All your comments about the decisions taken are correct, but I don't agree that arrogance is at their heart. This is New England, in the New Labour sense, which requires a different approach and mindset. Change is definitely what was needed and the McCullum-Stokes axis has produced thrilling cricket in effecting it. Fast forward 2-3 years. Whilst we may rue not winning the Ashes back in 2023, we may have rediscovered something that was missing during the Ashley Gilezzzzzz years. Fun, daring, seat-of-your-pants cricket where we win more than we lose. I'm up for that!
All for Bazball, but Philip's comments are spot on. What they have NOT factored in is that us cricket lovers also want us to WIN. Especially the Ashes. And if that means bouts of pragmatism, so be it. What we do know, is that had Foakes been chosen, we would have won the first test, and would now be 2-1 up with the Oval to go.
We definitely want to win. 11 out of 17 is pretty good. But I agree, the Ashes is special and requires a slightly more respectful approach perhaps? I don't think you can say we would have won the first test with Faokes keeping, but clearly Bairstow is not fit enough or, currently, good enough. Hand on heart, I'm not sure Jimmy should have played at Old Trafford either, but that would have invited Northern wrath not seen since Scargill's syrup nearly flew off.
Bairstow was way out of sorts in the first test. And whilst he may not bat like Bairstow at his best, he has a reliable test average. As for Jimmy - as a Lancy manqué - brought up near Stockport, and into a cricket mad family, Mum used to take us to Old Trafford and cooking stopped at home when a test match was on; the old man knew he was coming home to sandwiches and salad. He didn't mind - he was telephoned at work at his factory in Denton, with a friend saying - "You'd better get over here PDQ - Laker's taking wicket after wicket. He got there top see the last four.
Many years later, my mother and younger brother and I were at that famous Gillette Cup semi at OT that we won c9pm with the sun almost down and the moon up. I hear that now at least 200,000 attended that match!
Regardless, I'd have dropped Jimmy. I fear his wonderful stretch is over, though Broad looks good for a few more seasons. And I do think that not having any of our super quickest for two matches cost us. Wood has been magnificent. Robinson for Jimmy at the Oval, and I think we'll win that game.
All your comments about the decisions taken are correct, but I don't agree that arrogance is at their heart. This is New England, in the New Labour sense, which requires a different approach and mindset. Change is definitely what was needed and the McCullum-Stokes axis has produced thrilling cricket in effecting it. Fast forward 2-3 years. Whilst we may rue not winning the Ashes back in 2023, we may have rediscovered something that was missing during the Ashley Gilezzzzzz years. Fun, daring, seat-of-your-pants cricket where we win more than we lose. I'm up for that!
All for Bazball, but Philip's comments are spot on. What they have NOT factored in is that us cricket lovers also want us to WIN. Especially the Ashes. And if that means bouts of pragmatism, so be it. What we do know, is that had Foakes been chosen, we would have won the first test, and would now be 2-1 up with the Oval to go.
8/10 so far for Stokes and McCallum.
We definitely want to win. 11 out of 17 is pretty good. But I agree, the Ashes is special and requires a slightly more respectful approach perhaps? I don't think you can say we would have won the first test with Faokes keeping, but clearly Bairstow is not fit enough or, currently, good enough. Hand on heart, I'm not sure Jimmy should have played at Old Trafford either, but that would have invited Northern wrath not seen since Scargill's syrup nearly flew off.
Bairstow was way out of sorts in the first test. And whilst he may not bat like Bairstow at his best, he has a reliable test average. As for Jimmy - as a Lancy manqué - brought up near Stockport, and into a cricket mad family, Mum used to take us to Old Trafford and cooking stopped at home when a test match was on; the old man knew he was coming home to sandwiches and salad. He didn't mind - he was telephoned at work at his factory in Denton, with a friend saying - "You'd better get over here PDQ - Laker's taking wicket after wicket. He got there top see the last four.
Many years later, my mother and younger brother and I were at that famous Gillette Cup semi at OT that we won c9pm with the sun almost down and the moon up. I hear that now at least 200,000 attended that match!
Regardless, I'd have dropped Jimmy. I fear his wonderful stretch is over, though Broad looks good for a few more seasons. And I do think that not having any of our super quickest for two matches cost us. Wood has been magnificent. Robinson for Jimmy at the Oval, and I think we'll win that game.