England v Australia, 5th Investec Test, The Oval

Kerrigan and Woakes named in squad

Andrew McGlashan

August 18, 2013

Comments: 70 | Text size: A | A

Simon Kerrigan took some punishment in his short spell, England Lions v New Zealanders, Tour match, Grace Road, 1st day, May 9, 2013
Simon Kerrigan has been handed his first call-up to an England Test squad © PA Photos
Related Links

Simon Kerrigan, the Lancashire left-arm spinner, and Warwickshire allrounder Chris Woakes have been named in England's squad for the final Investec Ashes Test at The Oval. There is also a recall for Steven Finn as part of a 14-man party, while James Anderson is included with no indication that a rest is on the cards for him.

With Tim Bresnan ruled out due to a stress fracture of his back and Graham Onions not available due to a broken finger, this squad was always likely to require the selectors to look at a new name or two. Kerrigan is uncapped at all full international levels while Woakes has previously played ODIs and T20s.

Geoff Miller, the national selector, said: "The inclusion of five pace bowlers as well as an additional spinner in Simon Kerrigan who has impressed with Lancashire and England Lions in recent years gives Andy Flower and Alastair Cook plenty of options once they have assessed the conditions at the Oval.

"Tim Bresnan has made valuable contributions with both bat and ball during the series and I would like to wish him all the very best in his recovery from his back injury. The focus for Bresnan now will be the tour of Australia later this year while this Test will provide an opportunity for another member of this squad to make equally vital contributions."

Kerrigan, 24, is now in pole position to become Graeme Swann's No. 2 following the recent problems for Monty Panesar which have left his international future in doubt. Although it remains unlikely that England will play two spinners at The Oval, Kerrigan now looks set to tour Australia later this year for the return Ashes series.

Kerrigan, a regular England Lions representative, has taken 47 wickets at 20.23 in the Championship this season (albeit Division Two) which makes him the leading spinner in the country. He played against the Australians at Wantage Road in the two-day fixture and took 1 for 66 in 17 overs, although he did receive some punishment from Shane Watson.

Woakes, meanwhile, provides a Bresnan-like all-round option in the squad. He has been on the fringes of the Test side in recent times - he toured New Zealand and was one injury away from a debut - and has had another solid season for Warwickshire in the Championship, taking 26 wickets at 21.50 and scoring 385 runs at 42.77. He has been a frequent part of the England one-day set-up although has not secured a regular starting place in the XI.

Given England's desire for continuity, Bresnan's replacement is strongly tipped to be Chris Tremlett who has been part of the squad for the previous two matches. If Tremlett did return, on his homeground, it would be his first Test appearance since January 2012, against Pakistan, in the UAE, although questions remain about his long-term durability following a run of serious injuries over the last 18 months.

Finn, who was dropped after the Trent Bridge Test and removed from the squad after Lord's, is back in the mix. He has taken nine wickets in two Championship matches since being omitted.

No extra batting cover has been included in the squad which indicates that Kevin Pietersen's knee, which was scanned last week following the Durham Test, is not a significant concern although he, plus James Anderson and Stuart Broad, can expect to be rested during the one-day matches next month.

Jonny Bairstow, who has not convinced during the series with 203 runs at 29, will complete the series at No. 6 but will soon face pressure for his spot from James Taylor and Gary Ballance.

Squad Alastair Cook (capt), Joe Root, Jonathan Trott, Kevin Pietersen, Ian Bell, Jonny Bairstow, Matt Prior (wk), Stuart Broad, Graeme Swann, James Anderson, Chris Tremlett, Simon Kerrigan, Steven Finn, Chris Woakes

Andrew McGlashan is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: Andrew McGlashan

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by JG2704 on (August 20, 2013, 8:34 GMT)

@cric_J on (August 20, 2013, 8:03 GMT) Obviously no one's sure what their bad performances are about , but if Eng were to drop them for a test and say they are being rested - rested doesn't sound as bad as dropped if you get my drift

Posted by cric_J on (August 20, 2013, 8:03 GMT)

@JG2704: Agree that Jimmy and Prior have looked pretty out of sorts recently. But how can we be sure that their poor performances are a result of stress and fatigue only, and that resting them would help them regain their form ?

