Sussex v Australians, Tour match, Hove, 3rd day July 28, 2013

Taylor ready and willing for England

23

James Taylor has declared himself far better prepared for Test cricket now than he was on debut last year, despite conceding that his unbeaten century against the Australians in Hove was less than fluent. Taylor and his temporary county team-mate Monty Panesar both enjoyed their audition against the Australians and both will hope to face them again next week after being named in England's 14-man squad for the Old Trafford Test.

Panesar's chances of playing hinge largely on the condition of the pitch in Manchester, while Taylor's hopes rest on the condition of Kevin Pietersen's troublesome calf. Taylor, parachuted in from Nottinghamshire in order to gain some experience against the Australians, scratched around for his 121 not out and was dropped twice before he reached triple-figures but said if he received the nod in Manchester he would be ready.

"It wasn't the best innings I've played, it wasn't one of my most fluent at all, but it's about finding a way when you're not feeling in the best touch and I did that," Taylor said. "Mentally and technically I feel in a good place. I'm delighted to score runs, I don't really mind how. It's not how, it's how many, and that's how I go about my game."

Taylor's two Tests against South Africa last year brought scores of 34, 10 and 4, and he was told by the selectors to go away, work on some technical issues and churn out the runs at domestic level. He has done that, piling up 824 for Nottinghamshire in the County Championship this season, and his hundred against the Australians was his third first-class century this summer.

"I've worked hard on my game since I was left out," he said. "It was a great experience playing against South Africa but it was all too brief, and I've gone away and worked really hard since getting left out. I've piled on the runs like the selectors asked me to and I feel like I'm in a good place now.

"I was in a kind of a no-win situation in this game, but the purpose was to spend time in the middle against the red ball after all the T20 cricket in recent weeks and it was nice to do that against a decent attack. It was definitely a pressure situation - if I hadn't scored any runs everybody would have commented on that, but luckily I did and got what I needed out of the game."

Like Taylor, Panesar got what he wanted out of the match against the Australians, picking up 3 for 70 in the first innings, and it was another confidence-booster after a difficult start to the summer. Panesar has managed only 21 wickets at 40.09 during the Championship this season but he said some remedial work with Peter Such, England's spin bowling coach, had put his season back on track.

"I kind of struggled early season, I was not getting the action I wanted to get, and then I went away and did a bit of work with Peter Such on a one-to-one basis to get my action in the right order," Panesar said. "Over the Twenty20 period I've used the time to get my action in order, and in the Championship games and in the dry weather we've had I've tried to perform and prepare myself if the call came."

Panesar has an outstanding record at Old Trafford, where he has collected 25 wickets at 16.72 in three Tests, but it is five years since he last played a Test there. If, as expected, the teams are greeted with a dry pitch, a two-man spin attack could well be employed by England, and Panesar said he would fancy his chances against the Australians in such circumstances.

"The England team have put them slightly under pressure, but the Australia team is a very competitive team, they are going to come hard at us. You always feel maybe against spin there is an opportunity," he said. "But they are good players, you can't completely discard Australia, they're a competitive cricket team - but I do feel even in this game I was always in with a chance."

Brydon Coverdale is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. He tweets here

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • jmcilhinney on July 29, 2013, 0:57 GMT

    @JG2704 on (July 28, 2013, 20:30 GMT), it's hard to know what he's thinking but I reckon many can feel KP's retirement approaching. Probably not until after the next Ashes series in Australia but I reckon that he'd love to go out on a high and, if England win both series, he'll bow out then.

    It must be a slightly uncomfortable situation for Taylor - hoping that one of the England team is injured for the upcoming Test - but, given that the injury has already been sustained, he might feel less guilty hoping for an extended recovery period. Also, he may feel slightly less guilty given that it's KP if the reports are true regarding KP's evaluation of his performance against SA.

    This innings wasn't fluent but he was readjusting to FC cricket after mostly T20 for a while. Given that he'll almost certainly get no more than one game, no matter how well he does, he'll be very keen to impress because doing so will probably guarantee him a spot in the touring party for the trip to Australia

  • landl47 on July 29, 2013, 0:25 GMT

    I'm pleased that Taylor's century wasn't too fluent. Test cricket is all about working for everything you get and making runs even when it isn't your best day. Unless batsmen can do that they'll always be fair-weather players, getting runs when the going is easy but crumbling under pressure. Ian Bell in the last 8 tests has played 4 significant innings when the side has been in trouble, grafting for his runs and not trying to be pretty. That's what is needed from young players like Taylor and in my view he made a very good case for himself in this innings.

