Rootin' for Joe etc...

[hancockjr]

The only really relevant part if the footage is Ryan Ali threatening the other chap, then stokes, with a bottle. Once that has happened he has picked a fight, with a weapon, and Stokes did what he is allowed to do by law in that situation. Ryan Hales does similar by all accounts - same result. Would not have gone to court had Stokes not been high profile.

Not sure why the couple didn’t testify - presumably would have helped one side. Suspect Stokes solicitor knew he had enough without having to take the risk.

Dropping a batter would be utterly barmy and cowardly.

[liquidfootball2]

Yes although Pope is a candidate, for me no spinner at all and drop Rashid or dropping Curran are more likely than replacing a batsman, you could say the batting has been their most vulnerable point in the series to date.

Only Curran himself in the first test gave them a chance after a dramatic collapse, and but for India's completely ludicrous selection of two spinners (and the heroics of Bairstow and Woakes) it could have been different in the last test. England were let off the hook at 89-4 when the front line two seamers inevitably got tired and another seamer could have made the difference.

Pope is almost certainly a better batsman than Curran, and Stokes atm a better bowler despite the variety of a left armer. So Curran looks probable to me.

They could drop Rashid as he may not be needed at Trent Bridge, but it will likely be a seamer to make way for Stokes imo as five seamers are unnecessary. Stokes, Woakes and indeed Curran can bat and Stokes on form is definitely among our very best batsmen. So Curran to Stokes in theory should strengthen both the batting and bowling.

If we were chasing the series then dropping a batsman may be more feasible, but weakening our weakest link isn't usually a great idea, although tbf Curran, Pope, Rashid and possibly even Buttler are all possible candidates to miss out imo.

[ooozzzie]

Its not tough on Pope at all, he was a surprise pick, he did ok, he will get another chance, but isn't that tough, and its definitely not "extremely tough" Unlucky maybe, and perhaps they might keep the same team, but if not, Pope goes, easy decision.

Do you swap an all-rounder for a specialist though? Five seamers seems like overkill, one of them will barely get a bowl. Stokes has been in better form with ball than bat anyway, and not sure he’s a Test number 4, same goes for Buttler (Bairstow won’t want to move up and give up the gloves).

If conditions aren’t conducive to spin then Rashid probably misses out, otherwise Curran perhaps.

To be really fair Stokes should be 12th man and so we keep the same team. Why should he walk straight back in the team. They coped well enough without him in the 2nd Test. He will obviously get his place back very soon, but after giving it a bit more thought, I don't think we should drop anyone. The whole incident hasn't been a great advert for Cricket and he has brought the game into disrepute even being found not guilty. However he has of course already missed the Ashes. We are probably in a no win situation here, dammed if you play him, and dammed if you don't. Had they played pathetic in the 2nd Test then the decision would have been a lot easier.

[liquidfootball2]

Stokes has to take this whole episode as a severe lesson to be learnt, as it will always be hung on him despite the verdict. No England cricketer can be seen to be fighting in the street, no matter what the provocation may or may not have been, (the fact the prosecution didn't even know how it all started, for me just killed the case, it was never going to be guilty, a glaring ommision).

For the ECB or their funded 'independent' CDC committee to then try to pretend that somehow he hasn't been seriously punished in cricketing terms already, or to construct an incredibly transparent legal loophole of non selection not suspension, so they can just ignore it, would be to bring the board into disrepute too, if the whole world knows he's been punished they have to recognise it too.

Selection for me should therefore be on the premise that you pick your strongest eleven available, and Stokes is still a world class all-rounder and one of the first names on the teamsheet. Recently he's been far more effective with the ball, but prior to the court case he can't not have been affected mentally, the pressure on him must have been absolutely enormous, batting does perhaps take a more intense concentration and he is a quality performer.

There really is no question for me that someone has to miss this match, in my view it has to be a bowler as per my last post, so that really means Rashid or Curran. The weather forecast does indicate sufficient cloud cover on days 2 to 4 to not really require a spinner. Five seamers are usually not needed but there is plenty of variety within those five seamers and personally I see Curran at Trent Bridge as a more potent threat than Rashid.

