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

Hameed does seem to be getting some of his form back, he made 80 tough runs against Middlesex this week, he's also a lot more defensive than any other option which would help protect the flaky middle order, but Stoneman has to start the first Test.

As for Westley, he's not exactly impressed and while he's clearly talented his habit of playing around his front pad is going to be exploited, can he work out a way to stop doing it in the few CC innings he has left I wonder. The most obvious, and I know I've banged on about it, fix to the order would be batting Root at three and Stokes at 5. I'd find it difficult to advocate throwing another new player in at 3 for the Ashes which really only leaves Hales and he wants to bat lower down.

I supposed it depends on what exactly Bayliss means by experienced players, is he talking generally or just in Test cricket? Could open the door for someone like Roy. Buttler will likely go because he's experienced internationally, it's hard to impress when you don't play, he did make 40 odd a game or two ago and had a good T20 campaign.

Making_Splinters wrote:Hameed does seem to be getting some of his form back, he made 80 tough runs against Middlesex this week, he's also a lot more defensive than any other option which would help protect the flaky middle order, but Stoneman has to start the first Test.

As for Westley, he's not exactly impressed and while he's clearly talented his habit of playing around his front pad is going to be exploited, can he work out a way to stop doing it in the few CC innings he has left I wonder. The most obvious, and I know I've banged on about it, fix to the order would be batting Root at three and Stokes at 5. I'd find it difficult to advocate throwing another new player in at 3 for the Ashes which really only leaves Hales and he wants to bat lower down.

I supposed it depends on what exactly Bayliss means by experienced players, is he talking generally or just in Test cricket? Could open the door for someone like Roy. Buttler will likely go because he's experienced internationally, it's hard to impress when you don't play, he did make 40 odd a game or two ago and had a good T20 campaign.

Very informative discussion with Athers, Sir Ian, Nasser and Sir Ian on Sky this morning. They were all adamant that form or shortcomings highlighted during this summer's test series were irrelevant to the Ashes because conditions will be so different. Not so sure if, for example, Westley's tendency to play across his front foot makes him vulnerable when the kookaburra ball doesn't seam much. They were confident that Stoneman would do well. He's scored 1000+ runs opening in the 1st division in each of the past 4 seasons; sufficient to indicate that he's the best available.Any opener would have been vulnerable particularly to such a quality S. African attack in this season's conditions.

I think they'll tear Stonemercenary apart

I am biased, of course

but you watch!

he won't last 5 minutes

Durhamfootman wrote:I think they'll tear Stonemercenary apart

I am biased, of course

but you watch!

he won't last 5 minutes

With the greatest respect D/F, I think the aforementioned 4 wise men are more qualified to speak on the issue and, as you admit, you're biased. I think he has the ability, it's his temperament that is debatable. We've seen him play disciplined innings but not consistently. He certainly appears to have displayed consistency at Surrey.

The quicker pitches potentially could make planting the front pad even more problematic. There will be reverse swing and Hazlewood at least will seam the ball at a very high standard. We'll see. If one of the rookie three emerges from this tough tour that would be a good outcome for England.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:The quicker pitches potentially could make planting the front pad even more problematic. There will be reverse swing and Hazlewood at least will seam the ball at a very high standard. We'll see. If one of the rookie three emerges from this tough tour that would be a good outcome for England.

The best players won't cope with high quality reverse swing. Certainly can't believe there'll be as much seam and swing as there's been this season. If Hazelwood can seam it in Aussie conditions then so will Anderson. As you say, time will tell

westoelad wrote: I think the aforementioned 4 wise men are more qualified to speak on the issue

As William Goldman famously said, nobody knows anything. Though in retrospect, everyone will have seen the signs.

There are many greats with just the same flaws as the multitudes who failed. Currently the Sky box has as much of an idea as anyone who will score runs in Australia. I don't recall anyone predicting Carberry would head the averages last time around. Or that England would be wrecked by Mitchell Johnson.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:

westoelad wrote: I think the aforementioned 4 wise men are more qualified to speak on the issue

As William Goldman famously said, nobody knows anything. Though in retrospect, everyone will have seen the signs.

