Here's my tuppence-worth:
Largely under Bayliss we have gone backwards. I'd shunt him out and promote Farbrace, under whom we were making great strides before Bayliss was appointed.
Agreed with the last couple of posters that there has been something of a hysterical reaction here. Our county system is fine, the two division system working pretty well in ensuring the best players are starting to filter to the top ensuring more competitive matches.
The Stokes situation was massive - his removal from the batting and bowling line-up has left us somewhat imbalanced, not only that but our fielding has been below par (something he really adds to the team too) and the general spirit of the team will have been affected. Like Flintoff before him just having Stokes in your line-up, even if he doesn't necessarily contribute too heavily himself, is a fillip to the side.
Obviously most of the more senior players haven't stepped up, which is a crying shame. I wouldn't write off the likes of Cook and Broad just yet, but they needed to show up and haven't done so.
As the last two posters have both said, Australia's attack this series (in generally more helpful conditions) has been superior to ours. All three quicks are injury-prone but all have stayed fit and firing.
And then there's Steve Smith - bloody awful to watch but boy, his reactions are so quick he's in position to play his shot when the bowler is still running in.
This isn't like 13/14, there are a few positives at least to take out of this series so far even if the end results have been comprehensive. Dawid Malan (not good enough, apparently), has already scored more runs in three Tests than any England player managed across five in 13/14. I've been impressed by Overton. Stoneman has shown glimpses, as has James Vince (if he can avoid getting out driving!).
Largely under Bayliss we have gone backwards. I'd shunt him out and promote Farbrace, under whom we were making great strides before Bayliss was appointed.
Agreed with the last couple of posters that there has been something of a hysterical reaction here. Our county system is fine, the two division system working pretty well in ensuring the best players are starting to filter to the top ensuring more competitive matches.
The Stokes situation was massive - his removal from the batting and bowling line-up has left us somewhat imbalanced, not only that but our fielding has been below par (something he really adds to the team too) and the general spirit of the team will have been affected. Like Flintoff before him just having Stokes in your line-up, even if he doesn't necessarily contribute too heavily himself, is a fillip to the side.
Obviously most of the more senior players haven't stepped up, which is a crying shame. I wouldn't write off the likes of Cook and Broad just yet, but they needed to show up and haven't done so.
As the last two posters have both said, Australia's attack this series (in generally more helpful conditions) has been superior to ours. All three quicks are injury-prone but all have stayed fit and firing.
And then there's Steve Smith - bloody awful to watch but boy, his reactions are so quick he's in position to play his shot when the bowler is still running in.
This isn't like 13/14, there are a few positives at least to take out of this series so far even if the end results have been comprehensive. Dawid Malan (not good enough, apparently), has already scored more runs in three Tests than any England player managed across five in 13/14. I've been impressed by Overton. Stoneman has shown glimpses, as has James Vince (if he can avoid getting out driving!).
