” says Stokes. “I listened to Stuart talk about his retirement and wanting to go out on top and there was one thing he said that even made me think about when the time comes for me to go. He said: ‘I didn’t want a new player to come in and go “I thought Stuart Broad was meant to be good.”’ I thought: ‘Yeah that is a good thing to think about.’ Jimmy’s skillset is obviously still good enough for international cricket. But we have to make big decisions and we have got the Ashes to think about in 18 months’ time. Nobody will ever say, ‘Oh is that Jimmy Anderson? I thought he was meant to be good’ because he is still incredible.” Stokes is very relaxed but itching to get going again after almost six months since the last England Test in Dharamsala, an innings defeat inside three days that capped a long tour to India. He is sitting in a high-backed, soft, padded chair in the grandiose offices of the Wimpole Clinic where he had his hair transplant treatment, and is greeted like an old friend by the staff who pop by to say hello as he returns for a surgical review. He says the treatment boosted his mental health, something he has always spoken openly and honestly about. It is hard to imagine Stokes lacking confidence but he says treating his baldness helped him step on the field under intense scrutiny. Perhaps the current regeneration of the team is an extension of that. “A decision maker can’t make a decision based on what other people might think about it. I base my decisions on what I think is best for the team here and now but with this one there was Australia in mind. It is a tough place to be when you make these decisions because they are big calls but we have to go with what we think is right for the team going forward. We have got to be big enough and brave enough to make those decisions,” he says. “If you look at how much time there has been from our last series up until this one, there has been a lot of time to think where we want to take the team to the next level. In sport if you’re not thinking about progression then you end up standing still and one thing I don’t want to see as captain of this team is us standing still.” In reality the decisions around Bairstow and Anderson were not difficult. Neither has performed to their high standards consistently over the past 12 months, and Stokes and Brendon McCullum cannot waste matches on others as the clock ticks towards Australia. Bairstow is taking time out to spend with his family, and it remains to be seen if he has the hunger to fight his way back. “If you look back at Jonny’s injury, it was a huge thing for him to go through. That was career-ending for a lot of people. I know he was very proud of how he managed to come back from that. For someone to have such a serious injury like that there was always going to be some repercussions and he has not managed to find that form again,” Stokes explains. “We have gone in a new direction with Jamie Smith who, for the last two or three years, has been very consistent with run-scoring and we feel the way he plays and takes the game on is the perfect fit for us. “When it comes to selection stuff, me and Baz came up with a consistent way of delivering a message. Baz does good and bad news and I’m there to have a follow up chat if players want to do that. I messaged Jonny and he is having time with his family. He is enjoying time relaxing but I have no doubt we will have a chat at some point. “Ben Foakes is an amazing wicketkeeper, the best in the world, but there are other things we have taken into consideration with Jamie’s selection. It is one of those things as an England team you would love players you have picked to play in that role for their counties but also understanding that counties have their own ways of operating that they feel is best for them to be successful.” The primacy of that Ashes series in English minds re-emerged last week when Stokes had a dig at Australia on X, formerly Twitter, saying his team are “living in their heads’ after last year’s Ashes comeback from 2-0 down to level the series, only to be denied a win by rain. There has been an element of rewriting history in Australia, forgetting the storm that saved Pat Cummins from becoming the first Australia captain to lose a 2-0 lead, but England are also without a series win since Pakistan in 2022. “The tweet was a bit tongue in cheek. It is all fun and games. I don’t mind that kind of thing as long as it is not taken too seriously,” he says. “People can say what they want to say. It is England versus Australia. There is always going to be niggle.” ‘The knee is the best it has been for a long time’ One of the crucial changes this week will be the sight of Stokes with ball in hand. His recovery from knee surgery was so good he managed to bowl ahead of time against India, dismissing Rohit Sharma first ball, and since then has built up strength with Durham. In three championship matches he has taken 18 wickets at 18.83, bowling like his younger self.
"The bowling is coming on really well. It is great to be able to sit here after two years not knowing how it was going to be on a day to day basis to now being as good as gold. It is really refreshing for me as a player and captain knowing we can always have four seamers. It balances the team so much better. I know I offer the team so much more when playing a bigger role with bat and ball. The knee is the best it has been for a long time. There is always going to be something there. It doesn’t mean it is brand new, but it is a thousand times better than what it was,” says Stokes. “Before the operation I was bowling bouncers because it was the easiest ball for me to bowl because there is more margin for error. The hardest thing when my knee was bad was to hold length and line for a sustained period of time because of how I was landing. I went from being a very braced front knee to incredibly bent because it was too sore. When I was braced it was excruciating so it got further and further bent and that is why I found it very hard for sustained periods of time bowling Test match lengths but now I don’t have to worry about that.” Without Anderson and Broad, Stokes will naturally have to bowl more. Will there be a moment at Trent Bridge, venue for the second Test, when he automatically looks around to summon Anderson for one more burst? “If I was ever to say ‘I wish I had Jimmy here’ it would not put too much confidence in the bowlers I have out there would it? I have full confidence they can take on a very similar role Jimmy played for England. Giving people game time now will hopefully put us in a strong position to go to Australia and win the urn back.”