By Jimmy's own admission, he has been below par but that has not been due to a niggle or tiredness. He just hasn't put the ball in the right areas. I feel that a reassessment and retrying of his tactics would do him a world of good as compared to sitting in an armchair,drinking coffee. Wouldn't it be better for our key bowler to correct as many issues as possible before the series down under starts ?

Prior, IMO, has looked too eager to assert himself on the bowlers. His defence has been pathetic, if at all existent. He just hasn't given himself enough time at the crease and with the pressure considerably off, this might be a good game to correct those wrongs.

As for the intensity and being fired up, the Ashes is synonymous to those emotions for these lads.

Posted by JG2704 on (August 19, 2013, 21:57 GMT)

@cric_J - I half agree with you but I think a valid point is that the 2 players who some of us have been talking about resting (Prior and Jimmy) have both been somewhat out of sorts , so would the fans prefer to see out of sorts versions of these players or fired up replacements - not saying either are not fired up? As it is , looking at the squad , I don't see them resting either. Finn and CT are too similar so I don't see them playing both and I don't see them playing Woakes although they may like him for his batting. If they rest Prior they'd need to go 5/1/5 and that won't happen - as much as I'd like it. My hunch is that the bowlers will be Jimmy,Broad,Finn and Swann - which would be my 4 in a 4 man attack

@ Train Stationer- Further to JMC's comms CT is still making his way back and I don't think he's even taken a 5 for this season. Also CT has played half the tests and all bar Pak in UAE (where his 1 test yielded no wickets) have been in decent conditions for pace

Posted by cric_J on (August 19, 2013, 16:00 GMT)

There is a lot of talk here of resting some key players for the Oval test because the series is already in England's hand. But I'm afraid I don't quite agree with this motion. And I feel, thankfully enough, that Flower and Cook feel the same way.

If there is an injury or a niggle to one of the players or they themselves want a break , then resting them is fine. But doing it just for the sake of experimentation isn't fair. Certainly not in a precious series like the Ashes , even if it has already been won.

The crowd and the viewers who spend a reasonable amount of money and time want to see the best 11 of their team out on the field, the 11 who stand the best chance of winning any game of cricket for their team.

Also, I'm sure that none of those lads in the England dressing room would voluntarily want to miss out on being part of the last test in a victorious Ashes campaign only to be wrapped up in cotton wool. So, we should probably just let it be the way they want it.

Posted by cric_J on (August 19, 2013, 15:45 GMT)

@SDH12: Mate, I'm not one to care too much for stats and don't believe in selecting a team based on that only. Pitch, opposition etc must be taken into account too. So, for me Bres is a better test player than Woakes ATM despite what his FC stats may say. And I feel the England management second my thoughts there.

IMO succeeding at domestic level is one thing but doing consistently well at international level is quite another. Though I agree that unless we try Chris out at the top level we'll never actually know if he is good enough or not, I guess this isn't the time for it.

Mind you, I agree that Woakes is a great prospect. He gets decent swing and has even upped his pace now. My only issues are with his accuracy and control and the consistency with which he can bowl tight, testing spells.

These issues are similar to the one with Finn. But since the Oval pitch with its pace, bounce and little lateral movement will certainly suit him more than Woakes, I'd go for him 200%.

Posted by Charlie101 on (August 19, 2013, 14:52 GMT)

I can not believe we will play 2 spinners and whilst it is good to give Kerrigan the experience it may have been better to add Taylor or Ballence to the squad as one of them is sure to travel to Australia. I like both Finn and Tremlet as bowlers and am glad I do not have to make the decision about who plays but feel we need a pure bowler to replace Bresnan . If Woakes plays he should replace Bairstow and play as an all rounder .

Posted by brusselslion on (August 19, 2013, 10:03 GMT)

Wickets at the Oval were dead earlier in the season. Not having seen any cricket there recently, I've no idea if the recent hot spell has had any effect?

Anyway, notwithstanding the state of the pitch, it's not often that you get 'dead' rubbers in a Test series, so why not take the chance to try out all the 'new' boys? 3-0 or 3-1 does it really matter?

@Cpt.Meanster: Surely, the opposite argument is true. In normal 'Test' circumstances (this has been a strange series!), the batsman will try to perserve his wicket at all costs, & not usually go after the bowler unless there is a tactical reason to do so. Hence the onus is on the bowler to produce a wicket taking ball. In 2020 especially - and to a lesser extent ODIs - the batsman will often throw his bat at anything & everything and a perfectly ordinary ball will take a wicket.

