England Test tour party to West Indies

Not interested in Swann's opinion

So, maybe the pitch wasn't as bad as we made it appear? Last week the Aussies were quaking in their boots about facing this new revitalised England, now they can sleep easy again. Poor batting, poor bowling, poor selection, and you know what, I don't really care anymore.

He was on screen for only a second or so before a compassionate Sky TV editor switched to another camera, presumabaly  on the grounds that it was a voyeuristic intrusion into a deeply personal crisis. As far as I could see, they were then very careful not to show Trott again.

I agree with all that's being said here. Whittaker and Moores have been an absolute disaster - there's no doubt that they will be out of the picture very soon. I'm pleased that his Sussex history hasn't stopped folks on this board from taking an objective view of Moores' performance. I feel so sorry for Trott, but I'd like to think he could settle down again at Warwickshire. I also feel sorry for the poor sod who's got to take over from Moores - what a poisoned chalice. What chance has anyone got to sort out this mess before the Aussies arrive.   

Looking back at my pre-tour, indeed pre-selection comments, how many of those have been vindicated by events, and mostly the negative ones?

Bell's occasional delightful innings failed to give any stiffening to a side that depended on him as a senior batsman and in the critical test he went for a pair, whilst England failed to look at alternative young middle-order batsmen.

Ballance and Root were good and came to the rescue repeatedly, until panic and poor technique on the one contentious pitch they found let them down. That's a coaching issue.

Moeen's batting only really came off in the first innings at Barbados and the run out was another coaching issue, whteher he or Cook was at fault. More runs in that first innings could have salvaged a generally poor bowling performance. Moeen's own bowling didn't wor,k and of course we needed at laeast one more serious spinner in the team. From everything I've seen myself and heard from those who follow Yorkshire, that wouldn't have been Adil Rashid, but having been picked for the tour he should have played, at least to preserve the myth that the Coach and Chairman of Selectors are working to the same strategic vision.

Buttler had some entertaining innings, perhaps batting a bit too low, but he isn't a Test match keeper, and sometimes not even a championship class one. His catching was competent enough but his failure to anticipate cost England the game when he missed stumping Blackwood off Root at the critical moment.

Stokes is a powerful bat but his bowling is not up to Test standards at the moment and certainly not as a strike bowler. Unless a really helpful coach can work with him he will have to fight for a number 6 place as a batsman and maybe contribute the odd spell of change bowling.

I was half-right about Broad: he can no longer be considered any more of a batsman than Jack Brooks, but he did summon up some impressive spells. A better balanced side would have included him as an option, not a mainstay.

Cook finally fought his way back into batting form but his captaincy remained inept, through to the final innings when he hesitated over reintroducing his main spinner until the 5th wicket pair were well established. Once he had done so, and that weapon had proved to be malfunctioning, then there were no more options.
Of course Lyth should have played as the opener on trial and would have spared us the tragedy of seeing Trott's career melt down in public.

A badly planned tour, with no opportunity for practice and a serious of glaring selection flaws, failed to uncover new talent in key positions - opener, middle-order, spin, strike bowling - and ended up reliant on players with technical flaws that don't seem to have been rectified despite a lot of time spent in the protective environment of the England performance establishment. About the only things that can be taken as positives from this ghastly cock-up are several amazing catches from Jordan - and wonderful though they were, the rest of his game didn't quite measure up.

Excellent and thoughtful analysis, hh.

I'd agree with almost every word, my only question being that - to my own surprise - I find myself wondering if you are being a bit harsh on Cook's captaincy?

He's never going to be Mike Brearley or even Michael Vaughan as a cricketing brain. He mostly does what his coach tells him. But in his defence, why did he hesitate to introduce his "main spinner"? Answer: because Moeen Ali has shown himself not to be a main spinner, had let him down in the first innings and simply could not be trusted. I'd also say some of the fields Cook set yesterday , with catchers at very short mid-on and mid-off hoping for a mistimed drive  from the ball that 'stuck' in a wearing pitch, were what in modern parlance I believe is called "funky", and showed some imagination (although I accept that the plan may have been hatched for him by Moores and Farbrace).

I don't know what England should do about the captaincy. I'd be inclined to remove it from Cook, not least because captaining and opening is a huge mental strain; both Joyce at Sussex and Key at Kent now prefer to bat at three or four and if it induces that kind of pressure at county level it must be even more intense at test match level. But what if giving Root the captaincy too early were to ruin the batting of a player who should be England's heaviest run-getter for years to come?

A dilemma, for sure.