As its Trent Bridge, Rashid can miss a test for me.

[hancockjr]

No England cricketer can be seen to be fighting in the street, no matter what the provocation may or may not have been,

Agree with most of that but re. the above, I guess it’s personal preference but if, hypothetically for instance, any England cricketer were in future to come across someone threatening someone else in the street with a bottle, then personally I’d like the team to be full of players who would help in that situation, not walk on by.

If calling the police, or a chat, would work then fine, but if getting involved is necessary then I’d rather they did so. It then becomes a matter of degrees rather than absolutes.

[Ducks Deluxe]

I have read that Stokes is to replace Curran on Saturday...For me the obsessive pandering to this man indicated moral bankruptcy on behalf of all concerned...Truly awful....I am sure the spin doctors ( no pun intended) are preparing his "'re branding"'as we speak...

DD.

[liquidfootball2]

I personally think it being Trent Bridge, and a fair amount of cloud cover predicted, Adil Rashid will be largely unnecessary and he should have made way

However Stokes for Curran is the only change.

It must have been an extremely difficult decision to have to make, but if you're objective is just to pick the strongest eleven available for selection, then as one of the first names down on the team sheet, he really had to play.

They will have a look at the whole Stokes incident, including it's effect as regards to any disrepute charges, soon after this test match with the disciplinary committee. Of course being filmed fighting in the street at such an hour, for whatever reason, is totally and absolutely deplorable imo, and he shouldn't just be welcomed back as some kind of victorious pugilist, but nevertheless on cricketing terms alone, he had to play.

The comments from Nasser Hussein that the easy option is to say he's just missed the ashes tour (and New Zealand test matches and been stripped of the vice captaincy) and we shouldn't just end it there, is to my mind grandstanding and not even vaguely recognising just how significant, and just how severe, such a punishment is.

The ashes can't be trivialised in such a manner, as though it's not the absolute pinnacle, and competing in such a series very often the greatest privilege possible. It's achievements and disappointments are remembered long after, and personal goals achieved in such a series exactly what you strive for, what you really want to be remembered for, it is the absolute zenith for English and Australian cricketers.

By minimising the severity, and stating rather hypocritically that he was still on full wages, while just conveniently ignoring that any suspension would have been on full wages too, is almost engaging in the new competition now running on some channels and in some publications, that of advocating the harshest and most punitive measures imaginable, and then if possible, adding even more the next day too, as if by doing so it will somehow confirm his own moral identity and just what an outstanding human being he actually is, there is a balance to be struck and it is possible to go too far.

Sam Curran will be incredibly unlucky, he's done nothing wrong and has been an outstanding success, his return is set to be very swift indeed, and he should be straight back into the team for the next test at Southampton.

The selectors have done the only thing really possible, as quite a few have said on here, it had to be a bowler who made way, and that really only meant Rashid or Curran. You don't weaken your weakest link, the batsmen had to remain.

The selectors have chosen to keep the spin option which really gave them little choice.

Sam Curran is extremely unfortunate but he should return straight after.

[ooozzzie]

I suppose that makes sense from a playing respective, but, big but, in moral one it is a terrible decision. Where is your heart? Mine is moral no change to the team. Going to split opinions (as did Rashid) But, Especially as we won with an Innings and X Runs, they must keep the same team? Had we lost then it's open doors, which is fair enough. No win as I said before.

[liquidfootball2]

I suppose that makes sense from a playing respective, but, big but, in moral one it is a terrible decision. Where is your heart? Mine is moral no change to the team. Going to split opinions (as did Rashid) But, Especially as we won with an Innings and X Runs, they must keep the same team? Had we lost then it's open doors, which is fair enough. No win as I said before.

Yes ooozzzie, it's a dreadful decision to have to make, but if given the task of picking your strongest possible eleven there were really only two choices imo

Rashid to Stokes or the incredibly unfortunate Curran

Ben Stokes has to be included on cricketing grounds alone and I think that's the premise they had to go by.