Posted by liz1558 on (August 19, 2013, 9:52 GMT)

Normally, at this stage of a series the pressure would be off the side 3-0 up. Young players could be blooded, tired ones rested and we could get a glimpse of a promising future in a carefree exciting dispay of uninhibited cricket. Unfortunately England have been so tight, and Australia so desperately competitive because there is another series immediately following. Every game matters and is an opportunity for the Aussies to take some little morsal of encouragement. England don't want to give them anything they can take with them back to the series in Aus.

In all probability there will be another tight game with England doing just enough with the bat to win. Another total of 350, another strong display from Aus seamers, and anoher collapse under pressure. England will need their best XI to achieve it. They aren't in a position to do anything else.

Posted by jmcilhinney on (August 19, 2013, 9:42 GMT)

@Train Stationer on (August 19, 2013, 8:17 GMT), Tremlett certainly has the better average at Test level (26.75 vs 29.40) but loses out on strike rate (54.8 vs 48.3). That's a 9% better average for Tremlett but an 12% better strike rate for Finn. Finn could do with gaining a bit more control but he's definitely a wicket-taker and you need to take wickets to win. He's certainly worth persevering with in the hope that he develops that control. Working out a run up that works without taking him into the stumps will go a long way to doing that. I wonder what Anderson's career figures looked like when he was Finn's age.

Posted by   on (August 19, 2013, 8:17 GMT)

Finn is not test quality, Tremlett is. Do not be deceived by County figures.

Posted by JG2704 on (August 19, 2013, 8:12 GMT)

@Shan156 on (August 19, 2013, 2:09 GMT) I'd certainly consider resting him for this test and while the ODIs aren't AS important as the tests , it's a series I'd still like to see England win and having a refreshed Jimmy (chomping at the bit) will do our ODI chances no harm whatsoever. He'll prob get selected and take 10 for now - just to spite our judgment

Posted by JG2704 on (August 19, 2013, 8:08 GMT)

@Cpt.Meanster - So if your reckoning is true , how come not all bowlers who play shorter format international cricket , also play test cricket? Maybe you're right and the shorter format bowlers are just rested from test cricket. I guess that would explain why SA would have to resort to picking Vernon Philander for tests - not because he's a decent bowler but because they are resting guys like Mcclaren for the more important fixtures?

Posted by jmcilhinney on (August 19, 2013, 5:54 GMT)

@powerpuff8 on (August 18, 2013, 20:54 GMT), because it's only bowlers who need replacing. Bresnan and Onions are out with injuries and Monty's lost the plot. They're not interested in replacing batsmen and rightly so. They're not going to replace Cook, Trott, KP or Prior, all of whom have been below par this series but all of whom have excellent records over long periods. They're also not going to replace Root, who has struggled this series but has shown what he can do previously. If they were going to replace anyone it would be Bairstow, maybe with Taylor or maybe dropping Root down to #6 and bringing in another opener. They're not going to do that either though because they don't need to. They've won the series and they believe that Bairstow can succeed so they can afford to carry him a little. This is the first time that he's had a proper run of more than a game or two at a time and people seem to forget that most batsmen struggle early in their career.

Posted by jmcilhinney on (August 19, 2013, 5:45 GMT)

@Cpt.Meanster on (August 18, 2013, 15:33 GMT), well, you're wrong. According to you, Test cricket should be abolished and T20 is the pinnacle, so why should anyone listen to what you think where anything to do with Test cricket is concerned anyway?

Posted by Stevros3 on (August 19, 2013, 5:36 GMT)

After watching Warwickshire for a number of years I've always considered Woakes' bowling similar to that of Hoggard, capable of doing well in the test arena, but will always struggle to succeed in limited overs.

Posted by Shan156 on (August 19, 2013, 2:09 GMT)

So, Anderson may not be rested after all? No good resting him for the ODIs alone. I don't see the point of playing all our top players for this dead rubber. The gains of winning with a relatively inexperienced team outweighs the possible momentum shift ahead of the return series in the event of an Aussie victory. If we win, it will be a demoralizing loss for the Aussies. If we lose, the Aussies are not going to be as satisfied as they would have had they defeated our 1st choice XI. Or, it may even delude them into thinking that they can beat us and lure them into complacency ahead of the return series. Either way, it exposes our bench to the international level.

