England cricket finds itself in a world of hurt following their defeat at the hands of New Zealand at their so-called fortress in Edgbaston at the weekend.
The loss came partly through their insistence upon a bubble mentality in the age of COVID-19 but also through a desperate lack of depth in batting.
England were fortunate not to lose the two-Test series 2-0, with the Lord’s Test having lost a complete day to rain – New Zealand were in a strong position to press for victory had it not rained throughout Day 3.
Not only that, but New Zealand made six changes to their team for the second Test and still managed to thump England to the tune of eight wickets in a comprehensive and dominant display of Test cricket.
Joe Root (Julian Finney/Getty Images)
English commentators and experts are already wondering how the team can possibly find a way to reverse this by the time they reach Australia in an effort to regain the Ashes at the end of the year, but surely their first port of call should be trying to avoid a series loss – or, worse, a series wipeout – at the hands of visiting No. 1 Test team India from August rather than worrying about an Australian team with its own batting woes to solve.
England did themselves no favours in this series, deciding that the players returning from the Indian Premier League would not be considered for selection tp instead rest and recuperate at home. It has been the England solution to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic. The use of bubbles in the various tours they have undertaken over the last 12 months certainly cannot be criticised for not putting player welfare and mental health first in these unique times.
But in a home series, where it appears from the outside that players would have had sufficient time to be ready to participate, surely the likes of Jos Buttler and Jonny Bairstow could have been vital inclusions in this batting line-up. Or perhaps not – indeed perhaps the selectors felt all along that the top six they went into this series with was the best England had to offer.
The fact that Ben Stokes was out injured certainly hampered the team balance, while Jofra Archer’s injury woes also cost them another vital piece of their best team scenario. And losing Ben Foakes to an injury the day before the first Test was also not the best preparation, with both next best keeping options in Buttler and Bairstow not in the team bubble.
However, it is the lack of runs from the top six that is causing the greatest concern.
Change must occur before that first Test against India. Rory Burns and skipper Joe Root are the only certain inclusions in that top six.
They must look at New Zealand’s depth. They had not only a solid top six in the first Test but then replaced two of them, including their captain and best batsman, almost seamlessly for the second Test and still won comfortably.
Dom Sibley crawled to a half-century in the second innings of the first Test when England just batted time but otherwise struggled. Zac Crawley continues to plod along in mediocrity. Ollie Pope looks good without being able to make that solid contribution they need, while Dan Lawrence is still a work in progress.
No doubt Stokes will return if fit, and perhaps either Foakes or Buttler will be back as keeper – or maybe even both with will return, with one as a batsman only. And surely if these two Tests have shown anything, they have shown Root is not a frontline spin option. England must choose one to be effective in all conditions.
From an Australian perspective, I love seeing England get beaten. I don’t know what the answers are to their batting woes any more than I know the answers to Australia’s own similar problems in their Test batting. But one thing is for sure: England must decide very soon which of their misfiring batting order they feel are worth persisting with and which they feel are now ballast, because Australia is the least of their problems in the immediate future.
England will host a full-strength India in a five-Test series in just a matter of weeks. That is the immediate cause for concern.
Oliver
Roar Rookie
Easy mistake, the Windies match didn’t have a lot of publicity and even the commentators got it wrong.
13th Man
Roar Rookie
I think Pope has the game to be their longer term. Not sold on any of the others.
13th Man
Roar Rookie
That's the risk of course, India will have Jadeja at 7 I'd assume so certainly will bat deeper than that lineup. I do think however for NZ that is the bowling attack that will win the test.
Diamond Jackie
Roar Rookie
He seems to have a tighter technique so could evolve into an Ian Bell-type character...
Carlin
Roar Rookie
Ollie Pope also only averages early 30s from 19 tests. Does have a first class average of 50 though.
Micko
Roar Rookie
The Indians do enough rooting already! :silly: :stoked:
Diamond Jackie
Roar Rookie
A billion or so from India rooting for India… the rest of the world going for the kiwis. A fascinating match up.