    Monty isn't going to play unless Swann isn't fit. There's no way England goes into this game with 2 seamers and Monty is too much of a liability with the bat and in the field to be part of a 5-man attack- especially with Joe Root, 3-15 including two #3 batsmen and Michael Clarke, to back up Swann.

  • subbass on July 31, 2013, 1:34 GMT

    KP wants 10k Test runs, he pretty much said that was his goal when he did that interview with Freddie Flintoff, so I think he will be still playing Tests in 2014.. But yes, you do get the impression he wants to sail off into the IPL sunset as he makes zillions for 6 weeks work. He will also surely go play in the BBL.

    Great shame that Monty is so one dimensional, as if he was not I think he would get selected more often. But Swanny is 34 now and yes there is Kerrigan, but for me Monty is still the 2nd best spinner we have and would get into pretty much any other side in world cricket.

  • bonobo on July 30, 2013, 21:54 GMT

    KP wont be interested in retiring in any format until after the World Cup and then if he does, it will be partly do with fitness as much as anything, he picks up a lot of niggles for a batsman and he might want to cash in if he doesnt feel he has 3 or 4 years of Test Cricket in him or it might compromise his cricket altogether....but if he is fit and there are runs and records to be achieved and accolades to be garnished, he is too proud and too much of a competitor to jack it in.....although I wouldnt put things beyond another spat about being rested for a tour. Taylor is next in line and did what was asked of him in the Sussex game, he still has to convince me a bit....but equally I think pressure is on Bairstow...his game is riddled with as many flaws as it is with obvious flair and temperament...it cant all be about grafting in this English set up, so I hope their faith in a genuine shot maker like Bairstow pays off

  • H_Z_O on July 30, 2013, 17:22 GMT

    @GiantScrub it's probably 6 of one. I agree with everything you've said. He's got an excellent work ethic, but for some reason his bowling's just never come on as you'd have hoped. On the right pitch, he's brilliant, on the wrong one, next to useless.

    The problem is, can that ever make him our number 1 spinner? I've got no problems with Panesar being our number 2, but I don't agree with the idea that just because he's arguably a better bowler than Swann on a turning pitch that he should be take Swann's place. We play most of our Tests on flat or seam-friendly wickets. Had this summer not been unseasonably dry, I doubt we'd have seen the pitches we've seen so far in this series. And I'm not a fan of overdoing "horses for courses" selections.

    Whether Monty takes over from Swann when he retires is another matter, but even then I suspect his future's out of his (huge) hands. If Kerrigan keeps developing we may opt to blood him sooner rather than later and let him learn on the Test stage.

  • GiantScrub on July 30, 2013, 13:07 GMT

    H_Z_O: I've said this in other threads this week, but I really feel that Monty's various awfulness and brilliance can both be explained by his bowling style and the pitches rather than by any mental failures, though it's sometimes hard to disagree with the famous Warne comment about him that he's played the same test 33 times especially in that horrible run of form that led to him being dropped in 2009. It's simply that he puts no air on the ball, but as much spin as possible, and darts it in every time. This makes him unplayable when the pitch is wearing, as the natural variation off the pitch combined with his own turn and speed make it very hard to play him. However, when the pitch is flat, those same darts turn into horrible little 60mph legcutters and he can't beat the batsman in the air. This means that if the pitch is a road, Monty is going to be the guy who takes 0/200 from 50 overs and gets dropped.

  • H_Z_O on July 29, 2013, 18:01 GMT

    @Train Stationer yeah, Panesar was brilliant in India. With Swann at the other end. In New Zealand he was woeful and even Bruce Martin out-bowled him.

    The Indian pitches probably suited him better, but I also question whether he's just the kind of guy that can't handle the pressure of expectation. When he's the second spinner, he just has to bowl, and if he gets wickets, great, but if not, and if Swann's not taking them, then the blame will fall on Swanny as the #1 spinner.

    That's not just based on his time in New Zealand, but his time before Swann came into the side, when he was the undisputed #1 spinner (after Giles was dropped). I felt like he only ever bowled well on really responsive surfaces, and when the pitch offered nothing, and the batsmen came after him, he wilted.

    I think Monty's career will end up being a case-study in how no amount of talent is enough to overcome a shortcoming in temperament. Test cricket is played between the ears. Colly's an example of the opposite.