I personally think it being Trent Bridge, and a fair amount of cloud cover predicted, Adil Rashid will be largely unnecessary and he should have made way, but then they've chosen the other option.

[Ducks Deluxe]

Being a simple person the moral obligation to the game in the wider sense ,especially from the perspective of the " family audience " that the ECB is so desperate to tap into, overrides everything for me..and always will...I don't expect many to agree..

Cricketing reasons just don't come into it...even if he had a DNA mix of Sobers,Kapil Dev,Hadlee and Botham...

Interesting to see how the rugby authorities will try to spin around the latest Cipriani incident!

DD...

[hancockjr]

Being a simple person the moral obligation to the game in the wider sense ,especially from the perspective of the " family audience " that the ECB is so desperate to tap into, overrides everything for me..and always will...I don't expect many to agree..

Cricketing reasons just don't come into it...even if he had a DNA mix of Sobers,Kapil Dev,Hadlee and Botham...

Interesting to see how the rugby authorities will try to spin around the latest Cipriani incident!

DD...

Even if you are considering the “wider sense” and “family audience” surely that has to be after a proper hearing/disciplinary committee etc? Maybe they could/should have had this in the last 2 days, but given they haven’t it’s very hard to leave Stokes out for further matches on those grounds.

[liquidfootball2]

A suitable punishment and means of reparation for virtually all misdemeanors, and that is of all levels of gravity, including the most serious, should always be decided upon as close to, or as near to the actual event as possible. Sandpaper-gate was partially adjudicated upon directly before the next test, and finally at the end of that series.

(They won't be missing the Ashes, don't worry about that)

This case has been mishandled by both the cricket and civil authorities from the very first moment. The delay of virtually one whole year before it was brought before the magistrates, and from there to the higher court, was absolutely extraordinary and fairly unique.

Then the ECB ...to suspend .....sorry we've been advised we should call it.....non-selection.....to 'not select' him for the very pinnacle of test cricket for an England player, as well as other tests, is a severe punishment, to then have to wait virtually a whole year with the threat of prison hanging over you isn't a minor, trivial burden, it's something that will remain with you for the rest of your life.

It's so easy to cite 'family audience' etc, but its also far too easy to lose any sense of perspective on what is fair and just too. A very harsh and real cricketing punishment has already been delivered, and the civil authorities delay in bringing the case has already surely cost him both in the mental and physical sense too, the effects of that delay can't really be underestimated.

Now he has been found NOT guilty by the civil authorities, there now seems to be a feeling, or even a contagion affecting so many in the media, it's currently taking the form of a sort of competition, one to try and devise something nasty, to exact our pound of flesh, to somehow punish him very excessively and extremely harshly, to punish him much more so than is really necessary in a cricketing sense, to somehow make up for the shortfall in the judicial punishment, a punishment so shamelessly and unfairly taken away by the innocent verdict in the civil courts.

This IS WRONG and should be equally condemned, a public hanging isn't the way forward, and the ECB usually so zealous in it's chasing of commercial revenue shouldn't be a party to allowing such a tawdry affair to drag on indefinitely.

He's been punished severely in the cricketing sense, he should be made aware of his responsibility, a public apology and retraining if needed.....

but not shot.

[ooozzzie]

Well everyone interested in this, MUST watch the Root interview today, he looked petrified embarrassed and completely unconvincing about this decision. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/45223168 Shame because England have done well to go 2-0 up and all they needed to do was bring him back into the fold and say, hold on a minute
this is going to take a game or two. Pressure is really on him now. Lets hope he can produce. Bowling no worries, Batting big worries.

[liquidfootball2]

Well everyone interested in this, MUST watch the Root interview today, he looked petrified embarrassed and completely unconvincing about this decision. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/45223168 Shame because England have done well to go 2-0 up and all they needed to do was bring him back into the fold and say, hold on a minute
this is going to take a game or two. Pressure is really on him now. Lets hope he can produce. Bowling no worries, Batting big worries.