Posted by landl47 on (August 19, 2013, 0:18 GMT)

I'd rather see Finn back than Tremlett. Finn might get a bit wild but he has the pace to worry test batsmen. Tremlett in the T20 semi-final and final barely bowled above 80mph and was played easily by some average county batsmen.

Woakes is a good young player. He's raised his pace and now just needs to worry about rediscovering lateral movement. His FC record this year shows that at county level he's good enough- even though, OMM, Kallis, Sobers, Hadlee and Khan he sure isn't.

Kerrigan's there for experience. At 24, and with Swann not in decline yet, he's got a while to wait and getting him known in the dressing room is a good idea.

Taylor and Ballance should be in the touring squad- both very good young players.

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 22:42 GMT)

Tremlett to replace Bresnan for me.

Posted by powerpuff8 on (August 18, 2013, 20:54 GMT)

I think Taylor and Compton should have made the cut. Johnny Bairstow has enough of opportunities. One option would be to send Root (who other than the 180 has looked dodgy) at six and open with Compton or the second would be to replace Bairstow with Taylor. What I don't understand is that why only bowlers have been added to the squad when its the batting (exception Ian Bell) that has failed to fire.

Posted by JG2704 on (August 18, 2013, 20:20 GMT)

Perhaps predictably , I agree with Dark_Harlequin on (August 18, 2013, 10:37 GMT) but I don't think England will do 5/1/5 under any circumstances. Woakes batting this year is not what it was last year and while his bowling average is good this year , he has taken 27 wickets and has 1 5 for to his name which suggests that he might not be ideal in a 4 man attack. So bearing in mind a 4 man attack is gospel , I'd probably go Jimmy,Broad,Finn,Swann - unless it's a spinning track in which case I may actually think about resting Jimmy. For me Finn has still been bowling better than Tremlett at county level this year and I think England will go with Finn ahead of Tremlett too.

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 19:26 GMT)

Woakes is a far better FC cricketer than a limited overs player. His FC stats are much superior to any other current English player, viz:

3089 runs @ 37.67 and 284 wickets @ 25.48

As for pace, it is worth remembering that four of England greatest bowlers have been class RFMs: Lohmann, Barnes, Tate and Bedser. The idea that you cannot be successful bowling around the 80-83 mph is absurd.

Woakes has far more potential than Bresnan.

Posted by 200ondebut on (August 18, 2013, 18:08 GMT)

England have been pretty good recently at identifying talent and nurturing it. I would therefore trust them with Woakes. Unlikely to play tho - will go with Tremlett or Finn

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 17:52 GMT)

Broad, Swann and Anderson rested, Tremlett, Kerrigan and Finn in; they ought to learn how to carry the English cross...

Posted by Optic on (August 18, 2013, 17:17 GMT)

Anyone that thinks Woakes is either too slow or not good enough for international cricket can't have ever watched him bowl with the red ball in the County Championship. He simply wouldn't have the stats he has in first class cricket by throwing down straight medium pace dibber dobbers. I've watched him play numerous times and he's a very good bowler, he's accurate, swings the ball and is always at the batmen. He bowls a similar pace to Jimmy, which is 83/85mph range, which is fast enough, as long as you can get something out of the pitch or through the air, which he does. It's a shame that England fans talk him down because of one day games they've seen him play. He's not a one day bowler, he just doesn't have the variations yet for that.

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 17:07 GMT)

For all those who don't think Woakes will do well, based on his international achievements, I point you in the direction of his domestic stats: http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/player/247235.html

This clearly shows that his first class record is way, way, way superior to his list A record. He is clearly better suited to the red ball than the white.

So why shouldn't he get a chance at test level? Now, in this dead rubber. What have England got to lose? Nothing. What have England got to gain? A potential 6/7 batsman who can also be their fifth bowler. Weigh up the pros and cons yourselves...

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 16:05 GMT)

Question that should be asked is who would the Ozzies least like to face Tremlett or Woakes. Based on the last Ashes down under I think the answer is clear.