  • on July 29, 2013, 16:04 GMT

    Time for Swann to go, he's been out of form for near on two years. panesar was brilliant in India and should play ahead of Swann. Taylor looked hopelessly out of his depth last year, and a knock at Hove really doesn't say much.What about playing lees if we must have six batsmen?

  • cloudmess on July 29, 2013, 13:22 GMT

    Is it not possible to find a better coach for Monty Panesar? What's he going to learn from Peter Such? How to float in non-spinning balls from around off-stump? No wonder he has not kicked on from his most promising start in test cricket - the English county set-up has squeezed the flair out of his game. We need an Asian coach, someone who actually knows about spinning the ball.

  • Iddo555 on July 29, 2013, 12:41 GMT

    Pietersen isn't going to be kicked out any time soon. Batsmen can play on to their late 30's. They could maybe introduce a young batsmen or two in tests that aren't that important such as Bangladesh, Zimbabwe so when the time comes they are needed on a full time basis they aren't completely new to the whole thing

  • jmcilhinney on July 29, 2013, 0:57 GMT

    @JG2704 on (July 28, 2013, 20:30 GMT), it's hard to know what he's thinking but I reckon many can feel KP's retirement approaching. Probably not until after the next Ashes series in Australia but I reckon that he'd love to go out on a high and, if England win both series, he'll bow out then.

    It must be a slightly uncomfortable situation for Taylor - hoping that one of the England team is injured for the upcoming Test - but, given that the injury has already been sustained, he might feel less guilty hoping for an extended recovery period. Also, he may feel slightly less guilty given that it's KP if the reports are true regarding KP's evaluation of his performance against SA.

    This innings wasn't fluent but he was readjusting to FC cricket after mostly T20 for a while. Given that he'll almost certainly get no more than one game, no matter how well he does, he'll be very keen to impress because doing so will probably guarantee him a spot in the touring party for the trip to Australia

  • landl47 on July 29, 2013, 0:25 GMT

    I'm pleased that Taylor's century wasn't too fluent. Test cricket is all about working for everything you get and making runs even when it isn't your best day. Unless batsmen can do that they'll always be fair-weather players, getting runs when the going is easy but crumbling under pressure. Ian Bell in the last 8 tests has played 4 significant innings when the side has been in trouble, grafting for his runs and not trying to be pretty. That's what is needed from young players like Taylor and in my view he made a very good case for himself in this innings.

    Monty isn't going to play unless Swann isn't fit. There's no way England goes into this game with 2 seamers and Monty is too much of a liability with the bat and in the field to be part of a 5-man attack- especially with Joe Root, 3-15 including two #3 batsmen and Michael Clarke, to back up Swann.

  • subbass on July 31, 2013, 1:34 GMT

    KP wants 10k Test runs, he pretty much said that was his goal when he did that interview with Freddie Flintoff, so I think he will be still playing Tests in 2014.. But yes, you do get the impression he wants to sail off into the IPL sunset as he makes zillions for 6 weeks work. He will also surely go play in the BBL.

    Great shame that Monty is so one dimensional, as if he was not I think he would get selected more often. But Swanny is 34 now and yes there is Kerrigan, but for me Monty is still the 2nd best spinner we have and would get into pretty much any other side in world cricket.

  • bonobo on July 30, 2013, 21:54 GMT

    KP wont be interested in retiring in any format until after the World Cup and then if he does, it will be partly do with fitness as much as anything, he picks up a lot of niggles for a batsman and he might want to cash in if he doesnt feel he has 3 or 4 years of Test Cricket in him or it might compromise his cricket altogether....but if he is fit and there are runs and records to be achieved and accolades to be garnished, he is too proud and too much of a competitor to jack it in.....although I wouldnt put things beyond another spat about being rested for a tour. Taylor is next in line and did what was asked of him in the Sussex game, he still has to convince me a bit....but equally I think pressure is on Bairstow...his game is riddled with as many flaws as it is with obvious flair and temperament...it cant all be about grafting in this English set up, so I hope their faith in a genuine shot maker like Bairstow pays off

  • H_Z_O on July 30, 2013, 17:22 GMT

    @GiantScrub it's probably 6 of one. I agree with everything you've said. He's got an excellent work ethic, but for some reason his bowling's just never come on as you'd have hoped. On the right pitch, he's brilliant, on the wrong one, next to useless.