Or.....hold on you can sit this one out and who knows you might be suspended .....or 'not selected'...for the others, and for a few years more too!

In fact you may as well retire.

[hancockjr]

Well everyone interested in this, MUST watch the Root interview today, he looked petrified embarrassed and completely unconvincing about this decision. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/45223168 Shame because England have done well to go 2-0 up and all they needed to do was bring him back into the fold and say, hold on a minute
this is going to take a game or two. Pressure is really on him now. Lets hope he can produce. Bowling no worries, Batting big worries.

Just looks like Joe Root giving an interview to me.

[liquidfootball2]

Well everyone interested in this, MUST watch the Root interview today, he looked petrified embarrassed and completely unconvincing about this decision. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/45223168 Shame because England have done well to go 2-0 up and all they needed to do was bring him back into the fold and say, hold on a minute
this is going to take a game or two. Pressure is really on him now. Lets hope he can produce. Bowling no worries, Batting big worries.

My impression was Joe Root spoke well, he said he had spoken to Ben Stokes personally to assess if he was right mentally to play, and then complimented the superb start young Curran has made.

He made sure to mention it takes a squad of players and not just the actual eleven, and Sam had contributed greatly and may well do again.

I really didn't see that nervous embarrassed persona at all, He conducted himself the right way, was respectful, and explained just what a difficult decision it was..

I do though fully agree on Ben's batting being by far the weakest part of his game atm and that it's badly misfiring atm. Despite this, you just can't mistake the innate ability the lad has with the bat. Players, especially ones that have been under such intense and almost unbearable pressure as he has, do suffer bad periods in form, but if they're a class performer of real quality they have to play, as ability will always come out sooner rather than later and doesn't just disappear.

Without quite so much mental pressure on him in this match he may well cut loose, free his arms and play a typical swashbuckling Stokes' innings.

Rashid should have made way not poor Sam Curran, with cloud predicted for all five days, what is the point of picking a spinner who's also a significantly weaker batsman than either Stokes or Curran?

Keeping the spin option at Trent Bridge is overrated.

I know it's far too much to hope for especially with Jasprit Bumrah possibly back, but I do hope India pick two spinners again

India may make two changes imo,

Bumrah for Kuldeep and possibly strengthen the batting too so ..

Pant in as keeper for me.

(Nair a possible at six, but two changes at once is enough, three smacks of panic to me)

[baganboy]

Karun Nair is a little bit off form. A local boy, whenever he is not at 100% mentally, he seems to slip.
Rishabh Pant's elevation happened a little too early for my comfort. But heck, this guy can be a generational talent the way Adam Gilchrist and Kumar Sangakkara were. He has that kind of potential - india has not had a clean hitter of the ball like him since Sehwag. Not even Kohli.

[baganboy]

Bumrah is the best quick bowler we have. The mistake would be to get him in for Kuldeep. He should come in for Pandya. Kuldeep should sit too, and Jadeja come in for him. Ashwin and Jadeja and Pant is enough lower order batting.

[ooozzzie]

Well it came across to me that the didn't actually believe he was doing the right thing, and was getting ready for the backlash. 2 mins looking on social media on hashtag samcurran benstokes or joeroot you can see the decision has not been received well, and it looked obvious to me he knew that. Your dropping a guy who has played brilliant for someone coming from court guilty or not guilty he was on the piss etc etc and it is too soon to play him, and Root knew it. It showed all over his face, Trevor Bayliss made this decision and Rooty had to go with it,

[liquidfootball2]

Well it came across to me that the didn't actually believe he was doing the right thing, and was getting ready for the backlash. 2 mins looking on social media on hashtag samcurran benstokes or joeroot you can see the decision has not been received well, and it looked obvious to me he knew that. Your dropping a guy who has played brilliant for someone coming from court guilty or not guilty he was on the piss etc etc and it is too soon to play him, and Root knew it. It showed all over his face, Trevor Bayliss made this decision and Rooty had to go with it,

Social media? Really?

What an abhorrent barometer of any sense of normality or even common sense.