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 16:04 GMT)

Really felt Panesar should have been picked. But looking at the future, definitely Kerrigan is a better option. Anderson should b rested as mentioned in my earlier comment, which would give Eng a chance to try out Finn/Tremlett/Woakes for a seamer spot.

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 15:41 GMT)

would of thought with his improvement of his bowling then maybe for what Bairstow has scored then we could have given Ben Stokes a game

Posted by Cpt.Meanster on (August 18, 2013, 15:33 GMT)

@jmcilhinney: First of all, there is nothing special about Woakes from what I have seen of him. Secondly, your true ability is exposed in ODIs and T20s when the pressure is put on you by the batsmen. In test cricket, such players won't be exposed because the batsmen usually don't go after them. If the conditions turn out to be helpful, even a half decent bowler can get wickets. In the Indian team, Ishant Sharma is a fine example. He's a decent test match bowler but not a very good limited overs bowler. According to me, a bowler who bowls well in limited overs cricket will be as good or even better in test match cricket.

Posted by SDHM on (August 18, 2013, 15:07 GMT)

@cric_J - Woakes has a better average, strike rate and economy rate than Bresnan in first class cricket. Suggests he does indeed have the consistency to succeed in Tests. Like Onions, his consistency and accuracy from 4 day cricket don't translate too well to limited overs; it makes him predictable and easy to target, but it's definitely a strength of his in the longer game.

Posted by browners76 on (August 18, 2013, 15:03 GMT)

It should have been Stokes not Woakes picked. Woakes is very much an English type seamer who I think will struggle to get wickets overseas. Stokes is the better bet for me long term and his bowling impressed in the Lions game.

Posted by cric_J on (August 18, 2013, 14:03 GMT)

Re Woakes being included in the team, IMO it is more for his similar (maybe better) batting ability as compared to Bres rather than his bowling.

I strongly feel that Woakes hasn't got the sustained accuracy that is so vital to be a test seamer, not yet at least. He may bowl a couple of good spells but you need way more than that to take 20 wickets and win a game of cricket.

I agree with @jmcilhinney that ODI performances have very little to do with your test form, but I feel it is worth noting that in the ODI series against NZ, Woakes not only looked unimpressive but completely hopeless. He lacked any accuracy or control whatsoever.And be it tests, ODIs,T20s or even college cricket, those 2 are the bare minimum requirements to be a decent fast bowler.

P.S. All those who wanted Jimmy to be rested, should read his column in the Sunday Mail today. "Please don't rest me, I'm not tired out" he says. The poor lad really wants to regain his touch and be part of every Ashes moment !

Posted by cric_J on (August 18, 2013, 13:42 GMT)

I see that majority of the posters here would like to go with Tremlett in place of Bres. But since I'm not too sure if he is good enough to be back to international cricket just yet, I'd rather go for Finny.

I agree that Finny looked completely out of sorts at TB but the Oval will be quite a different proposition not only in terms of the pitch and conditions but also in terms of the mental pressure on players. Having already won the urn and being 3-0 up, Finny might just be provided the psychological cushion that he needs to regain his touch and accuracy.

Also, Finny and Tremlett are pretty similar sort of bowlers, both are tall and prefer a lot of pace and bounce off the surface which they are likely to get if the Oval pitch behaves as usual. Tremlett is more accurate and a "safer" bet on most days. But with the pace that Finny has, he is certainly the trickier proposition of the two for batsmen and will bowl more wicket-taking deliveries IF he gets it right.

Posted by class9ryan on (August 18, 2013, 13:13 GMT)

Chris Woakes I suspect is still not international quality, but saying that he's the one who is pretty similar to Bresnan in England. Very pleased for Simon Kerrigan. Good performances really count atleast in England.

Posted by jmcilhinney on (August 18, 2013, 12:42 GMT)

@Usman Sharif on (August 18, 2013, 11:43 GMT), that doesn't really make sense. Limited-overs performances shouldn't count for all that much when it comes to selection for Tests anyway and many, many people have been saying for a long, long time that Woakes is better with the red ball than the white. Even if he doesn't bowl well in ODIs and/or T20Is, that still doesn't mean that he won't bowl well enough to be a fourth seamer at Test level.