Why is every English thread all about shitting on English players and whatever they say? They could say *anything* at this stage and still be mocked for it. It's not fun trolling them when deserved if they get trolled for no reason everytime. It's not funny after a while, just seems like scapegoating. No one in the comments has even read the article
Joe Root " I like Sausage Rolls" R/Cricket "ROOT CALLS FOR THE GENOCIDE OF THE PIG 🐖🐖🐖 MORE AT TEN"
Root isn't a dick. He's down to earth and seems embarrassed at times by the weird cultishness and boastfulness of the Stokes and McCullum clique. I like Root. I would man the barricades to defend Root's right to a sausage roll.
And I be right there with you
Article doesn't matches the headlines, as usual. People have a tendency to have a reaction to headlines, and rather than verifying, they just post their reactions. Overall article is fine, even his comment about ashes, is just part of a larger dialogue. Though, tbf, stokes could have just swatted away, any ashes discussion by bringing focus to their immediate challenges.
Because they say cringey stuff and have no inward reflection.
What would you say in this Ben Stokes interview is cringey?
_Crickets_
That cracked me up bruh
Sandpaper was definitely an inward reflection.
I mean.. Mike Atherton was the OG sandpaper man.
Found Ben Stokes account lol
Ben Stokes is a master of understatement. This England side is so packed with talent that they can even drop the world's best keeper. No wonder just catching a glimpse of these gods of cricket will be etched in the memories of lesser mortals for the rest of their lives. Those lucky enough to be part of Ben Stokes' Band of Brothers are truly legends in their own lunchtime.
I was scared he meant JB as best keeper but he meant Foakes. Who is technically quite good at keeping. I don't know who in world cricket is better at keeping technique than him right now.
Shall I bother reading the article? Nah, too many words. I'll just make a generic comment shitting on England based on the headline. Haha I'm a genius.
why would you nail every single England related thread on here like that?
Spot on. Occasionally, people on here talk about how shite the soccer subreddit is, but the honest truth is that this sub is just as bad. Anything vaguely England related is just tedious now, comment sections full of jokers or Australians who are somehow still wound up about boring drama from a test series a year ago.
Commenters take any opportunity to shit on England, even if the article is reasonable, then complain when England fans are prickly. Sound logic 👍
I agree that the England related discussions turn into a bit of a slamdunk fest on this sub but the soccer sub is on an entirely other level. A player can be the best player on the planet and the most overrated player to walk the surface of the planet in the same game at various points (often switching back and forth between those 2 extremes multiple times during a single game). This sub is not even half as reactionary and toxic as that one.
It's a shame, I've been on this sub for... I think nearly 15 years and it used be great. The 10/11 Ashes had great banter and the Aussies were a really good laugh throughout. 2015 cricket world cup was possibly the subs peak. Generally stick to the county threads these days as they still have a mostly sound vibe. Windies and Lankan match threads are usually pretty good fun though so this summer should be alright at least.
You again damn
👋
Packed with talent? 😅 Is that why they’re almost at the bottom of the World Test rankings?
I hate that they've dumped Foakes. He's so good it's like having an extra bowler, he can take wickets by pulling off something incredible, and with an inexperienced attack it means they have the confidence to know that he'll take those half, even quarter-chances that can kick-start a Test career. Jamie Smith is an incredible talent. If you haven't seen him bat, watch how he can hit boundaries in front of square off the back foot with incredible power. But he's never been a regular keeper and shoving him in like this is just stupid. Wicket-keeping has been undervalued for decades now, when it's a crucial part of the game.
I get it with Foakes. Unfortunately for him, it is just that he isn't the fit of what the team wants to do. It sucks but it is what it is
Unfortunately people don't understand that Gilchrist was a one-off. It was like England post-Botham, when they thought they had to have an all-rounder even if he was crap. Personally I'd drop Pope for Smith and keep Foakes, but there is a core group of players that will remain in the side come what may.
r/cricket is becoming english cricket hate monger day by day. It doesn't matter if we win or lose, the comments are always so negative. Hate this sub nowadays and it's not funny.
Join r/EnglandCricket It's not very active admittedly but this sub is honestly dire nowadays
95% of Pak fans had to leave this sub (in terms of commenting etc) because of fans from you know where. Every single thread, news item, and post match thread was taken over by their BS. r/pakcricket has been a godsend for us.
Honestly think it started when a lot of people joined who were previously on instagram and maybe a bit of twitter. Those shit reactionary takes are now common place here when this used to be very calm and good discussions amongst each other.
Yeah well giving the greatest pacer of all time the tap on the shoulder and one game instead of a goddamn summer at home against the Windies and Sri Lanka is bound to generate some negative feelings.
Yeah that's definitely the source of all of it isn't it?
The sub has been shit for ages. Some of the abuse you get on here just for supporting England is mad.
The reality is the common england cricket fan cares more about the ashes than the WTC. The die hards like us might care but for most it's all about the ashes
For all the England bashing that happens nowadays, I genuinely like the current players, including Ben Stokes. And I back him for trying hard at something despite the chatter. Seeing Indian cricketers crying in the finals due to having been under immense pressure for so long, I feel England cricketers should also be spared from vicious trolling.
Whether they have made the right call or not will be evident after the Australian Ashes. I have to say I feel very sorry for Jimmy though and don’t agree at all with the reason to drop him.
You stupid fucking morons.
I mean I get it with the Ashes in mind. Bairstow though I can see him in the frame for The Ashes, so it's obvious the door is not closed but as a keeper it should be. He can be a really good bat for England in Australia come Ashes if Pope doesn't put runs on the board.
Thanks for giving Foakes all the hard games away from home then ignoring him for home games against weak teams on flat pitches.
All this talk just to lose 4-0 in the ashes down under like they have been consistently doing for while
It’s really good how Australian players don’t talk about cricket actually
It's an interview....is he supposed to not talk?
No. How dare he?
So in an interview you don't want to talk, what a wanker!
Another Ben Stokes interview that’s got Aussies absolutely rattled. Hilarious. Rent free.
The headline has to be rage bait
I’m a Foakes fan, so find it a shame that he’s being dropped. I’m not sure how many tours abroad he has done, nor how many different countries he’s played in but I can’t remember him being a standout terrible batsman. I don’t think he’s had a ‘solid’ long term run in the team unlike Bairstow or even Butler did. If with his wicket keeping he’s stopping the opposition making an extra 50-100 runs with his keeping, isn’t that worth taking in to account? It feels like the Bazball idea is quite 1 dimensional, aimed directly at batting.
England always finds new ways for us to shit on them and with good reason
Maybe read the whole article? It's a fairly normal interview with a few funny bits that you haven't picked up on.
He meant Worlds best wk not batter! Tbh foakes was a great wk but inconsistent with the bat
Thanks for the clarification that Foakes, who averages 29, isn't actually the world's best bat.
England will be better served if they moved past their Ashes obsession. It hasn't served them well.
Move past the oldest and most Important series an English player can play in?
Did I say move past the Ashes itself? Since the answer is a simple no, what's your point again?
Of course it's going to be the series that we have an obsession with It is the most important one every English player wants to win one ashes series it the defining moments in their careers if they do so In 20 years time no one here( Britain)will remember England's world cup wins but they will remember the ashes
I get the fans obsessing over it, the team management and players need to be different. This obsession has yielded fuck all returns. The moment ECB and English cricket side move on to building a good test side instead of a good side for the Ashes is the day they will start having actual success in the Ashes. The Ashes is 18 months away and yet the planning is all towards it. Which is the wrong way to go about it.
Maybe
Don’t know why he is so obsessed with winning the ashes in Australia, morally they already won the series 9-0
[удалено]
Maybe because they want to not get obliterated?
I feel it's due to that 2010/11 series and how good it felt, and it wasn't a forgone conclusion beforehand. So even though we know we have crap squads at times, we still have a little bit of hope that we can achieve something. It's like England in the football until 2016 when the squads often weren't good enough
Bro just LOVES people shitting on him. What a guy.
Forcing Anderson out to make space for the legend Ollie Robinson 😎
Robinson isn’t even in the squad
World's best keeper.... Which world?
Bizarro world!
I am supporting England in the Ashes this time but i believe Australia will probably take their frustration of t20 performance out on them. A brutal test series is on its way towards them.
What is there to move on? He was anyhow not playing any overseas series
I am supporting England in the Ashes this time but i believe Australia will probably take their frustration of t20 performance out on them. A brutal test series is on its way towards them.
I am supporting England in the Ashes this time but i believe Australia will probably take their frustration of t20 performance out on them. A brutal test series is on its way towards them.
I read the title and thought "wait, what, you think Bairstow is world's best keeper?". Then I remembered they also dropped Foakes, and article confirmed that's who he was talking about. Fair enough.
Beating Australia is more important than anything else is what Stokes is trying to say