I hope you’re all basking in the glory of England’s win yesterday. It was a sensational comeback. England picked an unbalanced team, collapsed horribly twice in the match, surrendered a first innings deficit of over one hundred runs, and still somehow managed to win. Pakistan must be wondering what hit them.
The prime architect of the win was one of the most modest and unappreciated professional cricketers in the world. Take a bow Chris Woakes. He took 2-43 (with the best economy rate) in the first innings, 2-11 in the second (including the prize wicket of Babar Azam), and then scored a match winning 84 not out in England’s unlikely run chase. He’s a world class all-rounder in home conditions. Can England ever afford to leave him out again?
I feel as pleased as punch for Woakes. He’s been in and out of the side over the years, picked up some very unfortunate injuries at precisely the worst moments, and he always seems to get overlooked by the media who naturally gravitate towards flashier players.
However, I’ve grown fond of him because, amongst other things, he’s just so damn orthodox. Indeed, his bowling has sometimes been criticised for being too orthodox and therefore too easy to line up. But none of this matters, of course, when he’s got a Dukes ball in his hand.
Woakes does absolutely everything that cricket coaches in England tell young bowlers to do: run in economically, get close to the stumps, bowl wicket to wicket, pitch the ball up, get your wrist in a upright position, and swing the ball away. It’s absolutely text book.
Woakes the batsman is also an impressive specimen. In fact, I’ve written in the past that I sometimes like his batting more than his bowling. He has a first class batting average of 34 with ten hundreds, which is better than Buttler and not far behind the likes of Jason Roy and James Vince, and a very good temperament. I have to admit that I thought England’s batting looked a bit thin with Buttler at 6 and Woakes at 7. Perhaps I needn’t have worried.
Yesterday’s other star was the aforementioned Jos Buttler. He batted fantastically well and showed just why Ed Smith is completely enamoured with him. He started the day under immense pressure after making several gaffs with the gloves, and he clearly needed a score after his disappointing dismissal in the first innings in which he was bowled through the gate. His counter-attacking 75 was therefore an innings of immense character.
We all know that Jos can hack it at Test level. He does have a Test century to his name after all. The whole question, in my book anyway, is whether he can produce consistently given his admission that he can’t quite get his head around how to approach Test innings.
Yesterday’s circumstances actually helped him. Knowing the total that England needed to chase (a bit like an ODI) seem to clear his head and give him clarity of thought. What’s more, the match looked lost when he marched to the crease at 106-4 and then 117-5. This can sometimes take the pressure off.
At first I thought that the burgeoning Buttler and Woakes axis had the feel of a “look this is going completely wrong so let’s just play some shots and see what happens” type of partnership. Runs can come quite easily in these circumstances. The test comes when the target gradually becomes achievable again.
However, Buttler and Woakes never looked fazed. They just kept on batting in tough circumstances against a pretty decent Pakistan attack. I wouldn’t say they played in a carefree way. I think they just found a gear that suited them and they stuck to a method that was proving successful. Lesser players might have overthought the situation and let doubts consume them. Bravo.
The end result is that England are now 1-0 up in the series. We’re usually 0-1 down at this point. Let’s hope they can sustain their good form.
It will be interesting to see what team England pick for the next game. Only a brave man would leave out Woakes this time. Perhaps Anderson will be the man ‘rested’ as Stuart Broad is likely to spontaneously combust if he’s ever left out again.
As for Buttler, his place looks secure for at least the summer. However, I wonder whether Ed Smith might be tempted to give the gloves to someone else now? After all, cynics would say that Buttler was only given the gloves in the first place as an excuse to justify his place. You can average 32 as a keeper but not as a specialist batsman. Now Jos is scoring runs less people will question his inclusion.
Much could depend on the fitness of Ben Stokes, of course. I have no idea what’s going on there. All I know is that the balance of England’s side looks a bit daft when Stokes decides that he is actually going to bowl in the middle of a match after all. No cricket team should take the field with four specialist batsmen, two all-rounders, and five bowlers. England are basically picking more bowlers than batsmen. And no team needs five bloody seamers!
But then again, who cares if your six and seven (who are more accustomed to batting at seven and eight) are winning games for you anyway. That’s what Ed Smith would say. “It’s total cricket you sad lamentable imbeciles. I told you I was right all along”.
Well, you were this time, Ed. Take the positives when you can I reckon.
James Morgan
Buttler played a good innings yesterday having done a good deal to put England in such a difficult position in the first place. If he is to picked at all in test cricket it must be as a specialist batter – and as you point out his average even in first class cricket is not impressive – low thirties. Woakes I agree has to be picked in English conditions, and if one of Broad or Anderson is to miss out it should be the latter. In England, although I am not keen on it in general, I could countenance leaving out the spinner – Bess did not bowl especially well, although bad keeping denied him at least two wickets.