Posted by jmcilhinney on (August 18, 2013, 12:37 GMT)

@Chaman Betrabet on (August 18, 2013, 11:55 GMT), a worn out Anderson is better than an Onions with a broken finger.

Posted by 2.14istherunrate on (August 18, 2013, 12:35 GMT)

This is an interesting squad though the addition I predicted has not materialised-Taylor for Bairstow. I do not mind if Bairstow says but he must start to produce.He has great potential and a couple of flaws. Taylor though should go to Aus. Re Kerrigan- Monty seems to have lost his space but the cupboard is not bare. That he is a real spinner-not a cynic-is very reassuring. Giving it a rip is really the key and 47 wickets attest to his ability.Monty I suspect lost favour in NZ and not after. His future and Kerrigan's are intertwined. Woakes- The should be but is not player. The trouble with Woakes is that while he has it all, the all is not to a high enough level. He and Dernbach fought it out for the 'rubbish' bowler's spot in CT. All but the irresistible force in English cricket I am not sure I could trust him in Ashes cricket. needs 2 yards of pace Anderson will polay, I think. Onion's injury has made this necessary. Who cares? Not me. Tremlett should play too.

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 11:55 GMT)

Anderson shud b replaced with onions as he looks worn out after a big season

Posted by OhhhhhMattyMatty on (August 18, 2013, 11:43 GMT)

You can't compare Woakes' ODI displays with his potential Test displays. His List A and T20 records are abysmal. His FC record is world class!

He averages over 37 with the bat and 25 with the ball! That puts him in the class of Kallis, Sobers, Hadlee and Khan as a FC all-rounder. If he replicates that at Test level, he will become an all time great!

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 11:43 GMT)

I would prefer Tremlett over Woakes any day. Eng has to tour Australia and it is not too far away. Tremlett and Finn will be crucial in bouncy wickets with their height. Woakes need to prove his worth in ODIs where Anderson and Broad will be rested... Moreover, with urn and Ashes series in hand, it will be worthwhile to give Finn a go ahead of exhausted Anderson and Bairstow deserves a last chance...

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 11:40 GMT)

Good piece of comedy from the selectors by picking the medium pacer Chris Woakes. Certainly made me laugh.

Posted by Front-Foot-Lunge on (August 18, 2013, 11:38 GMT)

As a proven wicket taker and speedster, Finn is a natural inclusion. Great for Kerrigan to be blooded this early too. Bresnan will undoubtedly be missed as he is a genuine all-rounder and therefore irreplaceable in his current form, but Woakes is destined for big things so deserves a chance.

Posted by AKS286 on (August 18, 2013, 11:35 GMT)

I'm very happy to see Tremlett.Onion is unlucky injury hits him again. Kerrigan ahead of Panesar & Tredwell lets see what he proves. Again Woakes OMG -not again Luke Wright & W.White are better than Woakes. I want Taylor and Hales in the 5th test. A new Wicket keeper can also be tested in 5th test or Baistow should keep and Taylor should be added in place of Prior (rest). A spin all-rounder is also a good choice for Woakes.

Posted by anton1234 on (August 18, 2013, 11:27 GMT)

Kerrigan is a backup. He is also being brought into the England setup as he will fly to Australia as the second spinner. He will not play at the Oval. Monty should not play for England again after what he did,

Tremlett will come in for Bresnan and Finn will play should England decide to rest Anderson.

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 11:22 GMT)

I suspect David Willey's stock has risen after his performance in the T20 final yesterday. Good to see Kerrigan called up, less certain about Woakes... I'd wondered whether Ballance might a call up perhaps instead of Bairstow. Suspect his time is coming. All that really concerns me is England taking their foot off the gas rather than going saying we're going to win 4-0 - sincerely hope the attitude is the latter.

Posted by venkatesh018 on (August 18, 2013, 11:21 GMT)

Why not try James Tredwell?

Posted by jmcilhinney on (August 18, 2013, 11:10 GMT)

I'm happy to see that the selectors haven't given up on Woakes despite his poor returns with the white ball but I'm not sure that they would consider him a like-for-like replacement for Bresnan, probably being a better batsman but hot as a good a bowler. I would think that, if Woakes plays, it would be batting at #7, behind Prior, and bowling as a fourth seamer. That might actually provide a bit of a safety net if they want to play Tremlett, who seems to still be a bit of a gamble after not having seemed back to his best in the CC. I'd probably prefer to see Finn replace Bresnan than Tremlett, as long as they've watched him in the CC and think that he's addressed some of his issues. That would not be inconsistent because I think that dropping him from the squad was more about making sure that he got to bowl while out of the first XI rather than thinking that he wasn't good enough.

