Durhamfootman wrote:should be 1 or 2 or 3, of course, Arthur
the way i put it looks more like I meant 1 and 2 and 3
but yes... fair enough
although the score card reads as if he was only playing in order to bowl the first 5 overs of each innings
England already have a team containing 2 keepers and on another occasion it might be 3 keepers, so if you add 2 all rounders (3 with Moeen) to that, more than half the team may one day be either an all rounder or a keeper, which feels like a team full to the brim with bits and pieces cricketers to me
Don't get me wrong... I like Sam Curran, I'm just not sure whether adding 40 runs to a 200 run victory represents best value for his place in the side in this series.... especially since England are still experimenting and still desperately hoping to find some batsmen capable of holding down a top order role for years to come
They could easily have played Denly instead of Curran without affecting the margin of victory unduly
easy in hindsight, of course
Arthur Crabtree wrote:Probably need to find a number three with the potential to average more than Moeen's 30, which sends him down into the crowded late middle order. Only play two of JB1&2 and Foakes. Probably play one of Stokes and Curran in most circumstances.
In England, potentially neither of Leach of Rashid will play. Maybe one of them sometimes.
Might as well forget about Buttler's keeping. He's a specialist bat now. As proven by Foakes coming into the squad and then the team to keep when JB1 got injured.
meninblue wrote:
Moeen, Ben 1, Sam, Jos, Ben 2 as all batting -bowling all rounders or wicket-keeper batsmen all rounder. There are 5. That is too many imo as well. However, the all rounders are doing better than specialist batsmen or specialist bowlers. But if they (specialists) are not played they will not be found at all.
Arthur Crabtree wrote:Probably need to find a number three with the potential to average more than Moeen's 30, which sends him down into the crowded late middle order. Only play two of JB1&2 and Foakes. Probably play one of Stokes and Curran in most circumstances.
In England, potentially neither of Leach of Rashid will play. Maybe one of them sometimes.
Arthur Crabtree wrote:
Might as well forget about Buttler's keeping. He's a specialist bat now. As proven by Foakes coming into the squad and then the team to keep when JB1 got injured.
Arthur Crabtree wrote:England have tried specialist batters who have failed to come up to the mark. Westley, Lyth, Stoneman, Duckett, Pope (so far) and plenty more who haven't amassed the stats, like Malan, Hales, Compton, Ballance and Vince. Or who were unfortunate like Taylor and Haseeb. Trott was recalled. Cook was held on to. There are others...
meninblue wrote:Arthur Crabtree wrote:England have tried specialist batters who have failed to come up to the mark. Westley, Lyth, Stoneman, Duckett, Pope (so far) and plenty more who haven't amassed the stats, like Malan, Hales, Compton, Ballance and Vince. Or who were unfortunate like Taylor and Haseeb. Trott was recalled. Cook was held on to. There are others...
I see 12 inexperienced test batsmen there, Arthur. All of them failed. One succeeded but post injury could not score even in county (Haseeb). Others probably ended with average below 30 or 20. What i find odd is they really had to try 11 specialist batsmen and secondly why none of them came good. Think Jos has best test average (36) amongst these experiments. What's the issue here. Are they selecting wrong players or are the players being given test cap are correctly selected but international format is something they cannot cope up with or they are not given a decent continuous run or something else apart from these reasons.
backfootpunch wrote:meninblue wrote:Arthur Crabtree wrote:England have tried specialist batters who have failed to come up to the mark. Westley, Lyth, Stoneman, Duckett, Pope (so far) and plenty more who haven't amassed the stats, like Malan, Hales, Compton, Ballance and Vince. Or who were unfortunate like Taylor and Haseeb. Trott was recalled. Cook was held on to. There are others...
I see 12 inexperienced test batsmen there, Arthur. All of them failed. One succeeded but post injury could not score even in county (Haseeb). Others probably ended with average below 30 or 20. What i find odd is they really had to try 11 specialist batsmen and secondly why none of them came good. Think Jos has best test average (36) amongst these experiments. What's the issue here. Are they selecting wrong players or are the players being given test cap are correctly selected but international format is something they cannot cope up with or they are not given a decent continuous run or something else apart from these reasons.
County cricket just isn't producing any top batsmen at the moment
At the moment our best batsmen just happen to be keepers as well, fortunately the likes of buttler and bairstow are excellent fielders without the gloves on
They are batsmen who can keep for me not wicket keeper batsmen
If they are the best we have which tbh it looks like they are then they play
There really isn't anyone scoring so many runs they are forced to pick them other than burns
Arthur Crabtree wrote:Some didn't have the county record to suggest they would succeed. I suspect there are problems at international coaching level. Since Joe Root, I don't think anyone has averaged over 40. And that was eight years ago. Ballance did ok, but lost his way badly.
OK, Haseeb averaged over 40. But he wouldn't be if he hadn't got injured.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... pe=batting
Even the payers we think are doing well, like JB1 and Stokes, aren't.
Return to Live Cricket Matches
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest