Quote Originally Posted by Hot Shot Hamish. View Post
At least today has proved that Foakes has to play in the remainder of the series. Bairstow is worth his place as a batsmen in the team without doubt, but I’m sure if you looked at all 18 counties wicketkeepers he is easily the poorest of them all. Good standing back I don’t dispute, but standing up which is so much more difficult he couldn’t keep chickens.
Who do you leave out if you include Foakes though? Crawley's the obvious candidate I suppose, but he looked good in the first innings, as did Bairstow. Wasn't impressed by Duckett, but he'd been on a really good run before Friday's innings, so it would be very harsh to consider dropping him on the back of one bad test (he could still get a good score second time around as well).

Although Stokes has picked up a very important wicket, his place would be under threat now if it wasn't for his inspired captaincy because he's not scoring many runs and bowling is, clearly, much harder for his body to cope with these days. England also need an all rounder (I'd consider Curran if Stokes' bowling tails off like it may well do), but I'd also always want a spinner because England's attack would be very samey without one, I think the Aussies may have something to say about using thirteen mind

Think one of the seamers has to stand down for a Wood or Curran to give us something different in terms of pace bowling and, although I'd also be looking to play Foakes, for Crawley I suppose, I think they'll stick with Bairstow behind the stumps.