Posted by salazar555 on (August 18, 2013, 11:07 GMT)

I'd have put Stokes in before Woakes. Happy Kerrigan is getting a taste even if it is just to stand on the sidelines.

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 10:59 GMT)

I don't think Woakes will play test cricket for England any time soon. As a batsman, he must be way behind the likes of Bairstow, Taylor, Ballance, even Bopara. As a bowler, the queue must be even longer. I don't think he'll merit selection as a bits and pieces player, either. Still, if England are still having difficulty filling the number 6 slot in a few years, especially after Pietersen retires (which I don't think will be too distant in the future), he might have a look in if there is nobody else. I don't think he's a test quality bowler, but I think he'd be a more useful part-timer than Trott.

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 10:47 GMT)

Woakes has the first first class bowling average in the squad but has struggled in the ODI cricket he has played recently looked like he needed an extra yard of pace so I am not sure he is third pace bowler

With the series won I wouldn't mind England looking at him and if he succeeds, he could bat at 6 and England would have a 5 man pace attack. With Bairstow going back to the counties to work on his batting and keeping. Matt Prior will not play forever

Posted by Harlequin. on (August 18, 2013, 10:37 GMT)

I'd combine what patchmaster and Vinay Kolhatkar are saying; rest Prior, Bairstow to keep wicket, and bring Woakes in at 7. Then you could go in with 2 spinners in Swann and Kerrigan. But they won't, I'd bet that they keep the same team but Finn in for Bresnan.

Posted by Yasassri on (August 18, 2013, 10:28 GMT)

jonathan trott, bairstrow or even 'root' to be consider for leave out in next Test Criket match and must give chance for 'Chris Woakes' and 'Tremlett'.

Posted by countjimmoriarty on (August 18, 2013, 10:26 GMT)

Woakes Bresnan-like? Apart from being less than half the bowler that is.

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 10:26 GMT)

I can see England looking for an all rounder by bringing in woakes but worked did not look like be was going to get anyone out in the ODI series against New Zealand. Woakes bowling is a yard short on pace for international cricket. It's a shame Broad cant tighten up his game to bat at 7. Anderson needs a rest soon as he has bowled his heart out so far this summer.

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 10:21 GMT)

Monty still second best after swan. .no doubt about it

Posted by Yarms on (August 18, 2013, 10:18 GMT)

Is Panasar a spent force? Surely he is the best left arm spinner England have?

Posted by whatawicket on (August 18, 2013, 10:16 GMT)

i think kerrigan is just a pick to maybe make the aussies go in with 2 spinners. as hes from my county and i do think hes good enough now, his time will come. with this winters tour of oz that time ahead of monty.

Posted by Ms.Cricket on (August 18, 2013, 10:15 GMT)

Root and Bairstow are lucky. Compton should have been given another chance with Root at 6. Anderson has stuggled last three Tests and Fiinn, Broad and Tremlett should be the pace attack at The Oval.

Posted by RednWhiteArmy on (August 18, 2013, 9:53 GMT)

Broad, Anderson, Swann & either Kerrigan, Tremlett or Woakes should be competitive. Its unfortunate for Bres but now (3-0 up) id like to see England take a positive risk & win with 2 spinners.

Posted by 5wombats on (August 18, 2013, 9:52 GMT)

Good. Kerrigan is a good move - he may even play if The Oval is the way it has been in recent years - dry, moderate bounce and suitable for spin. Woakes is the next cab off the rank - has been for a while. Not so sure about him as I was; his bowling is not of the calibre of Bresnan - but Woakes can bat better imo. As for Finn - I personally don't want to see him play as I think he lost it at Trent Bridge. That's not to say that he is a bad player - we know he's going to be around for a few years yet. Regulars will know that I rate Tremlett - a player who is sure to come to Australia in a few weeks and will play here. Having said that - it's unclear whether he is back to his best, yet. Can't make up my mind about whether they will play Lurch though. They probably won't. I should imagine they will play Finn in place of Bresnan. Conservative lot the England selectors.