I realise that's a massive and unfair generalisation as it differs in platforms and users so widely, here being one example, but I couldn't care less about the majority of opinions expressed for the most part.

If he's mentally right to play there really isn't much of a comparison at all, its not that difficult or complicated, Curran has scored 147 runs in Test cricket and taken eight wickets. Stokes has 2,606 and 104. 

The only difficulty is a human one, and the natural feeling of great regret in having to drop a player who has done nothing wrong only excelled and made an outstanding contribution.

It's for the law courts and the cricket disciplinary committees to decide guilt or innocence and if necessary administer discipline or punishment, not Trevor Bayliss or Joe Root. It was a collective decision involving Andy Flower and probably Ed Smith to bring him back into the fold, the cricket environment and determine his mental state and whether or not mentally he was right to play.

Having done so, it was easy for Root to say: “Sam misses out, Ben comes into the side.”

Rashid should have gone imo but it had to be a bowler.

[ooozzzie]

Well it came across to me that the didn't actually believe he was doing the right thing, and was getting ready for the backlash. 2 mins looking on social media on hashtag samcurran benstokes or joeroot you can see the decision has not been received well, and it looked obvious to me he knew that. Your dropping a guy who has played brilliant for someone coming from court guilty or not guilty he was on the piss etc etc and it is too soon to play him, and Root knew it. It showed all over his face, Trevor Bayliss made this decision and Rooty had to go with it,

Social media? Really?

What an abhorrent barometer of any sense of normality or even common sense.

Well I think it makes quite interesting reading myself https://twitter.com/search?q=%23samcurran&src=typd

Anyway whats your prediction after your earth shattering prediction of an England defeat at Lords?

[hancockjr]

Dropping Cook seems the solution on Twitter. Maybe Root should make way too?

[forestfan]

Dropping Cook seems the solution on Twitter. Maybe Root should make way too?

Yeah, maybe we could not play any specialist batsmen at all... a team of 11 all-rounders, it’s only a matter of time!

[ooozzzie]

Dropping Cook seems the solution on Twitter. Maybe Root should make way too?

By many? Have you a link? I can't see that in any great numbers at all. Unlike the Curran decision. You want to drop Root?

[ooozzzie]

Dropping Cook seems the solution on Twitter. Maybe Root should make way too?

Yeah, maybe we could not play any specialist batsmen at all... a team of 11 all-rounders, it’s only a matter of time!

Ridiculous.

[hancockjr]

Dropping Cook seems the solution on Twitter. Maybe Root should make way too?

By many? Have you a link? I can't see that in any great numbers at all. Unlike the Curran decision. You want to drop Root?

It was on the link you sent.

Basically if you look on Twitter you'll find anything and everything suggested, except probably the sensible option, as no-one would bother Twitting that.

[forestfan]

Dropping Cook seems the solution on Twitter. Maybe Root should make way too?

Yeah, maybe we could not play any specialist batsmen at all... a team of 11 all-rounders, it’s only a matter of time!

Ridiculous.

Was just an ironic follow-on from the suggestion of dropping Cook or Root...

[ooozzzie]

Dropping Cook seems the solution on Twitter. Maybe Root should make way too?

Yeah, maybe we could not play any specialist batsmen at all... a team of 11 all-rounders, it’s only a matter of time!

Ridiculous.

Was just an ironic follow-on from the suggestion of dropping Cook or Root...

I know Just waiting for the Cricket to start.

[hancockjr]

We’ve elected to bowl. I find that very strange.

[liquidfootball2]

England won the toss and have elected to field

There is some high cloud cover so no surprise with a greenish wicket when after winning the toss, Root said he wanted to bowl. It seems a straightforward decision.

Perhaps surprisingly though Kohli said he would have batted.

As expected India bring in Pant for Khartik and Bumrah for Kuldeep, although after a layoff and not having played much red ball cricket whether Bumrah is quite up to speed with the red duke ball remains to be seen. They've also decided on playing musical chairs with the opener Dharwan, who after being dropped for the second, now returns for Murali Vijay.

For England, Stokes will bat at six and Buttler seven.