Diamond Jackie
Roar Rookie
You can add Burns to that list. Yes I know he has scored 200+ runs in the series so far but his test average of low 30s and his technique puts him in the Crawley/Sibley/Lawrence camp I’m afraid.
Sylvester
Guest
Risky due to Watling being short on runs, but it's really the bowling line-up they need. You have to back the top 6 and back this class attack to do its thing.
Sylvester
Guest
To be fair, he's not played that much top-level cricket due to injury and the diet of white ball cricket. He's still a class act and capable of turning it on, particularly in his last match.
Carlin
Roar Rookie
As much as I loved seeing the English batsmen knick off to some great swing bowling and good behind the wicket catching, it was really clear how poor some of their top order were. It amazed me how many times batsmen made the same mistake which was playing at ball aggressively early in an innings that could have been left. Zac Crawley was the main culprit there. I do wonder whether the next tier of batsmen England are producing are actually that good. I look at the first class averages of Crawley (31.44), Sibley (39.05) and Lawrence (38.48) and think what do the selectors see in these guys. I also think England got things wrong with not having a specialist spinner and as much as James Bracey may have been flying high in county cricket he is a part time keeper. I really think this series has put NZ in good stead for the WTC and are going to be well prepared. They have some big selection decisions to make. Conditions will suit them more than India and they did have the upper hand over India at the start of 2020.
Micko
Roar Rookie
Yep, I can't see a need for the all rounder here for NZ with their batting depth. Plus they need to get 20 wickets, which 5 frontline bowlers are more likely to achieve over 4 and a part timer in CDG or Mitchell, who could possibly go wicketless even in conditions that suit.
Henry is good on the English wickets but Jamison will be selected above him I believe. Id have 4 quicks ( Boult, Southee, Jamison, Wagner ) and 1 spinner in Patel as you have gone with too. Jamison and Wagner are capable of batting for a while so why take a allrounder like Mitchell or DeGrons in instead.
Micko
Roar Rookie
I tell you what Jacko, Henry might be an inspired choice for the final next week. I'm just not sure who he pushes out though, because Jamieson & Southee are certain selections, and presumably Wagner & Boult would keep their spots. Plus NZ would be crazy not to keep Patel as the spinner, despite their love affair with Santner over the years. Really great dilemma for NZ selectors in the coming week, but certainly a tough situation for them!
Did I mention Im happy to agree to disagree?? :laughing: :laughing:
Micko
Roar Rookie
Henry has never proven anything against Australia, and particularly in more difficult Australian bowling conditions, which don't suit fast medium trundlers who rely on seam movement, like Henry. It's naive to think that'd change. Jamieson was clearly a superior selection, regardless of whether he had played test cricket before or not. Lachie Ferguson made his test debut in Perth, and was an inspired selection, but realistically should've made his test debut in the preceding two match series in NZ vs England. He wasn't match fit, and thus broke down after a dozen overs or so. But in that time he should've had Smith out for 30 odd, as Latham dropped a fairly regulation chance in the slips. Guys like Jamieson and Ferguson are the types of bowlers that will win tests and test series for NZ in Australia. Realistically Henry would need a green Bellerieve pitch, or a pink ball D/N test to be even slightly effective against Australia in Australia. But even in that scenario, presumably he'd be behind a lot of others in the pecking order.
Sgt Pepperoni
Roar Rookie
From an ashes perspective, harsh losses to Nz and India may result in key changes. Close victories or sporting draws more likely to paper over cracks
Sorry but Ill agree to disagree. Henry is was a proven asset Jamison had not even played. Agree about height being an advantage in Aus but you dont just select tall bowlers when they havnt played yet.
Micko
Roar Rookie
Height is always an asset in Australia. It was a weak conservative selection from NZ to think a consistently mediocre Henry would be superior to Jamieson in Australian conditions.
Nah. No one knew he would be as good as he is becoming and Henry was the natural backup at the time. Hindsight is wonderful but its hard to say what should have been done at the time.