Posted by Jaffa79 on (August 18, 2013, 9:48 GMT)

I know many Warks fans might disagree with me but I seriously doubt Woakes at the top level. He looks like he has a good technique with the bat and has developed well over the last few years but I am not sure he can get good batsmen out. He lacks pace and doesn't really do much with it either. Perhaps I am wrong but he looks just under Test cricket class. Stokes on the other hand looks like he has more potential; he has pace, moves it about and whilst his batting looks a bit it needs some refinement he does take the attack to the opposition. I think they'll need a all rounder option in Aus and I'd be inclined to take Stokes instead of Bairstow, who again, looks just under Test quality.

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 9:40 GMT)

Woakes can play for Bairstow if he is averaging 42 with the bat. Fantastic if he succeeds. Ideally Tremlett for Bresnan as well, and England would be very competitive again.

Posted by OhhhhhMattyMatty on (August 18, 2013, 9:12 GMT)

Delighted for Woaksey, who is statistically one of the all time great English FC cricketers. Tarnished by some unlucky and poor ODI and T20 showings, which he is clearly not suited for, despite his incredible all-round talent, his FC performances remain unbelievable.

Always has a batting average above 35, always has a bowling average around 25! Imagine that talent at number 8, with Stokes at number 7 and Prior at number 6! Fantastic thought in a year or so.

(With Bairstow then getting ready to replace Prior in 3-4 years!)

Posted by Patchmaster on (August 18, 2013, 9:10 GMT)

Bairstow should keep wicket, and they should bring Ballance into the side. This adds an extra batsman to the line up, and gives the out of form Prior a well earned rest. Plus we get to see what Jonny is like with the gloves.

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 9:09 GMT)

MY XI for england is 1.Cook 2.root 3.trott 4.kp 5.bell 6.bairstow 7.prior 8.broad 9.swann 10.finn 11. Tremlett. Rest for anderson... And my XI for aus is 1.warner 2.rogers 3.Hughes 4.clarke 5.S.smith 6.Watson 7.haddin 8.faulkner 9.starc 10.Bird 11.Lyon.. Rest for both siddle and harris as next ashes is very much near by... And my aus xi for 1st odi is 1.Watson 2.Warner 3.hughes 4.Clarke 5.Bailey 6.Adam voges 7.wade 8.Johnson 9.Faulkner 10. Mckay 11. Fawad ahmed

Posted by Murnau on (August 18, 2013, 8:50 GMT)

We're probably not far away from the day when Geoff Miller calls up all the players in the county championship to give Flower and Cook plenty of options for the Test.

Miller seems to leave the decisions to Flower.

Posted by Tom_Bowler on (August 18, 2013, 8:41 GMT)

Tremlett for Bresnan should be the one change for me although if Finn can convince Saker his run up's fixed he could be in with a chance. Good to see Kerrigan get a call up, sincerely hope Woakes is there to do drinks, far too vanilla a bowler to trouble Test batsmen.

Posted by   on (August 18, 2013, 8:38 GMT)

Woakes is a bit of a surprise with the game being at the Oval. I think he'd be fairly innocuous on that pitch but I don't think he'll play as Tremlett would be a better bet. Good pick though with Kerrigan

Comments have now been closed for this article

Email Feedback Print
Andrew McGlashanClose
Andrew McGlashan Assistant Editor Andrew arrived at ESPNcricinfo via Manchester and Cape Town, after finding the assistant editor at a weak moment as he watched England's batting collapse in the Newlands Test. Andrew began his cricket writing as a freelance covering Lancashire during 2004 when they were relegated in the County Championship. In fact, they were top of the table when he began reporting on them but things went dramatically downhill. He likes to let people know that he is a supporter of county cricket, a fact his colleagues will testify to and bemoan in equal quantities.
Tour Results
England v Australia at Southampton - Sep 16, 2013
Australia won by 49 runs
England v Australia at Cardiff - Sep 14, 2013
England won by 3 wickets (with 3 balls remaining)
England v Australia at Birmingham - Sep 11, 2013
No result
England v Australia at Manchester - Sep 8, 2013
Australia won by 88 runs
England v Australia at Leeds - Sep 6, 2013
Match abandoned without a ball bowled
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days