On the wicket-keeping issue, some of the criticism was a bit harsh. The first dropped catch was difficult (though the second wasn’t), and I don’t think many keepers would have got the missed stumping – it spun and jumped, and nearly went over Buttler’s shoulder.
I don’t think Bairstow is much better up to the stumps either. Foakes is, but it would would make getting the balance right difficult if he were included.
I don’t know if Foakes could have played one of the necessary match-saving innings yesterday, but he probably would not have needed to. The stumping was not easy, because the ball did leap, but if Buttler were even half decent up to the stumps, his hands would have been up there, not his shoulder. There was an easy comparison in this match, where Rizwan showed what a keeper can do who has good timing of his moves down and then up (the Stokes catch was exactly what a Test keeper is supposed to do).
Really enjoyable test match.
Kudos to Buttler for being honest in the final interview (if only that was the norm rather than the usual ECB PR dept clat trap tosh they usually real out)
Bess out, Leach in.
Anderson out (1-97 in the match). Selection must not be based on personal milestones.
Archer stays (4-86 in the match).
Foakes in, Buttler out – always go for the best ‘keeper.
Buttler has to be a specialist batter and compete on that front only
Bairstow should never be back and sadly people are still talking like he’s good.. crap avg and has massive technical and mental issues
Foakes is the only option for wk
Whilst I don’t disagree with some of your argument, on the crap average it might be worth pointing out that since he started being picked at all regularly, only five England players have a higher average than Bairstow (one of whom is now retired and the other four of whom are already in this team), and only one more (also in this team) is within another six runs of him (essentially that is, over 30).
Given that the county game isn’t overflowing with high-averaging alternatives, he should at least be in the mix if not in the starting XI.
Buttler has now earned his place as a batsman and twice played innings against his natural aggressive instincts. Foakes must fit into the side now.
Just a quick note on Buttler. All batsmen will score runs sometimes. Even Stuart Broad scores runs sometimes! The key factor is how consistently they perform.
James Vince scored 2 half centuries in his last 6 Test innings (including a very good 70-odd in his last innings) but we was dropped unceremoniously by Ed Smith. He was judged on a run of games. Not his last one.
I hope they take the same view with Jos. If, at the end of a summer or a winter, they decide he’s done enough then fair play. If not then he should go. We can’t make judgements on one game. It’s the body of work over time that should count.
Let’s not forget, of course, that Zak Crawley scored a lovely 70 odd a couple of weeks ago. He looked like a player of real promise. Yet he got a couple of low scores in the next game and was gone. Now people are saying that Buttler should play as a specialist batsman instead of Crawley. Hold your horses! :-)
I think most people just want to see a level playing field re: Buttler. Thus far in his career it hasn’t been this way. He’s been given all sorts of opportunities that others simply wouldn’t get because Ed Smith effectively staked his reputation on Jos coming good. After all, most of the other players he brought in from the wilderness haven’t done very well and are now out of the team.
I would love to see Butter come good because he seems like a good guy and we know how talented he is. But he must be judged the same as everyone else otherwise the England cricket team can’t claim to be a meritocracy. And that’s a dangerous place to be. It’s great that he’s found some form. But history tells us that this good form is only temporary and he seem reverts back to the mean. Improving his consistency is the key.
Your last paragraph sums up the situation well. To be fair to Buttler, before that drop against WI he hadn’t missed an easy one for two years, but he’s not Test class standing up. I can’t believe you can play him on the winter tour when we will surely be more spin dependent, so by then he needs to have established himself as a batsman by then. It’s not take anything away from his innings to say that Pakistan played to his strengths by setting one day fields from the start, rather than trying to put him under pressure. If it’s a choice between Crawley and Root playing in their proper positions, and unbalancing the side by accommodating Buttler, I know which way I would go.
Yes if he can bat like yesterday consistently he earns his place as a batsman, but not as a keeper. Others here have pointed out his technical difficulties better than me, but simply he’s not good enough and probably never will be. He missed 5 in this game and having watched Foakes for several years with Surrey he would have got at least 4 of those. His reactions are just so much quicker. If England want be a complete team they must pick the best keeper, and it’s not Butler. Somehow they need to rejig this team to include both of Butler is to perform with the Bat.
I agree James 5 seamers, if Stokes decides he wants a bowl, is too much. I’m not sure why Archer is in there if he’s going to bowl in the low 80s. Either he’s been told to do it or cannot sustain a few flat out 90mph overs, which really is his roll. Jimmy, well I’m beginning to think it’s time to go , Is hard to see such a fine bowler just go on to long. He’s nothing more to prove. Bess isn’t a Test quality spinner, but Leach apart, who do we have? With no county cricket played in peak summer now there is little one can do to develop a good spinner, the last of which was Graham Swann at this level.