There are many greats with just the same flaws as the multitudes who failed. Currently the Sky box has as much of an idea as anyone who will score runs in Australia. I don't recall anyone predicting Carberry would head the averages last time around. Or that England would be wrecked by Mitchell Johnson.

I'm not claiming the aforesaid are clairvoyant or omnipotent. It would be rather boring if they were. I would claim that they're the best qualified to offer an opinion. Some are more informed than others.

England have had 2 x 5-0 drubbings in a decade in Australia, and these experts are predicting English batsman will probably prefer playing away against a world class attack, than a team that hasnt achieved anything in tests for nearly 20 years at home?

sussexpob wrote:England have had 2 x 5-0 drubbings in a decade in Australia, and these experts are predicting English batsman will probably prefer playing away against a world class attack, than a team that hasnt achieved anything in tests for nearly 20 years at home?

2 ashes series in Australia in the last decade.
Score 1-1. Source. Wisdens Cricketers Almanacj.
2nd part of your claim is too vague to have any credence.

westoelad wrote:

Durhamfootman wrote:I think they'll tear Stonemercenary apart

I am biased, of course

but you watch!

he won't last 5 minutes

With the greatest respect D/F, I think the aforementioned 4 wise men are more qualified to speak on the issue and, as you admit, you're biased. I think he has the ability, it's his temperament that is debatable. We've seen him play disciplined innings but not consistently. He certainly appears to have displayed consistency at Surrey.

I'll stand by my assertion

Find out if I'm right in a few months time

Durhamfootman wrote:

westoelad wrote:

Durhamfootman wrote:I think they'll tear Stonemercenary apart

I am biased, of course

but you watch!

he won't last 5 minutes

With the greatest respect D/F, I think the aforementioned 4 wise men are more qualified to speak on the issue and, as you admit, you're biased. I think he has the ability, it's his temperament that is debatable. We've seen him play disciplined innings but not consistently. He certainly appears to have displayed consistency at Surrey.

I'll stand by my assertion

Find out if I'm right in a few months time

We will indeed.

Aside from the pedantic comment, I dont think the point made about it potentially being easier due to the lack of ball movement, is at all a sensible one to make considering the performance of some of our far superior batting line ups in Australia in history. Home against Windies, away against Australia, I know which Id want to play.

Stoneman for me looks like a player who's feet take a while to get moving. Especially early in his innings, he likes to plant his feet before delivery, and rely on his hands a lot. He might struggle with extra bounce and accuracy of Australia, playing away from his pad. When he settles, he picks up the ball better, has decent hand-eye coordination to pick up the ball. But always looks like a vulnerable player early in the innings.

sussexpob wrote:Aside from the pedantic comment, I dont think the point made about it potentially being easier due to the lack of ball movement, is at all a sensible one to make considering the performance of some of our far superior batting line ups in Australia in history. Home against Windies, away against Australia, I know which Id want to play.

Stoneman for me looks like a player who's feet take a while to get moving. Especially early in his innings, he likes to plant his feet before delivery, and rely on his hands a lot. He might struggle with extra bounce and accuracy of Australia, playing away from his pad. When he settles, he picks up the ball better, has decent hand-eye coordination to pick up the ball. But always looks like a vulnerable player early in the innings.

Wouldn't disagree with anything there. His foot movement isn't great but he's coped well at the Riverside where both seam and swing are excessive. Faults can be found in most batsmen's technique but a good eye and quick hands helps to compensate. What I find frustrating is those who criticise but can't offer a better alternative. Stoneman is to my mind the best available so we have to back him. We can't now send in a raw alternative in an ashes series in Australia. Not so sure that we're against one of the great Aussie sides,; they're 5 th in the world rankings and have only one seam bowler in the top 12 rankings. We'll certainly get hammered if we go there with a negative attitude.

Of course, someone like Steve Smith relys entirely on his hand eye coordination, and he isnt bad.

I am about 30-70 in favour that he doesnt play the end of the series, but apart from the fact I wouldnt have dropped Robson and gave him another 10 tests (and subsequently want ENG to try him again) there is no one. I think they will take Hameed, but he needs to find longer term form.