Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

From statsguru.

In Aus-77
BD- 30
UK-43
India-60
NZ-66
SA-67
SL-41
UAE-44
WI-142

Don't reckon anyone called him a ftb though.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:From statsguru.

In Aus-77
BD- 30
UK-43
India-60
NZ-66
SA-67
SL-41
UAE-44
WI-142

Don't reckon anyone called him a ftb though.

My mistake. I did copy paste of the SR instead of the average. Given these stats, i see that he has flopped in Bangladesh only.

Good in fact if nobody considers him a "FTB". But i got that impression reading some posts, just that he was wasn't tagged as FTB.

Good strike rates!

He actually scored more runs in 2015.

He doesn't have the most runs in a calendar year for someone called Smith. That was Graeme Smith in 2008.

Will be interesting to see if Agar will make his Australian test debut in a home test, 4 years after his surprise call up in England. Still best known for that 98 on debut then his ability with the ball

I think Lehman will be keen to give him a test.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Good strike rates!

He actually scored more runs in 2015.

He doesn't have the most runs in a calendar year for someone called Smith. That was Graeme Smith in 2008.

Don't mention Graeme to sussex, or in fact any player with the surname Smith!

Seems to be quite a bit of suggestion from the pundits that Ali should be dropped for the last Test. Yes, he’s currently as much use as that toasted sandwich maker you got for Christmas one year at present, but, how do you replace him? It can’t be a like for like swap with Crane as that would be a very long tail, then again if you replace Curran with Crane and being say Foakes in, that’s a huge amount of pressure on Crane if it all goes wrong.

I’d just play Ali personally, if a certain Durham player were around this would be a lot simpler!

I'd play Moeen too... and I think England will. Might bring Crane in for Curran. Horses for courses

the argument that we should just play someone that is basically a passenger because on paper without him the team looks a bit unbalanced doesn't make alot of sense to me

just about every reason for keeping him in the side is a negative one

England couldn't pick Mason Crane with a great deal of confidence either. Which is a fault with the squad.

Maybe go with seven batters, three quicks and a spinner?

Haven't heard if Overton is going to be fit.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:It's not happening in this series though. No one else has more than one ton on either side. All the England players are struggling. Paine, Handscom, Bancroft, Khawaja average under 40. Smith has half again the runs Warner has, twice the total of S.Marsh, four times the rest... The pitches have been good enough to produce results (and there would have been one at the MCG if Smith hadn't dropped Cook on 50...).

Too true Arthur!

As an aside I think it was Warne and Giles who both got the label ‘dropped the Ashes’.

Did Smith ‘drop the whitewash’?

Can’t see the point of changing the team now - Moeen needs encouragement and support, with decent fields to bowl to. Like batsmen in poor nick eg as Cook was, a slice of luck or two can make a huge difference.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:England couldn't pick Mason Crane with a great deal of confidence either. Which is a fault with the squad.

thats kinda what i meant when i said the reasons for keeping Ali in the team are negative ones

he's coming off a year where he is only averaging 27 with the bat and he has taken 3 wickets at 135 in this series in 120 overs bowled

the innings he played in Melbourne was one of the most reckless i can remember for a long time as well, he comes in as the last recognised batsman, has a guy at the other end on 146 and starts slogging like its a t20

Fair enough. Not sure either option sounds appealing. If Crane isn't ready he could have another Kerrigan (or Borthwick). If he'd built up a few years of experience in CC1 and was a regular pick for his county, he could be better rated as to whether he's ready or good enough. I'd have taken Leach and Rayner, though I have to admit that Leach wasn't doing well for the Lions. Crane just feels like a throw of the dice, especially as a lone spinner. He's also hardly played all winter.

Seems to be press talk that Mo will go though.

Stoneman/Cook/Vince/Root/Malan/Bairstow/Ballance or Foakes/Overton or Woakes/Broad/Crane/Anderson.

Leaves out: Mo, Curran, Ball.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Fair enough. Not sure either option sounds appealing. If Crane isn't ready he could have another Kerrigan (or Borthwick). If he'd built up a few years of experience in CC1 and was a regular pick for his county, he could be better rated as to whether he's ready or good enough. I'd have taken Leach and Rayner, though I have to admit that Leach wasn't doing well for the Lions. Crane just feels like a throw of the dice, especially as a lone spinner. He's also hardly played all winter.

i'm not particularly comfortable playing Crane as the sole spinner either, just saying that using that as the reason for keeping Ali in the team is negative, as is the worry about extending the tail or going in with just 4 bowlers

bottom line is we have a guy who is really out of form, cant buy a wicket, is struggling for runs and is coming off one of the worst situational innings in recent memory and its depressing that we might have to play him because all the alternatives dont really inspire confidence either

and even more depressing is we were having a similar conversation last winter when getting thrashed by India but all the alternatives in the squad were seen to be just as unselectable as the people who weren't justifying their spot

The India squad was probably worse! And damaged by still taking all the players who had burned their chances in BD for the second part of the winter. But yes, the rest of the Ashes squad offers scant optimism and the Lions have played so little, so no one from outside the squad has been able to make a case for inclusion,