This will be my last word on this FT (honest). I don’t think Buttler should ever have been bought back and I stand by that. Even during his more successful period he was the beneficiary of poor fielding and captaincy by Kohli. That was not his fault its just a fact . He cannot keep wicket after the last display and he is simply not even in the top 10 batsmen in the Country never mind the top 6. To drop him, people would say would be “harsh” and “ruthless”. But, as was trotted out when he leapt inexplicably to the front of the queue to get selected ,(having shown NO interest in or aptitude for red ball) tough this is international sport. The problem now is of course Foakes has had no cricket of any note for yonks so is probably undercooked. Anyway for me, as stated in this article, this should be a celebration of Woakes. Just because Anderson has stated he wants go go out after the next Ashes should not deter the selectors from “resting” him if it makes the team better. Woakes is a real talent and shouldn’t suffer because he is a good guy. On a final note how well did the third umpire calling no balls work! They all got called so bowlers knew where they stood and it sped up the referral process no end. That match was why we all the proper cricket.
Terrific fightback from nowhere. Almost because of the situation (and knowing he was in the last chance saloon) Buttler had no choice but to play his natural game, and he was so much better for it. Woakes was superb too, even if Pakistan missed a trick by not giving him any short stuff early.
Still doesn’t cover up the glaring holes in our line up. Despite his batting efforts, Buttler’s keeping was atrocious- from now on he should either play as a specialist batsman or not at all. Foakes must come in, and Crawley return to cover for Stokes, as well as Leach for Bess.
We seemed to have uncovered a decent batting balance after the South African series, with Sibley and Burns opening, Crawley at 3, Root back at 4 and Stokes 5 and Pope 6. So why mess with it, even though Stokes was a fitness issue. Only Pope seems to benefitted from these changes to the order.
Let’s not beat about the bush, we were lucky here, losing early wickets both innings and exposing Root and Stokes to a pretty new ball against a good seam attack.
I am a firm believer in sticking to the tried and tested formula of solid 1st innings totals as the basis for winning test matches. This game produced little to enhance that.
Buttler may have a test Hundred but so does Foakes and who’s to say he wouldn’t have made the sort of contributions Buttler did. He certainly wouldn’t have made the mistakes behind the stumps and let Pakistan off the hook and who do you drop by playing Buttler as a batsman?
Anderson and Bess don’t look much of a threat this summer and with Broad, Archer and Woakes available why be shy about recalling Leach and using the underrated Root as your off spinner. Stokes could bowl at reduced pace in short spells till he’s fit again. No test team should need 5 seamers.
I know Ed will get his way and Buttler will be selected as batsman wicketkeeper but I still say it’s wrong headed, as is the continued selection of the distinctly ordinary bits and pieces Bess.
Most of the previous comments were made before the dire news that Stoakes will miss the rest of the season. Nonetheless, I would bring in Foakes (he would have played all the matches if I were the elector) as we learned what happens when your wicket keeper at test level is only just about county standard. His heroics with the bat would not have been necessary without the 110 runs he cost us but Bravo to him and Woakes. It made wonderful watching.
As an aside, what on earth do they feed England on at lunch? They should stop it and give what they give to Pakistan!
Crawley in for Stokes, Foakes in for Anderson. Not sure about Bess and Leach. Bess is the better batsman but Leach is the best 11 in world cricket! If Root practices his bowling in the meantime, he could be the third bowler. I could not bring myself to drop Butler after his heroics on Friday!
Don’t worry Ron. Buttler will stay as a batsman with Stokes out, even if Crawley returns, batting 6 with Pope at 5. However this series has to be a last chance saloon for him to establish his credentials. I am a great fan of the obviously considerable time and effort Buttler has put in to making his technique fit for the test arena. He is a class act and a game changer, and with Stokes out we need that in our armoury. Clearly Sibley and Crawley have technical issues every bit as obvious as Buttler’s and are being allowed time to work them out at this level against a bevy of decent seamers and spinners. Their mixed success reflects this. The one thing about our present selection I cannot come to terms with is the continued support given to sub standard keepers when we have half a dozen on a different level languishing in the counties which most other countries would give their eye teeth for. For me keepers are the most important single member of a side, more consistently involved than any other with a technical and temperamental power to influence what goes on in the middle as important as a captain. You have great batsmen and great bowlers who can win matches but mistakes from keepers lose them just as surely.
Marc
I agree with you about Sibley and Crawley who are indeed working on their game. The difference though is that they are 24 and 22 respectively. Buttler is no longer a promising youngster; his technical deficiencies at Test level both in front of and behind the stumps are as obvious now as they were 5 years ago and in his case it’s getting late to address them.
What a fantastic post! This is so informative. I am very thankful to you and excited to read your article. Good luck and thanks for sharing such nice information.
Download our app to participate in Our Fantasy King 11 and earn Money and win exciting price. : https://www.fantasyking11.com/