    The problem is, can that ever make him our number 1 spinner? I've got no problems with Panesar being our number 2, but I don't agree with the idea that just because he's arguably a better bowler than Swann on a turning pitch that he should be take Swann's place. We play most of our Tests on flat or seam-friendly wickets. Had this summer not been unseasonably dry, I doubt we'd have seen the pitches we've seen so far in this series. And I'm not a fan of overdoing "horses for courses" selections.

    Whether Monty takes over from Swann when he retires is another matter, but even then I suspect his future's out of his (huge) hands. If Kerrigan keeps developing we may opt to blood him sooner rather than later and let him learn on the Test stage.

  • GiantScrub on July 30, 2013, 13:07 GMT

    H_Z_O: I've said this in other threads this week, but I really feel that Monty's various awfulness and brilliance can both be explained by his bowling style and the pitches rather than by any mental failures, though it's sometimes hard to disagree with the famous Warne comment about him that he's played the same test 33 times especially in that horrible run of form that led to him being dropped in 2009. It's simply that he puts no air on the ball, but as much spin as possible, and darts it in every time. This makes him unplayable when the pitch is wearing, as the natural variation off the pitch combined with his own turn and speed make it very hard to play him. However, when the pitch is flat, those same darts turn into horrible little 60mph legcutters and he can't beat the batsman in the air. This means that if the pitch is a road, Monty is going to be the guy who takes 0/200 from 50 overs and gets dropped.

  • H_Z_O on July 29, 2013, 18:01 GMT

    @Train Stationer yeah, Panesar was brilliant in India. With Swann at the other end. In New Zealand he was woeful and even Bruce Martin out-bowled him.

    The Indian pitches probably suited him better, but I also question whether he's just the kind of guy that can't handle the pressure of expectation. When he's the second spinner, he just has to bowl, and if he gets wickets, great, but if not, and if Swann's not taking them, then the blame will fall on Swanny as the #1 spinner.

    That's not just based on his time in New Zealand, but his time before Swann came into the side, when he was the undisputed #1 spinner (after Giles was dropped). I felt like he only ever bowled well on really responsive surfaces, and when the pitch offered nothing, and the batsmen came after him, he wilted.

    I think Monty's career will end up being a case-study in how no amount of talent is enough to overcome a shortcoming in temperament. Test cricket is played between the ears. Colly's an example of the opposite.

  • on July 29, 2013, 16:04 GMT

    Time for Swann to go, he's been out of form for near on two years. panesar was brilliant in India and should play ahead of Swann. Taylor looked hopelessly out of his depth last year, and a knock at Hove really doesn't say much.What about playing lees if we must have six batsmen?

  • cloudmess on July 29, 2013, 13:22 GMT

    Is it not possible to find a better coach for Monty Panesar? What's he going to learn from Peter Such? How to float in non-spinning balls from around off-stump? No wonder he has not kicked on from his most promising start in test cricket - the English county set-up has squeezed the flair out of his game. We need an Asian coach, someone who actually knows about spinning the ball.

  • Iddo555 on July 29, 2013, 12:41 GMT

    Pietersen isn't going to be kicked out any time soon. Batsmen can play on to their late 30's. They could maybe introduce a young batsmen or two in tests that aren't that important such as Bangladesh, Zimbabwe so when the time comes they are needed on a full time basis they aren't completely new to the whole thing

  • ChrisKOTW on July 29, 2013, 12:25 GMT

    Just out of curiosity, does anyone know the number of English players that have scored first class hundreds for three different county sides? I'm not sure if Taylor counts (Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire, Sussex(?)) but I'd be interested to know of any others.

  • SDHM on July 29, 2013, 9:54 GMT

    Find it amazing that somehow a gritty knock when he clearly isn't in his best form (something to do with the amount of T20 cricket being played perhaps? Although worth pointing out in his last couple of FC games he didn't set the world alight) is somehow seen as a negative. Run-scoring, especially at Test level, is about finding a way. Sounds to me like Taylor managed to do that. He was struggling for fluency and obviously under pressure from both himself and the selectors to perform. That he found a way suggests a good temperament.

  • py0alb on July 29, 2013, 9:37 GMT

    I went to watch the game and I'm afraid to say Taylor was scratchy and unconvincing. He got dropped at least once and generally seemed all at sea against the pace bowlers.

  • Jordanious77 on July 29, 2013, 3:24 GMT

    @Dean Verlander because they wouldn't see it as weakening. Sure, England have been winning it with the Bat, but that's no thanks to the top 3 who have been in bad form. And KP is a part of the part 3.. All taylor needs to do is score over 30 and he'll already be doing more to securing a victory than England were in other tests..

    Obviously KP has the ability to win matches, but Taylor most likely does as well or he wouldn't be there.

  • MB40 on July 29, 2013, 2:09 GMT

    I think the Taylor and Panesar selections are a shame in two ways. Firstly, Trott, KP and Bell are all 30+ and, although I hope they can all go on into their forties, we must accept that at this point, a prolonged period of scratchy form would probably signal the end of a Test place for them. So who succeeds them? Root and Bairstow have been introduced into the team successfully, but the future middle order players like Taylor have not - and it would be a good idea to start the integration process now. Ben Stokes is another who England should consider for the fourth and fifth Tests (if they are dead rubbers).

    As for Panesar, the same situation applies: he is 31 and Swann is 34 - the next generation of spinners needs to be given some playing time against a decent opponent, or we'll face an Australian situation: Hauritz, McGain, Krejza, Cullen, Lyon, Casson, Beer, Doherty, Maxwell, Agar, all being tried and then discarded because of inadequate preparation when Warne was still playing.

  • Liquefierrrr on July 28, 2013, 23:41 GMT

    As an Aussie it annoys me that some of the comments from our players have indicated that they'd be comfortable/keen to have another look at Taylor or that his innings was scratchy.

    To me that is worse. If he looked scratchy and was dismissed for 20 or so off a substantial amount of balls then fair enough. That he was able to face more than 40 overs, amass 120-odd runs unbeaten and declare himself that it wasn't his 'best innings' is bad news. Imagine when he plays well?

    Despite a very strange team that was selected for this match we could only snare 7 wickets in 100 overs, that is a wicket every 85.7 balls. Against a County side.

    Cowan's runs are almost irrelevant, especially his second innings score as it seems like he's cashed in against part-timers.

    I hope for the best in this series, but have already planned for the worst in terms of my state of mind for when we lose 5-0.

    I just wish we'd play some proper test cricket. Grind when we have to then flourish once settled.

  • Iddo555 on July 28, 2013, 22:15 GMT

    @ testsarebest

    No they wouldn't. England are set in stone with:

    6 batsmen wicketkeeper/batsmen 3 seamers 1 spinner

    The only time this changes is when they go to the sub continent and drop a seamer (bresnan) and play an extra spinner (panesar)

    This is all talk anyway, Pietersen will be fit so the Taylor playing and coming into the squad is all a show and an experiment to see how Taylor does under pressure.

  • TenDonebyaShooter on July 28, 2013, 21:41 GMT

    England play only five batsmen? Nice idea, but let me introduce you to the real world, in which a particular strategy has exerted an overwhelming influence on England selection for nearly two decades. It can be labelled: "pick 6 batsmen so that if the captain is in poor form it isn't so obvious", and it dates at least back to the days of Mike Atherton, if not before. The purpose of the strategy is to avoid bad PR, which is administrators' real concern

  • Lmaotsetung on July 28, 2013, 21:40 GMT

    Monty is proven at test level, Monty's best venue on the whole planet is OT, Monty ply his trade in D1....no brainer to pick Monty. I know we all like the exotic pick, just like how most outsiders think Finn should be the leader of England's attack because he bowls fast and scare some batsmen. Just like how people fall in love with Patto on the back of his flash in the pan series in India.

  • on July 28, 2013, 20:52 GMT

    dropping a batsman would give the aussies a boost in my view. batting has been the difference between the two sides so far why weaken that part of the team?

  • JG2704 on July 28, 2013, 20:30 GMT

    I wonder if it may be an idea to play Taylor anyway? He seems to be in decent form. Not sure whether this injury setback is the start of the end for KP?

  • TestsareBest on July 28, 2013, 19:22 GMT

    If KP isn't fit, I wonder if the selectors would dare to change their master formula a little and play:

    Cook; Root; Trott; Bell; Bairstow; Prior; Bresnan; Broad; Swann; Anderson; Panesar.

    I'm sure they feel the Aussie batting isn't worth five bowlers but it would lighten the quickies' workload for back-to-back tests. It woul dbe fun to watch, anyway.

  • njr1330 on July 28, 2013, 19:01 GMT

    Sorry, Monty...but if they're going to go with 2 spinners, the other one has to be Kerrigan!!

  • njr1330 on July 28, 2013, 19:01 GMT

    Sorry, Monty...but if they're going to go with 2 spinners, the other one has to be Kerrigan!!

  • TestsareBest on July 28, 2013, 19:22 GMT

    If KP isn't fit, I wonder if the selectors would dare to change their master formula a little and play:

    Cook; Root; Trott; Bell; Bairstow; Prior; Bresnan; Broad; Swann; Anderson; Panesar.

    I'm sure they feel the Aussie batting isn't worth five bowlers but it would lighten the quickies' workload for back-to-back tests. It woul dbe fun to watch, anyway.

  • JG2704 on July 28, 2013, 20:30 GMT

    I wonder if it may be an idea to play Taylor anyway? He seems to be in decent form. Not sure whether this injury setback is the start of the end for KP?

  • on July 28, 2013, 20:52 GMT

    dropping a batsman would give the aussies a boost in my view. batting has been the difference between the two sides so far why weaken that part of the team?

  • Lmaotsetung on July 28, 2013, 21:40 GMT

    Monty is proven at test level, Monty's best venue on the whole planet is OT, Monty ply his trade in D1....no brainer to pick Monty. I know we all like the exotic pick, just like how most outsiders think Finn should be the leader of England's attack because he bowls fast and scare some batsmen. Just like how people fall in love with Patto on the back of his flash in the pan series in India.

  • TenDonebyaShooter on July 28, 2013, 21:41 GMT

    England play only five batsmen? Nice idea, but let me introduce you to the real world, in which a particular strategy has exerted an overwhelming influence on England selection for nearly two decades. It can be labelled: "pick 6 batsmen so that if the captain is in poor form it isn't so obvious", and it dates at least back to the days of Mike Atherton, if not before. The purpose of the strategy is to avoid bad PR, which is administrators' real concern

  • Iddo555 on July 28, 2013, 22:15 GMT

    @ testsarebest

    No they wouldn't. England are set in stone with:

    6 batsmen wicketkeeper/batsmen 3 seamers 1 spinner

    The only time this changes is when they go to the sub continent and drop a seamer (bresnan) and play an extra spinner (panesar)

    This is all talk anyway, Pietersen will be fit so the Taylor playing and coming into the squad is all a show and an experiment to see how Taylor does under pressure.

  • Liquefierrrr on July 28, 2013, 23:41 GMT

    As an Aussie it annoys me that some of the comments from our players have indicated that they'd be comfortable/keen to have another look at Taylor or that his innings was scratchy.

    To me that is worse. If he looked scratchy and was dismissed for 20 or so off a substantial amount of balls then fair enough. That he was able to face more than 40 overs, amass 120-odd runs unbeaten and declare himself that it wasn't his 'best innings' is bad news. Imagine when he plays well?

    Despite a very strange team that was selected for this match we could only snare 7 wickets in 100 overs, that is a wicket every 85.7 balls. Against a County side.

    Cowan's runs are almost irrelevant, especially his second innings score as it seems like he's cashed in against part-timers.

    I hope for the best in this series, but have already planned for the worst in terms of my state of mind for when we lose 5-0.

    I just wish we'd play some proper test cricket. Grind when we have to then flourish once settled.

  • MB40 on July 29, 2013, 2:09 GMT

    I think the Taylor and Panesar selections are a shame in two ways. Firstly, Trott, KP and Bell are all 30+ and, although I hope they can all go on into their forties, we must accept that at this point, a prolonged period of scratchy form would probably signal the end of a Test place for them. So who succeeds them? Root and Bairstow have been introduced into the team successfully, but the future middle order players like Taylor have not - and it would be a good idea to start the integration process now. Ben Stokes is another who England should consider for the fourth and fifth Tests (if they are dead rubbers).

    As for Panesar, the same situation applies: he is 31 and Swann is 34 - the next generation of spinners needs to be given some playing time against a decent opponent, or we'll face an Australian situation: Hauritz, McGain, Krejza, Cullen, Lyon, Casson, Beer, Doherty, Maxwell, Agar, all being tried and then discarded because of inadequate preparation when Warne was still playing.

  • Jordanious77 on July 29, 2013, 3:24 GMT

    @Dean Verlander because they wouldn't see it as weakening. Sure, England have been winning it with the Bat, but that's no thanks to the top 3 who have been in bad form. And KP is a part of the part 3.. All taylor needs to do is score over 30 and he'll already be doing more to securing a victory than England were in other tests..

    Obviously KP has the ability to win matches, but Taylor most likely does as well or he wouldn't be there.